The new Greek government.

There is an art to blackmailing. I should know because I’m pretty sure my ancestors on the Scottish border were mixed up in it, either as perpetrators or victims, along with the Nixons, Maxwells, Armstrongs, and the other feisty Border clans.

You see, "blackmail" is an old Scottish Borders word, from back in the day when the Borders was a relatively lawless zone (for around 700 years) and what little law there was, carried a price tag.

Like any business transaction – kidnapping or hostage taking, for example – it depends on offering a relative service, i.e. giving the payer some benefit over not paying. Once the benefit is eliminated, it all becomes a bit pointless. Credibility is an issue. Morality not so much.


Would THIS face lie?

In the movie Fight Club, charismatic terrorist Tyler Durden chastises the more timid, never-named narrator for advocating what Durden disdainfully calls “premature enlightenment.”

Durden uses this colorful, vaguely obscene-sounding expression to refer to the tendency of an individual, following a protracted period of mental anguish and spiritual suffering, suddenly to succumb to “wishful thinking”: that is, all at once to see only what he wants to see, pushed into this state of willed myopia by a desperate desire to manufacture inner peace for himself.


SYRIZA's Alexis Tsipras: Samson between the pillars of the Greek state.

by Dimitrios Papageorgiou

The results of the Greek elections were not really a surprise to any Greek except those hopelessly in love with the previous government. Everyone knew that after five years of austerity, which has been harder on Greece than most wars, a lot of people gave up hope on any chance of a smooth transition to an era of stability, and felt the need to replace their government.

As I have stated in my Vdare article, SYRIZA was effectively pushed into its present position by the supposedly conservative New Democracy Party through the criminalisation of Golden Dawn which was the main opponent of SYRIZA in gathering the votes of those opposed to government policies. The disaffected – and there are many in Greece – were actually funneled by the establishment and the previous government to vote for SYRIZA, since that was the only option seriously opposed to the austerity measures.


Does he look like he's laughing?

The prism of æsthetics is not just an aspect of the struggle for national self-overbecoming, it is the struggle rarefied. To the ancients, there was no way to divorce their art from their cultural vantage.

You would not publish a scientific treatise on species of weeds and not consider the art of the actual object: the lavish woodcut illustrations, for instance, or Euclidian layout and typography, as well as esoteric symbolism splashed lavishly throughout. The binding would be hand-tooled, decorated and gilded, so that even to such a stark and (to a modernist viewpoint) seemingly artless subject, Form would remain as important as Function.


Recently there has been some discussion about this thing called "Cultural Marxism," and whether–or how–it exists or not. The discussion began with an article by Jason Wilson in Britain's premier left-wing broadsheet the Guardian, titled “Cultural Marxism: a uniting theory for right wingers who love to play the victim,” to which Michael Enoch at The Right Stuff responded with “I Acknowledge That Cultural Marxism Exists,” with which alt-right stalwarts Keith Preston and Greg Johnson then seemingly concurred.


Black people are not actually very good at this sort of thing.

There’s no point in trying to deny that many within the alternative right and white nationalist movements aren’t especially fond of black people. The implications of low average black IQ, the incessant grievance mongering of professional black leaders, as well as rowdy and violent black misbehavior are recurring themes when discussing the black question. Aside from the most extreme of white nationalists, you won’t see anyone calling for the extermination or ethnic cleansing of black people. Nevertheless, the general sentiment is that black people are at best an unwelcome presence and thorn in the side, and at worst a hostile population that poses a great danger to white people. Prominent white nationalist Jared Taylor has spent much of his career documenting the annoyances and even violence that blacks inflict on whites, which has culminated in his recent book Face to Face With Race. (See Matt Forney’s review).


Colin Liddell reads his 2013 article on the meaninglessness of political terminology founded on the outmoded linear Left/ Right political spectrum. The article proposes that much of the confusion surrounding political definitions could be cleared up by invoking instead a political spectrum founded on vertical and horizontal vectors. The article can be read here.


Why would anyone ever say, especially in a pained voice, “Can’t we all just get along?”

All of us getting along means acceptance of whatever. It means that there is no evolution, no searching for a better answer. In practice, it means that we all retreat to our homes and ignore each other as well as ignoring what happens to our society. If it gets worse, that is not our fault.

People who ask why we cannot all get along are seeking this kind of bourgeois individualism. They want the freedom to ignore the consequences of their actions and their inaction, so that if they contribute to mass destruction of society, they can look back and say “But I was fair to everyone, and I guaranteed that we all had rights.” Yes, rights to ignore that our fate is bound together and that what determines this is not the freedom of individuals, but the health of societies.


I'd like to preface this article with the observation that I think Andy Nowicki is a thoughtful, articulate observer of the New Right, as well as the moral and spiritual wasteland that lies beyond it. That said, in his article "The Patriarchy" and Proper Manhood he seems to have committed the intellectual equivalent of one of those stagger-steps one can't help but do when walking past a lovely woman on the sidewalk.

I'm going to do the equivalent of filming this fumble with a high-speed camera, slow down the footage, and show exactly how and where he went wrong.


“Andy Nowicki is a master at using beautifully crafted prose to illuminate the ugly, the painful and the agonized.” –James LaFond


The great Neo-Con Wars of the early 21st century.

A lot of hype has surrounded Clint Eastwood’s cinematic version of American Sniper, the story of the most prolific sniper in American military history, Chris Kyle, accredited with 160 confirmed kills out of 255 probable kills, clocked up over four tours of duty in Iraq.

Much of the hype surrounding the movie has centered around Bradley Cooper’s performance, and Cooper certainly deserves the credit. While watching the movie, it’s difficult to remember that Cooper largely made his big time breakthrough with the buddy comedy The Hangover, and at least from a cinematic point of view, one can certainly say Cooper carries the film, which is, in some respects, a bit disjointed. Regardless, Eastwood and Cooper combine to give an accurate portrayal of the West’s modern day warriors, something that, not surprisingly, the professional Left throughout the world has found deeply troubling.


The ever-popular astronaut and bookcase theme.

By now most of you will have seen Christopher Nolan's latest movie Interstellar, or decided not to bother, so spoiler alerts are no longer an issue. It is fairly well-written, ably-acted, and stylishly executed. There is plenty of interest and much provocation of thought, so I don't regret the money I spent to go and watch it.

But what is the message?

Is it, as some claim, a great invocation of the fucked-up Faustian spirit of European man? Is it a Nietzschen opus of man slaying his Last Man avatar and becoming his own Prometheus? Or is it simply "damn it all" escapism from the complex and daunting challenges we face here on Earth?


Be a "man of steel," not a "playa"

Recently The Patriarchy, a Facebook page geared towards young nationalist men, ran a series of posts, each of which featured an eye-catching picture of a highly attractive young woman possessed of an apparently impeccable traditionalist orientation and mindset. In each case, the text below the comely lass took the form of a pep talk: “Come on lads, don’t give up! Play your cards right, get your shit together, and something like this could be yours!!!”

Responses to these posts, which I am paraphrasing here, ranged from  expressions of sullenly cynical Return of Kings-esque bon mots (“No way a girl like that really exists in the West – these days, they’re all a bunch of fat, skanky liberal feminist sluts!!!”) to effusions of simple mouth-agape admiration (“Whoa, she’s HOT!!!”) to displays of good-naturedly brazen, jovial braggadocio (“Get away from her, you bunch of losers… she’s MINE!”), to general declarations of approval with the overall message of the post (“What an inspiring speech! I won’t give up!”), each post more emphatic than the last (as signified here by the copious exclamation marks).

And I suppose it was all somewhat touching, in a way. The editor in question (I presume a slightly older, though still rather young man, perhaps in his early 30s) wished to instruct his youthful comrades not to despair, because dark as things may seem, victory is actually within their grasp; “We few, we happy few, we band of brothers,” and all that. But I nevertheless found something about the scene quite unsettling; watching the feeding frenzy of commenters, each desperately tearing away a digestible message from the bewitching images on display, reminded me that even among those pockets of resistance to the cultural miasma that is the rancid mainstream, an air of conspicuously degraded sensualism still pervades.


James Lawrence

V Číně žijící Evropan si jednoduše nemůže nepovšimnout tamějšího intenzivního nacionalismu – zejména v porovnání se směsicí strachu, opovržení a lhostejnosti, která ve vztahu k národnímu cítění převládá na Západě.


Today is the birthday of Yukio Mishima, the Japanese writer and nationalist revered by many on the alternative right. His fame was sealed by his ritual suicide on the 25th of November, 1970, after he had failed to incite a nationalist coup at the Ichigaya Bararcks in central Tokyo.


There is probably no other institution in the medieval world that has been slandered as much as the Holy Inquisition. Enlighteners, Protestants, and Jews managed for a long time to tarnish this very important institution in every possible way. Even in our own day, Hollywood continues to produce movies that reinforce this view.

But, as the saying goes, “lies have small feet.” Modern historical research has proved that a lot of the so-called “truths” that were widely believed about the actions of this institution were just myths created by modernity.


by Colin Liddell

If you don’t want rodents in your house, you make your house unlivable for rats, perhaps by buying a cat. If you don’t want cockroaches, you likewise make your house unlivable for those unlovable critters too. So, what do you do if you don’t want to live (and die) cheek-by-bloody-jowl with Islamist nut jobs, like the Kouachi brothers, the gunmen who attacked the offices of Charlie Hebdo, and their various cohorts? The answer is simple: you make it unlivable for such scum.


by Dota

Throughout my years in elementary school I felt that certain teachers harboured unwarranted prejudice against me. I’d complain to my parents and my Dad’s response was fairly consistent: “What have you been up to?” My Mother’s response was somewhat more sympathetic: “Why don’t they like you? You’re so likable!” Both of their responses subtly implied that the way people treat you is a function of your own behaviour toward them. I have mentioned numerous times that the West needs to embrace this virtue of reciprocity. The virtue of tolerance that was championed by the Old Left of John Stuart Mill has been degraded by the modern left. In his essay On Liberty Mill championed a diversity of opinions (NOT a diversity of races) while placing one sole limit on free speech: using it to incite a mob.


Note: this article was originally posted at The Last Ditch in March 2006. At that time, a Danish magazine's publication of unflattering depictions of Mohammed had touched off riots across much of the Muslim world, resulting in mass destruction and several mob-instigated murders. The article is reposted here and now in 2015, as the points it makes are tragically once again quite relevant in light of last Tuesday's Charlie Hebdo massacre carried out by radical Islamists in Paris.

"He's a prophet and a pusher, partly truth and partly fiction."

The now-notorious Mohammed cartoons published in Denmark last year have in fact a historical, as well as geographical, precedent. In 1845, a satirical Danish journal named Corsair ran a series of cartoons mocking the appearance of Copenhagen author and personality — and later renowned philosopher and Christian polemicist — Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855). The cartoons highlighted the writer's baggy, ill-fitting clothes, particularly focusing attention upon his chronically uneven pant legs.


In 1914, at the start of WWI the British Foreign Secretary Sir Edward Grey, famously remarked "The lamps are going out all over Europe, we shall not see them lit again in our life-time."

Recently, in Germany there has also been some lamp dimming, and for a reason just as significant as 1914, if not more so. The cathedral authorities in the German city of Cologne decided to put out the lights of the famous cathedral in order to show their displeasure at the well-behaved anti-Islamic supporters of Pegida. Other prominent landmarks, including bridges over the Rhine and the Brandenburg Gate, also joined in.


Perhaps my biggest qualm with the blog, Stuff Black People Don’t Like is that its acronym is nearly impossible to say correctly on the first try. If FDR ever made an acronym that hard, which given how many he created, seems likely, “Paul Kersey,” the creator of the blog, should have been able to do better. Outside of this minor issue, however, his blog and its expansive archives are an incredible resource.

Within the unauthorized right, the media blackout (no pun intended) of interracial crime in the black-on-white direction is well understood. But that by no means implies that I want to spend a great deal of my time digging around the Internet in search of genuine reporting on the matter. Quite frankly, I want someone else to do it for me. From what I can tell, there are four competitors in this field: SBPDL, The Daily Kenn, American Renaissance, and Top Conservative News. All do an excellent job in curating news stories from an incredible array of sources, and all are equally well intentioned, but what makes SBPDL shine is the commentary it provides. Like the above sites, it produces reports on the general anti-white state of American culture, but a service it provides that is completely unique, is its commentary on each news item. While other sites merely curate, SBPDL, digs in and highlights the details.


Liberals finding their natural level.

by Sean Last

In this post I am going to argue that one important reason why many people adopt a liberal political ideology is that it boosts their self esteem by allowing liberals to view themselves as noble warriors in a great battle against evil. There is a good deal of empirical data which is consistent with this theory. But I will also be making use of some evidence which is purely anecdotal. I fully recognize the limitations of such data. But I am still going to talk about it because it adds something meaningful to this theory.

The first question that needs answering is why liberals would need to increase their self-esteem in a way that conservatives do not. The answer is simple: liberals have less self esteem than conservatives to begin with.


One of the most noticeable trends during my life has been the extent to which popular documentaries have been dumbed-down and feminized. In the past the typical documentary on British television would be presented by someone like Lord Kenneth Clark, Sir David Attenborough, Jacob Bronowski, or James Burke, men of evident genius, with deep familiarity with their subjects. But combined with their great erudition, they often had a slightly aloof manner or an appearance that wasn't exactly show business.


With the closing of another year marked by media hysteria, the narrative that the crazed hermit North Korean regime orchestrated the hacking of the Japanese-owned Hollywood company Sony, thereby assaulting our precious freedom to crank out cultural subversion, has quickly begun to fall apart. From the beginning the story never held neither consistency nor any forensic evidence. Yet the notion that ruthless Korean dictator Kim Jong Un wants to keep them from the movies, the modern substitute for the West’s emptying churches, has sent cable news consumers into a panic.


A version of this article was published at the old Alternative Right site on the 2nd of October, 2013. This is an updated and expanded version.

Doctor Johnson once famously refuted the nonsensical idealism of the Anglo-Irish cleric Bishop Berkeley by kicking a rock. This example is relevant when considering the over-intellectualization that many on the alternative right are drawn to in their attempts to challenge the hegemonic power of "Liberal Ideology," while also signalling their general intelligence and all-round superiority to their friends. It is certainly relevant to the contentious and arcanely expressed ideas of Alexandr Dugin.

The Russian intellectual's striving for a "Fourth Political Theory" is based on his abstracted view of the history of ideology, which, like Berkeley's idealism, seems to exist in a rarefied space separate from a robust dialogue with physical reality of the kind that Johnson favoured.


Jean Valjean: drowning in Liberal tears?

by General Beardcastle

You’ll have heard by now of “dindus” and the “gentle giant” who wishes to “turn his life around.” Although now almost always Black, the origin of this archetypal object of liberal leftist sympathies was the character of Jean Valjean in Victor Hugo’s famous novel, Les Misérables, which has also been made into one of the longest-running musicals of all time as well as a movie or two.

Valjean is described as a stout, hardy man of great muscular strength, whom we are made to feel has been unjustly imprisoned for merely stealing a loaf of bread and then only because he was starving. Our hearts are supposed to bleed for him and then burn with a sense of outrage at the terrible injustices of the world.

But, just how true is any of this?