Twilight of the Thots: Woman and Love in the Age of the Shitlord

In the year 1951 Nat King Cole recorded the (((Irving Gordon))) song Unforgettable. In 2006 Beyonce recorded the (written by a team of dindus and marketing executives) song Irreplaceable. Although the song titles are near synonyms, their messages are diametrically opposed. In Cole the beloved is in fact “unforgettable,” while in Beyonce the beloved is eminently “replaceable,” as the lyrics attest:

You must not know ’bout me

You must not know ’bout me

I could have another you in a minute

Matter fact he’ll be here in a minute, baby…

You must not know ’bout me

You must not know ’bout me

I’ll have another you by tomorrow

So don’t you ever for a second

Get to thinking you’re irreplaceable

Each song represents the zeitgeist of its era. So while both these Negroes can ape our higher and lower selves dancing and singing our elevated romanticism or our depraved bacchaeism into congestible mass consumption by filtering it through their best contemporary Josephine Baker Banana Dance, they are not  responsible for the premium put on romantic love, which is largely a Western convention, invention and world feeling. One may go back and look into the canon beyond Dante and Beatrice and the dolce stil nuovo, past the troubadours, who borrowed from Muslim sources, who had themselves borrowed from the Greeks, past Tristian and Iseult and Abelard and Heloise somewhere further back beyond Ovid’s love elegies and more distant and ancient still. For me our first twinkling of our notion of romantic love comes from Paris’ choice for Helen – in the Judgment of Paris. Here is man faced with the decision of which form of love to worship between Hera (mothering love; Agape), Athena (temperate-philosophical love; Philia) and Aphrodite (lustful-beauty love; Eros). Each represents one aspect of the threefold nature of woman – the triple Goddess (the maiden, the mother, and the crone). Paris chooses Eros and is awarded the most beautiful woman in the world Helen of Tory – launching the Trojan War. Because the beauty Paris stole (Menelaus did not take kindly to being cucked), was rather non-fungible.

Ye will be judged

In contrast is this postmodern ethos of fungibility related and reproduced by a society of designed obsolesce, of the expendable, the cheaply consumed commodity, the plastic cup of the DSL bukkake of the proliferation of pornography, to the swipe right ‘Tinderfication’ of urbanite hooking up, the tweet, the normalization of the immoral logic of Kapital applied to sexual morals (‘blow-job,’ ‘hand-job,’ ‘sex-worker’ ‘porn actress,’ ‘adult industry’) and the sex-in-the-city ‘Independent woman’ who rides the cock carousel of her own “liberation” to a unholy litany of shameless infanticides. Everything is now replaceable, from populations, to cultures, to significant others. The female feminist attitude is omnipresent and rampant and perhaps the greatest (((weapon of destruction))) against our civilization and our people.


While society advances the aims of women and PoC through legal means depriving white men of the “bread winner paradigm,” we on the AltRight are left with no further recourse than a complete and utter reversal towards a gender division of labour: White Sharia. The WQ is not some isolated issue to be dismembered by the forceps of an abortionist, rather it is a question that is a part of a larger constellation of opposing worldviews and part of a larger revolt against the Father and against European Man. Francis Parker Yockey identified the larger issues in Imperium by discerning a helpful dichotomy of forces:

“Two ideas are opposed — not concepts or abstractions, but Ideas which were in the blood of men before they were formulated by the minds of men. The Resurgence of Authority stands opposed to the Rule of Money; Order to Social Chaos, Hierarchy to Equality, socio-economico-political Stability to constant Flux; glad assumption of Duties to whining for Rights; Socialism to Capitalism, ethically, economically, politically; the Rebirth of Religion to Materialism; Fertility to Sterility; the spirit of Heroism to the spirit of Trade; the principle of Responsibility to Parliamentarism; the idea of Polarity of Man and Woman to Feminism; the idea of the individual task to the ideal of ‘happiness’; Discipline to Propaganda-compulsion; the higher unities of family, society, State to social atomism; Marriage to the Communistic ideal of free love; economic self-sufficiency to senseless trade as an end in itself; the inner imperative to Rationalism.”


The dispossessed rootless white male, deprived of his bread winner role, his status and place is yet still expected to “be a man,” meaning holding onto chivalrous conventions towards a society and people that hate him. While our global elite import both poorer and wealthier PoC to compete for our resources and women. The lingering psychological predominance of the ‘breadwinner paradigm’ and the reality of the loss of it – has created a situation in which lower and working class white males and fathers have been systematically weakened and are being forced to reconstruct their identities around emerging lower expectations. This can place a tremendous amount of psychological pressure on men as they attempt to readjust – this is called by the academic literature ‘gender role strain’ and also referred to as a ‘crisis in masculinity.” The Peter Gabriel song Don’t Give Up beautifully expresses our modern displacement in the lyrics and complementing gender roles, “for every job, so many men, so many men that no one needs.” With essays, articles and books written with titles like “Are we on the brink of a society without any need for men?,” “Why are we still telling women that they need a man” and “Finding your purpose in a society that no longer requires men…” etc. Is it any wonder why MGTOW is a thing?

While rich Brown guys like Hooman reveal the burden of our White Privilege to us by pointing out how insipid our race-traiting whore women have become. But remember YOU’RE PRIVILEGED! and it is only right to allow subsidized foreign competition to cuck you by fucking and mistreating your thot-whore women, that’s the only path towards redemption goyium. So while our societies literally subsidize (through policies like employment equity, mass immigration and the normalization of miscegenation through media) our own disadvantageous position in the economic-dating pool in favour of foreign savages who are often wealthier than our own betrayed working classes, we are told by the system that we are privileged and should jump at the opportunity to hold Hooman’s ballsack while he gorilla fucks our wandering thots like Stacy and Brittany. But like Menelaus the time has come to wage a war.

The choice we are faced with now is to use our discernment for a Judgement: do we want the post-modern-feminist-race-traitor-whore-thot (The dreaded Thotubus) or do we want the Helen with a dash of Little Suzie Homemaker and forgive my Catholic sensibilities, but what happened to Mother Mary? Woman has forgotten the triple aspect of her nature and man’s peril forces him to elevate Eros as triumphant.


In the judgement of Paris:

“The fact that a woman is the center of this story suggests that women are important and not secondary. In fact they are central to the whole scheme. But this was an embarrassment to the Greek men. The two sides of the Trojan conflict were not Ares and Aphrodite, they were Aphrodite against Athena.”

That is to say the two sides were fighting over the Pure Idea of what the Goddesses represent; Eros for Tory and Philia for the Greeks. Now it might seem that though the Greeks and hence Philia can be related to nationalist ‘love of one’s own’ triumphed over Eros, it triumphed in order to regain Eros.

Hel n Mene intends strike H captivated by her beauty M drop sword flying Eros n Aphrodite watch Detail Attic red-figure krater c.jpg
Lauren Southern cucks the AltRight fanboy who intends to strike her but captivated by her beauty drops his sword while a flying Eros and Aphrodite watch

Woman and the strong emotions and biological drives she unleashes from men is a catalyst for war and revolution, for death and destruction as well as birth and life; men will fight and die over women, Aphrodite was for that reason married to Mars, the God of war. From Zizek, worth quoting at length:

“In Montenegrin folklore the origin of Evil is a beautiful woman. She makes men lose their balance, she literally destabilizes the universe, coloring all things with a tone of partiality. Among Christian theologists it was Gilbert Keith Chesterton who fully assumed the consequences of this violent aspect of love: one has to get rid of the old Platonic topos of love as Eros which gradually elevates itself from the love for a particular individual through the love for the beauty of a human body in general and the love of the beautiful form as such to the love for the supreme Good beyond all forms: true love is precisely the opposite move of forsaking the promise of Eternity itself for an imperfect individual. What if the gesture of choosing temporal existence, of giving up eternal existence for the sake of love, from Jesus Christ to, for example Siegmund in Act II of Richard Wagner’s Die Walküre, who prefers to remain a common mortal if his beloved Sieglinde cannot follow him to Walhalla, the eternal dwelling of the dead heroes. What if this is the highest ethical act of them all?”

So what is the woman’s role in the AltRight? The same it has always been to support and accept her God-given role as a mother and wife. The reason I talk about the metaphysics or the mystification of love is because woman has forgotten her role as the teacher of love, the comforter of Mars. There are exceptional women, although the words ‘genius’ and ‘woman’ are near antonyms, but remember it was a woman, the esteemed Diotima who taught our Western sensibility the origin of love, as a child born of resource and poverty to become the pregnancy of a soul seeking the eternal form. The AltRight isn’t about hate, it’s about love and hate, war and sex, Mars and Aphrodite. 

What happened to the Heart?

Someone posted an audio I came across of Mike Cernovich talking about doing “depraved, dark shit” to women sexually, in the video Cernovich echoes Beyonce’s dictum on the inherent interchangeability of one’s partner. “Once you realize pussy is fungible…” Cernovich says. According to the prevailing and frightening Chadology of the Man-o-sphere, most of the great romantic Eros-Thumos balanced by the Idealism of the Philia-Agapic that so defines the complex matrix of the uniqueness of who we are and the blessedness of our higher selves is just the emo-ramblings of cucked beta-males: what becomes of the Liebestod of Wagner’s Tristian and Isolde? Or the tragedy of Romeo and Juliet? The judgement of Paris? Or the story of Francesca di Rimini? I want us to MAKE LOVE GREAT AGAIN, and I believe the only way to do that is to learn to hate again, to learn to fight again, only by fighting do we move towards a discernment of the unforgettable, of the truly irreplaceable. Pussy is fungible in a fungible society, but love shall reign again at the Twilight of the Thots.




Authoritas Rising: Death of the Father – Birth of the Monster – Reign of the Undead

The Return of Authoritas at the Helm of Western Destiny

“No ‘enlightenment’ provides a purely rational, universal form. There is no such form.” – Michael Novak, Unmeltable Ethnics

“The bourgeois, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations.”  – Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto

The major pillar of ‘Western repression’ identified by the Left begins within the basic unit of society, the family, and extends as a corruption of human nature itself, which it centers on the free conscience of the individual – thus making the individual the basic unit of society.


This is especially problematic for the family, originally conceived as the basic unit of society, now viewed as an instrument or remnant of oppression. The Left’s attacks against patriarchal authority, have morphed the symbol and function of the Father, as something at the very center of the evil ‘authoritarian society’ to be overcome:

“the fundamental shift from the sociological to the psychological level that occurred during the 1940s was motivated by the fact that in Germany the proletariat had succumbed to fascism and in the Soviet Union socialism had not prevented the development of an authoritarian government that failed to guarantee individual autonomy or Jewish group interests. Within the new perspective authoritarianism was viewed as the fundamental problem, its origin traceable to family interactions and ultimately to the suppression of human nature.”



Even at its onset, the primordial cry of the child for the freedom of the birds – the cry for individual freedom was heard loudest from men who owed their learning and subsequent indignation to the very forms of authoritarian government that had nourished their genius, Immanuel Kant referred to the Enlightenment as “man’s release from his self-incurred tutelage”, tutelage being “man’s inability to make use of his understanding without direction from another”. Of course Kant’s ideas were the result of studiously leaning from the knowledge of other men. Perhaps those men who learn to be shepherds can lead a flock, but not all men become shepherds and philosophers or poet-visionaries, or ‘dreamers of the day,’ like the shepherd, are useless without a flock, just as flocks are aimless without shepherds. One need not look to Milgram-like experimentation to confirm that the majority of people everywhere are sheep. Whether in NAZI Germany or under Maoist communism or within Anglo-American liberal-capitalism, supraindividualist systems, modes of interaction, interrelated recursive systems of symbolic interaction mean that most people just want to get along to get by, most accept the rules of the game, adopting coping mechanisms, and top-down ideologies, accepting that life is unfair while attempting to make the most of it. Thus, the dictation of our current social order, which knowingly and self-deludedly expects shepherds, priests and philosophers of ordinary men and women of no considerable inclination towards such vocation – the ultimate lie of democracy and equality is in attributing noble virtues to the ignoble masses.

“The first great affirmation of modern liberalism: religious freedom.” such injunctions justified its historic attacks against the Church; ‘bless me Father,’ became a form of oppression. Protestantism had broken the sacredness of authority by bestowing priesthood on all believers, the social order that rested on the idea of the Holy Family became a source of exploitation, which have since morphed into attacks upon the social role of men generally, but the European “white male,” in particular. That the crisis of the West has been conceived in terms as a crisis of authority, is most relevant, liberalism like Protestantism is merely a revolt against the sacred principle of authoritas; “Liberalism can only be defined negatively. It is a mere critique, not a living idea. Its great word “freedom” is a negative–it means in fact, freedom from authority.” To base the society on the abstract principle of freedom necessarily entails always looking to extend the remit, from men, to women, to Negroes, to homosexuals, to transgenders, to animals, etc. The progressive tendency is never satisfied because freedom is limitless in its abstraction and run from authoritas. To base a society on Reason, as the Enlightenment attempted, was to dream ineffectual. The sleep of Reason, produces monsters.

 That Freud’s father figure had to be dislodged from the fall of 20th Century “totalitarianisms,” became a clarion call to dethrone the European man from atop the castle that he built, as Gertrude Stein once said of Hitler, Mussolini and Roosevelt; “There is too much fathering going on just now and there is no doubt about it fathers are depressing” (Blackner 1995). The father is ‘depressing’ because the father represents the Apollonian principle, a Nietzschean disciplined control of the unregulated Dionysian ego (Freud’s Id) through instilling social order – the father expects, the mother accepts.  


The empty shell of nationalism usurped by the merchant religiosity of economic and social liberalism. Insofar as the guillotine performs its democratic function, with globalized finance underwriting both government debt and the illusion of sovereignty. In attempting to give form to modern man (and woman), the private individual endowed with the right to pursue his own happiness, who is nevertheless under the distrustful surveillance of the national security state, one should recall the figure of the Acephalic employed by that theoretician of ‘sacred sociology,’ George Bataille. The Acephalic is the figure of man and the body politic of his democratic-liberal dispensation = headless, which is Bataille and Andre Masson’s symbolic representation of modern man, as a being “unaware of prohibition” moving beyond god and himself, “made of innocence and crime” holding life in one hand and death in another, losing himself in the labyrinth of his intestines, “in which I discover myself as him, in other words as a monster.” His appetites are his only responsibility, the politics of the ‘free’ individual. 

Acephalic Society = Acephalic Man

Bataille’s Acephalic, apparently giving form to the Leftist variant of the Nietzschean ‘Ubermensch’… as “an attempted harnessing of an aggressive libidinal energy to combat the violent ascendancy of Fascism… The community must serve no master, no minister, no Fuhrer, it must be headless.”


It was at one point common to speak of the father as the ‘head of the family’ but under the assault of ‘freedom’ and ‘happiness’ only rarely is that possible. The ascension of Trump at least symbolically reinstates such a positionality, as the homosexual-nigger-dick-sucking-Jew-Milo affectionately calls Trump “daddy” it is in fact representational of the primordial need for strong men in leadership positions, to concretize form in the shape of authority to battle the chaos monsters that threaten to relativize the world into the primordial swamp of its birthing.




Return of the King


Richie Chowmein

AF – Richie, first of all thanks for joining us.

RC – Sometime I throw Whitey a bone, like you pay  now, but China own your bonds, just remember who gonna be first GDP…

AF – I’ve seen from your Twitter feed that you use the word “Baizuo” quite a bit, I see one Tweet you even referred to Canadian PM Justin Trudeau as a Baizuo, now I had to look it up, but for our audience what does it mean?

RICHIE CHOWMEIN RichieChowmein Twitter

RC – Baizuo mean stupid white liberal cuck phaggots who sell out their own country and let foreigners take over. China have no respect for baizuo who morally try to make themselves look good by betraying their race and nation. China number one! Bitch.

AF – What about all the Chinese that are leaving China and investing their money in Western countries, doesn’t that worry you?

RC – China need aggressive expansion, the Fuedai go and buy, buy, buy, we rule in white country but dumb baizuo like Trudeau say whiteman who serve me food and cook me dinner and shine my car is privileged… lol… If he so stupid I fuck his mother like Castro and he call me daddy.

AF – Richie, that’s not nice.

RC – Fuck nice, nice for phaggot losers, CHINA NUMBER ONE, bitch. You be nice to China now. You see soyboy Trudeau have private dinners with China businessman who invest in his fake-daddy’s foundation and then he lift restrictions… lol… plus China now colonizer, we taking over Africa and niggers slave for us… stupid gweilo – we Faustians now! You never seen Rising Sun? We take over.

AF – I thought Rising Sun was about the Japs?

RC – Chick is chink.

RICHIE CHOWMEIN RichieChowmein Twitter (2)

AF – But not everyone who comes to places like Canada from China and elsewhere is fuedai, some are poor, I’ve seen them picking through trash at night to return bottles to the LCBO.

RC – That because Chinese very smart, high IQ, we come from high like fuedai and buy, buy, buy, but also low like starving Maoist peasant and we take shitty jobs from white people too… But we have communist/Confucius work ethic and we take over your universities, so dumb whites cannot even get in…lol… So everywhere you look Chinese take over… Like in Germany with Hitler, all the German Jews owned everything and the Germans were poor peasants and then the Jews from the East came over and they like the bottom feeders and they become communists because not like rich Jews who bankers, but everywhere they think ‘what is best for Jews’ that why Chinese like Great Jewish rats, you cannot stop us, Hitler no come back, too many soyboy baizuos…lol..

AF – That’s interesting, so you’re saying the Chinese are basically the new Jews? ‘Yellow Jews?’

RC – What you think dumb-dumb, China only care for money, we take skinny white buddha and we make him jolly fat Chinaman because we no suffer like stupid Christians, we do job, like Trump said ‘we make deal now.’ We don’t care about your Christian morality, we like Jews reject Christ as kike on stick, you fucking dumb gweilo, human rights are for white cucks. We use genetic modifications to make the great Han race superior. 

RICHIE CHOWMEIN   RichieChowmein    Twitter (1).jpg

AF – Trump said before he got in office that he was going to nationalize the American economy and he had a lot of bad things to say about China ‘ripping off the American people’ and was against globalism, but now he’s making historic business deals with China, what changed?

RC – Trump is businessman, his skin really yellow, he like Jew, he need China.

AF – How do you feel about North Korea?

RC – Chink is chink, but China number one! If Trump say we put more money in military its good for China… soon we turn on whole world… fuck you, China number one.

AF – How do you feel about white people who have been warning about the yellow peril for decades, even over a century, like Jack London and the German Kaiser?

RC – Of course yellow peril real, we taking over, have you looked at our numbers? The great Han race will not perish from this earth, hail the great Han race, hail Mao, hail victory!

AF – Hail Mao?

g2292-net (1) (1).jpg

RC – Why not, great leap forward, Mao wanted China to match British GDP, but soon we number one! We come to your country and your white youth all fucked up on MTV and ‘finding themselves’ with subculture crap, parents think like phaggot Kevin Spacey in American Beauty… they smoke pot think it cool… and we get good jobs become doctor and lawyer, we marry and fuck and buy your country and your women… we eat red meat now, not empty carb and soy, we drink finest European wine… You’re all fucked… Yellowman is future, even Nietzsche say…lol…

AF – Wow, are there closing remarks to the American AltRight maybe?

RC – Old Chinese proverb, ‘never interrupt baizuo when he make mistake,’ Confusion say.

AF – Thanks for your time.

RC – Yea very busy right now, you lucky.


Originally published:

There have been a slew of articles lately that have been fumbling around trying to get a hold on this thing we call the “Alt-Right.” Good luck with that! Many of these have been reactionary pieces for mainstream ed-ops. The most notable was by the half-Jewish homosexual Milo Yiannopoulos, who has taken it upon himself to wear the mantle of Alt-Right pundit.

As something of latter day Oscar Wilde (without the scintillating literary output) Milo affects the pose of being a transgressive mischief maker. The gay thing is no biggie for me, as it is with some elements of the Alt-Right, but may be interesting as a factor suggesting a kind of social distance that opens people up to the possibility of heterodox opinions.

Milo, thinking about the BBC.

As we know, the old order is breaking down across the West, and a paradigm shift is under way. This is manifesting itself in Europe as ethnonationalism, while in America – a land deprived of ethnicity – it is taking more eccentric forms, expressing itself through the America’s “liberalism” (in the more etymologically sound sense of the word). Milo fits in well there, representing the dual “freedoms” of social pluralism and the new values of cynical trolling: a thesis + antithesis = synthesis. But the current paradigm shift is also being defined by technology. Much of the confusion and relative openness of the Alt-Right comes from the conflicted nature of its major platform – the internet – and the confusions that this creates.

The internet is defined by forces moving in opposing directions. On the one hand there is anonymity – think 4Chan, sock accounts, etc. – but mixed with this there is also a growing tendency in the opposite direction, powered by the need to create “marketable subjects” and therefore virtual “internet data serfs” that can be traded between internet companies. Web 2.0 social media spaces like Facebook are entirely committed to such traceability and transparency to further their data mining, profiling, and ability to monitor dissent.

These two tendencies are polar opposites in regards to identity on the internet and can be symbolically represented by the respective founders of 4Chan and Facebook: Christopher Poole and Mark Zuckerberg.

Poole has publically attacked the Facebook and Google+ approaches to the internet, with one Forbes Magazine article even labeling Poole as the “Anti-Mark Zuckerberg,” although both are Jewish.

Poole has been public about his ideological difference with the ‘authenticity model’:

“We all have multiple identities. That’s not abnormal. It’s part of being human. Identity is prismatic.”

Poole makes a valid point, one that anti-authoritarian theorists have been pushing for. It is not a coincidence that Anonymous the internet hacker group spawned from 4Chan.

The polymorphism of memes.

The internet, when it went public in the Web 1.0 days, came to be viewed by the likes of Poole as a space beyond the hegemony of both the social order and the symbolic order that it necessarily creates, percolates, and functions through – a space of relative autonomy through anonymity.

This was the concept of cyberspace that many signed on for. What Facebook and Google+ are trying to do is to destroy that anonymity and thus autonomy – to “rein in” the parade. Cyberspace thus becomes another realm to reinforce “that which is” – not that which could be or should be.

At best, one could reconcile these two perspectives as dialectical forces, which in their opposition create a synthesized web, in which both anonymity and authenticity are possible, an internet which, “works” and an internet which “plays,” so to speak. Milo is the public face of this “play” element and accordingly has a problem dissociating reality from ‘interreality’ – what Jean Baudrillard calls Hyperreality. In some ways, the AltRight is a product of disconnected Hyperrealism. Although its political origins – its “message” – may lie in the heady writings of Alain de Benoist’s Nouvelle Droite, it really only took flight in cyberspace.

Colin Liddell’s distinction between the two aspects of the Alt-Right is spot on:

“As a medium, the Alt-Right is an aspect of the internet and social media that makes use of a number of simple psychological tricks and which exploits a number of factors, including youth, anonymity, boredom, egoism, and shock value. This translates essentially into memes, trolling, shitposting, Tweeting, and various forms of LARPing and (usually anonymous) signalling. Its operatives are typically anonymous individuals, except in cases where they have been too stupid to ensure this.

The Alt-Right-as-Message, however, is a collection of ideas and moral positions that, like any ideology, has an inherent tonality and consistency (or not, in which case it needs to work harder at this). These ideas and insights involve anti-liberal, anti-globalist, and anti-egalitarian positions on things like gender, race, identity, materialism, and even economics.”

This is the dichotomy we need to analyse the Alt-Right. In his early book The Mechanical Bride (1951), the Canadian “philosopher of communication,” Marshall McLuhan, offered an analysis of newspaper montage that focused on its characteristics of simultaneity and intellectual decline. The internet has revived interest in McLuhan’s ideas, and this analysis applies even more aptly to the internet, where we see the intellect superseded by the “meme universe.”

The unimorphism of TV.

Why study the Federal Reserve System when you can watch a video of a man getting bit by a baby shark? Why read an article on the eugenic and demographic benefits of abortion, when you can play Gemquest? Why write an article in favor of ethno-nationalism, when you can blast 1488 “spamming every place on the web with our corrosive memes…” as one commenter to Liddell’s Counter-Currents article wrote.

In its day, the newspaper page formed connections between disparate elements, fragmenting them but opening up the potentiality of “the global village” – Chinese Revolutions and American Presidential coverage all on a single page. The anti-globalist tendency of the Alt-Right has seized upon a medium based on the opposite principle to further itself.

Although emphasizing the contrast between medium and message for clarity’s sake, Liddell’s analysis does not necessarily posit a conflict between the two – more an exchange of vivifying energies and a hierarchy of ideas and methods. Liddell sees an evolution of the cyber-spray-painting-technopunk element into a more matured, principled, and less puerile expression of the message that can effect the political situation in the real world.

Unfortunately, McLuhan’s dictum may well hold true that the medium is indeed the message – with the potentialities of the internet creating a kind of downward slope into increasing inanity and self indulgence. But the two elements can still reinforce each other, while also exploiting the “work” and “play” tendencies of the internet.

I have no problem straddling the line between anonymous “1488” troll territory and the more intellectualized wing of the Alt-Right, but there is a clear distinction as well as a relationship between the two that should be utilized to our benefit. Actual 1488 is the past. It ended in an underground section of Berlin in 1945 (with a fading echo in the skinhead scene of the 1980s). The Alt-Right may invoke its ghost, but it is the present and future.

How Blacks and PoC Ruin Everything

It has only recently come to my attention that back in June, Amber Hikes, the black female Executive Director, of the Office of LGBT Affairs at City of Philadelphia, thought it appropriate to add black and brown stripes to the gay pride flag. Having myself longstanding reservations over the appropriation of the Rainbow for the purposes of promoting sodomy and the degenerate ‘lifestyle choices’ inherent to gay identity welcome Hike’s new additions as adding a touch of realism. The inclusivity of the new stripes, promoting black and brown LGBTQwhatevers, are more representative of the acts and reality of queer-as-folk ‘lifestyle choices’ – black signifying death by AIDS, and brown signifying the leaky prolapsed assholes of the gay community, generally. What’s more these additions highlight how counter-aesthetic black and brown actual are.

Gay pride = all about black power

The sheer stupidity of the new additions are not lost on youtube commentators, who point out that the flag itself has nothing to do with race. This is of course symptomatic of how Blacks and PoC generally ruin everything.

This is obviously racist because it doesn’t have anything to do with race

That is because if something does not highlight them by focusing on race and their victimhood status, granting them special considerations, adulations and reparations the thing in question is deemed to be insensitive and racist and should be amended, revoked or abolished altogether. This ‘pride flag’ example highlights how Blacks hijack everything possible to put themselves at the fore, including other areas of Leftist progressive vanguardism whose ‘rainbow coalition‘ is presently or previously aligned, such as gay rights or women’s rights, and make it about ‘blacks and PoC gay rights’ or ‘blacks and PoC women’s rights,’ etc. Because through the metrics of ‘intersectionality‘ the academic code-word for ‘victimhood status points,’ blacks consider and are considered as the highest scoring representatives most deserved of special considerations, representation and privileges today. This ‘pride flag’ example highlights how what Blacks and other PoC truly want is to be foremost represented, to be sycophantically highlighted, until every last white person acknowledges what special snowflakes they are by licking their boots. The addition of the Black and Brown colours at the top of the flag rather than humbly placing them as new editions on the bottom can no doubt be read as another instance of the innate Black Supremacist tendency to privilege and place themselves as foremost deserving the spotlight and peoples consideration.

The hypocrisy and double-standard becomes apparent because they are imputing these racial signifiers into a flag that has no signifiers for Whites, which points to their future goal of either the eradication or exclusion of Whites from mention or consideration. Blacks complain that the Oscars are too white, while no one complains that the BET Awards are too black. What the politics of representation is really about is demographics and the struggle of races for survival, what Blacks and other PoC really want is to see themselves, or representations of themselves proliferate, which itself is about the proliferation of their genes and their race.

Ahmed Hussen AhmedDHussen Twitter
Canadian Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen – I wonder why he chose this photo for his Twitter? Me, me, me, me, me… oh I see…

Thus when the millionaire basketball-American Lebron James holds a press conference declaring, while millions of White Americans live in near abject poverty, that race is still the real issue affecting America (notice this t-shirt he’s wearing below from the press conference – oh another representation of himself), we can all applaud him for his courageousness.



Only when we acknowledge who are enemies are and what our predicament is can we overcome and reign supreme in the real world struggle between races, only when we take our own side the same way everyone else does. Because our culture is poisoned by an alien elite we are losing the representation struggle, and if we do not fight back we will lose the demographic struggle as well.

We wuz kangs


The Citadel and The Swamp: A Study of East and West: Silence Film Review Part 3

“While some characters like Durand and Inoue employ the swamp to emphasize cultural incongruities of Christian moral teaching, Ferreira’s swamp bespeaks an intellectual dissonance between Christian and Japanese traditions of metaphysics.”[i]

”Contrary to the view, whether philosophical or religious, which ascribes to some moral rules an intrinsic autonomous value (a typical instance of this is the so-called “absolute morality” of Kant’s categorical imperative) the Buddha ascribed to the several attitudes of right conduct that he pointed out, a purely instrumental value, the value of means justified only in view of a certain aim and therefore only sub conditione. But this end, just as the higher grades of Buddhistic ascesis and contemplation, is beyond morality, nor can it be measured by the religious conception of ‘holiness.’ As Milarepa was to say: ‘In my youth I committed some black deeds, in my maturity some white ones; but now I have rejected all distinctions of black and white.’”[ii]

Your Own Personal Logos

Thus, “The idea of personality is, of course, very vague in the Orient, and especially is the oriental mind slow in thinking of the ultimate reality in terms of personality.”[iii] At once both parties (West and East) are affirming “same, same…” but in radically different ways, likewise in the metaphysics of the Logos.

“The idea of the logos as a unique incarnation in a historical personality is not altogether absent, but it differs rather sharply from the Christian conception in that the clean cut theistic background is wanting, and further in that the historical personality in which the logos is incarnate lacks the marks of reality. Hozo Biku, the incarnate logos of the Orient, has not a shred of historical reality about him. And herein lies the great superiority of Christianity over Buddhism: not simply in its system of a theistic philosophy, but in its flesh-and-blood reality of the incarnate Logos, the Jesus of the New Testament.”[iv]

This “flesh-and-blood” reality of the personal savior however effectively makes the Christian-Logos, qualitatively different from Buddhist interpretations and grants the Christ-Logos a uniquely dispositional approach towards the reconciliation of the transcendent and immanent views of God (and reality –hence broadening the Western mind to a nuanced metaphysical complexity). Christ as the vesica piscis encompasses both principles of human (material) and divine (transcendent) a perfectly balanced (venn diagram). The passion of Christ, the bloody violence of his ascension, the fanaticism of the blood of the martyrs all point towards a radical activism; with a worldly concerned liberationist core, a being-in-the-world-ness that perhaps even functions to undermine Christianity and bring about the rationalizing secularism of modernity, Buddhism at its core rejects such passions as merely self-indulgent illusionary sufferings. The Christian looks out at the world in pain seeking justice; the Buddhist looks within for peace; ultimately seeking transcendence – essentially Buddhism is world-denying and escapist ideology and Christianity though containing that element is ultimately activist and world-immersing. The prolonged existence of these core divergent logos and ontological-ideas has created different character-types. At worst the Christian pushes liberationist theology to the point of undermining Christian institutions and theology itself – leading also to the undermining of European particularity. This process was so gradual and prolonged in Europe, that the Japanese shogunate showed tremendous foresight in banishing the egalitarianizing doctrine in order to preserve their social positioning, as well as their culture. However, the prolonged rejection of the Christian Logos and the metaphysics of personal salvation and liberation by the East and its overextension in the West has indeed created character and system-types that could be labeled “Oriental despotism,” in opposition to the liberationist-individualism-Faustian-Prometheanism of the West – perhaps shortened to “Occidental humanism.” As countervailing opposites however they are unequal, the unique dynamism of the essence of the West, may well preside in the balancing of these two poles within its own structure, almost to the unnecessary existence of the East as merely a backwards recrudescence. That is to say that the West contains a layer of “Oriental despotism,” and inward contemplation, but the Orient does not contain a layer of Occidental humanism or liberationist activism. If the postmodern imposition of human rights is counted it is only a mutated post-modern form of Occidental humanism that is itself morphing into its opposite – being dragged down into the swamp. The West is large spiritually, it contains multitudes, the East is large geographically, and it contains similitudes. That is to say that even the inwardness of Christian monastic, meditative and spiritual life has a radically different and personal dimension than the Eastern variants, “that sense of ‘inwardness’ which has already been defined as an important element in individuality,”[v] such that the Christian “spirit of world-rejection coexisted with a positive affirmation of individual and humane values,”[vi] that was lacking in the East. Furthermore the gold of its perfection is qualitatively reflective of this difference, in so far as the love of Christianity is not the same as the compassion of Buddhism, Christianity’s love is Agape, through which Zizek identifies a revolutionary potentiality, “the all-encompassing compassion of Buddhism (or Hinduism, for that matter) has to be opposed by Christianity’s intolerant, violent love.”[vii]

Furthermore, the Japanese and Eastern rejection of the truth claims of Christianity entails a rejection of the notions of justice, truth, beauty and the form of the good – as transcendental “objective” principles. The dialogues between the interpreter and Ft. Rodrigues and those between the Inquisitor and Ft. Rodrigues illuminate this denial of the objective and the affirmation of the subjective, culturally specific, particularism:


Father, the doctrine you bring with you may be true in Spain and Portugal. But we have studied it carefully…thought about it over much time…and find it’s of no use and no value in Japan. We have concluded that it is a danger.


But we believe we brought you the truth, and the truth is universal.

It’s common to all countries at all times, that’s why we call it the truth. If a doctrine weren’t as true in Japan as it is in Portugal, we couldn’t call it the truth.


“I see you do not work with your hands, Father. But everyone knows a tree which flourishes in one kind of earth may decay and die in another. It is the same with the tree of Christianity. The leaves decay here. The buds die.”



It is not the soil that has killed the buds. There were three hundred thousand Christians in Japan before the soil was…





It is clear from conversations with Fr Ferriera that the poisoning of the Christian doctrine by the authorities was not necessary since the Japanese Burakumin who were converted to the faith understood Christ to be a manifestation of the material sun rather than the mystery of incarnation. Nietzsche’s shrewd insight saw into the heart of Buddhism as “passive nihilism” – “the weary nihilism that no longer attacks… passive nihilism, weakness,”[viii] that which sustains an immoral social order. Nietzsche was beyond prescient when he ascribed to this form of nihilism that was enrapturing the European soul as a “new Buddhism,” presenting “‘the greatest danger.-How are truthfulness, love, and justice related to the actual world?’ Not at all!-”[ix] Nietzsche then saw the ushering in of the postmodern world as one imbued with Buddhist values, in which objective values no longer determine the social order, which like individual personality, is driven by sheer contingencies subservient to power relations. In this gross materialism of sameness, in which individuality is reduced to a hierarchicalization of functionary status, “Oriental despotism” assumes its place as the pragmatic component in an arbitrary social order based primarily on cohesion, violence and the senseless but ritualized routinization of the procedures of worship and administration – Western nihilism. The West had entered a stage analogous to the East philosophically and onto-theologically, but it did so through a Hellenization of Judaism. philosophically, the East never attained towards the “metaxological” balance of Aristotelian (Marxist historical-materialism) and Platonic (Hegelian-teleological) notions of what I will term ‘investigative transcentalism’ that defined Christianity – but remains as in Hegel’s reading of Oriental religions; stuck in the quagmire of the ‘emergent sphere of the spirit.’ The East, especially the far-East, also lacks ‘thumos’ or spiritedness above all, which results in an underdeveloped sense of self. As Zizek puts it:

“Love desires personality; therefore love desires division. It is the instinct of Christianity to be glad that God has broken the universe into little pieces. […] This is the intellectual abyss between Buddhism and Christianity; what for the Buddhist (or Theosophist) personality is the fall of man, for the Christian is the purpose of God, the whole point of his cosmic idea. The world-soul of the Theosophists [or Buddhist] asks man to love it only in order that man may throw himself into it. But the divine center of Christianity actually threw man out of it in order that he might love it. […] All modern philosophies are chains which connect and fetter; Christianity is a sword which separates and sets free. No other philosophy makes God actually rejoice in the separation of the universe into different living souls.”

Indeed, only Christianity ascends to the tripartite functions of interrelation and dialectic, which contains the seeds for an advanced metaphysical structure (investigative transcentalism) that encompasses all others:

Father – Grammar – Mind – Reason – objective – Logos – Nous – Yahweh

Son – Logic –Heart – Emotion – subjective – Pathos – Thumos – Christ

Holy Spirit – Rhetoric – Hands – Action – communal – EthosEpithumia – Allah

At this point a distinction between the Logos of the Greeks and the Logos of the Christians should be explored to pontificate upon their divergences and similarities. If as “In Voltaire’s theory of Western culture neither the Jews nor Biblical history nor even Christianity is ‘central.’ Rather the normative culture of the West had been disseminated by classical Greece and Rome, which are Europe’s authentic foundations, and whose Golden Age of paganism the Enlightenment would restore,” one could assume a distinct Logos of Hellenic conception as opposed to the Christian. Ezra Pound for his measure was overtly attracted to Confucianism akin to the Japanese feudalism witnessed in Silence. However, rather than Christ coming to fulfill the messianic covenant of the Torah, a position which Jews reject, Christ from a Hellenic perspective could also be said to have bastardized, rather than fulfill, the Logos of Greek metaphysics. It is a matter requiring exploration, beyond the scope of this review that I suggest that the Greeks were moving towards compatible truths with the Christian revelation, which because of it’s Oriental-Jewish elements caused a sort of disfigurement.

In each movement of Logos (both Hellenic and Christian) unanswerable questions are regulated to “Mystery” or “Myth” – designated by Plato in The Republic as “the noble lie.” If the story of Christ is compatible with such a social utility then the Myth of Er corresponds to the election of salvation and the promise of the afterlife in Christian theology as well. For the Greeks alone one could discuss the Logos of Heraclitus, Anaxagoras, Plato, Philo, Plotinus or the Stoics – the noetic or spermatic Logos, or the Logoi. The Greeks could not agree beyond a kind of metaphysics of reason at times interacting within the world through form and manifestation and at times wholly Other. Less still could one conceive of a pure Logos-Idea between civilizational forms; and one can speak of the Hebrew, the Persian, Greco-Jewish logos of Philo, the Christian, and even the Oriental conceptual theories of the Logos-Idea. Thus, “We realize of course that there is no such thing as a definite logos-doctrine, or rather that it was held under various forms.”[x] Such a nebulous idea could be molded to any platform.[xi] However, “There was perhaps no passage of Scripture which caused the translators of the Bible into Japanese so much trouble as the opening verses of the Gospel according to John. The controversy was not over the meaning of the Logos, but rather over the oriental equivalent and word to be chosen as the best translation… In the Chinese version Logos had been translated by the word T’ao…” The Japanese translate logos by the Japanese term for ‘word,’ kotoba. Within this loose schema, Reischauer wrongfully concludes “Thus the oriental mind is not at all unprepared to understand the logos-doctrine of Christianity, or any form of it,” forgetting that the Orientals lacked Hellenic roots although, Reischauer adds the caveat of the superiority of the Logos-Doctrine of Christianity to its oriental manifestations.


[i] John T. From Cultural Alterity to the Habitations of Grace: The Evolving Moral Topography of Endo’s Mudswamp Trope Netland Christianity & Literature Vol 59, Issue 1, pp. 27 – 48 First Published December 1, 2009.


[iii] Reischauer, A. K. “Japanese Buddhism and the Doctrine of the Logos.” The Biblical World, vol. 41, no. 4, 1913, pp. 245–251.

[iv] Reischauer, A. K. “Japanese Buddhism and the Doctrine of the Logos.” The Biblical World, vol. 41, no. 4, 1913, pp. 245–251. JSTOR, JSTOR,

[v] Morris, Colin. The discovery of the individual, 1050-1200. Toronto: University of Toronto Press in association with the Medieval Academy of America, 1987. Print. 32.

[vi] Morris, Colin. The discovery of the individual, 1050-1200. Toronto: University of Toronto Press in association with the Medieval Academy of America, 1987. Print. 29.

[vii] Žižek, Slavoj. Living in the end times. London New York: Verso, 2011. Print. 99.

[viii] Nietzsche, Friedrich W., Walter Kaufmann, and R. J. Hollingdale. The will to power. New York: Random House, 1967. Print. 18

[ix] Nietzsche, Friedrich W., Walter Kaufmann, and R. J. Hollingdale. The will to power. New York: Random House, 1967. Print.

[x] Reischauer, A. K. “Japanese Buddhism and the Doctrine of the Logos.” The Biblical World, vol. 41, no. 4, 1913, pp. 245–251.

[xi] A summary simplification of the strains of the Logos-Idea – In general… the logos doctrine stands for theory that there is a rational principle in things. 1. Regarded as ultimate and absolute principle, superior to all other principles (Greek – Stoic). 2. Regarded as one of two principles i.e., co-ordinate with another and opposing principle (Persian Dualism though early Greek philosophy has tendency and Philo himself is not free from it). 3. Regarded as subordinate principle, subject to higher and more ultimate reality. (Hebraic thought, in which logos-principle subordinated to ultimate reality, God). Reischauer, A. K. “Japanese Buddhism and the Doctrine of the Logos.” The Biblical World, vol. 41, no. 4, 1913, pp. 245–251.