Even though I can't tell half the time if Yarvin is joking or crazy, this is my favorite writing on the internet right now. I wish I could find more with a similar combination of prolific and awesome.
Totally agree - would also like to see Scott engage CY back - lets keep fingers crossed. So interesting Scott gets NYT'd and he's now trying to write Karl Roves playbook...
I once called to correct my monthly MUBI bill, and they gave me a year for free, which actually has continued on to 2 free years. Is this Roman privilege?
Talking about books banned by Amazon, I cannot recommend enough “Sexual Utopia in Power” by Roger F. Devlin. No longer sold by Amazon but they didn’t take back my kindle copy purchased before the ban (probably attributable to some suffragette or male soy-fed feminist working for Amazon). The essays collected in this volume are however available for free on the internet and they are barely longer than your average Curtis post. https://www.toqonline.com/archives/v6n2/DevlinTOQV6N2.pdf
I just started reading and the above essay is great. Its explanatory power is excellent, if anyone else has not read the above essay, they should, especially if you re not red pilled about male-female relationships
Good read. I wouldn't post such a perfunctory kudos, I'd leave it at the "like," except I've been justifiably scathing about Ch.6 so I owe it to our adept host/author to give a vocal "here here," instead of just only posting my negative comments.
Porphyrogenitus looked at his laptop and sighed. "This post is good" he thought, "Near the top of GM posts, but not at its zenith". He took a satisfied sip from his 500ml bottle of mountain dew code red.
Then he let out a self-satisfied belch of contentment, and wiped the Cheeto dust from the stubble of his unshaven face with the back of his hand, taking care to then clean his hand with the edge of his t-shirt. As it so happened, the hand in question was less filthy than the garment, so the Cheeto dust simply intermingled with the debris of the funk of a thousand nights spent in the darkness of his Hikikomori-pit. Then, noticing that the crusts of three-week-old pizza were too elderly even for his deadened palate, he resolved to suck some of yesterday's cup-a-ramen, long grown cold, from the styrofoam container...ahh, moments such as these: Priceless.
I have one purely stylistic critique: the italics were overused in this poast and became distracting. I challenge Curtis to write one essay where he only uses italics for foreign words. I have no other substantive criticism at this time.
See, I think the main problem with Alexander is that he doesn't argue in good faith, rather he argues to manipulate the audience into a certain position. Thus, as much as I like his writing, I won't feel bad when our predatory friends in the press finally decide to finish him off.
Well, I suppose it's hard to ever completely finish someone off these days, but I don't think it matters what he's trying to convert Republicans into. Being an alternative source of accurate information he's inherently a threat to entities like the NYT. I certainly don't believe this is the last time the press comes after him.
Regarding Coriolanus, you might be interested in this tidbit from the Gray Lady, back in.... 1984: 'Reportedly, a 1930's production in Paris triggered the protests of both Communists and Fascists, each side upset by what it considered offensive propaganda.'
Getting a bunch of Roman historians, playwrights, and tech bros with fresh Bitcoin stashes does seem the best way to plan the future for society. I will wave a flag at the front.
I am also into it. Our man previously came out against charter cities/ sea steading and that 's pretty damn good essay for anyone who's interested. (just google "unqualified reservations seasteading") but I think such projects are a good way for people to become metaphorically Amish in the way that yarvin has suggested. Politically detached and focused on constructing what comes next. LARPing an Antiversity or something until the time comes.
Worst case people will read a lot of Shakespeare, Tolkien, a few borderline anti-semitic essays, and write some new fangled blockchain project that only a few people who think of themselves as smart bother to use.
1. Aren’t Roman, and aren’t really Italian either. Whoop there it is.
2. They can’t run the government unless you mean stealing. No one runs the government, they “preside” over it.!
3. Most importantly the Romans openly march under the banner of “ERASE VOLSCES” and will undoubtedly snarl upon reading point 1 with “WE WILL REPLACE YOU”!!
4. The Volscians have noticed, and as the Architect explained to Neo this never ends well, but they are becoming exceedingly good at it not ending well.
5. The replacements are actually Spanish Fascists, the difference between Spanish Fascism and Italian Fascism is they make it work.
6. We already have the original Romans as servant of the new government, so we have already tried this solution, it led here. What do you think the GOP is anyway? Or the aging white dems?
7. The Volscians are actually most of the country, the rest being Samnites and er non Roman Latin tribes, see point 5 again; and if the WAB can ally in prison with the said Latin representatives what do you think happens in real life?
8. This scheme describes the situation we have now, just with a dreamed of happier outcome because we get some new bosses?
9. The Volscians have some choices and some time but its shrinking, certainly only old people and fools still talk of elections.
10. DC aka Rome has riot fenced and sealed itself off from the commons, guarded by troops who are half deplorable and the other half the sons of Franco, or perhaps nephews. Uncle Frank has kind of a homey ring to it, no?
You want this to end, learn to speak Volscian. Whoever your appealing to has fled DC to the hinterland or is trembling behind the wire, where they’ve thoughtfully placed themselves.
In 1959. "Other notable actors involved were Vanessa Redgrave (Valeria), Robert Hardy (Sicinius Velutus) and Edith Evans (Volumnia). Albert Finney and Diana Rigg both played Roman citizens.
"I understand Jones these days is putting most of his energy into the Jewish peril; I don’t remember Slaughter even mentioning us nefarious tricksters of the desert."
Well: anti-Semitism is the fate of the anti-Semites. Whoever will go into that territory has deserved to die in it.
"Well: anti-Semitism is the fate of the anti-Semites. Whoever will go into that territory has deserved to die in it." Yes well the Holodomor and various and sundry other genocides are the fate of those that don't enter that territory, and we don't have to guess. We're being told "Erase Whiteness" and more specifically to this issue "You will be Replaced."
We certainly will if one means the GOP, but by what?
If one means the Whites will be replaced - and it does exactly - what are whites to do?
If Anti-Semitism and dying in that territory is the fate of the Anti-Semites, what is the fate of the Loxists? And does not Loxism deserve the same fate of "go into that territory has deserved to die in it?"
[Loxism is the racial hatred of non-Jews, including the desire for their genocide.]
Loxism is new to me. Never heard that term. But I am neither American nor English, so I am not familiar with many more tropes.
It is hard for me to formulate a reply, so instead I will tell you, what the overall impression of your argument is. I can understand what your point, I don't share it for several reasons. One is that I don't think by inventing like "loxism" you are doing more than to imitate a certain pattern you despise. Why do you imitate that gesture, when you don't believe in it and don't know what to do with it? Will anybody like you more for having invented a new -ism? Or do you think you can transport "the racial hatred of non-Jews, including the desire for their genocide" to the ranks of "Loxism Remembrance Day"? Good luck with that.
What you pile up is entries into the Oppressed Olympics Charter. Do you think that's even a game you can play, let alone win?
And because you are not in the Oppression Olympics you have to write "erase whiteness" in Capital letters. The American delusion that there are "whites" is always stunning to observe and one of the reasons you get smacked everyday by the woke people.
The main reason you call yourself "white" or more precise, you accepted that label from the people who are running the show is, that you don't have an identity. If "white" is an identity, then you are nothing else than a caveman who found out about fire recently.
People who have an identity are not "white". They are people, who have a civilization, which goes beyond your spearheading tribesmen mentality. They go to the moon, or Mars, they built fusion reactors and engage in political theory.
Jurek: the people in power in America, who had a nice long year of burning and looting cities, who just seized power in DC, have identified me and mine as "white" and decided to Erase Whiteness.
I don't have a choice in the matter, and the accepting the label bullshit is just that - bullshit.
But no, we won't be playing in the Oppression Olympics.
We'll learn again to conquer, to be the Oppressor, or die.
So we'll win the Olympics, and decide then what to do.
> call yourself "white" or more precise, you accepted that label from the people who are running the show
The people running the show know where to apply it. They look at the target's skin, or their name, or some other racist "mark." They explain what they are looking at by making lists of "whiteness" behaviours. You don't have to "accept" it. The show-runners are categorising then attacking, with no need for an "accept."
They are not taxonomists and apply the category in an intentionally sloppy way through selective "campaigns," so many people imagine if they suck up to the people running the show like you're doing in this post it might earn a reprieve. Maybe? CRT is a tool so it depends, what can be gained from applying the tool, how much will it dull or sharpen the tool to apply it, who's holding the tool.
But I think there's a tendency to define oneself by what one is attacked for supposedly being. This could be useful for recruiting defensive allies, and it's hard to resist doing it because being attacked gets one's attention so, without great care, one "accepts the framing." That's how I read the long warred's "is clear enough."
You are making it sound like "stop attacking me for that!" is primarily about "accepting" that you are "that," and if you just wouldn't do it you wouldn't get attacked. This is a bizarre move that I don't think is the key to understanding anything, though it may be a useful political move for someone somewhere to play to confuse their enemies.
My problem with your post is that you are not primarily addressing what I wrote, but that you are making assumptions about disagreements which do not exist.
I like Curtis Yarvin mostly for his ability not to sound self-piteous or bitter or revengeful. Maybe I "make it sound" different to you. I don't know. But I am still puzzling, what exactly your problem is. Is there an accusation?
I've never met a Loxist. If they exist, then I would certainly have met one. I've never even met anyone who said Loxist things, but if I did then I'd conclude that he's in a theatrically expressed bad mood.
I’ve never met a nazi, or a KKK member but I’m assured they exist.
Are you also unfamiliar with ERASE WHITENESS and YOU WILL BE REPLACED? That being 2020, although there were certainly people who understood it in 1920.
No doubt you never met the news of 2020 ala burning down cities and toppling statues?
CRT? You must have met someone who espouses CRT, no?
I never met Marx, Trotsky, Yagoda, Lazar Kagan, Yezhov either. I have met some Ukrainians, but I personally wasn’t there for the Holodomor.
You might to paraphrase Yagoda call the Holdomor Loxism in action.
Never met Solitznizhen either, I am reasonably sure he existed. He had some historical hatefacts that many will likely never meet in print.
Now I actually don’t believe in mirroring the madness of others, or their evil.
But I can certainly name it.
I can also call 💩💩.
You’ve met plenty, whether they admitted it or not.
You have heard of Norman Lear certainly? Whether or not you met?
I've read three of Solzhenitsyn's books (August 1914, Lenin in Zurich, and that Day in the Life one), lots and lots of Marx including Das Kapital Vol 1, two of Marcuse's books ... do you want to discuss these guys with me?
Does Normal Lear write TV shows or something? The name vaguely rings a bell.
You've never met a nazi or KKK member because in fact they're an FBI-generated fictional monster, just as your Loxists are FBI-generated fictional monsters.
I've hung out with the whole spectrum of suspects from my father's communist aunt through his parents' socialist-to-liberal friends to liberal-synagogue types through modern orthodox types through chabad to satmar, bobover, and belzer, -- and I'm talking about twice a day here, because it's like a bar-scene -- and never met a Loxist.
It's reasonable to conclude that there are no Loxists, just as it's reasonable to conclude that there are no nazis.
I wonder if we can ponder agreeing that erasing whiteness is not only wrong but improbable, and an extremely unwise and provocative banner for others to march under?
I really enjoyed Song of Roland, Orlando Furioso, Liberation of Jerusalem, Faerie Queene, and Paradise Lost (reread the first five books recently, great English marriage between Adam and Eve with Adam explaining things to Eve and Eve very sweetly pretending to be interested), and within the last couple of months reredd Silmarillion, so I've very into Euro stuff and hope that a lot more of it emerges, and I guess you need Euros if you're going to have Euro stuff in the world so I want Euros to have lots of babies, mainly for the poetry that will come out of it, not so much for the tech, which I don't understand.
I'm half Euro on my mother's side, which is I guess why I'm so ready to fight. Of course the Yids of my father's type, the ones who annoy you, are half-Italian, which is why old Italians and old Yids are indistinguishable. Weirdly enough, Montaigne -- whose essays I spent a couple of months reading in the 1600 Florio translation in between anxiously scanning Treehouse comments for signs of intervention from Iggy Pop or a group of concerned Sumo wrestlers -- turns out (according to the Wiki) to have been significantly Sephardic-Yid, maybe even minyan-admissible by strict halachic standards. You can tell, too; he doesn't fantasize much. I can talk to my father about the Presence of God, but when I get into my Goddess-Visions and the question of whether trees are conscious then I hear his brain shutting down.
I never quite understood the reasons for the allegations among right-leaning people that the left-wing is anti-white, so I would be glad if someone could briefly explain this. Moreover, didn't Mr Yarvin just admit that the left-wing is composed of Patricians and Plebeians, with the former being mostly white (aside from some who are Jewish)? I am aware that within most American universities, rudeness toward black and LGBT people is often harshly punished, while rudeness toward white people is ignored (which I do not agree with). However, isn't the ability for organizations to set their own arbitrary standards covered under the "freedom of association" which right-leaning people are fighting for? Should the Ivy League schools not have the right to select students based on criteria other than merit?
There are two scopes people come to consider the left anti-white. One is data driven, the other is emotional/ experiential. You can arrive at this conclusion by purely the second (Wiggers), a mix of the two (typically your moderate 'alt-right/lite' like Nik Fuentes) or purely through the first (literal autists).
I think the two most obvious things here are tax (ie wealth redistribution) and education (university admissions).
First education. Simple question, "by intelligence and attainment what percentage of Ivy Leage schools students should be (non-jewish)white, hispanic, black, asian?" The answer is about 70 : 10 : 0.03 : 20. What are they actually? 30 : 20 : 10: 17 (not exact, this is off the top of my head). Now what do you get if you go to one of these universities? The experiential side of this is for many courses its mandatory to take at least some classes where the 'racism' of whites will be discussed (even in the hard sciences), every other group are allowed their own ethnic spaces (try setting up a society where you "discuss and enjoy shared european/ white culture"- (replacing "european" with "black/hispanic" is a perfectly acceptable society)). We can discuss how useful university education actually is, but the important point is that those bits of paper are just functionally important for breaking into higher paying roles where stuff actually gets done(engineering especially). This also goes part way to explaining why innovation rates have dropped (Since 1700 most inventors/ genius have been white anglo-saxon males who are protestant or atheist, if you reduce the numbers of these people in these institutions, you get fewer inventions)
Second taxes. If you break down how much different groups pay and use in tax $ who runs at a deficit and who runs at a loss? (lets even assign all military spending to whites). In 2016 the results were: whites run a surpluss of about 200 bn, hispanics a deficit of 300 bn and blacks a deficit of 700 bn. Ie from this angle the whole "tax" thing just looks like a wealth redistribution from whites to non-whites, with whites covering the borrowing of all that money in an attempt to elevate out groups, and who is calling for more taxes?
And then theres lots of other experiential things, I'll list some: when are you taught about slavery and how bad it was for the slaves, and who the perpetrators were? Whos getting those seasonal summer jobs that would otherwise be perfect for the student population? When you apply for a job why do they ask your race/ethnicity when you have been told all your life these things dont matter? In the midst of the biggest economic recession since the 1930s, why are the borders to "economic migrants" still open? Why am i forced to drive 2h to/from work every day because the inner city has turned into a hell scape where I wouldnt feel safe living/ starting a family (and who turned these places into a hell-scape)?...
Onto your claims
1) many anti-whites are in fact white
True. Some people are pre-disposed to cult like behaviour where they harm themselves/ their own group. This is a common occurrence in history, and is often accompanied with very long texts/ rationalisations to get around said insanity. Anti-white sentiment has all the hallmarks of a cult: an original sin (racism), ritual ceremony (taking the knee), central texts, the belief of being "on the right side of history"...
2) rudness against black/ LGBT is punished
Its not "punished" its functionally illegal. You CAN go to court and serve jail time for saying certain things to certain people. Barring that you will get kicked from universities/ your job, have your bank card cancelled. These are not hypothetical, this stuff is routine now
3) Rudeness towards white people is ignored
No its not. Its encouraged. Some groups even get funding off this sentiment.
4) Shouldn't the Ivy League schools admit who they want
This is fine so long as I, or anyone else, could just start their own school and reward accreditations of equal weight to the Ivy League. Newsflash, universities are not just an 'organisation' like a company that can be setup. Even if i could, would I be allowed to even hypothetically admit only white students? No, the "freedom of association" thing is a one way street.
I'm not saying everything above reflects what I think about the matter. But its very obvious why people think the left is anti-white: because all their serious policies, institutions, and words reflect the beating down of the white population and the elevation of all that is brown.
Some of these are genuine problems which I would also like to see fixed. I think it is worth mentioning though for the benefit of others that a few of these negative trends can be explained by motives which do not exactly fit within the frame of racial contention (not that the American educational establishment would ever frankly admit to these reasons). For instance, the maintenance of urban neighborhoods with high crime is the result of vote-trading schemes in the vein of Tammany Hall, which far predate the Civil Rights movement. The criminalization of rudeness including white-against-white has been an ongoing movement in the Anglosphere countries (try getting a restraining order against someone in a non-Anglosphere country to see what I mean; the Anglosphere countries have the strongest restraining-order and anti-harassment systems) but there remains disagreement over what exactly should be criminalized. Starting a "white students club" at an American university would not be allowed, but there are, in fact, Polish and Ukrainian heritage-clubs, so the disparity is not purely black-versus-white. As for economic immigration, for the United States this is an important diplomatic tool to earn the respect of other countries (similar to how China goes into other countries to build infrastructure) and additionally the restriction of such would damage the strong Americanophile communities which exist in numerous foreign countries (many Americans are not aware that other countries have Americanophiles similar to how the United States has Japanophiles).
He has a point Mr. Yarvin but he is also deflecting. He has deflected onto the WASPS for a decade.
And denying to a degree that Metternich, Talleyrand and for that matter Murat and Danton could not endorse, probably not endure.
Anything to do with Puritans and WASPS is the past. Further; At no time in the past did the Puritans raise the Black Flag of ERASE the others and begin to implement Year Zero against the others. At no time did they ever discuss such, never mind publish it, nor do they have such a record of deeds.
Yarvin wants a happy ending, but he’s asking this from psychopaths and their vast number of now aware victims, it can’t really happen, someones going to win. The losers will need to run, or perish.
Marx's takedown on Castereigh. Roughly half as good, and the one time Karl was the funniest Marx Brother.
Keep in mind that Yarvin speaks in metaphors mixed with wishes.
The wish by the way is for a just king.
A King so Just he never just existed, but one can dream.
If you want to understand Yarvin's desires read his verbal documentation on Urbit and what it is designed to do, for software is the lens by which he judges the world.
One of the few Brits I enjoy reading is Peter Hitchens. I don't know where he sits on the Yarvin scale, but he might be at least half as good. He's a turbo boomer, but he writes well.
Mr Hitchens is one of the "Benito Cereno conservatives" of which the article above makes mention. He is part of the same circle of writers as Edward Feser and Sir Roger Scruton.
I agree. He's still an interesting writer/speaker/tragicomic personality. I don't agree with him politically.
I follow British politics because as an American it's so meaningless to me. It's like watching people get into political knife fights about inheritance tax in Narnia. One of the nice things about reading Yarvin is that he provides that kind of detachment for things that do matter in my life. Or, things that I thought mattered.
On a serious note, in about two sentences this essay has excellent descriptions of both the Tastycrats and the Fingerlicans, and why neither - or a combination - will do any good.
Even though I can't tell half the time if Yarvin is joking or crazy, this is my favorite writing on the internet right now. I wish I could find more with a similar combination of prolific and awesome.
Totally agree - would also like to see Scott engage CY back - lets keep fingers crossed. So interesting Scott gets NYT'd and he's now trying to write Karl Roves playbook...
Very similar deal with Glenn Greenwald, another Coriolanus conservative.
When he said Mubi subscription I laughed so hard I now have a collapsed lung.
I once called to correct my monthly MUBI bill, and they gave me a year for free, which actually has continued on to 2 free years. Is this Roman privilege?
I wanna be like you when I grow up.
If we Volscians get us some Mubi, can we rule? Or will Mubification just semi-Romanify us into sissies?
rather have a mubi than a m*therf*cking TikTok
Talking about books banned by Amazon, I cannot recommend enough “Sexual Utopia in Power” by Roger F. Devlin. No longer sold by Amazon but they didn’t take back my kindle copy purchased before the ban (probably attributable to some suffragette or male soy-fed feminist working for Amazon). The essays collected in this volume are however available for free on the internet and they are barely longer than your average Curtis post. https://www.toqonline.com/archives/v6n2/DevlinTOQV6N2.pdf
I just started reading and the above essay is great. Its explanatory power is excellent, if anyone else has not read the above essay, they should, especially if you re not red pilled about male-female relationships
Good read. I wouldn't post such a perfunctory kudos, I'd leave it at the "like," except I've been justifiably scathing about Ch.6 so I owe it to our adept host/author to give a vocal "here here," instead of just only posting my negative comments.
Porphyrogenitus looked at his laptop and sighed. "This post is good" he thought, "Near the top of GM posts, but not at its zenith". He took a satisfied sip from his 500ml bottle of mountain dew code red.
Then he let out a self-satisfied belch of contentment, and wiped the Cheeto dust from the stubble of his unshaven face with the back of his hand, taking care to then clean his hand with the edge of his t-shirt. As it so happened, the hand in question was less filthy than the garment, so the Cheeto dust simply intermingled with the debris of the funk of a thousand nights spent in the darkness of his Hikikomori-pit. Then, noticing that the crusts of three-week-old pizza were too elderly even for his deadened palate, he resolved to suck some of yesterday's cup-a-ramen, long grown cold, from the styrofoam container...ahh, moments such as these: Priceless.
I have one purely stylistic critique: the italics were overused in this poast and became distracting. I challenge Curtis to write one essay where he only uses italics for foreign words. I have no other substantive criticism at this time.
yawn
See, I think the main problem with Alexander is that he doesn't argue in good faith, rather he argues to manipulate the audience into a certain position. Thus, as much as I like his writing, I won't feel bad when our predatory friends in the press finally decide to finish him off.
What makes you think they will finish him off? He's currently trying to convert Republicans into Marxists. His writing is eminently useful to power.
Well, I suppose it's hard to ever completely finish someone off these days, but I don't think it matters what he's trying to convert Republicans into. Being an alternative source of accurate information he's inherently a threat to entities like the NYT. I certainly don't believe this is the last time the press comes after him.
Regarding Coriolanus, you might be interested in this tidbit from the Gray Lady, back in.... 1984: 'Reportedly, a 1930's production in Paris triggered the protests of both Communists and Fascists, each side upset by what it considered offensive propaganda.'
Getting a bunch of Roman historians, playwrights, and tech bros with fresh Bitcoin stashes does seem the best way to plan the future for society. I will wave a flag at the front.
I am also into it. Our man previously came out against charter cities/ sea steading and that 's pretty damn good essay for anyone who's interested. (just google "unqualified reservations seasteading") but I think such projects are a good way for people to become metaphorically Amish in the way that yarvin has suggested. Politically detached and focused on constructing what comes next. LARPing an Antiversity or something until the time comes.
Worst case people will read a lot of Shakespeare, Tolkien, a few borderline anti-semitic essays, and write some new fangled blockchain project that only a few people who think of themselves as smart bother to use.
Here's the link for those interested: https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2009/09/seasteading-without-that-warm-glow/
I feel like my hyperculture project came through looking pretty good!
A fantastic quick definition of fascism.
Yes but you see the Romans who rule us:
1. Aren’t Roman, and aren’t really Italian either. Whoop there it is.
2. They can’t run the government unless you mean stealing. No one runs the government, they “preside” over it.!
3. Most importantly the Romans openly march under the banner of “ERASE VOLSCES” and will undoubtedly snarl upon reading point 1 with “WE WILL REPLACE YOU”!!
4. The Volscians have noticed, and as the Architect explained to Neo this never ends well, but they are becoming exceedingly good at it not ending well.
5. The replacements are actually Spanish Fascists, the difference between Spanish Fascism and Italian Fascism is they make it work.
6. We already have the original Romans as servant of the new government, so we have already tried this solution, it led here. What do you think the GOP is anyway? Or the aging white dems?
7. The Volscians are actually most of the country, the rest being Samnites and er non Roman Latin tribes, see point 5 again; and if the WAB can ally in prison with the said Latin representatives what do you think happens in real life?
8. This scheme describes the situation we have now, just with a dreamed of happier outcome because we get some new bosses?
9. The Volscians have some choices and some time but its shrinking, certainly only old people and fools still talk of elections.
10. DC aka Rome has riot fenced and sealed itself off from the commons, guarded by troops who are half deplorable and the other half the sons of Franco, or perhaps nephews. Uncle Frank has kind of a homey ring to it, no?
You want this to end, learn to speak Volscian. Whoever your appealing to has fled DC to the hinterland or is trembling behind the wire, where they’ve thoughtfully placed themselves.
When I was a lad back in Britland I saw Sir Laurence Olivier playing Coriolanus at Stratford-upon-Avon. Jolly good show, and all.
In 1959. "Other notable actors involved were Vanessa Redgrave (Valeria), Robert Hardy (Sicinius Velutus) and Edith Evans (Volumnia). Albert Finney and Diana Rigg both played Roman citizens.
Godfrey Daniels.
The Volscians missed their chance. Coulda taken out half the Patrician stars in one night.
"I understand Jones these days is putting most of his energy into the Jewish peril; I don’t remember Slaughter even mentioning us nefarious tricksters of the desert."
Well: anti-Semitism is the fate of the anti-Semites. Whoever will go into that territory has deserved to die in it.
"Well: anti-Semitism is the fate of the anti-Semites. Whoever will go into that territory has deserved to die in it." Yes well the Holodomor and various and sundry other genocides are the fate of those that don't enter that territory, and we don't have to guess. We're being told "Erase Whiteness" and more specifically to this issue "You will be Replaced."
We certainly will if one means the GOP, but by what?
If one means the Whites will be replaced - and it does exactly - what are whites to do?
If Anti-Semitism and dying in that territory is the fate of the Anti-Semites, what is the fate of the Loxists? And does not Loxism deserve the same fate of "go into that territory has deserved to die in it?"
[Loxism is the racial hatred of non-Jews, including the desire for their genocide.]
I feel like this belongs here. https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2007/06/why-i-am-not-anti-semite/
and why not have another https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2007/11/why-i-am-not-white-nationalist/
Loxism is new to me. Never heard that term. But I am neither American nor English, so I am not familiar with many more tropes.
It is hard for me to formulate a reply, so instead I will tell you, what the overall impression of your argument is. I can understand what your point, I don't share it for several reasons. One is that I don't think by inventing like "loxism" you are doing more than to imitate a certain pattern you despise. Why do you imitate that gesture, when you don't believe in it and don't know what to do with it? Will anybody like you more for having invented a new -ism? Or do you think you can transport "the racial hatred of non-Jews, including the desire for their genocide" to the ranks of "Loxism Remembrance Day"? Good luck with that.
What you pile up is entries into the Oppressed Olympics Charter. Do you think that's even a game you can play, let alone win?
I think numbers tell.
I think ERASE WHITENESS is clear enough to Whites for we whites to decide.
The decision has nothing to do with oppressed Olympics, or the victim game.
That’s the Others game, and they”ll probably be sorry they played it in the end.
And because you are not in the Oppression Olympics you have to write "erase whiteness" in Capital letters. The American delusion that there are "whites" is always stunning to observe and one of the reasons you get smacked everyday by the woke people.
The main reason you call yourself "white" or more precise, you accepted that label from the people who are running the show is, that you don't have an identity. If "white" is an identity, then you are nothing else than a caveman who found out about fire recently.
People who have an identity are not "white". They are people, who have a civilization, which goes beyond your spearheading tribesmen mentality. They go to the moon, or Mars, they built fusion reactors and engage in political theory.
Jurek: the people in power in America, who had a nice long year of burning and looting cities, who just seized power in DC, have identified me and mine as "white" and decided to Erase Whiteness.
I don't have a choice in the matter, and the accepting the label bullshit is just that - bullshit.
But no, we won't be playing in the Oppression Olympics.
We'll learn again to conquer, to be the Oppressor, or die.
So we'll win the Olympics, and decide then what to do.
I am always open to good plans.
> call yourself "white" or more precise, you accepted that label from the people who are running the show
The people running the show know where to apply it. They look at the target's skin, or their name, or some other racist "mark." They explain what they are looking at by making lists of "whiteness" behaviours. You don't have to "accept" it. The show-runners are categorising then attacking, with no need for an "accept."
They are not taxonomists and apply the category in an intentionally sloppy way through selective "campaigns," so many people imagine if they suck up to the people running the show like you're doing in this post it might earn a reprieve. Maybe? CRT is a tool so it depends, what can be gained from applying the tool, how much will it dull or sharpen the tool to apply it, who's holding the tool.
But I think there's a tendency to define oneself by what one is attacked for supposedly being. This could be useful for recruiting defensive allies, and it's hard to resist doing it because being attacked gets one's attention so, without great care, one "accepts the framing." That's how I read the long warred's "is clear enough."
You are making it sound like "stop attacking me for that!" is primarily about "accepting" that you are "that," and if you just wouldn't do it you wouldn't get attacked. This is a bizarre move that I don't think is the key to understanding anything, though it may be a useful political move for someone somewhere to play to confuse their enemies.
My problem with your post is that you are not primarily addressing what I wrote, but that you are making assumptions about disagreements which do not exist.
I like Curtis Yarvin mostly for his ability not to sound self-piteous or bitter or revengeful. Maybe I "make it sound" different to you. I don't know. But I am still puzzling, what exactly your problem is. Is there an accusation?
I think the term Loxism was meant to be a joke. It comes from "lox and bagels" which is a type of food associated with Jewish Americans.
It's hard to be Jewish
It's hard to be Jewish
It's hard to be Jewish in Russia, Yo!
I've never met a Loxist. If they exist, then I would certainly have met one. I've never even met anyone who said Loxist things, but if I did then I'd conclude that he's in a theatrically expressed bad mood.
I’ve never met a nazi, or a KKK member but I’m assured they exist.
Are you also unfamiliar with ERASE WHITENESS and YOU WILL BE REPLACED? That being 2020, although there were certainly people who understood it in 1920.
No doubt you never met the news of 2020 ala burning down cities and toppling statues?
CRT? You must have met someone who espouses CRT, no?
I never met Marx, Trotsky, Yagoda, Lazar Kagan, Yezhov either. I have met some Ukrainians, but I personally wasn’t there for the Holodomor.
You might to paraphrase Yagoda call the Holdomor Loxism in action.
Never met Solitznizhen either, I am reasonably sure he existed. He had some historical hatefacts that many will likely never meet in print.
Now I actually don’t believe in mirroring the madness of others, or their evil.
But I can certainly name it.
I can also call 💩💩.
You’ve met plenty, whether they admitted it or not.
You have heard of Norman Lear certainly? Whether or not you met?
Marcusse?
💩💩
I've read three of Solzhenitsyn's books (August 1914, Lenin in Zurich, and that Day in the Life one), lots and lots of Marx including Das Kapital Vol 1, two of Marcuse's books ... do you want to discuss these guys with me?
Does Normal Lear write TV shows or something? The name vaguely rings a bell.
You've never met a nazi or KKK member because in fact they're an FBI-generated fictional monster, just as your Loxists are FBI-generated fictional monsters.
I've hung out with the whole spectrum of suspects from my father's communist aunt through his parents' socialist-to-liberal friends to liberal-synagogue types through modern orthodox types through chabad to satmar, bobover, and belzer, -- and I'm talking about twice a day here, because it's like a bar-scene -- and never met a Loxist.
It's reasonable to conclude that there are no Loxists, just as it's reasonable to conclude that there are no nazis.
We can agree!
I wonder if we can ponder agreeing that erasing whiteness is not only wrong but improbable, and an extremely unwise and provocative banner for others to march under?
Which they did. Hopefully they’ll stop now.
I really enjoyed Song of Roland, Orlando Furioso, Liberation of Jerusalem, Faerie Queene, and Paradise Lost (reread the first five books recently, great English marriage between Adam and Eve with Adam explaining things to Eve and Eve very sweetly pretending to be interested), and within the last couple of months reredd Silmarillion, so I've very into Euro stuff and hope that a lot more of it emerges, and I guess you need Euros if you're going to have Euro stuff in the world so I want Euros to have lots of babies, mainly for the poetry that will come out of it, not so much for the tech, which I don't understand.
I'm half Euro on my mother's side, which is I guess why I'm so ready to fight. Of course the Yids of my father's type, the ones who annoy you, are half-Italian, which is why old Italians and old Yids are indistinguishable. Weirdly enough, Montaigne -- whose essays I spent a couple of months reading in the 1600 Florio translation in between anxiously scanning Treehouse comments for signs of intervention from Iggy Pop or a group of concerned Sumo wrestlers -- turns out (according to the Wiki) to have been significantly Sephardic-Yid, maybe even minyan-admissible by strict halachic standards. You can tell, too; he doesn't fantasize much. I can talk to my father about the Presence of God, but when I get into my Goddess-Visions and the question of whether trees are conscious then I hear his brain shutting down.
I never quite understood the reasons for the allegations among right-leaning people that the left-wing is anti-white, so I would be glad if someone could briefly explain this. Moreover, didn't Mr Yarvin just admit that the left-wing is composed of Patricians and Plebeians, with the former being mostly white (aside from some who are Jewish)? I am aware that within most American universities, rudeness toward black and LGBT people is often harshly punished, while rudeness toward white people is ignored (which I do not agree with). However, isn't the ability for organizations to set their own arbitrary standards covered under the "freedom of association" which right-leaning people are fighting for? Should the Ivy League schools not have the right to select students based on criteria other than merit?
There are two scopes people come to consider the left anti-white. One is data driven, the other is emotional/ experiential. You can arrive at this conclusion by purely the second (Wiggers), a mix of the two (typically your moderate 'alt-right/lite' like Nik Fuentes) or purely through the first (literal autists).
I think the two most obvious things here are tax (ie wealth redistribution) and education (university admissions).
First education. Simple question, "by intelligence and attainment what percentage of Ivy Leage schools students should be (non-jewish)white, hispanic, black, asian?" The answer is about 70 : 10 : 0.03 : 20. What are they actually? 30 : 20 : 10: 17 (not exact, this is off the top of my head). Now what do you get if you go to one of these universities? The experiential side of this is for many courses its mandatory to take at least some classes where the 'racism' of whites will be discussed (even in the hard sciences), every other group are allowed their own ethnic spaces (try setting up a society where you "discuss and enjoy shared european/ white culture"- (replacing "european" with "black/hispanic" is a perfectly acceptable society)). We can discuss how useful university education actually is, but the important point is that those bits of paper are just functionally important for breaking into higher paying roles where stuff actually gets done(engineering especially). This also goes part way to explaining why innovation rates have dropped (Since 1700 most inventors/ genius have been white anglo-saxon males who are protestant or atheist, if you reduce the numbers of these people in these institutions, you get fewer inventions)
Second taxes. If you break down how much different groups pay and use in tax $ who runs at a deficit and who runs at a loss? (lets even assign all military spending to whites). In 2016 the results were: whites run a surpluss of about 200 bn, hispanics a deficit of 300 bn and blacks a deficit of 700 bn. Ie from this angle the whole "tax" thing just looks like a wealth redistribution from whites to non-whites, with whites covering the borrowing of all that money in an attempt to elevate out groups, and who is calling for more taxes?
And then theres lots of other experiential things, I'll list some: when are you taught about slavery and how bad it was for the slaves, and who the perpetrators were? Whos getting those seasonal summer jobs that would otherwise be perfect for the student population? When you apply for a job why do they ask your race/ethnicity when you have been told all your life these things dont matter? In the midst of the biggest economic recession since the 1930s, why are the borders to "economic migrants" still open? Why am i forced to drive 2h to/from work every day because the inner city has turned into a hell scape where I wouldnt feel safe living/ starting a family (and who turned these places into a hell-scape)?...
Onto your claims
1) many anti-whites are in fact white
True. Some people are pre-disposed to cult like behaviour where they harm themselves/ their own group. This is a common occurrence in history, and is often accompanied with very long texts/ rationalisations to get around said insanity. Anti-white sentiment has all the hallmarks of a cult: an original sin (racism), ritual ceremony (taking the knee), central texts, the belief of being "on the right side of history"...
2) rudness against black/ LGBT is punished
Its not "punished" its functionally illegal. You CAN go to court and serve jail time for saying certain things to certain people. Barring that you will get kicked from universities/ your job, have your bank card cancelled. These are not hypothetical, this stuff is routine now
3) Rudeness towards white people is ignored
No its not. Its encouraged. Some groups even get funding off this sentiment.
4) Shouldn't the Ivy League schools admit who they want
This is fine so long as I, or anyone else, could just start their own school and reward accreditations of equal weight to the Ivy League. Newsflash, universities are not just an 'organisation' like a company that can be setup. Even if i could, would I be allowed to even hypothetically admit only white students? No, the "freedom of association" thing is a one way street.
I'm not saying everything above reflects what I think about the matter. But its very obvious why people think the left is anti-white: because all their serious policies, institutions, and words reflect the beating down of the white population and the elevation of all that is brown.
Some of these are genuine problems which I would also like to see fixed. I think it is worth mentioning though for the benefit of others that a few of these negative trends can be explained by motives which do not exactly fit within the frame of racial contention (not that the American educational establishment would ever frankly admit to these reasons). For instance, the maintenance of urban neighborhoods with high crime is the result of vote-trading schemes in the vein of Tammany Hall, which far predate the Civil Rights movement. The criminalization of rudeness including white-against-white has been an ongoing movement in the Anglosphere countries (try getting a restraining order against someone in a non-Anglosphere country to see what I mean; the Anglosphere countries have the strongest restraining-order and anti-harassment systems) but there remains disagreement over what exactly should be criminalized. Starting a "white students club" at an American university would not be allowed, but there are, in fact, Polish and Ukrainian heritage-clubs, so the disparity is not purely black-versus-white. As for economic immigration, for the United States this is an important diplomatic tool to earn the respect of other countries (similar to how China goes into other countries to build infrastructure) and additionally the restriction of such would damage the strong Americanophile communities which exist in numerous foreign countries (many Americans are not aware that other countries have Americanophiles similar to how the United States has Japanophiles).
He has a point Mr. Yarvin but he is also deflecting. He has deflected onto the WASPS for a decade.
And denying to a degree that Metternich, Talleyrand and for that matter Murat and Danton could not endorse, probably not endure.
Anything to do with Puritans and WASPS is the past. Further; At no time in the past did the Puritans raise the Black Flag of ERASE the others and begin to implement Year Zero against the others. At no time did they ever discuss such, never mind publish it, nor do they have such a record of deeds.
Yarvin wants a happy ending, but he’s asking this from psychopaths and their vast number of now aware victims, it can’t really happen, someones going to win. The losers will need to run, or perish.
Instead of a platform it may be more useful for them to create a story. Not a narrative, but a story. For the present and the future.
Maybe too positive for this negative world.
I wish I could draw some parallels to British politics as I feel it could be of use.
Can anyone recommend a writer half as good as Curtis to me?
Marx's takedown on Castereigh. Roughly half as good, and the one time Karl was the funniest Marx Brother.
Keep in mind that Yarvin speaks in metaphors mixed with wishes.
The wish by the way is for a just king.
A King so Just he never just existed, but one can dream.
If you want to understand Yarvin's desires read his verbal documentation on Urbit and what it is designed to do, for software is the lens by which he judges the world.
One of the few Brits I enjoy reading is Peter Hitchens. I don't know where he sits on the Yarvin scale, but he might be at least half as good. He's a turbo boomer, but he writes well.
Mr Hitchens is one of the "Benito Cereno conservatives" of which the article above makes mention. He is part of the same circle of writers as Edward Feser and Sir Roger Scruton.
I agree. He's still an interesting writer/speaker/tragicomic personality. I don't agree with him politically.
I follow British politics because as an American it's so meaningless to me. It's like watching people get into political knife fights about inheritance tax in Narnia. One of the nice things about reading Yarvin is that he provides that kind of detachment for things that do matter in my life. Or, things that I thought mattered.
His lectures about ww2 pretty stimulating.
>Coriolanus and the conservatives
Easily my favorite 500 BC Doo Wop group!
On a serious note, in about two sentences this essay has excellent descriptions of both the Tastycrats and the Fingerlicans, and why neither - or a combination - will do any good.
Any chance you can have the same conversation with Rod Dreher? He seems lost in the same grumpy jobber role as your mysterious trad friend.