Note: The following ended up on the cutting room floor as I prepared “Birth of a Nation,” my review of Harold Covington’s Northwest Quartet, for publication. I decided to cut it for lack of space, and also because I thought that even serious criticisms seemed petty when considered alongside the Quartet’s towering virtues. I came across these words while tidying up my files, and I decided to publish them as a free-standing essay because they echo and reinforce some very wise comments on Occidental Dissent by one of my favorite commentators, who goes by the name Trainspotter.
The most problematic feature of the Northwest Quartet, like The Turner Diaries, is the author’s penchant for genocidal fantasies, directed not just at non-whites, but at white people as well. The most famous such passage in The Turner Diaries tells of the “day of the rope” in which white race-traitors, particularly those who engaged in inter-racial sex, are lynched by the thousands.
Covington makes clear that the creation of a white homeland would not, and indeed could not, require the mass killing of non-whites, even though moral qualms about mass murder of civilians tend to be set aside during warfare. Such killing would be logistically impossible for a small guerrilla army, and it would be unnecessary, since Covington thinks that most non-whites could be induced to flee simply by destroying their employment and social support networks through targeted killings, beatings, and property destruction, mostly aimed at the whites who profit from and facilitate their presence.
He is less surgical and discerning in choosing his white victims, both during the war of liberation and the subsequent “cleanup.” Covington’s death list contains not just white operatives and allies of the regime, but three whole categories of individuals: lawyers, race-mixers (meaning anyone who has had interracial sex, regardless of issue), and homosexuals. This is problematic, because if white nationalism begins making progress in the Northwest, these views will be broadcast far and wide to scare white people away from white nationalism and into conformity with the system that is killing us. Beyond that, these lapses are at odds with the generally rational and pragmatic character of Covington’s political thought.
First, spare the lawyers. Although killing lawyers has the authority of the Bard, and everyone enjoys a good lawyer joke, among white nationalists of my acquaintance, lawyers are the best represented profession. Thus it seems foolish to treat all lawyers as enemies, since this will drive otherwise sympathetic and useful individuals into the arms of the system for protection.
Second, it is easy to understand why white nationalists see homosexuals as enemies, since the organized homosexual community is an integral part of the anti-white governing coalition. Beyond that, white nationalism is steeped in a right-wing, conservative subculture with strong currents of anti-homosexual sentiment, which are constantly stoked by the organized homosexual community.
But Covington’s stated rationale for murdering homosexuals is that homosexuality is a mental illness. I think that homosexuality is neither a sin (an offense against the God of the Jews) nor an illness, but rather it is something that might be called a “natural suboptimal condition,” like baldness or myopia or a propensity to pack on the pounds.
But let’s just grant Covington’s premise for the sake of argument. So what about all the other mental illnesses? Covington does not mention if melancholics, manic depressives, schizophrenics, paranoiacs, compulsive liars, kleptomaniacs, alcoholics, and other sufferers of mental maladies will be marked for death.
The reason for this is obvious: homosexuals are marked for death not because they suffer from a mental illness, but because the Bible—the Jewish Torah—tells us so. This is probably the source of the extreme animus toward race-mixers as well. It is, to put it mildly, a rather astonishing lapse. It makes it all too easy to parody white nationalists as Bible-thumping hayseeds and hillbilly psychopaths.
It also serves to drive otherwise sympathetic and useful individuals—who might be guilty of nothing more than an experimental homosexual or inter-racial dalliance while in college or the military, where such experimentation is common—into the arms of the system for protection.
What would Aryan reason, as opposed to Jewish superstition, dictate in dealing with homosexuals and race-mixers?
First, it is no policy or solution to postulate that when a white nationalist state is founded it will simply chase away or kill the homosexuals on its territory, for inevitably new homosexuals will appear (it does not matter whether by nature or nurture or both). Furthermore, these individuals will manifestly not be “one of them” (the anti-white ruling coalition) but “one of us” (a racially-conscious white person, raised in a racially homogenous and self-conscious society).
On Covington’s premise, the policy a rational society adopts to homosexuality is an instance of the larger policy it should adopt toward mental illness. The appropriate attitude toward mental illness is not hatred but pity and compassion. It is reasonable to fear the unknown, but unreasonable to persist in one’s ignorance. The idea that homosexuality should be treated as a crime is a relic of benighted times when people thought that other mental illnesses were evidence of witchcraft or demonic possession and should be “treated” by torture and burning at the stake.
Mental illness is not a crime. If mentally ill people commit crimes, we punish the crimes, not the illness. Thus it would be inhuman to exile or kill our relatives simply because they suffer from manic depression or paranoia. It would be arbitrary to treat homosexuality any differently. If homosexuality is a mental illness, not a crime, then it should be treated as an illness. If it can be cured, then cure it. If it cannot be cured but can be lived with, then live with it. If it is genetically determined, then screen for it and try to decrease its representation in the next generation. (If homosexuality has a genetic component, then homosexuals should not be encouraged to “pass” as straight and pass on their genes to their children, but to live as homosexuals and take their genes out of the next generation.)
In a healthy society, people should, of course, be free to associate with or avoid homosexuals just as they are free to associate with or avoid people who suffer from other mental maladies. But to determine rational policies and attitudes toward homosexuality, one would have to compare it to other such illnesses. One would have to determine whether homosexuals are more or less reliable friends, colleagues, and comrades than, say, manic depressives, alcoholics, or compulsive liars.
Of course there would be no problems excluding homosexuals from the pup tents of boy scouts, the locker rooms of school children, or the barracks of the military. There would be no nonsense about homosexuals marrying or adopting children, which seeks to erase the distinction between the normal and the abnormal. Should society also be expected to provide everyone who thinks himself Napoleon a coronation and everyone who thinks himself Jesus a crucifixion?
The question of race-mixing is more complicated. First, the problem is not interracial sex or marriage per se. The problem is interracial babies. Of course there are no interracial babies without interracial sex, but not all interracial sex produces babies. The problem with multi-racial societies is that inter-racial sex is inevitable, because it is perfectly natural and normal for people to take advantage of a wider range of possible mates and sexual partners.
Many racialists claim that they are immune to inter-racial attractions, that they have some sort of genetic aversion. This may well be true of a tiny percentage of people, but it is surely not true of most. There may well be an instinct for mating with one’s kind, but there is no reason to think that this instinct will always trump the other instincts under certain circumstances, particularly given the power of the sex drive.
For instance, the person who had the single greatest influence on my awakening on race and the Jewish question obviously had a great deal of instinctive feeling for his own kind. But that feeling was insufficient to trump his conflicting desires for a home and a family with a woman who has not corrupted by feminism and American junk culture. So he ended up marrying a woman from the Philippines. The marriage was without issue, thank goodness, and it did not last. Now he is married to a white woman who has given him three sons. Yes, he made a potentially terrible mistake, but the idea that this man has committed a capital offense is ludicrous.
Interracial sex is not only inevitable in a multi-racial society, it is being relentlessly promoted by every organ of the establishment. (The same is true of the normalization of homosexuality.) The propaganda is particularly intense on college campuses, where sexual experimentation has always been more common. The number of college students who have had interracial dalliances is already quite high, and if present conditions continue, it will rapidly reach the point of saturation. (We will soon have a better idea if some are genetically immune to the lure of exotic flesh.)
But the percentage of these dalliances that turn into long-term interracial relationships, much less marriage and child-rearing, is still small. Indeed, some such encounters may be the first steps down the road to a full racial awakening. (This is true of one young woman of my acquaintance, who was raped by her black boyfriend.) Again, the idea that these people have committed not just a mistake but a capital crime is offensive to reason. These people are victims of our present regime, not criminals.
What then should be the attitude of a white nationalist regime to race-mixers? First, all whites who produce offspring with members of other races have, in effect, left our race for another. One cannot mix one’s blood without mixing one’s loyalties. We cannot reasonably expect that such people will be more loyal to their extended racial family than to their mixed-race children, and no white nationalist would ask them to. They could not, therefore, be citizens of a white ethnostate (much less would-be white nationalist leaders). Whites who have married non-whites without offspring or prospects of offspring clearly belong to a different category, but it is not clear that a different policy should apply.
As for whites who have had sexual relations with non-whites, or who married but then divorced non-whites without producing children: they should be able to become citizens of a white ethnostate without penalty. But this would not be possible without somehow addressing the irrational yet powerful antipathy they arouse in some racialists.
For the offenders, there needs to be a process of confession, contrition, cleansing, and atonement to incorporate them into a self-conscious white nation. Ideally, such a truth and reconciliation process should be modeled on a religious ceremony (how about a bath, for starters) rather than a legal proceeding if the atonement it produces is to be heartfelt and enduring.
But racialists need to change too. There is a larger principle here that applies to more than just sexual matters. A healthy new society can be made only by and from the products of today’s sick society. White nationalists are not an Elect, chosen by genes or by God to be immune to the corruptions of our age, thus licensing us to smugly look down upon and condemn the rest of humanity.
If there is any hope of our people at all, then most of them are capable of seeing the light, and the only thing that sets today’s white nationalists apart from them is . . . time. We saw first, but we will never be saved until they see as well.
This means that there is no room self-righteousness and much room for compassion. Indeed, the leaders of any revolution are likely to be worse rather than better than the average person in important respects. Not only are they imperfect to begin with, but given the dark necessities of revolution, they are likely to be monsters in the end. They may be creating a better world—but not for themselves.
Covington shows that he understands this in many subtle and funny ways. For instance, in The Hill of the Ravens, he remarks on how the veterans who created the Northwest American Republic shock their own grandchildren with the vulgar language and tastes inherited from Amurrica. Also, Covington’s self-portrait as “the Old Man” is hardly flattering and shows that he too is out of place in the republic he helped create.
Until we breed a race of flawless Nietzschean Supermen, we will have to muddle through with people who have a short list of essential virtues (honesty, courage, intelligence, loyalty, good-judgment, initiative) and a rather longer list of inessential flaws and past mistakes. No, I am not recommending that we try to get mileage out of creeps and kooks. Just virtuous, talented, committed, imperfect people.
Within the movement, we need to be willing to tolerate inessential flaws and past mistakes on the condition that people are honest and transparent about them. One can build with flawed materials, but only if one knows where the flaws are. We don’t want to put the guy who is hiding his dyslexia in charge of editing, the guy who is hiding his agoraphobia out distributing literature, an insecure buffoon in charge of picking up a VIP, or a creepy compulsive womanizer among the wives and daughters of comrades, etc.
A weakness is compounded by concealment. It does not become a virtue by being flaunted. But when one is willing to acknowledge one’s flaws, that is the first step toward rising above them. It is an opportunity for moral growth, a way of strengthening one’s character. Thus we have to penalize concealment and reward transparency.
For a white nationalist revolution to have any moral authority, its leaders must not just lead us to regaining control of our racial destiny. They must also lead us in self-criticism, self-purification, and atonement with the greater racial body.
Bibliographical Note:
The novels of the Northwest Quartet are:
The Hill of the Ravens
H. A. Covington
Lincoln, Nebr.: 1stBooks Library, 2003
A Distant Thunder
H. A. Covington
Bloomington, Ind.: Authorhouse, 2004
A Mighty Fortress
H. A. Covington
Bloomington, Ind.: Authorhouse, 2005
The Brigade
H. A. Covington
Philadelphia: Xlibris, 2008
29 Comments
This is odd, because one of Donovan’s themes is that gay males create trouble for themselves by refusing to respect straight “preferences” and appropriate boundaries.
Jack Donovan has been appearing in many bylines recently. In regard to homosexuals, I note that they are often intelligent, rich, and willing to commit to politics. However, personalities such as Jack Donovan, by encouraging a more robust approach to playfulness, are likely to excite opposition from more straight-laced men. This delicate issue needs to be put in the perspective of larger issues.
Second topic, in re Steven E. Romer: ‘our ideas should be UNIVERSALLY accepted by all races — because they are universally moral. Call me naive, but I imagine all the races pitching in together to support each other in their, and OUR racial eugenic programs — including segregation. If we keep on this path, I think we have the highest chance of success.’
Honesty is the best policy. I have a dream: I envision a world in which every person can speak his (or her) mind openly and state the truth to the best of available knowledge, and seek further truth, without fear of repression.
To establish such a world of truth-seeking, one must oppose Ziofascist censorship, fraud, and disinformation. If white, yellow, brown, and black races can agree that truth is preferable than falsehood, we have a starting point for coexistence. I am not a Muslim, nor a Buddhist, but I see myself as having a great deal of common ground with honest thinkers of those faiths.
The IRA was indeed a community-based urban-guerrilla force.
But the NW struggle — though it too will be largely urban — or suburban — looks to wage a 4GW action, in which the American colonials ride around in very fast cars — which is as American as the IRA is Irish.
Some readers may be familiar with a short work by English Playwright,
novelist and short story writer, W Somerset Maugham: “The Appointment
in Samara,” 1933. It is a little parable about a merchant in Baghdad who
sends his servant to market for provisions. The servant returns pale and
trembling – having been jostled by Death in the market-place, who made a
threatening gesture to him. To avoid his fate he borrows his master’s horse
and rides from Baghdad to Samara to hide from Death there. The merchant
goes to the market-place and bumps into Death there. He inquires why
Death has made a threatening gesture to his servant. Death’s response is
to deny it was a threatening gesture – “it was only a start of surprise. I was
astonished to see him in Baghdad, for I had an appointment with him tonight
in Samara.”
The moral of this story is that there is no escape from the inevitable. Therefore, retreating to the wilderness is a non-starter.
The Irish Republican Army drew a lot of its success from having bases within its own community. Had the IRA retreated to the Irish countryside in the hope of creating a “FREE” independent Ireland, then I’m sure it would have failed miserably. I know the parallel is not exactly the same as what white nationalist face today, but it’s a good example of how we ALL need to stick together. OUR people may indeed be hostile at the moment to those it perceives enemies and not saviors, but this is rapidly changing. In the meantime, let’s sink roots into local white communities, and not jump too far ahead of ourselves. The creation of a white homeland is just one of them jumps.
Michael, I will indeed read Covington’s A Distant Thunder.
Joe,
We are not that far apart.
And I too despair.
I came of age in the early Sixties and I have seen all the terrible things corrupting our youth that you mention, as well as an astonishing demographic transformation that upsets me to no end, as my homeland ceases to be.
We agree in wanting to re-awake the heroes — who, btw, I’m seeing more of, especially more of in your Britain — as young men stand up in the streets of your cities to defend themselves.
I realize I’m something of a dreamer, looking for the long shot that will get us out of the desperate straits we’ve gotten into. That’s my Fenian blood..
You should read Covington, who’s nothing like William Pearse (who wrote that crude book, which I, and a hundred thousand other adolescents, immensely enjoyed, especially for the vicariousness of it all). I recommend Covington’s A Distant Thunder.
One last point: in my view, the last Nietzschean Ubermenschen were born in Junger’s storms of steel and came to manhood in the interwar period, realizing their extraordinary destiny in that heritage of European revolutionary nationalism, with whose cause I identify.
I have read a few of your earlier pieces and completely liked them.
Michael
You are indeed right but also wrong. I know that the present system cannot be reformed, but it will never be violently overthrown. With each passing day our enemies are changing the individual by means of fashions, music, race mixing and TV etc. As the (white male) individual begins this process he will slip further and further into a feminized state, into complete demoralization and subjugation. As the white male is being subverted in this way, the non – whites will be dispossessing him house by house, street by street and neighborhood by neighborhood. I do not believe this will end up a race war in the true sense of the word, but more a war of violence, rape, murder and dispossession. Our enemies have been very careful that the Nietzschean Superman is never awoken. In fact, I believe the last Nietzschean Supermen died at the Somme. So what do we do? Whatever we do we need to do it now, and not in 10 or 20 years time, at some remote baron wilderness. The longer we leave this, the less chance we will ever have of stopping it, let alone turning it around. Our young people of today are being turned into freaks and misfits by Jews pushing the likes of Lady Ga Ga and co. My generation was the last that offered any hope of salvation. We have now sadly lost that opportunity.
Michael, now here’s where I agree with you:
“And besides, the object of our struggle is not to resign ourselves to the demise of the Nietzschean Ubermensch (that’s the course of Nietzsche’s Last Man), but to rekindle that Aryo-Western spirit that makes us worthy of our European destiny.”
We need to push “Towards The Superman” before there’s no more Supermen left. We have to counter the poison that is destroying our youth, and we will never do this staying silent over rock music or the Simpsons, in that it may offend people. While our young absorb this garbage then the Aryo-Western spirit will never even get off the ground, let alone be victorious. This is what I mean when I say we need to change (it back) the individual and culture.
We also need to win small towns and cities by the ballot box and not run away into the wilderness. This is now being achieved by the BNP in England, with excellent results. We need areas our people can control and feel save in, as bases of white occupation. Don’t forget, the reds only overthrew St Petersburg to win Russia. Once they conciliated their power they then went to the smaller towns and cities and massacred them all. If Nationalists could control sections of its country, then at least they would begin to have a fighting chance. This, coupled with Nietzschean Supermen, will give our people HOPE.
Anyone remember Lawrence Dennis?
http://www.toqonline.com/archives/v1n1/TOQv1n1Stimely.pdf
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/04/usa.race
John Walters wrote about the same thing I was going to — combinations of genes that singly confer advantages so great the the negative effects when 2 or more of them combine are a trade-off of sorts. I have long thought this was the MAIN problem with the Nazi eugenic program, they did not have enough knowledge of behavioral and brain genetics to be making such specific decisions about the mentally ill. A great example of this is resistance to malaria in blacks — a gene which gives a sickle-shape to the blood cells and therefore resists the malaria parasite also causes the disease Sickle-cell anemia. Another one closer to home in many whites is color-blindness — studies show that the color blind are actually superior in picking out certain earth-tones from subtle background colors, and they think that color-blindness would actually confer and advantage on hunters because of this. You can get into trouble by doing specific eugenics like this if you are not careful. Things that are shown to be obvious defects like Down syndrome or microcephaly could easily be manipulated with eugenics. Then you have cases where multiple genes combine to create a type arising with statistical regularity that would be considered mentally ill, but the background pool of genes is absolutely necessary to who we are and where we are going when they are more evenly distributed in the individuals in the gene-pool.
With gays, I personally don’t understand that perception and behavior in the least, but I really do not give it a second thought. I think about it so little that I was surprised in years past when I found out years after college that my best friend at one time was gay. I had no idea whatsoever. I think it is a marginal side issue which has no bearing on our fate as a people except that Jews have stirred the gays into their cauldron of “otherness” as another faction to help them boil us alive in their stew of “we are all persecuted by whitey so let’s get ‘im” coalition. Even if gays mattered for some reason — even religious — they still would not really matter because they do not procreate, right?
Anyway, my point is that Eugenics is a very complex topic and warrants massive research. Some things in eugenics are very simple however — like making sure our highest-functioning people are also procreating in large numbers, and our lowest-functioning not procreating. It’s all about moving the bar upward. To even consider the idea of any sort of violence is completely 100% counterproductive and absolutely unnecessary. While it might give a thrill like a little kid wanting god to kill the bully at school, it has no place in our movement IMHO.
I am serious when I say that our ideas should be UNIVERSALLY accepted by all races — because they are universally moral. Call me naive, but I imagine all the races pitching in together to support each other in their, and OUR racial eugenic programs — including segregation. If we keep on this path, I think we have the highest chance of success. I am not “wimping out” either in any way. Actions speak louder than words, and I think the reactions of other races to our MORAL program will say the right things to the world — whether their behavior goes the way I like to envision or not…
Joe,
You think Covington’s vision a fantasy. And I would agree that it is highly unlikely that white men are ever going to throw off their comfortable chains and act like their ancestors, who defended their lands with sword in hand.
But isn’t it an even greater (and less noble) fantasy to think that the existing system — product not just of Jewish machinations, as the naive among us believe, but of two or three centuries of what Spengler called “Zivilisation” — can be reformed?
Moreover, any reform within the present order, no matter how consequential, would simply be inverted — for the system, by its very nature, reduces everything to its quantifying, mechanistic, rationalizing, technicizing, leveling, and deadening logic.
Ultimately, the only thing that will save us is an awakening of a new sensibility and a reorientation of the spirit. And this, as Vico tells us, is always a product of heroic ages — in which the bravehearted stand and fight for their idea.
You speak of changing the culture and the individual. Yes. But how?
I say that such change will come in the way it has always come — through struggle — struggle not in the parliamentary gas houses — but in the streets and on the fields of battle.
Impossible, you say. Perhaps. But the “realistic” way you propose has centuries of failure behind it. And besides, the object of our struggle is not to resign ourselves to the demise of the Nietzschean Ubermensch (that’s the course of Nietzsche’s Last Man), but to rekindle that Aryo-Western spirit that makes us worthy of our European destiny.
People need to stop fantasizing about white homelands and mass murder of their enemies and undesirables. The war being waged now is all about changing the individual and culture, and will not be the apocalyptic vision foretold in The Turner Diaries. If ever the day arrives when we have to rely on our people to rise up and slay the beast, then it will be well and truly too late. Sorry, but Nietzschean Supermen died amongst our race a long time ago. If we don’t win the hearts and minds of our people, we will never have the numbers or caliber for revolution.
We either take our planet back or we completely lose it. Sorry, but the idea of a white homeland, surrounded by millions of our enemies, is a non-starter.
Yes the American public is “fat & happy,” but so are the “activists.”
As life in the West gets steadily worse, both may find themselves more pragmatic than morally narcissistic.
If I’m perfectly honest I am friends with a gay man, and rather interestingly he finds the whole gay scene to be “seedy.” He prefers to keep his sexuality private rather than flaunt it before the world. It wasn’t till I made a joke based on innuendo that I found out he was actually gay!
I would say my opinions on gays have very much evolved from my becoming racially aware, which I feel can be summed up with the phrase…”bigger fish.”
We need to deal with the attainable now and not some futuristic fantasy world. Utter nonsense from Harold Covington.
Michael O: that was such a good post. I wish I had written it.
Sorry, Mr. Johnson, I know you don’t like short, meaningless entries; therefore, I understand if you don’t wish to publish the above little sentence.
As is the case with monogamy and many other features of traditional Euro-Christian culture, opposition to homosexuality had very strong roots in pre-Christian Germanic culture. According to Tacitus, the ancient Germans punished homosexuals and cowards by throwing them into bogs to drown – such shameful crimes being unworthy of more public forms of execution such as hanging.
Thus Christianity reinforced – but did not create – homophobia, monogamy and other aspects of traditional Northern European sexual morality.
O’Meara: ‘At the same time, I accept that homosexuality is probably inherited, affecting 2 or 3 percent of the population.’
Said Something: ‘Homosexuality is an unfortunate developmental disorder, probably with some sort of hormonal cause. Like with someone who is sadly deaf, we make allowances.’
Robin Baker wrote a book called Sperm Wars: Infidelity, Sexual Conflict, and other Bedroom Battles, in which she suggested that bisexuality as a recessive trait would promote reproduction, and that when recessive bisexual genes combine, exclusive homosexuality results. Either Baker’s book, or a more recent book that can address her claims, would be useful to TOQOnline.
Johnson: ‘There are, of course, other possible historical and cultural sources for homicidal punishment of race-mixers/adulterers and homosexuals…’
Certainly the historical and cultural sources are important in the long run. I look forward to the day when some white genius will publish an easy-to-read summary of how to understand the history of white spirituality, going from the Vedas to the Eddas to J. Evola.
Such an ambitious book, however, is not the most urgent goal for the present website.
Perhaps Kurtagic will be inspired to write more about white religion, in a more pagan vein than his excellent post at:
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Kurtagic-Quakers.html
Perhaps I misremembered RE lawyers.
As someone who grew up Catholic, Irish, and working class, homosexuality (actually sexuality of any kind) has always been something of a taboo subject with me. I’m still not comfortable discussing the subject.
I too tend to share many of Covington’s “day of the rope” fantasies. And leaders of the Gay Pride movement and other pervaders of degenerate sexual and social practices certainly figure in my version of these “fantasies.”
At the same time, I accept that homosexuality is probably inherited, affecting 2 or 3 percent of the population.
No healthy society would, of course, promote or publicly endorse homosexuality because of its obvious dysgenic implications. But our imagined white nation, reconnected again to Europe’s High Culture, would likely assume a more nuanced view than the two extremes dominating today’s discourse on the subject.
Moreover, in the years I’ve spent in the white nationalist “movement,” I have met more than a few comrades who I thought were homosexual. Their behavior was not “gay,” revealingly, and they shared many of the same conservative life-style values I uphold.
I’ve also come to suspect that the percentage of homosexuals in our “movement” is probably higher than that of the general population.
Just as my own background put me at odds with our Jew-run Anglo-Protestant middle-class society and helped make me a rebel, I imagine that homosexuality has a similar alienating and consciousness-changing effect — and could lead to an explicit white identity.
I believe, therefore, that homosexuals who share our values and fight our fight (which means, among other things, keeping their sexual preferences private) ought to be accepted into our “movement” and in the white nation this movement seeks to liberate. Despite the conflicting rhetoric, this has also been the way Europeans have generally dealt with the issue.
“Said Something” – I read in a health book by a man who is both a doctor and a vet, that there’s only homosexual behaviour: the biology comes first and the psychology is plastered onto it afterwards by people trying to make sense of it, and as usual they are full of ****. Time to stop blaming the distant daddy for this particular problem.
Yes, you are right, according to that doctor/vet and also to a practitioner of old oriental medicine whose works I read ages ago. The hormonal troubles have their basis in a serious lack of certain minerals during gestation. According to the first doctor, this is why it is not uncommon to find that homosexuals are the last in a line of several children born to to the same woman – a simple case of the mother’s body having run out of the minerals necessary to spark the enzyme reactions necessary for balanced hormone production. I have seen this myself in some distant relatives and acquaintances. And firstborns are sometimes homosexuals, also. But the basic cause is the same.
Of course, there are women who’ve had 10 kids who don’t produce homosexuals but either they are tough birds with a wonderful constitution; or her later progeny are weak in other ways. All the more reason why both men and women who want to have children should take very good care of their health, eating a more-than-adequate diet prior to conception; living a clean, moderate life; and consuming special,nutrient- rich foods during pregnancy, which is what some precivilized tribes used to do. No science! No doctors! No Einstein! Yet they knew “eugenics” by instinct.
Greg, because of your positive reviews I have recently begun reading The Brigade. Covington makes clear that there are certain lawyers who won’t be targeted. The majority are fair-game. Knowing how often White Nationalists get screwed by the judicial system, this isn’t too extreme for a guerrilla war. To put it into perspective, there are blacks like Maurice Clemmons guilty of violent crimes who are released from prison after a few years only to go on another spree of violence. The Order members who killed Alan Berg are going to die in prison.
Like you, I don’t really understand the NVA’s obsession with rooting out homosexuals. But otherwise The Brigade seems like a very excellent book. I read The Turner Diaries many years ago and was very disappointed. The characters were flat and boring, the plot was nonsensical, and the writing was poor. The Northwest Quartet is at least good writing, even if your average White Person wouldn’t understand most of it.
“My basic point remains: we take down the central ZOG first, or our white bantustan will be swiftly overrrun by a Jew-directed black-brown horde, and we will be exterminated root and branch.”
Why limit ourselves to one white bantustan? Why not encourage the development of hundreds – indeed, thousands – of white bantustans throughout the North American landscape (preferably in regions with local access to water and tillable soil, unlike the Southwest)?
White men who claim they would never have sex with a non-white woman are most likely liars, as men will have sex with mostly any woman, and have to be corralled into monogamy or otherwise stable relationships with social pressure.
Likewise, if a white man has non-white children, he has effectively joined the other team. And if a white man with non-white children is still is pro-white – then he is probably a psychopath, going against his own children, and we wouldn’t want him anyway. Not a good outcome, but it is what it is.
Homosexuality is an unfortunate developmental disorder, probably with some sort of hormonal cause. Like with someone who is sadly deaf, we make allowances.
But I’m not sure about this tolerance for lawyers thing – I’ll go with the Bard on that one.
Interesting, ecumenical piece by Greg Johnson. Also just studied his review of the 4 Covington books. I’ll obtain and read the last two, as I always enjoy Sci Fi and Fantasy literature. My basic point remains: we take down the central ZOG first, or our white bantustan will be swiftly overrrun by a Jew-directed black-brown horde, and we will be exterminated root and branch. In the meantime – as the executioner said to the man strapped in the Chair – “more power to ya”.
If gays weren’t so self-indulgent then they in fact could be a big plus for society. If a woman had 5 kids and one or two were gay then it isn’t a big deal. Those two gay kids would work and have no spouse/kids to support so they could help out their siblings and/or parents and grandparents. Likewise, a bright gay would dedicate himself to his work and not worry about wife/kids. Those are good things. But if women have few children then gays could become an issue. Also, gays today seem to want to spend money on themselves, and get married (!!), want government protections/benefits, etc. so they aren’t very helpful.
Gays are only an issue because of our current post-1960s culture. Otherwise, past great White societies have always had gays, and in ancient Rome and Greece the gay sex act wasn’t a sin.
There are, of course, other possible historical and cultural sources for homicidal punishment of race-mixers/adulterers and homosexuals, but in this culture, the root is the Old Testament.
I suspect that creation of a homeland for us will be doable only in the midst of extreme economic and social chaos or outright war. Most N. American whites are just too fat and happy right now.
However, as Charlton Heston discovered when his ultra liberal anti-gun neighbours came running to him as looters took advantage of an earthquake in California, so too will weaklings such as race mixers and most homosexuals want to throw their lot in with us for protection. As Elie Weisel reportedly did also, running from the Russians in 1945 to follow the German army and receive their protection.
I don’t care much for homosexuals and in particular not their contemporary “culture”; however, there is no need for a homosexual to be against family, order and traditions. In fact, the opposite can be true i.e., a homosexual can, at least in principle, act eusocial rather than antisocial. There are plenty of such examples in history: Yukio Mishima, de Motherlant, Röhm etc.
The Turner Diaries is so bad for us, that it could equally well be a PSY-OP.
What does bible thumping have to do with it? I’m not a Christian but when some Christians espouse sound values their Christianity doesn’t discredit those values for me. Also, is there a persuasive scientific refutation of the American Psychiatric Association’s pre-1973 view of homosexuality as mental illness? I thought their reversal was due to political correctness—one more defeat for normals in the culture wars of the time. Anyway, German NS is for me the epitome of Aryan reason, so whatever they did with homosexuals is fine.
‘The reason for this is obvious: homosexuals are marked for death not because they suffer from a mental illness, but because the Bible—the Jewish Torah—tells us so.’
The Jewish Bible has some ambiguous characters, such as David and Jonathan, but those are not my primary point.
To the best of my limited knowledge, neither Pre-Christian Teutonic culture nor medieval Viking culture seem to have tolerated homosexuality. Certain neopagans have argued that all pre-Christian cultures were gay-friendly, but I have my doubts.
For that matter, even classical Greece was not uniformly tolerant of homosexual conduct. The compositions of Archilochus are a case in point. I am not an expert, but from what I can see in HOMOSEXUALITY IN GREECE AND ROME – A Sourcebook of Basic Documents, edited by Hubbard, the words of Archilochus suggest that the lower classes did not tolerate upper-class homosexual conduct.
I am open to correction on this – I do not claim to have a deep understanding of these issues.