The tenth of the Vanguard Podcasts, featuring the original "triumvirate" of Richard Spencer, Andy Nowicki, and Colin Liddell. In this episode they continue their discussion of The Hobbit as well as J.R.R. Tolkein's Lord of the Rings books. They then turn to Quentin Tarantino's slave-revolt and revenge fantasy, Django Unchained, before talking about the meaning of Christmas.


Multiracialism and the Death of Politics

During the American election contest, I found myself paying less attention than ever to the arguments, campaign slogans, promises and gaffes made by both sides – and I have to admit to having felt somewhat guilty about this at the time. Despite my contempt for mainstream politics both in my own country and abroad, a nagging little voice persisted in scolding me that one should at least study these things in some measure of detail.

On second thoughts, and having perused the election results, I think I should have paid even less attention than I did. As America advances towards Multi-Racial Utopia, the content of the national debates and media circus around its elections is going to become about as relevant to their results as the spectacle of a surfer dancing on the crest of a wave would be to an oceanographer. Political programmes and arguments that might once have been worthy of debate are degenerating into irrelevant entertainment, as demography and caste become the true determining factors.


When living in China a European cannot fail to be struck by the country’s intense nationalism; especially as it contrasts so sharply with the mixture of fear, disdain, and indifference towards national sentiment that prevails in the modern West.

When a drunken Western tourist was caught on video attempting to assault a Chinese woman in Beijing, the result was uproar on the Chinese internet and a crackdown on foreign residents by the government; contrast this with the reaction of the British establishment to the actual rapes of English girls by Pakistani gangs, which was mainly concerned with not appearing “racist” to the compatriots of the offenders! A long list of similar contrasts could be made for almost every aspect of national life, and it would make for depressing reading indeed.


Words before they escaped from the monastery.

If I could write this article without words I would, because, by employing more of the squiggly little things, I am being complicit in “The Great Wordflation,” that great clogging of the mental arteries, or that stimulus to ignorance that you encounter when you see another yet another 10000-word-plus essay on the internet, written by someone with a pen name detailing their personal path to enlightenment.

Matching the great inflation of the money/credit/debt supply and the great outpouring of cheap, mass produced consumerism that has characterized our era, we have also seen The Great Wordflation. It seems only fair to assume that they are somehow all marching in lock step towards some mutually agreed cataclysmic point.


by Colin Liddell

Much of what happened in the recent US presidential election – ethnic minorities swinging the vote, the continuing lack of White consciousness and growing apathy – is perfectly understandable and fits well within what we already know.


Creating new states on the template of the old
will lead to the same problems.

by John Maelstrom

There’s a lot excitement right now about the recent outbreak of petitions on the White House website calling for secession. The latest news says there are petitions now for all fifty States, with Texas already collecting over 100,000 signatures. Wow!

On the surface this is fine. It’s even harmless fun. Nothing will come of it from this White House and it’s good to see people mentally moving in the right direction, according to my worldview.


The classic moronic gurn of the habitual teleprompter addict.

It is often remarked that Communism did the White race a major favour, helping to preserve it in its Eastern homelands, and that since its fall in 1989, those areas have become subjected to the same destructive tides of feminism, low-birth rates, and multiculturalism that have overwhelmed the West. At the same time we are supposed to be saddened that America has just returned an essentially Communist president. Is there not perhaps something of a paradox here?


The fourth of the Vanguard Podcasts featuring the original "triumvirate" of Richard Spencer, Andy Nowicki, and Colin Liddell discusses the 2012 US Presidential Election.

Originally uploaded on the original Alternative Right site on the 5th of November, 2012, it was later added to our SoundCloud page, where it remained until August, 2017, when SoundCloud shut the page down without any warning or reason.


News is starting to filter through that Black actor Idris Ebola is the favourite to be the next Bond, and is in "talks" with the producers. Of course, this could be a little bit of sub-racist marketing to get everybody thinking about the latest Bond release, Skyfall, which is now engaged in major product placement in theatres across the world. As talentless fuckwits Madonna and Kim Kardashian have demonstrated, nothing gets the word out quite as much as teasing people's racial sensibilities just below the heavily-suppressed collective conscious threshold. But, in a world that’s increasingly dedicated to White racial replacement, we shouldn't be overly complacent. A Black Bond could very well be on the cards.


by Colin Liddell

Recently a low-budget piece of cinematic schlock had a vast swath of the world’s population foaming at the mouth, simply because it represented a slight upon their religiously-based identity.

Compare this with the almost blanket indifference that has greeted another small film, this one touching on a campaign of genocidal murder against another group.


"Rats leave Nick Griffin behind on the BNP's swiftly sinking ship" is the antagonistic headline of an article detailing the ongoing decline and collapse of the British National Party published in the left-of-centre Independent newspaper earlier this month.

Since the 2010 general election, where, to be fair, the BNP polled reasonably well for a radical political party and easily eclipsed the likes of UKIP and the Greens in many areas, the political trajectory of the BNP under Nick Griffin has been irredeemably downwards with financial shenanigans, constitutional rigging, organisational collapse, interminable legal spats, self-inflicted media own goals, membership fragmentation and decline making the last two years the most fractious and damaging in the party's thirty year history. Only eventual political oblivion awaits by the time of the 2014 European elections, where Griffin will attempt to hold his seat in Brussels but more than likely fail badly thanks to this ongoing debilitating process.


There is a distinction between natural and artificial societies. Natural societies grow organically within a group of people with a shared ancestry. This is why patriotism is natural – it grows from emotional relationships and does not need a theory or ideological underpinning. There is more to human nature than reason and the act of bonding with your people and territory is a process of feeling, instinct, intuition and other human qualities.

I live in England so I will use England as my exemplar. England has been a nation since the time of Alfred the Great, and it is an emotional, organic growth, not an intellectual agreement. Intellectual nationalism came from the Enlightenment and, like other forms of thinking derived from the Enlightenment, is theory to be applied to men and women, that is, forced on people. It is a mistake for The New Right to adopt rationalist theorising in imitation of Marxist thinkers.


Last month, closely following the impressive march for Catalan independence through the streets of Barcelona in Spain, Scottish nationalists also staged a large march through the streets of Edinburgh in an attempt to rally the Scottish people to the cause of Scottish independence to be decided in a referendum planned for 2014.

Under the firm leadership of Alex Salmond, the Scottish National Party (SNP) now rules in Scotland, but he is demanding greater powers to deal with Scotland's troubling social and economic problems in the middle of an economic downturn caused by a credit crunch in the international financial markets and a debt crisis at the heart of Europe.


Whither the Fourth Political Theory?

The Fourth Political Theory is a book that is clearly not short on ambition. I haven't actually read it, but I already know more or less what is in it from past writings by its author, Professor Alexandr Dugin, as well as the lengthy video presentation he gave of his ideas at the Identitarian Ideas conference held earlier this year in Stockholm.

Dugin believes there have been three great ideologies in modern history – Liberalism, Communism, and Fascism/National Socialism – and that we are now seeing the formation of the Fourth, which is still waiting to be properly christened and so is known by an ordinal. In the footsteps of Locke, Marx, and Mussolini, we now have Dugin.


At the end of George Orwell’s 1984, hero and would-be revolutionary Winston Smith is tortured brutally by ghoulish government goons at the Ministry of Love. Following this ordeal, his will is utterly broken; he betrays his closest allies as well as himself; moreover, he learns to “love” Big Brother, the awful totalitarian entity who has made his life unbearably miserable. Winston himself gets absolutely nothing out of this bargain except a certain warped peace of mind and a perverse sense that he has in some way “done the right thing”:
“He gazed up at the enormous face. Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark moustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn self-willed exile from the loving breast!... It was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.”


The Khmer Rouge brought bone-deep equality to the citizens of Cambodia.
by Andy Nowicki

“Equality” is one of the hoariest cliches and most pernicious slogans of modern times. Said to derive from a supposedly common-sense notion of fairness, the mad clamor underway to 
equalize the human race in fact has no basis whatsoever in justice or reality, human or otherwise. 

Indeed, the idea of equality is almost inevitably deeply debasing to a culture; pushing for greater “equality” does nothing to make the dumb smart, the ugly beautiful, or the poor rich; instead, it only makes nearly everything—be it fashion, the arts, language, commerce, or general human interaction— duller, less pleasant, less orderly, less desirable, and infinitely more tacky, tawdry, and loathsome. 

More crucially, the ramming of equality down our collective gullet requires the construction of a hateful bureaucracy to monitor, control, and altogether enslave the very people it supposedly wishes to uplift and empower. The imposition of equality, that is, requires the self-appointment of a vanguard elite who arrogate to themselves the task of being the equalizers. Thus the attempt to construct a society of “equals” invariably leads to perpetual exercise of tyranny.

But how did we get to the point where this obviously insane concept came to be enshrined as an ideal? And why, after the untold carnage, horror, and heartbreak it has caused, do we still view equality as a thing worth pursuing, worth sacrificing for, a patriotic duty even?

The term “equality,” of course, isn’t exactly new; it first sprung up as a vogue among the Western intellectual elite over two centuries ago. It in large part inspired two major political upheavals, one in America and the other in France. Upon deciding to be unencumbered states, representatives of the thirteen former English colonies in the New World signed the Declaration of Independence, which holds it to be “self-evident” that “all men are created equal”; meanwhile, those guillotine-happy men of Gaul made “egalite” one of their watchwords of revolution.
"All men are created equal?...Say WHAT, TJ?"

Far be it from me to mock and deride America’s founding fathers—they were in many ways an impressive lot. Still, their collective signing on to the concept of mankind’s equality was an astoundingly stupid gesture, which has ushered in all kinds of ideological mischief. Whatever Thomas Jefferson’s reason for including the phrase in the Declaration of Independence, this ill-defined assertion of men’s equality is vexingly vague. “All men are equal,” how exactly? Equal under the law? Equal in the eyes of God? Equal, as in “deserving the same level of income as everyone else”? TJ doesn’t say. And the matter is complicated, since—as has often been pointed out in our selectively iconoclastic age—this supposed believer in the self-evidence of human equality was also an owner of slaves.

The French revolutionaries, for their part, weren’t content merely to cozy up to abstractions. Their tireless quest was to make society much more equal by bringing the mighty low: specifically, to cut the “one percent” of their time down to size by rendering them a whole head shorter. Thousands perished in this orchestrated reign of terror, whose main aim was to promote and promulgate equality.
Meanwhile, in France...
Once the Bolsheviks seized power in 20th-century Russia, joined later by the Maoist regime in China and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, the stakes were magnified. Now millions, and tens of millions, would be put to death for the singular crime of not being properly “equal” with their fellow men. Across the world, the quest for equality has led to carnage unequaled by any previous era in history. 

One would have thought, by now, that demagogic demands to “level the playing field,” as the sinister euphemism goes, would be utterly rejected as gauche and tasteless, given the moldering mound of corpses whose pitiful and poignant stink reminds us that equalitarian rhetoric seems inextricably tied with state-sanctioned mass murder. We live in a time, after all, when any criticism of Jews is treated, in respectable circles, with extreme reflexive suspicion, if not outright hostility. Because of the bloody Shoah of recent history, one who calls Jews to task for anything in any manner or context is punished with banishment from polite society and the imputation of being complicit in genocide; such a one might as well wear a scarlet swastika sewn across his chest, like a post-modern day Hester Prynne.

But of course, not all of history’s victims are held to be equal in stature; as George Orwell famously observed, some are indeed much “more equal” than others. Thus it seems to make no difference how many tens of millions have been beheaded by the guillotine, executed in the killing fields, or sent to Siberia to starve, all for the offense of seeming to be more prosperous or of a higher social strata than the average citizen, and thus rousing the ire of a murderous revolutionary regime demanding that the high be brought low (or, as the Hutus in Rwanda broadcast their genocidal designs prior to indulging in a luridly nightmarish three weeks of unfathomably promiscuous slaughter, that the “tall trees” be cut down)… No, it seems clear that no matter how many have been ground into dust under the tyranny of enforced “equalization,” demands to make things more “equal” will continue to be not only tolerated, but approved. Those who agitate for equality are still viewed as righteous crusaders for justice, rather than properly judged as shrieking nuisances spitefully waging a campaign of terror against tradition, logic, and reality.
Rwandan equality

It was, I suppose, only a matter of time before the relentless clamoring for “gay marriage”—that is, the demand that a millennia-old institution to be suddenly redefined based on a decade-old whim of the ruling class—got reframed as a matter of “equality.” The fact that a man and a woman can get married but not two men or two women, means that things aren’t “equal” on the marriage front (so it is asserted); therefore the law must be changed to accommodate those who feel left out (or at least those among the “left out” whose cause is favored by the hive-mind of the Zeitgeist-upholders; polygamists, having as they do the flavor and complexion of ultra-conservative patriarchy, are TSOL in the new dispensation, while incestuous couples are just seen as icky and are reflexively dismissed, though in truth no legitimate reason exists to reject either innovation under the new rules, given that everyone involved is a consenting adult).
Again, one would have thought, given the equality-brigade’s altogether crummy human-rights track record throughout recent history, that those stridently demanding what is now called “marriage equality” would be looked at askance for employing such rhetoric. Indeed, if the merest whiff of sanity prevailed among the fetid fumes of our brain-dead Zeitgeist and its uncritical adherents who man our opinion-shaping institutions, then the invocation of “equality” would set off the same warning bells that “hate” now does among the highly-placed and powerful and their eager lapdogs and water-carriers. In such a world, an outfit called “equality-watch” would be keeping a wary eye on equality-agitators. 
An emblem of murder, hate, and horror
As it stands, the SPLC’s “hate watch” has conniptions whenever any skinhead with an iron cross tattoo on his neck appears to sneer threateningly at an illegal immigrant, and it completely flips its lid anytime a small group of clean-cut, suit-and-tied white activists want to hold a weekend seminar in a medium-sized hotel ballroom somewhere in the United States. But far-greater malefactions are excused, or even defended, if left-leaning equalitarians commit them. (A semi-famous Hollywood actress can even wish catastrophic death upon a group of convention-goers who don’t meet her definition of “enlightened,” and nobody important seems to care, since even if her words were imprudent at least she’s on the side of the angels.

Again, as we see, the legacy of genocide, terror, and tyranny that the push for equality has engendered makes absolutely no difference; equality will remain perversely sacrosanct among our cultural betters; it will continue to be trumpeted as a good in itself, an end unquestionably worthy of fulfillment, and its conspicuous historical dark side will be downplayed, if not completely ignored. In Europe and North America, the wish to impose “equality” now carries a more and more pronounced anti-white subtext; its advocates tend to be deracinated white liberals (or SWPLs, as they are now called) who have imbibed poisonous cultural Marxism like mother’s milk, and who flatter themselves as being the vanguard of the ongoing societal revolution, ridiculously romanticizing the cultures of urban blacks, barrio Latinos, and other ethnic minorities, while viewing their conservative Middle American racial brethren with an unhinged, embittered hostility worthy of an Ellen Barkin Twitter hissy-fit.

But the truth is a mighty ally, and those of us who know better than to believe what we’re told should never hesitate to point out that our would-be vanguard are naught but a bunch of smug, self-serving, and generally ignorant brainwashed clowns. And it is a grim irony not untinged with Shadenfreude that, should a real, brutal, balls-to-the-wall, no-bullshit revolution ever actually gain momentum, these useful idiots will no doubt be the first to face the firing squad.

Andy Nowicki, assistant editor of Alternative Right, is the author of eight books, including Under the NihilThe Columbine PilgrimConsidering Suicide, and Beauty and the Least. Visit his Soundcloud page, and his author page Alt-Right Novelist


The West is made up of countries built around one basic and incredibly important political ethos – they are all Liberal Democracies. Unfortunately, these countries also share a more recent political ideology which has come to be known as multiculturalism, a word invented in the latter half of the 20th century to enforce our toleration – indeed celebration – of all faiths, cultures and races.

Multiculturalism sits at the pinnacle of Political Correctness (another expression invented in the late 20th century) and is promoted in the post-Christian West with a religious fervour. Multiculturalism trumps all in the PC world. The working class, the homosexual, women in general but particularly so feminist women – all bow before a political and ideological supremacy invented in favour of a foreign race and a foreign religion.


Political party conventions. Alternatively known as The Whooping of the Tards. Fucking gross.

Like… it’s 2012. The internet is everywhere. Information is no longer controlled by the hate-filled cunts at the helm of political divide and conquer. And people still vote?


If you've walked through a checkout line in a grocery store lately, you've probably seen the earth-shattering, heartbreaking news. Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani! Your dreams have been betrayed, your hopes deceived, your spirit horrifically sodomized and left for dead. Your sink to your knees, gasp for air; tears cloud your eyes. You look again... yes, it has happened. Robert Pattinson and Kristin Stewart are splitsville.

"But how can this be?" you ask yourself. "They seemed so happy together..." And you grasp frantically at the glossy pages on the newsstand, flipping through one celebrity rag after another, groping desperately for anwers. Soon enough you have an explanation for this tragic turn of events, but it makes no sense. It doesn't fit with anything you've previously known to be true. You are baffled, and appalled.


The third of the Vanguard Podcasts featuring the original "triumvirate" of Richard Spencer, Andy Nowicki, and Colin Liddell discusses Mitt Romney’s 2012 running mate, Paul Ryan, Wade Michael Page’s bloody rampage at a Sikh Temple, and PC triumphalism at the London Olympics.



Vanguard Podcast marked a vital step in the evolution of Alt-Right podcasting. Its format of a regular team with occasional guests discussing issues of the day—"a conversation amongst friends"—established a highly successful template that many other Alt-Right podcasts later followed. Originally uploaded on the 4th of August, 2012, this podcast features a discussion between Andy Nowicki and Richard Spencer (Colin Liddell was travelling) about the Chick-Fil-A controversy, the question of gay-marriage, and Christopher Nolan's Batman.


The second of the Vanguard Podcasts featuring the original "triumvirate" of Richard Spencer, Andy Nowicki, and Colin Liddell discusses the significance of Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy. 


This year sees America engaged in a titanic political struggle between two radically different systems.

You already know that I am not referring to the policy differences of the Republican and Democrat parties, which are microscopic at best. Nor is the contest between the differing outlooks of the candidates, as both of them view the world from the same tiny, myopic eye. No. The real contest will centre on the methods used to secure a majority of those who can be bothered to vote. What makes this doubly interesting is that what is happening in America is not just confined to the States, but can also be detected in other political systems in the so-called 'advanced democracies' of the World.


Of the various manifestations of the egalitarian cultural revolution that has transpired in the Western world over the past half century, none have been quite so enduring or become so deeply rooted in the culture of modern society as the so-called “sexual revolution.” Indeed, it might well be argued that even the supposed commitment of Western cultural elites in the early twenty-first century to the ethos of racial egalitarianism is not quite as profound as their commitment to the preservation and expansion of the victories of the sexual revolution. The sexual revolution itself brings with it many of its own manifestations. These include the now prevailing feminist ethos, the liberalization of both popular opinion and public legislation concerning sexual conduct, abortion and contraception, divorce, the normalization of homosexuality accompanied by the growth of powerful homosexual political interest groups, and the identification of an ever-growing list of “gender identity” or “sexual orientation” groups who are subsequently assigned their position in the Left’s pantheon of the oppressed.


Vanguard Podcast marked a vital step in the evolution of Alt-Right podcasting. Its format of a regular team with occasional guests discussing issues of the day—"a conversation amongst friends"—established a highly successful template that many other Alt-Right podcasts later followed. This is the first of these podcasts to feature the "original triumvirate" of Richard Spencer, Andy Nowicki, and Colin Liddell. Originally uploaded on the 16th of July, 2012, topics included Mitt Romney's Presidential campaign, the politics of Japan, life in South Africa, and why young people should avoid higher education.


My previous articles at Alternative Right and Counter-Currents, analyzing and and critiquing the manosphere and its attendent pick-up-artist "game" ethos, provoked a wide variety of responses. Commenters chimed in with much to say about what I had to say, and their feedback ranged from the highly complimentary to the lasceratingly scathing and epithet-intensive.

Still, nothing that I've written on this subject has managed to stir the proverbial shit so vigorously as Ava Moretti's recent article "Pick Up Artists" has. Like Jaenelle Antas in a similar piece two years ago, Moretti indicted alt-rightists, white nationalists, and gamers alike for what she claimed was their all-too prevalent misogynistic attitudes. At the same time (also like Antas), Moretti maintained her own traditionalist female bona fides, thus distancing herself from the harridanic ideological misandry which pockmarks the hideously haggish countenance of contemporary feminism. But such insistances on Moretti's part did nothing to dissuade many masculinist commenters from believing her to be little more than a shrill feminist shill in disguise, or even more hilariously, a "beta" male on the down-low (perhaps yours truly, or perhaps C-C editor-in-chief Greg Johnson), who'd pussily assumed a female pseudonym to engage in an undercover rant against those manly-man "alpha" gamers of whom he's clearly so desperately jealous.


European civilization of the early to middle twentieth century was characterized in part by the growth of political movements with a martial character. These included both the many variants of fascism from the far Right and revolutionary socialist currents from the far Left. The proliferation of such movements accelerated sharply in the interwar period. Particularly noteworthy were Mussolini’s Fascisti and the National Socialists of Germany, given the later success of these at actual achievement of state power, as well as the various factions involved in the Spanish Civil War. Romania’s Iron Guard, under the leadership of Corneliu Codreanu, was unique among these movements in that it was one of the few such tendencies with a strong religious orientation, and a highly eccentric religiosity at that. (Payne, 1995)


The case of footballer John Terry has once again brought the issues of racism and political correctness into the media spotlight. As these pustulent entities sit there baking in the glare, they emit a miasma of side issues and discussion points that the mainstream media dutifully spins in appropriate ways.

This time Terry got off with calling opposing player Anton Ferdinand a "fucking Black cunt." Apparently his lawyers were a lot better than those of Emma West. But he's not out of the woods yet. The Football Association, which got egg on its face when they prematurely removed him from the captaincy of the English national team, is set to reopen its own investigation into the incident, with possible sanctions and stigma beckoning for Terry.

The main reason for Terry's acquittal may have been his actual innocence. It is obvious that the man who has successfully captained the multiracial Chelsea team for several seasons can’t be what most people understand to be a "racist." But since when has the thoughtcrime industry been interested in innocence?


Repentance: once a means of righting your wrongs before God, now a mechanism for the savages of our post-Christian society to publicly humiliate anyone who goes against the grain.

If you’re a rebel and the masses can’t kill or silence you, their fallback is to try to convert you. Castrate you, lobotomize you, make you as mindless and suppliant as they are.


Not overly concerned with the issue of his own "hotness."

by Jack Donovan

Ego-inflating rhetoric is everywhere. At work, at school, and at the mall, Americans expect everyone to tell 'em how special, talented and important they are. In our inverted world, the weak are somehow strong, everyone who survives a hangnail is "brave," and every bean-counter who works for the Department of Defense is a goddamn hero.


Note: The following excerpt is taken from my longer piece, entitled The Niggers of the Earth, which chronicles my recent travels among the embattled Afrikaners in post-Apartheid, ANC-ruled South Africa. The Niggers of the Earth will appear in the first issue of Radix, the new print journal funded by the National Policy Institute.

This passage concerns my visit to the town of Orania, a specifically Afrikaner enclave and mini-ethnostate in the Northern Cape that has garnered worldwide attention. While there, I speak with one of the community’s many interesting inhabitants, a German convert to Boer-dom named Sebastiaan Biehl.


The following is an exclusive excerpt from my article The N*****s of the Earth, concerning my travels among the Afrikaners last December, and included in the first issue of Radix, the print journal put out by the National Policy Institute. 

The Voortrekker Monument in a lightning storm.

During the time I spend in Johannesburg and neighboring Pretoria, the word “surreal” keeps leaping to mind. It’s just hard to get a handle on this strange place. There is dire talk of continuing Black-on-White crime and even whispers of a coming Rwanda-style attempted genocide, an event supposedly predicted by legendary Afrikaner seer and mystic Nicholaas “Siener” van Rensburg, a kind of Boer Nostradamus who allegedly predicted the assassinations of Koos De La Rey and Hendrik Verwoerd, the advent of black rule in South Africa and the bitter blossoming of the deadly and virulent AIDS epidemic.


It's good to see Gavin McInnes giving his usual sensitive take on the Islamic world, over at Taki's. Yes, he's right. Islam does produce plenty of newsworthy and easy-to-ridicule moments. For a writer of McInnes's sarkiness it must look like one hell of an inviting piƱata, although the words "fish," "barrel," and "shooting" also spring to mind.


Ferdinand Bardamu, master of ceremonies at the seminal mansophere blog In Mala Fide, has opted to take his website to the cyber-scrapheap while he heads for some ill-defined greener pastures. I don't know Ferd personally, though he has been kind enough to link to many of my articles, and I will always adore the implacably profane honesty of the opening sentence of his review of The Columbine Pilgrim ("Holy fuck, this is one messed-up book."); thus, I wish him well.

Ferd and I recently engaged in a vigorous exchange of ideas on the subject of embracing one's "beta"-hood vs. striving to be "alpha"; though Ferd's side of the debate isn't curently available, you can see my two articles, "In Defense of Squares" and "Reply to Bardamu." Though we differed radically in our perspectives, it was an amicable debate. It has been eye-opening for me to discover and explore the online "manosphere" lately, as its adherents are one segment of the uneasy coalition of malcontents with modernity that make up the alternative right.

As with any social movement, be it mainstream or fringe, large or tiny, the manosphere appears to be riddled with factions, which regard one another with suspicion and sometimes outright antipathy. Indeed, these factions often seem to train their firepower with more gusto upon one another than they do upon the common enemy of radical feminism. The chest-thumping "pick up artist" types promote "game," and appear to take the view that "he who scores the most wins," much like Tom Cruise's character T.J. Mackey in Magnolia. The less hedonistic and more earnest "men's right movement" types, on the other hand, seem fixated on addressing the egregious anti-male bias of the courts, the media, and society at large. The former faction sees the latter as whining, feminized losers, while the latter regards the former as shallow, preening phonies.

Among both factions, the dislike of the misandric abuses of contemporary feminism often shades not so subtly into an anger and contempt for women in general, to the point where they almost read as a strident and one-sided "feminism in reverse," wherein men are always right and women are always wrong, rather than vice-versa. That said, it is certainly true that feminism – like every other left-wing identity movement today – is the ascendant ideology of our age, so a degree of overcorrection on the part of defiant masculinists can be forgiven to some extent; such as these are, after all, the Rebel Alliance, a ragtag bunch of despised misfits attacking the stronghold of the ruthless Galactic Empire-like dominant paradigm, whose agents in turn seeks to wipe out dissent as surely as Grand Moff Tarkin destroyed Princess Leia's home world with the Empire's massive and deadly laser turret on the Death Star.

Now my very use of the "Star Wars" metaphor above would render me a "beta"-like geek among the manosphere's "game" followers, and being a "geek" is greatly to be shunned among "alpha"-chasing pick-up-artist types, since chicks don't dig nerds, and discussing Star Wars arcana is no way to show that you're the dominant kind of he-man who calls the shots and won't get pushed around or manipulated or "friend-zoned" by any potential lay. In my two essays at Counter-Currents, which led to my friendly-fire exchange with Bardamu, I explained why I found such compulsive fastidiousness in playing the "badass" in fact rather un-manly, since a real man is comfortable being true to his native inclinations, even if they are "nerdy."

Now allow me to take this argument a step further. There is, I think, something essentially degraded about a mindset which takes it as self-evident that sex in itself is a thing to be prized and sought after and salivated over, simply because cultural forces scream to us that indulging our appetite is some kind of biological imperative. It is, of course, no revelation to admit that the male libido is a potent, often growlingly insistent force, but this does not mean that it must be placated, or that it defines who we are as men.

In fact, is there not something appalling in the prospect of being led by the nose to do the bidding of our loins? Think of how easy it is for this drive to be harnassed and manipulated by those who, for one reason or another, seek control over us! I am in fact astounded that fewer manosphere-scribes and readers haven't wised up to this stark principle, stated at blogger The Blanque's site:

"Do you want to undermine the matriarchy? Then stop fucking.

Seriously. What is it that drives the matriarchal control of men today? What is it that the matriarchy manipulates to achieve their goals?

The answer is obvious: it's the sex drive of men.

If you want to take power back, stop doing what the enemy wants you to do: Stop hooking up, stop going to bars and clubs, stop behaving like there is nothing more to being a man than dipping your wick. Stop fucking.

Watch how quickly the feminists panic when they have nothing to hold over you anymore: "Do as we say, or you'll never get laid again!"

Answer them: 'Fine-- I'll never get laid again.' Watch what happens."

The Blanque's counsel is perhaps a bit extreme. Not every display of titillation is necessarily an act of female manipulation aiming at emascuation and control. Still, it follows that if more men had the self-control and the discipline to say "no ma'am" to sex more often, some of the more repugnant elements of contemporary misandric feminism would be significantly eroded.

Could this be yet another reason why the principalities and powers of our age are so hell-bent on sexualizing everything and everyone?


Nature abhors a vacuum, and will often work overtime and at the weekends to fill one. In political and civilizational terms several vacuums seem to have opened up recently. We can only imagine what new-fangled entities will be called forth to occupy them.

For example, what will replace the vast, perennially gaping hole that seems to exist in Continental Europe? The tottering Eurozone is just the latest in a succession of weird and outlandish political entities, ideologies, and 'solutions' that have tried and failed to fill that particular void over the last 2000 years. On past records, the restoration of the Holy Roman Empire looks like the best bet for stability, so Franz Joseph the XXVIIth, or whatever his name will be, has got my vote.


The world is changing. We are slowly reversing two thousand years of decline.

Like most decline, ours has not been absolute. It happens in stops and starts, in little increments, working inward from the details. It’s like getting the flu during a busy work week: on Monday, you sneeze (once). Tuesday the eyes water. Wednesday morning you feel a little off, but have a sudden burst of energy. Wednesday afternoon it looks like a cold. Thursday you’re a wreck.

Despite the relative density of most people, more and more of the people who make crucial decisions are noticing that a wrong turn occurred in the past. When you take a wrong turn, you re-trace your steps and go back to where you made the wrong decision, and then fix it, preferably without undoing anything positive you’ve done since that time.

We live in a society of people drugged on the progressive vision that says greater year numbers and greater permissiveness go hand-in-hand, and mean that we’re getting somewhere. These will try to tell you that changing anything we do to a version from the past is a defeat, but they’ve obviously never trailblazed any woods. When you take the wrong course, the sooner you fix it and get back to the old course, the more you win.


In my recent review of Ann Sterzinger's novel Nowhere, I observed that we now now live in an age when most social and intellectual movements with any sort of momentum and enduring traction are essentially negative in orientation, "anti-" in temperament. Sterzinger's book highlights one of the less visible, if most radical of these anti-ideologies – that of "antinatalism," the belief that life itself is a misery best avoided.


The result of the elections of May 6th in Greece was a stunning defeat of the bipartisan system with the main parties of New Democracy (conservative) and PASOK (socialist) suffering major defeats. New Democracy still managed to come first, with 18.85% of the vote and 108 seats in the parliament (50 bonus seats go to the winner according to a quaint Greek electoral law). This is certainly a Pyrrhic victory compared to its previous showings: 33.47% (2009) and 41.84% (2007). PASOK finished 3rd with a shocking 13.18% and 41 seats, plummeting from 43.92 % (160 seats) in 2009 and 38.10% (102 seats) in 2007.


I’m going to tell you ladies something that will upset and anger you and cause you to call me all sorts of names, but you can’t deny the fact that it’s the truth.

If he wanted to, any man could rape and/or kill you and there’s nothing you could do, on your own, to stop him.

I don’t care if you work out every day and have a BMI in the normal range. He can overpower you because nature has endowed him with a bigger frame and superior musculature by the mere virtue of being born a man. Those women's self-defense classes you took at the community center? Completely worthless. I can defeat any "self-defense method" by simply uppercutting you in the jaw.


During Easter Christians like to remember the crucifixion of an innocent man for his words, so it was entirely appropriate that John Derbyshire was sacked at this time from the National Review for innocently writing an article for another magazine that intruded on America's central taboo of race. But there was more to it than that. This case also helps to reveal some of the "uncomfortable truths" (notice how these two words increasingly go together) about America and the decline of the national discourse once represented by the likes of the National Review.

This wasn’t the first time Derbyshire had expressed "politically incorrect" views on race. In the past he has even admitted to being a "tolerant racist," so one has to wonder about the timing of his dismissal. Perhaps it was because his latest article came too close to the canonization of America's latest saint, Saint Trayvon of Sanford, the patron saint of Skittles, or perhaps it was the fact that Derbyshire's face was an increasingly bad fit among the growing ranks of wet-behind-the-ears, multicultural, Israel-loving Neo-Cons who have now 'occupied' the National Review.


The greatest love of all...

After several painful years of committing what may be called slow-motion suicide, pop singer Whitney Houston has perished at the age of 48, another wretchedly pitiful casualty of celebrity self-induced crapulence. Her burial earlier this month was accompanied by the same sort of flamboyant pomp and colorful fanfare that attended the funeral of Michael Jackson three years ago, and many of the usual suspects were on hand to exploit the tragedy of an early death for the purposes of egregious self-promotion. (Whenever someone Black and famous dies, that tubby walrus-like buffoon Al “Tawana Told the Truth” Sharpton seems to take it as his cue to stick his mug into every TV camera in sight and pontificate in his inimitably greasy way about America’s innumerable social ills, until you wish some renegade reporter would have the decency to smack him over the head with his microphone and yell, “Prophesy to us, O ebony Savior… Who hath struck you?”)

I am not immune to the pathos surrounding Ms. Houston’s demise, and I will pray for her eternal soul. The truth is, though, that her music was crap.


Modern Mayan LARPing the history for tourist dollars.

One of the legacies of the world financial crisis is that it showed how absolutely clueless pundits, politicians, and financial planners can be about the direction we are heading in. This also explains our growing fascination with the mysterious Maya and their reputation for fathoming the distant future by reading the stars and the courses of the planets.

With the great vacuum of ignorance that enshrouds the future, it is not surprising that this long dead civilization with an astronomical bent has been sucked into the role of providing gnostic hints of what is to come. It was either that or Madame Zaza's tea leaves.