Suburban Populism Beats Rural Traditionalism In Mass Identity Politics

Race is indeed a major dividing line between human beings and their collective interests but class and culture is often at least as important.  The dissident right’s model of reality falls short when it focuses on race while ignoring class.  

Barack Obama, for example, is anathema to working class Whites as Trump is to upper middle class Whites.  People across the political spectrum seem to focus on Obama’s Blackness even though he is only half-Black and talks and acts White much of the time.  Race is a huge factor, but at least as significant is how Obama oozes a smarmy SWPL vibe.  When you combine race and class in one man, you end up with anti-red-state personified.  When Obama said “clinging to guns and religion” that was roughly equivalent to Trump saying “not sending their best” or “grab them by the pussy.”   

The upset defeat of Roy Moore is a good example of the importance of class and culture.  The focus on bibles and cowboy hats may have appealed to the rural working classes but alienated the suburban middle classes.  This leaves Reagan era conservatism and the religious right utterly discredited as decisive political forces.  Even a lame GOP candidate should have won easily in Alabama, by far too much for ballot stuffing in the cities to make a difference.
To be successful in politics, populists and racial identitarians must be able to reach across the huge class and culture barrier or at least, not be overtly threatening to the other side.

On right wing blogs and on gab I see endless discussion about everything from being “trad” to restoring the Christianity of the crusades(Deus Vult!).  Also pretty popular is posturing about getting married to virgins somewhere in rural Montana or putting sodomites back in the closet.  These are kind of cool-sounding concepts that establish an aesthetic and a “feel.”  They’re great for memes and trolling too. The problem with all these things is some people start to forget that this stuff is fantasy.

In the real world, most of America lives in the suburban orbit of the cities and not only does a minority live in the more traditional countryside, lots of them are old people.  The city and its hinterlands is where most the action is at.  The country has the advantage of providing safer territory for right wing populists to operate in, but in any kind of electoral politics, suburbanites both middle and working class have to be the main focus.  Even people in the country can use facebook and tinder now.  Going “trad” is a recipe for failure at this point.  Nobody really can go back or even really wants to.  The real question is what replaces obsolete, dead social structures.

That’s a problem that can’t really be dealt with until more urgent matters are settled first.  What most Euro-Americans can agree on now across class lines are the principles of alt-centrist tribal populism.  Everyone younger than boomers intuitively gets that the pie is either static or shrinking for most people no matter how headlines boast about unemployment or the stock market.  Thus the fundamental question all politics must address is how to increase the security and access to resources of a given group.  First, constituents need solid proposals of how they will materially benefit. 

Talking about “heritage” is a good start to set the tone, but the looming reality is we have jobs we have to show up at, bills to pay—and that’s what informs most of our actual actions.  European roots are just an abstraction for the typical suburban White American.  The way forward is to remind them how they are living in exile and can be forced to run away again at any time, how affirmative action turns their jobs into nightmares, how immigration legal or illegal crushes their wages, how the law fails to protect them from colored criminals and punishes them more severely, how their taxes fund the very parasites they struggle to fend off…

The mistake of speaking to principles and responsibility is no one actually wants those things.  Being principled and responsible is tough and in the modern workplace these behaviors are not rewarded, or even crushed and punished instead.  Nobody cares.  Successful politics offers people something they want.  The common complaint about the left’s successes is they give out “free stuff.”  Well, that’s exactly what a successful faction is supposed to do for its people.  If you don’t get a share of the plunder, why bother?  A political movement that spouts empty platitudes about individual responsibility while leaving its ordinary backers with empty pockets has already lost.

Heritage, tradition, cohesiveness, self-improvement, and responsibility are the legitimate language of nascent neo-tribes and cells of activists for whom loyalty and cooperation matters most—but it has no place in mass politics. 
Dissident activist groups already form a sort of cultural aristocracy, a tiny handful who make international headlines every time they appear in public.  As a vanguard they have a powerful ability to nudge the ship in the direction they want it to go, but they can’t forget—they are not the ship.
Most of us are still stuck on the 20th century idea that every successful idea must become a mass movement.  In the 21st century, there is a strategy for the cultural aristocracy and a lowest-common denominator approach for people who are just worried about paying the bills.

Both the counter-cultural aristocracy and regular people alike must understand how race, class, and culture intersect.  If there is excessive focus on race, the upper classes win by simply dividing the races against each other and making them fight over the crumbs.  It blinds identitarians to important institutional divides.

A video came out recently showing a white man abjectly begging police for his life as they scream contradictory instructions at him and make him play a life-and-death game of Simon says until they have an “excuse” to pull the trigger.  The guys who shot Daniel Shaver after treating him worse than an animal were White themselves.  But anyone with common sense knows the real color of a cop’s skin is Blue.

I have wanted to vomit in my mouth a bit every time I’ve seen right-wingers heaping praise on police and the military.  I’ve been perplexed at their sense of shock every time the institutions have turned on them.  Had they understood other factors than race, they would have known the enforcers of the system are their most natural enemies.
This is in fact an area where the alt-right and black lives matter share common ground.  These groups are also natural enemies but perhaps both could set aside their differences where the police are concerned.

Successfully pursuing identitarian interests will require just this kind of diplomatic nuance.  A group with an incorrect or incomplete model of reality can easily be triggered into counter-productive and self-destructive actions.  By indulging in delusion, the establishment left has been caught in a downward spiral since Trump came down the golden escalator.  Now their energies are consumed by feminist witch hunts, race-politics in sports, and obsession with fever dreams of impeachment.  Entrapment in that blinding haze of rage, panic, and pain is a fate any faction would wish to avoid. 

Rethinking the State

A product of enlightenment thought, the nation-state tried from the beginning to make people into interchangeable citizen-workers. Whether in Japan, France, China, or Italy, no matter when, the program was always the same—to force everyone to speak the dialect of the capital city, wipe out regional differences, and mandate total participation in an impersonalized money economy. It allowed humans coordinate as never before, every citizen with an identification number and papers tracked from cradle to grave, everyone pumped through the same school system to be given the same standardized knowledge and experiences. By the 19th century, homogenized mass states were behemoths able to easily crush other forms of organization. The nation-state craze led to the colonization of most of the planet and culminated in the relentless meat-grinder of senseless world wars. Then an unstoppable force began to come apart.

The one-size-fits-all philosophy of the nation state is its demise. When nationalism stripped away traditional cultures, it never really replaced them with anything of substance. By making all a country one place, all the country became no-place and everyone became no-one. After the world wars, the cognitive dissonance was finally overwhelming. What had all the death and destruction been for? The mass state could grind on like a machine for its own sake and take on a hideous inanimate life devoid of the capacity to care.
The illusion of purpose in the nation-state slipped every time 100,000 young men ended up dead over one mile of ground or a beautiful ancient city was bombed flat for an airy idea. For some decades longer nationalistic zeal was perpetuated by the antagonism between the USA and the Soviet Union. But one could not continue without the other. Without the distraction of threatening outsiders, growing internal divisions could no longer be ignored.
Now, internet and smartphones have made 19th century nationalism obsolete. This is because the advantage of factory-style nationalism is the ability to coordinate millions of people at a time, however clumsily, and overwhelm the enemy.
This is a strategy appropriate for a world where the telegraph, railroads, steamships, and mass production were recent technologies. 1860s nationalism was a way for states to take full advantage of those advances in logistics and communication to crush their competitors. One mistake from a general or bureaucrat could get a million men killed, but so long as the other 10 million made it through, they could win the war.
The problem is communications and logistics have continued to rapidly develop since those days. In an agile world nation states are like drunken giants—mighty, slow, and clumsy.
War has left archaic nation states behind. Paralyzed by the threat of nuclear war, they continue to waste their wealth on massive conventional weapons that just sit there. When they try to use them against small, agile non-state groups, they fail. It’s like trying to swat mosquitoes with missiles.
The world of commerce has left the old nations behind. Corporations have little connection to any nation and they make a profit wherever they can. They are like nomads going from one pasture to the next as they will. When one archaic nation is used up, on to the next.
Culture is leaving behind the nation state as well. With the internet, only language barriers really limit communication any longer. This inherently challenges the ability of each nation to keep a closed off herd with limited access to information. It would be hard for us to imagine WW1 with smart phones. Everyone’s Mom and Dad would see the piles of dead on facebook and everyone would quickly realize the whole disaster had been caused by the machinations of a few effete nobles. With modern communications borders on a map are no longer the main way people determine affiliation. People are still limited by geography, but within their range, they naturally group with others who are like them and share their interests. This is the re-emergence of tribal identity within nations. In United States, politics become increasingly divisive as each faction in a diverse population begins to become more conscious of itself as a separate entity with its own interests diametrically opposed to those of other factions. Elections are thus becoming zero sum competitions to see which groups can screw over the others.

The nation-state became dominant even though it was less efficient and natural to humans than tribal groups because it could operate on a much larger scale. With mass communications, tribal groups can now also operate on a massive scale, neutralizing the advantage of having a monolithic nation.
I have pointed out there will be a state even if it’s just the local gang running things. The difference is there will be tribe-states instead of nation-states. This will mean the rules that could once only be applied to small groups will be applied to large groups.
In my latest articles discussing the ethics of economies, I am applying the rules of small societies to large ones, anticipating what the tribe-state might look like. The enlightenment thought that ultimately devolved into relativism and nihilism in government, commerce, and culture will be abolished. Every action by everyone will be understood to have a purpose in accomplishing a common goal.
It won’t be an order of equality, the most valuable will be rewarded best, though in proportion to what they offer. There will likely be informal castes where different types of people are encouraged to stick to what they’re best at. And I doubt it will be a peaceful time. The world is overpopulated and people are now scrambling to join whatever group they think will help them grab more scarce resources. History doesn’t take breaks and humanity is about to begin another big transition. There could be a dark age for awhile, but it will lead into the next age.

A Genetic Counter-Offensive?

There are those on the internet who are concerned about the low fertility rates and loss of territory of peoples of European descent, often called “white” people.
What mystifies me though is how they see their precious whites as some Elven race of Middle Earth, doomed to die out. They see themselves as delicate and weak and their rivals as strong and resilient.
We are taught to love nature by valuing endangered species but nature cares little for such creatures. Nature loves best mosquitoes, cockroaches, and mice that thrive in spite of the best efforts to eradicate them.  Cold reality has no sympathy for a people that still gets outcompeted despite having the most resources, with the best weapons, with every possible advantage. In the course of nature is it not right and just that temperamental hothouse plants be weeded out and cast aside onto the trash pile? Why are a people who see themselves as flightless dodo birds deserving of preservation?

Very telling is if a brown person mixes with a white they see it as a tragedy. The white blood in their mind is drowned out by the brown and genetic territory is lost.
But in reality a mixed person is 50/50 and if raised in a “brown” community, they end up spreading their European genes into another gene pool. Surely that could be seen as a success of sorts, the infiltration of spies, if we will.
For example, look at New World mulattoes and mestizos who no doubt carry the equivalent of millions of white people in their veins.
Latin Americans have never seen full blooded Indians and mestizos as the same thing, or thought a mulatto to be the same as an African.  Inexplicably, New World Anglo-founded nations embrace a bizarre notion of all one thing or the other sometimes known colloquially as “the one drop rule.”
I suppose it’s possible that Anglo views on Mestizos are distorted by the fact that the immigrant “Hispanics” they encounter are disproportionately not Hispanic, but Indian.

Because of defensive, defeatist thinking pro-whites do not consider ways to expand rather than shrink.
If Mexico is sending over lots of illegal immigrants that take over territory. Why not simply retaliate by genetically bombarding Mexico by buying up surrogate wombs by the hundreds of thousands? Or bombard the immigrant communities in America by simply buying off their women to accept anonymous white sperm.
Black Americans are already on average 20% white, nearly griffes and one can’t help but notice that the biggest trouble makers, the poorest are usually the darkest ones with the most African features.  I live in a town with a huge black population and have seen with my own eyes how blacks unapologetically discriminate by skin color amongst themselves.  It is rare to see a truly black black person in any position of power or prestige and their standard of beauty idolizes a decidedly mixed look.  Beyonce, Rihanna, Halle Berry, all their models are obviously half black at best. If pro-white groups feel that limiting African influence in North America is an important objective, why not simply begin genetic bombardment until American blacks are barely half African anymore?
It could be one part of a complete strategy that includes discouraging a rival group from breeding while subsidizing one’s own.

Most groups of people have low capabilities of abstraction. The same man who would fight you over a tangible 20 dollar bill will let you take thousands of dollars in fees and interest laid out in the fine print, especially if insidiously drawn out over a long period of time.
Mass reproduction following a grand strategy is a few levels of abstraction beyond what most people are capable of understanding. A genetic counter-offensive might well go mostly unopposed.

How much though does the white ideal really mean to these pro-whites, does it even exist? For the most part their complaining lets off some steam and then they go back to their day jobs. Considering I can’t think of once in my life anyone helped me just because I had white genes while I watch pretty much every other ethnic group help each other out, such an initiative seems too abstract-minded for them as well.
It is unlikely to see on a large scale what does not already exist on a smaller scale.
Yet I wonder as we become better able to understand nature, nurture, and epigenetics if we might one day see one group launch a coordinated sanguinary invasion on another.
Nukes and a worldwide economy make it so we can’t easily have profitable major wars—perhaps the conquerors of the future rely on demographics as their main weapon.  Perhaps the success of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo is a powerful example of how modern conflict is to be decisively won.
To date the spread of genes seems mostly an unintentional result.
As far as Irish genes are concerned, the potato famine was the best thing to ever happen.  The Armenian genocide and diaspora has probably been a net benefit to Armenian genes.
What if group spread of genes became applied as a deliberate strategy rather than mistakes of brutal happenstance?

Smart Racial Realism

It seems in the modern day that European Americans are the only group that doesn’t stick together while every other ethnicity seems to help each other out.
In my experience as a wanderer, I discovered the harsh reality that ethnicity is one of my fundamental traits, one I carry with me everywhere whether I like it or not.
I’ve been denied a job before when they learned I wasn’t Mexican.  I’ve been all but forced out of a job by black co-workers.  I curse my ancestors for allowing these outsiders to take over.

Rather than feeling guilt, “whites” should thank their lucky stars that they were the ones with the power.  I’ve seen the solidarity among just about any other group in the real world.  Long-nosed Europeans would have been wiped off the map if they hadn’t been able to defend themselves.  Most East Asian cultures, for example, are very frank about regarding other peoples as monkeys.

But experience also taught me working among European American proles is no better.  Just like the blacks and Mexicans, they sense I’m not of their kind.  Proles are everywhere the same.  Only the proportion of prolishness of a race differs.

Over years I experienced the difficulties of race, but also was forced to accept that class is more important.

This is where retarded white nationalists go wrong.  They blame all their problems in life on race.

I see the American Civil War as a grand monument to this sort of idiocy.

I’ll never understand why a single non-rich white in the South cared to fight for slavery, a system that hurt them and only benefited the very rich.

Most people who opposed the spread of slavery didn’t care about the slaves.  It wasn’t their problem.  What concerned them was the disastrous effect on the job market when abundant free labor arrives!

To your average white guy, the spread of slavery back then was like the mass illegal immigration and automation we face now.
One of the reasons young Abraham Lincoln’s family was forced to leave Kentucky for Illinois—slavery moved in and the prospects for ordinary people plummeted.
This early experience undoubtedly played a role in shaping the future president’s views.  He was first a believer in the Whig program of spreading wealth through developing infrastructure and commerce.  Slavery, a system that concentrated wealth on a few plantations and strangled commerce was inimical to his aims.

The vast majority of white southerners would have done better to forge an alliance with black slaves to overthrow the parasitic plantation owners without anyone in the North ever having to say anything.

That hundreds of thousands of them lined up to get shot for a system that only benefited the rich shows what dupes they were.  Faithful dogs, mere tools in the hands of their rulers.

To everything there’s a golden mean.  On one hand failing to embrace race realism is willful self delusion.  On the other hand, being obsessed with race makes one an easily manipulated pawn in the plans of the powerful.
If proles are everywhere the same, so are elites.
A millionaire in Massachusetts has far more in common with his counterparts in China or Nigeria than he has with a powerless US prole with his light beer, smokes, and football games.

When you bring up race with people in America only two possibilities can be imagined.
-Outright race war.
-Deluded ideas of sameness and equality.

It’s such a charged subject that no one can actually seem to think about it.  Being treated as a taboo subject prevents the issue being genuinely discussed.

I care about race because I know that when other peoples take over, I’m an outsider to them who will always be last in line to receive the fruits of society.  When you’re obviously different from everyone else, you become an easy target.  Cherokee Indians who tried to integrate into white culture discovered this the hard way.  If you live in another people’s culture, you’re at their mercy.  If one day they decide to exterminate you or take your stuff, too bad.

There’s no mystical magic in a race, though.  If I determine my clan’s interests can be better served by working with other peoples, I will do so.  I would gladly ally with blacks who share my interests against some plutocratic parasite with my skin color.  If I went out and took a bullet in some billionaire’s war because x people are bad, I would deserve what I got.

Race reality in modern America isn’t about racial solidarity to the point of stupidity.  It’s about recognizing opportunities for arbitrage across racial lines.  If I can get a hotter black or latina woman than I can a white woman, then I will not hesitate.
I’ve found that jobs with lots of blacks tend to have lower expectations.  Most Blacks don’t work hard if they don’t have to, a virtue as far as I’m concerned.  So  when I can get along with my co-workers, it’s great, because I can get paid for standing around half the time.  Whites and Asians who aspergically slave away spoil things for everyone.

Smart race realism means:
-A people must guard its territory; there must be a place that is unequivocally its own, even if it’s just a few city blocks.  It must protect its own and not give stupid concessions.  A people that shows signs of weakness gets quickly wiped out by its neighbors.
-A people must also maintain relations with its neighbors, being always ready to make a good deal.
-A people’s internal parasites are as much a threat as any outside people and must be dealt with.

Apocrine Glands: Race and Body Odor

“Blacks have more apocrine glands than whites, and whites more than Asians. Some blacks have apocrine glands on the chest and abdomen, both above and below the navel. In contrast, whites rarely have apocrine glands on the abdomen, and when they do the glands only occur below the navel.Japanese rarely have apocrine glands on the pubic mound or labia majora. They also have no apocrine glands on the chest, other than those around the nipples. While men have larger apocrine glands than women, the experts disagree on whether men or women have more apocrine glands.”

LINK

The Gun Bazaar of Pakistan

Pakistan’s Gun Bazaar

The area is inhabited by Pathans or Pushtuns, rather fierce Pushtu-speaking hill tribes. On the map, it is part of Pakistan, but the Pakistani government has never really controlled it. Pathan tribal chiefs run everything.

Pathan territory spans the border. 60% of them live in Pakistan, 40% in Afghanistan. In Afghanistan, they are the largest ethnic group at 40-odd% of the population and have often dominated government and business.

The Pathans have twice defeated the greatest armies of their day. When Alexander the Great wanted to cross the pass, he could not manage it for several weeks, until he bribed one of the local chieftains into assisting him against the ones who were blocking him. At the height of British power in Queen Victoria’s reign, the Khyber was the border of the Raj. Britain fought several wars against Pathans and never completely subdued the area. In the first Afghan war, a force of 16,000 (4500 soldiers plus grooms, cooks, etc.) went in and one man came out alive. Pathans were also recruited into the British military, where they were excellent soldiers.

Since 1980, Pathans have been fighting Russians, various other Afghans, American and allied forces, the Pakistani army…and sometimes each other.

The Pathans provided most of the adherents of Taliban. Many — both pro and anti-Taliban — are still (2012) fiercely resisting various efforts by US and allied forces and/or the Pakistani government to control their area.

Crossing the Khyber has always been something of an adventure. Today, it is far too dangerous for most travellers Link

In 2010, the already complicated relationship with Pakistan (always accused by the US of hosting the Taliban in this border area without reporting it) became tougher after the NATO forces, under the pretext of mitigating the Taliban’s power over this area, executed an attack with drones over the Durand line, passing the frontier of Afghanistan and killing three Pakistani soldiers. Pakistan answered by closing the pass the 30th of September which caused a convoy of several NATO trucks to queue at the closed border.^[8] This convoy was attacked by extremists apparently linked to Al Qaida which caused the destruction of more than 29 oil tankers and trucks and the killing of several soldiers.^[9] NATO chief members had to issue a formal apology to the Pakistan government so the supply traffic at this pass could be restored.

In August 2011, the activity at the Khyber pass was again halted^[10] by the Khyber Agency administration due to the more possible attacks of the insurgency over the NATO forces, which had suffered a period of big number of assaults over the trucks heading to supply the NATO and ISAF coalitions all over the frontier line. This instability made the Pakistan Oil Tanker Owners Association to demand more protection from the Pakistani and US government threatening not to supply fuel for the Afghan side.

This rising of violence had taken place due to the detention and killing of the Al Qaida´s chief leader Osama Bin Laden in May 2011. However, it must be said that the strengthening of the insurgency´s activity had always been linked to the control that Pakistani military services and the ISI exercises over this western area of Pakistan. In other words, conflict over the Khyber Pass is totally tied to the diplomatic relationships between Pakistan and the US, lately affected by the illegal American military intervention in Pakistan for the “hunting” of Bin Laden and the big number of Pakistani soldiers and civilians killed due to the, scarcely reported, drone attacks^[11] perpetrated by the NATO and US army over the frontier between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Link

William Shockley Talks About Race And Eugenics – 1974