The notion of “racism” implies that evolutionary group competition is illegitimate in humans, but only for whites. That idea is always pushed as a one way, antiwhite street, and we know why; it is just gaslighting to gain the spoils of war without fighting for them.
Imagine living in a society where sterilizing genetic mutants and violent criminals is seen as a bad thing.
When you look at the list of complaints given by “White Privilege” purveyors what you see is not privilege, but the fruits of a positive reputation cultivated over generations. This reputation is the result, the social capital amassed over many centuries of European biological outcomes. It wasn’t something granted to white people; it is an expression of who they are as an ethnic group. The positive social outcomes that White societies create is hardly something to lament, but when women are not sufficiently restrained they begin to subconsciously search for ways to cause male dominance to re-emerge. This is why Islam and Blacks are given a pass by feminists.
Meritocracy is not a high enough bar as it can be made to serve leftist ends by disregarding social and genetic capital for purely economic gain.
“Any sufficiently retarded immigration policy is indistinguishable from terrorism.”
“When White people get racist maps get redrawn.”
“True love is eventually measured by your willingness and ability to become a monster in order to protect those you love. You will do the unthinkable. What people so far could not even have imagined or dare not hope. You will do what can not be discussed later.” Kai Murros
“You are your deeds, what you do defines who you are. Your honor is your worth; without worth, we are nothing, worthless, you’re seen as deficient, even despicable and worthy only of being shunned. Your honor is your loyalty. Without honor, we do not further our folk, kin, or ourselves, but instead hold back that evolution for which we strive. Our deeds attest to our honor and our works prove our worth.
It is the most important and highest of all virtues. Honor isn’t just reputation nor self-esteem, it is an internal force whose outward manifestation is reputation. It is something deeply inherent and heartfelt from the depth of your soul; it’s knowing that what one is doing is right and correct. It’s your integrity, your honesty; it’s having courage, personal valor and strength of will and character. It is also and very importantly willingness to use violence to defend any threats to your kith and kin. Strong bonds with kin, along with a deep connection to the land, create an honor culture extraordinarily rooted in people and place. Blood & soil.
Courage and honor endure forever, their echoes remain when the mountains have crumbled to dust. In the past, honor was considered to be a central aspect of a one’s identity, people would go to great lengths to win honor and to prevent its loss. It is one of the defining aspects of Western civilization; from the Old Norse, to the chivalry of knights, to the antebellum South. The concept of honor pre-dates Christianity in the European ethos. When Europe became Christianized, honor was integrated into it as seen with the medieval concepts of chivalry and knighthood to an extent. Christian rulers during the Middle Ages “Christianized” traditional honor by developing the aristocratic Code of Chivalry.
A person’s good name is remembered through history and those who have achieved great things are remembered for their deeds. People who have lived exemplary lives are remembered by their descendants. Their glory never dies because, as the ancient Europeans believed, it would be honored and remembered by their progeny. This is rather quite different to the Christian concept of one’s reward being in heaven and it can be argued that Christian philosophy had a huge impact in actually weakening honor as a cultural force in the West in the end due to it’s inclusiveness, universality, pacifism, and emphasis on inner intent and faith; though it didn’t have that grave of a negative impact until the Enlightenment era in that regard. (More on that later).
Honor isn’t a stand alone concept, it must exist within the social context. It involves in-group loyalty and out-group exclusion. Egalitarianism and honor cannot coexist. If everyone and anyone can be part of the group, regardless of whether they uphold basic standards or not, then honor becomes meaningless. One must maintain very high standards for the group and those are the minimum standards for inclusion. Honor, by its nature, is hierarchical and competitive, hence why it seems to have fallen so out of favor in modern times. In a world deeply entrenched in egalitarianism and inclusion of all, honor doesn’t function well. If you live up to the group’s honor code, you’re given rights and privileges; if you don’t, you’re shamed and seen as inferior. You don’t gain respect and praise simply by existing – your honor must be earned based on your deeds. Much of this modern day degeneration stems from Enlightenment era thinking, the concept of inalienable rights that everyone is born with and which cannot be taken away, that everyone has inherent worth just for being human.
Honor requires a more close-knit, more homogenized group to function; in a multicultural society it fails. It likewise requires a cohesive honor code that everyone in the group understands and abides by as well as frequent interactions that allow folk to judge each other’s actions. This allows for the traditional mechanism of dealing with social deviants by shunning and shaming them for their behavior, by making them outcasts.
“Isolation is the sum-total of wretchedness to man. To be cut off, to be left solitary: to have a world alien, not your world, all a hostile camp for you; not a home at all, of hearts and faces who are yours, whose you are! … To have neither superior, nor inferior, nor equal, united manlike to you. Without father, without child, without brother. Man knows no sadder destiny.” – Thomas Carlyle
Passion and affability are also integral to the concept of honor. If one lacks passion for one’s beliefs, for one’s folk, for one’s own flesh and blood, they will not vehemently defend them. Being cordial and sincere relates both the Old Norse and Southern concept of honor in that one should be show hospitality and warmth to folk as it helps further social bonds and strengthens in-group loyalty as well as potentially make allies with neighbors.
Honesty, loyalty, and honor go together in all things. Honor is the strength of your word. More than that, it is the soul-might gained when your words uphold your deeds, when your oaths are sworn and kept. When an oath is broken, the whole soul and being of the person are broken with it because it is upon honor that many parts of one’s soul-might are based. Someone who lacks honor leeches life away from one’s kith and kin, they are parasitic.
Soul-might relates to the Norse concept of the soul, mátt sinn ok megin (your own strength and power). Another part of the soul, one’s hamingja, luck, is made greater by deeds of honor and lessened by dishonor. It also impacts one’s group, one’s kith and kin. You either bring honor or shame to them with your deeds as honor is not just a matter of personal ethnics but is integral to social bonds and the fabric of one’s society. ”
While they don’t realize it, Christians agree with their enemies that morality is an opinion (subjective). The only difference is that they attribute that opinion to a god. We know that it is only an opinion because their god breaks his own rules. This leaves us with two choices:
a. Admit that their god is evil or,
b. Admit that something like murder isn’t inherently wrong, but that it is only “wrong” because their god said not to do it.
This is a typically Jewish, legalistic view of law, morality, and deity.
Identity Politics is redundant.
Why this isn’t self evident to everyone is frankly, bizarre. I suppose it is the cuckservative urge to submit by surrendering their own identity in which this acquiescence finds its birth; but like all cuckservative positions it is a losing gamble based on false premises.
Think of any political debate about any topic and you will find an identity statement behind it: environmentalistm, racial quotas, abortion, religion, immigration, government spending, it all comes back to the identity of the people on each side. Some of these identities are chosen (as in the case of religion, abortion, and the environment) and some are not (race amd gender issues). In either case an identity is being presented and defended. It is impossible to avoid identity when speaking about politics.