Feminism and Its Right-Wing Alternative

The “Women” Question as a Weapon of Political and Ideological Struggle

This article originally appeared here.

The International Women’s Day customarily celebrated on March 8 once again sparked discussions about historic feminism and the status of women today. Unfortunately, even in Russia this day is increasingly being perceived not as a benign Soviet holiday—first off, as a family or corporate one. Nevertheless, the date is only an excuse. The “Women” Question—having gone overripe in the West (domestic Russian discussion within the limited scope of the media is only a faint echo thereof)—has acquired a new sound in light of the successes of the right-wing conservative agenda in the U.S. and Europe. Right-wingers focused on the slogan of protecting identity as such and received broad support from the people by responding to their current needs. Their opponents were forced to maximize all their power. And one of the reliable tools for promoting the ideas of globalism and Liberalism is feminism. It emerged from the outset as a positive undertaking but, ultimately, led to the erasure of the boundaries between the sexes and the destruction of traditional foundations of society.

A vivid example of this intensified struggle and, at the same time, an unhealthy response to the changes taking place in politics around the world was the Women’s March in the United States, whose participants wore pink hats and came out to protest President Donald Trump, whom they declared to be “sexist” and the main threat to Liberal values. At the same time, there is reason to say that a new right-wing women’s movement is starting to emerge, rethinking feminist ideas and offering an alternative. It is too early to name this phenomenon, although the media is already in a hurry to do so. At the same time, it is quite real and has decent prospects.

Feminism versus Women

It would, perhaps, be inaccurate to characterize feminism on general terms, since it has passed through very different periods of development and is not a homogeneous movement nowadays. But one thing is obvious: what is meant by “feminism” today, paradoxically, contradicts the very meaning of this word. The concept of “feminism,” formed from the Latin femina (“woman”), in its essence is directed against all that it traditionally means to be a woman. Consequently, it is directed against the family, entire society, and civilization in general.

The women’s-rights movement has existed for more than a century. It has achieved many things. Today, however, feminism is concerned about the following problems:

  • sexual harassment (when even a hint of perceiving a woman as a sexual object becomes a crime);
  • struggle against banning abortion, the so-called reproductive violence (despite the reduction of birth rates among the populations of Western countries);
  • workplace discrimination (understood very selectively);
  • a woman’s right not to meet the standards of beauty (even though beauty is the main traditional value);
  • misogyny “inspired” by patriarchy.

And all this is declared in the name of total equality of rights through the denial of any differences between the sexes (they are believed to not exist at all)—in other words, of human nature itself.

Of course, this is what multiculturalism is about, the bitter fruits of which Europe is currently consuming. The entire Western society faces the question of identity: national, gender- and sexuality-based, and religious, having become the question of life and death within the framework of the migrant crisis.

Voice of America

A vivid image of feminism today, picked up and promoted by the mainstream media, is the Women’s March held in Washington, DC—and other cities across the U.S. and Europe—the day after the inauguration of Donald Trump. Despite its outward comical and even grotesque nature, this protest with pink feline ears was more than serious. Its organizers managed to achieve universal protest and solidarity from the various strata of society. This protest was not so much in defense of women and against Trump but much broader: for LGBTQ rights, tolerance, diversity of races and cultures, freedom of religion, and “human rights” in general—all this in the most politicized sense. “Women’s rights are human rights,” activists stated. Disseminating the interests of a limited group of protesters (it’s not about women at all but about those who are so zealously trying to protect them) onto the majority is dangerous and destructive for the stability of any society and state. It is not a coincidence that its fierce opponents call feminism “cancer” (#FeminismIsCancer). Whereas the political correctness of using this comparison is certainly doubtful, in some aspects it is very accurate.

Real Women

Why right-wing politicians irritate feminists is not difficult to guess. This is a question of practically physiological incompatibility: feminism is based on neo-Marxist, Liberal, and globalist ideology and the denial of tradition. And yet it is profoundly inaccurate to consider right-wing conservatives “sexist” and misogynistic. Trump’s statement “Grab them by the pussy”—which caused a barrage of accusations of sexism and hating women—actually means that he is a real man who loves women, and not the other way around. Besides, is his wife Melania Trump not a female ideal for American women and all others? No-less-powerful women always stood by influential politicians and historical figures, and their achievements were shared.

Melania Trump with son. Source: Bryan Bedder/Getty images.

Obviously, any critique of feminism coming out of a man’s mouth, no matter how accurate, is doomed to failure. From this standpoint, the best answer is living examples of female right-wing politicians and activists who do not want to be less active than men by solely taking care of the home sphere, but who are not feminists at the same time.

Le Pen family. Source: Getty.

Hillary Clinton supporters balled their eyes out when their candidate’s loss became clear, and their dream of a woman-president was rudely trampled, in their view. But for some reason they are not happy with the success of Marin Le Pen, the leader of Front National, who has a real chance to lead the French Republic. Note that in her campaign video, which truly went viral, Le Pen emphasizes that she is a woman.

I am a woman, and as such I experience the ever-increasing restrictions on liberty in our country through the development of Islamic fundamentalism like an act of violence. I am a mother, and like millions of parents I worry each day about the state of the country and the world that we will leave as a legacy to our children.

She says this emphasizing the fact that a real threat to women and mothers in European countries is not discrimination by men and the state at all.

Virginia Raggi. Source:

Among other female politicians who hold right-wing views and are seriously competing with men are Frauke Petry, the leader of the Alternative for Germany, who won in a difficult inner-party struggle, or, for example, beauties like the Mayor of Rome, Virginia Raggi, from the Five Star Movement, and leader of the Danish Nye Borgerlige (New Right) Party, Pernille Vermund.

Virginia Raggi with her son. Source:
Pernille Vermund with her children. Source:

Within the framework of the European agenda, right-wing feminism confronts Islam with its ideas about the role of women. These women are not fighting for the right to wear short skirts but against imposing hijabs. But this is not a reason to immediately declare this movement racist and xenophobic. The clash of civilizations with different perceptions of the male and female roles invariably leads to conflict, especially if a civilization weakened by precisely Liberal and feminist ideas is less active and unable to reproduce itself as quickly as its opponent. This is the response of European women to mass rapes by migrants when their own men—whom the dominant ideology forces to be tolerant and prohibits from acting like men—failed to protect them. It is worth recalling that in Amsterdam, it was men who put on mini-skirts to protect the rights of women who suffered during the Night in Cologne—an incredibly absurd but real event.

Frauke Petry with her child. Source:

The Russian Model

As for Russia, in which many rightists in Europe and the U.S. see a bulwark of conservative values, here the situation with the “Women” Question is significantly different. Our country did not remain, to use feminist terminology, the preserve of patriarchy. In 1917, Russian women under the slogan “Free Women in Free Russia” earned the right to vote, and in 1918 adopted a Constitution that ensured the legal equality of women with men, whereas “the cook could run the state,” as Lenin said, which at that time was a very progressive step. At the same time, Russia has maintained the traditional model of relationships between men and women. In this respect, Russia’s experience would be useful to the West. It is also important to note that we do not have an acute conflict with our numerous indigenous Muslim community which has its own notions about women. Of course, any attempts of “human-rights activists” to play the Muslim card in order to destabilize the interethnic situation do not count.

Women-athletes, Red Square, Moscow, 1930s. Source: RIA.

It is also worth adding a personal observation, which may turn out to be more eloquent than a large sociological study: many men from Europe and the United States, and not just those with right-wing views, prefer Russian women as spouses.

Meanwhile, pro-Western lifestyle publications—whose baby-pink pages feature messages about feminist festivals—are exerting gentle but strategic pressure onto the generation of Russian women-millennials. Their pages contain calls to openly talk about sexual harassment that any woman encounters and feature stories about domestic violence, instilling the fear of starting a family, along with frightening forced customs discrediting traditional cultures.

Russian natalism: award ceremony for families with seven or more children at the Kremlin. Source:

However, the power of traditional culture in Russia and the emergence in the West of right-wing feminism, alt-feminism, or, if you like, a truly feminine movement that defends the right of women to be women, means that in the 21st century humanity has the chance to preserve the foundations that are a guarantee of its future existence.


  • I think new right women should be encouraged with all the support we can muster. Our civilization dies without them. I find it especially telling that our women are mothers, and proud of it, as they should be, while the screeching harpies and yenta’s on the left are quite commonly childless, or have maybe one child.

  • lol all forms of feminism need to be abandoned lol. “Right-wing” feminism is just as bad as “Left-wing” feminism, which is just bad as virtually every other form of feminism that’s ever existed. It’s all the same. Men towing the line for women without any, or minimal, benefit in return. Women aren’t in any position to be leading a country whatsoever unless its a means to an end, with the end being women no longer having that opportunity to do so.

    I find tbh, just looking at the “right-wing” and “left-wing” feminist ideologies that the leftist version is a lot more honest in its attempts to turn men into subjected cows whereas the right-wing version is much more subversive. A “right-wing” example of a feminist is as follows:

    me: “do you think men should protect women during tragic or violent events.”
    her: “oh ya, definitely. fireman are like so hot ya know.”
    me: “do you think women should vote?”
    her: “uh, ya. why the fuck would you ask that?”

    basically, right-wing feminists want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to be a “happy housewife with lots of babies” while having the “opportunity” to be a senator or president of this country.

    • Alt-right women specifically state women should not be involved in public politics (Lana explicitly states this in a few of her videos) but we can have an opinion and discuss it. I’m not sure what the overall consensus about voting is though. I’ve read some opinions that if you pay taxes you should vote or one vote per household. I don’t know how big a deal it is for women to vote if they’re married because many spouses vote the same.
      (As for President and other public office positions, I’ll take the advice of my mother: “Why would I want to be president? I’m too busy taking care of my family.”)

      • i totally agree lol. everything you said sounds fine to me lol. Lana is great. Regardless, all forms of feminism are retarded. There doesn’t seem to be any kind of “alt-right” feminism attempt yet (thank God lolol) buts a real possibility, given that a lot of guys try sucking up to women in order to appear like “badass alpha gentlemen” and a lot of women don’t like the “tone” expressed by some men lol, but these are all generalizations, and when that “alt-right” feminism comes up, it needs to get shut down fast lol

        • Fortunately, the Alt-right is a hostile growing ground for feminism. As far as the nasty “tone” of some men, men who talk to women in a demeaning manner tend to be beta males anyway and are usually ignored (by females… probably partial reason for their ire). Women should “know their place” but men should know theirs too, as leaders worth following.

          Honestly, I highly doubt an Altright feminism will happen. If someone tried to start that they’re most likely crypto.

  • Some animals that evolved in blissful isolation over a long spell are incapable of registering the danger posed by invasive species. They’ve been pampered into complacency in their own environmental bubble. So, when new species arrive and wreak havoc, the native species don’t know how to react. They aren’t used to dealing with this kind of danger. Worse, they even fail to identify it as a threat. So, many members of the species get destroyed or devoured, and the entire species may face extinction. In some cases, however, there are members of the native species that learn to perceive the danger and respond accordingly to ensure their own survival. So, unlike the clueless ones that are easily conquered or summarily devoured, they learn to flee from danger or fight back and strike back.

    Scandinavian nations are vulnerable to this kind of invasion because they haven’t known invasions, especially non-white invasion, for a long long time. Their only idea of ‘evil aggression’ involves historical narratives of fellow whites doing bad stuff: Nazi Germans especially and maybe the Russians. They have no idea of how direly destructive the massive arrival of non-whites can be, especially since they’ve gotten most of their impression of non-white worlds from Hollywood, PC, Pop Culture, and Christian do-goody stuff. So, when masses of foreigners arrive, these ‘welcoming’ whites are clueless and act like native species of Galapagos islands or Hawaii when met with the arrival of cats and rats. It doesn’t register sufficiently fast enough to these Swedes that these invasive human-organisms pose a very grave threat to Sweden as a people, culture, and territory.

    Because they’d been safely distanced from the non-white world for so long, their defensivist instincts grew weak(at least against non-whites who are seen as poor, weak, and helpless… and in need of compassion). With weak defensivist instinct, they’re virtually defenseless as the horror piles on. They are like the Eternals at the end of ZARDOZ. They are so ‘bored’ that they are turned on by anything ‘different’. (According to the EU narrative, the only invasive peoples have been white imperialist nations. So, whites have conquered, exploited, and destroyed. Non-whites have only been conquered and have suffered most nobly. So, if such people are allowed into EU, they are not invaders but pitiable ‘refugees’ and ‘migrants’ just seeking a better life and compassion from redemptive whites. According to PC, Europe’s defensive resistance against non-white invasion is ‘aggressive’, whereas non-white invasion is about spreading ‘peace’ and ‘tolerance’. This suggests that the political dynamics of aggression/defense is determined less by who-does-what than by who-is-’good-guy’-and-who-is-’bad-guy’. So, even though whites invaded American Indian lands, Manifest Destiny portrayed whites as the spreaders of ‘peace’ and Indians as the aggressors of ‘violence’. Likewise, even though the US invaded Iraq and Libya, the propagandists made US out to be the spreader of ‘human rights’ & ‘justice’ while making Iraq & Libya as ‘rogue’ nations sworn to evil and violence.)

    The current situation among the human organisms of Sweden(and other parts of Europe) is worse than among native animals being attacked by invasive animals.

    When the native species are attacked by invasive ones, some members of the native species will remain clueless and be hunted down(and thus weeded out of the gene pool). But others may come to realize what is happening and develop resistances and even means of counterattack.

    Suppose there’s a bunch of wombats minding their own business, and all is well in wombat-world. But suppose raccoons arrive in big numbers and eat wombat food and even attack wombats. Since wombat had been without enemies for as long as they can remember, they fail to recognize raccoons as enemies or danger. Indeed, the very notion of alien-species-posing-a-threat has become alien to the wombat way of thinking.

    So, a whole bunch of wombats get attacked without proper defenses and realization of what is really happening. But suppose some wombats have latent defensive instincts that are activated by the crisis, and they begin to fight back and resist.

    At least among animals, the defenseless members will not interfere with defensivist ones with the will to react, fight, and survive. Defenseless ones will be attacked and weeded out of the gene pool, whereas the defensivist ones will resist, fight back, survive, and pass down their genes(thereby creating a hardier race of wombats). So, there is at least a chance of defensivist ones surviving and carrying on a species.

    But among humans, the defenseless ones could prevent the defensivist ones from practicing their survivalist instinct. Such is happening in Sweden. Some Swedes are like clueless wombats. They are like deer in the headlight and don’t know what hit them. They’d been so accustomed to comfort & complacency and so instilled with holy notions of the Other(non-whites) that they have difficulty registering what is really happening in Sweden.

    But, there are other Swedes who have awoken and have the will to resist and fight back. They see the danger and want to do the right & necessary thing.

    But unlike defensivist wombats who are free to fight and resist, defensivist Swedes are restrained by defenseless Swedes who control the institutions. At least among animals, the defensivist ones are not hamstrung by defenseless ones. They can fight with furious abandon. But among Swedes, the defenseless bunch tie the hands of the defensivist Swedes so that NO Swede may put up a resistance. As the West is under Jewish-American globalist control, the defenseless ones have been given political, ideological, and economic power over the defensivist ones.

    But there is worse. There is the problem of the Deification of the Other. While, in most cases, human tribes have generally feared and distrusted outsiders and strangers, they’ve also been prone to spiritual imagination and exoticism. Thus, positive fantasies may be projected onto outsiders as holy men, saviors, liberators, and etc. (This can happen within the same race. Many Europeans mistakenly perceived Napoleon as a liberator of all of humanity, that is until French military invasion made a horror of their towns and cities. Ukrainians mis-perceived German Wehrmacht as a liberating force against the Soviet Union.) Consider the story of ‘Latin America’. When Conquistadors arrived, some natives greeted & welcomed the invaders as gods prophesied in their folklore and mythology. So, even though Spanish really came to conquer, plunder, exploit, and dominate the foolish natives thought they were visited by god-angel-races who arrived to liberate or redeem them.

    Today, a similar kind of neo-theological outlook has become pervasive among white gentiles. The PC deification of the Other as saintly, vibrant, wonderful, baptismal, and etc. had led to naive & clueless whites embracing mass non-white invasion as a kind of visitation of angels sent by the god of history bearing growth, prosperity, love, redemption, healing, color, and hope. It’s like the arrival of the 3 million Wise Men.

    Not only are too many whites stuck in defenseless mode but they are prone to worship the very thing that threatens their very existence as a civilization. It’s not unlike childlike white folks in the US worshiping the Magic Negro as represented by the mountain-sized Negro who loves a little white mouse in GREEN MILE.

    At the end of ZARDOZ, the foolish Eternals mistake the Exterminators as the Deliverers when the Exterminators just came to murder, plunder, and wreak vengeance.

    Instead of seeing the Other, the non-white invaders, for what they are, white folks project onto them all their hopes and dreams, like so many voters did with Obama of the vague faith of hope.

  • Mankind is constantly at war with nature.

    If mankind were to disappear, nature will invade and take back all of civilization.

    People have become so accustomed to human mastery of nature that they fail to appreciate how invasive and destructive nature is.

    And because we live it up to others to maintain things, we don’t full appreciate how this maintenance of civilization is a full-time job.

    What’s true of civilization as a whole is also true of every human community or nation.

    Humans are organisms and, as such, naturally invasive. Against such invasive-ness, other human communities must be nativist and defensivist.

    Just like animals move to where there’s food and good stuff, human nature searches out for ‘green pastures’. Long ago, hunters went where the mammoth were. Before mankind developed agriculture and put down roots in fixed territories that became their homeland, they were always on the move. Nomadism was the norm, like among African savage tribes, Germanic barbarian tribes, Mongol raiders, and other such folks. The rule was simple: Go where the ‘mammoths’ are. They were merciless and tireless in their pursuit of fruits and meats(and maybe of womenfolk too).

    But then, the rise of agriculture made people more stationary, and people put down roots and developed a sense of fixed borders. THIS is OUR land, THAT is YOUR land.

    But globalism is threatening this long-held state of affairs. Just like electricity & electronica have amplified hedonistic urges and made humanity revert to a kind of techno-savagery, the ease of communication & travel has made huge proportion of humanity revert to a kind of nomadism, indeed on a scale unimaginable even few decades ago.

    Some scholars have said that Jacob’s advantage over Esau represents the shift from hunter-nomadism — Esau is hairy like a barbarian and loves to hunt — to a more ordered and settled life. Though Jacob is a shepherd than a farmer, his life is more stable and sedentary than that of the wandering hunter led by whim, lust, and hunger.

    As time passed, Jacobism gained more and more power among civilized folks. Even though there were times when the Esau-ians whupped the Jacob-ians — Germanic sack of Rome, Mongol sack of China, etc — , the Jacob-ians eventually triumphed and maintained modern civilizations. One could argue that mobile Western Imperialism was Esau-ian, but not so. It was more like Jacob-ianism on the move, especially since the Western Imperialists, far from being savage or barbaric, were more advanced than the peoples and/or lands they conquered. Also, Europeans conquered to create permanent stable civilizations than to ‘play Indian’. They were more into New Romes than new roams. Indeed, it was the American Indians who were the Esau-ians, and it was the white arrivals who turned America into a permanent civilization with stable borders and settlements.

    But today, it seems like we are witnessing the Revenge of Esau. We really are seeing the vast movements of savage and barbarian folks who, upon entering Jacob-ian domains, turn them upside down. Look what’s happening to entire city blocks in Sweden, Paris, London, Rome, Madrid, and etc.

    So, why is so little being done about that? My guess is the Jacob-ians had it so good for so long and took the viability of their own domains for granted. As a result, they’ve forgotten that civilization needs constant maintenance, checkups, tuneups, cleanups, stress tests, reinforcements, and etc. They’ve fallen into the habit of thinking that a civilization just takes care of itself. But, it doesn’t. Unless it is constantly defended and maintained, it begins to corrode, rust, bend, cave, and the crumble. No bridge maintains itself. If not properly maintained, it will end up like the one in MOTHMAN PROPHECIES.

    Another problem of the current Jacob-ian world can be seen with all this Russia Hysteria.

    For much of human history, the Jacob-ian world was constantly under threat from the Esau-ian tribes. Even a high and mighty civilization like China could fall to ragtag Mongols. Even great Rome could fall to Germanic barbarians. This is why every kingdom had castles in which people could group and hide in case barbarian hordes came marauding into the area. Consider how both the Byzantine Empire and Persian Empire were shaken to the core by the sudden rise of nomadic Arab tribes led by Muhammad. And in Ancient times, great civilizations were shaken to the core — and some were smashed forever — by Sea Peoples. Chinese later got so worried about such things that they built a massive wall just to keep out Mongolian Esau-ians.

    But then, with rise of modern technology, the idea of any civilization being brought low by a Esau-ian nomadic armies became laughable. Mongols invade Russia in the 19th century? Ridiculous. So, the only danger to a civilization was another civilization. It was no longer Jacob-ians vs Esau-ains but purely Jacob-ians vs Jacob-ians… like in WWI and WWII, the clash of great civilizations. And this became a habit of mind.

    So, today, the EU still makes a lot of noise about the Russian Threat since Russia is a giant Jacob-ian power. It is a civilization with over 100 million people, and it has a sizable military and nukes. And some people in the West sound alarms about Iran, another civilization.

    Now, if every nation had strong borders and stringent rule of law on immigration, the West need only fear other Jacob-ian powers like Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, etc. After all, Russia can invade and destroy Poland if it wanted to whereas a bunch of ragtag migrants cannot. But that is ONLY IF Poland strictly maintains its borders and bans invasive migrants.

    Disturbingly, the Rule of Law on borders and the pride of identity(that morally justifies one’s defense of one’s realm) have broken down in the EU. The weakening of national identities under EU rule has led to weakening of the very idea of European-ness itself. It went from “a Pole can become a new Briton or Frenchman” to “a non-European can become a new European.” It went from “one kind of white can become another kind of white” to “a non-white can become a new white.”

    Thus, the West has become defenseless against neo-Esaus from the Third World. Many Europeans believe such people must not be banned from Europe. Why, they are just ‘new Europeans’, and anyone saying otherwise is a ‘racist’. The pope, or Poop, says the same thing too. He even allows Islamic prayers in Christian churches, implying that Islam is the new christianity.

    So, the real danger is no longer Jacob-ian vs Jacob-ian — except when the US, as the lone superpower, bombs and destroys nations like Iraq and Libya. The real danger is Jacob-ian world being invaded by neo-Esau-ians who are massively on the move for green pastures and mammoth meat. In the short term, these folks may be useful to businessmen in search for cheap labor they can exploit to maximize profits. But these invaders don’t return to whence they came when their employment runs out. They remain and call on more of their kind to join them. Even without jobs, there is a better life to be had in the land of greener pastures. Better to scavenge off mammoth remains than be stuck in poor Africa or Guatemala where the natives are still in subsistence or slash-and-burn mode.

    Esau-ians are on the move. Shiploads of Africans and Muslims are crashing onto the shores of Europe. Migrants from Central America and Mexico pour into the US. People are on the move all across Africa where effective border controls are non-existent. And the destabilization of Jacob-ian systems and infrastructure by the US and its allies in places like Syria & Libya opened the gates for Esau-ian ISIS and other Jihadis to move around and create all sorts of havoc.

    Esau-ians are not to be confused with Mercurians, even though the latter often champion the former in reckless virtue-signaling manner. Mercurians are elites and relatively small in number. They facilitate business all around the world and are most necessary. So, if a bunch of German executives travel to Paris, London, Hong Kong, New York, and etc., they are just doing business. It’s like Japanese companies send their agents and representatives all over the world. Also, Mercurians move around the world with specific purposes. A German company will send its workers to Saudi Arabia to finish a project. It’s like Burt Lancaster sent some guy to Scotland for a possible deal in LOCAL HERO.

    In contrast, Esau-ians move around not as purposeful individuals but parasitic populations… like the gypsies, the locusts among people. A group of German engineers or Japanese negotiators outside their own nations cannot take over another nation. But tons of Mexicans and Central Americans have taken over entire swaths of Southwest America. African migrants have taken over entire areas of Marseilles France. And these Esau-marauders or Esauders come with no purpose but to leech off green pastures. They have no specific skills or vision. They just come to take advantage of richer areas. Their mode of behavior is closer to wild nature than civilized norms. Because the current PC has done so much to subvert the validity of identity and territoriality, the Jacob-ian worlds are once again being invaded by Esau-ian peoples, a phenomenon that was thought to have have passed into dustbin of history forever. It’s coming back like some disease that was once thought be stamped out forever, at least in the advanced world. (To be sure, some people are waking up and embracing nationalism. Nationalism is the necessary bacteria — there are good bacteria and bad bacteria for humans — for the survival of civilization, but globalism keeps coming up with new strains of PC antibiotics to kill his beneficial form of bacteria while the nasty bad ones keep multiplying. Hopefully, the lactobacillus of European nationalism can develop immunity against PC eventually, and then no newer strain of PC antiobiotic will be effective.) Today, the Jacob-ian worlds have all the technologies at their disposable to keep out the Esua-ian marauders if they chose to, but their minds have been psycolonized by deadly PC that paralyzes their defensivist mechanisms of human nature are supposed to carry out necessary inspections and maintenance of the system to ensure survival of the realm. Without such mechanisms, cracks develop in the system and foreign elements begin to creep in in ever greater numbers. It’s like a house that isn’t properly maintained has more to fear from moisture, mold, ants, bugs, mice, and etc than from a wrecking ball. It’s death by a thousand cuts. It’s like a boxer with no defenses will lose even to a weak boxer. Even if there is no KO-magnitude punch, the constant barrages of jabs and punches will wear down the boxer. EU is alert to the danger of KO from Russia but willfullly blind to endless jabs from the Esau-ian Third World that are really wearing down Europe and turning it into hell. It fears the Czar’s sword when it’s really dying by 1000 cuts.

    People of the world may be categorized as four types: Mercurians, Apollonians, — as Yuri Slezkine defined them — , Jacob-ians, and Esau-ians. Mercurians would be the cosmopolitan elite class of businessmen and intellectuals. As long as they are trading ideas and goods, they do no harm to anyone. If anything, they make the world richer by creating new opportunities. And their minds are focused on specific tasks of business, technology, science, information, etc. Apollonians would be people who are clearly rooted deeply in their own homelands. Japanese and Hungarians would be such, especially those in small towns and rural areas. Many Americans are not Apollonians but Jacob-ians. Jacob, as a shepherd, was both on the move and a bearer of social order. Americans move around a lot with in the US and have weak sense of roots to any one area — though there are exceptions, like Mormons and Utah. (Utah is a special kind of place because of its mythic association with Mormonism. Mormons might see it as their ‘Israel’, and their narrative isn’t simply one of migration and settlement but of Biblical proportions. While other parts of US also have their cultural distinctness — Germans in Wisconsin and blacks in the South — , Utah is to Mormons what Monument Valley is to John Ford. There’s a mythic connection. Whatever their affinity for Wisconsin, but there is no mythic bond between it and German-Americans like there is between Utah and Mormons. Mormons have been mobile but also very insistent on maintaining historical roots and ties a certain state as distinctly their own. One might say this decision was as much made for them as was theirs since Mormonism was regarded with suspicion and even disgust for good part of American history.) If Europeans, at least prior to the creation of EU, tended to be Apollonians — Hungarians in Hungary, Poles in Poland, Irish in Ireland, etc — Americans were more like Jacob-ians because there was so much land and new opportunities in America. To be sure, there are two kinds of Americans: some who like to stay put and some who like to move. ‘Blue State’ whites tend to be more mobile than ‘Red State’ ones who prefer to put down their roots. Southern whites must really like the South. I mean they insist on staying there even though there are so many Negroes. (College culture is contradictory. In some ways, professors could be said to be Mercurian since they visit other institutions and exchange ideas. But so many colleges are like closed provincial bubbles separated from the rest of the world. After all, the ideal of academia is to create a safe and quiet environment where thinkers can pursue the truth without distractions, pressures, and compromises. So, what happened at places like Middlebury?) Finally, Esau-ians are essentially barbaric or even savage, and the only logic of their behavior is primal-organicist. If possible, they will invade and feed off anything deemed as greener pastures. Just like Ice Age folks went where the mammoth was to feed off it and just like some African tribes stayed close to big game, today’s Esau-ians see the West as just one big whale or mammoth to hunt. And they may well hunt it to extinction… like what happened to real mammoths and almost to blue whales. Their mindset is hunt-and-kill-but-don’t-know-how-to-breed-new-animals, slash-and-burn-but-don’t-know-how-to-plant-new-trees, and take-but-don’t-know-how-to-make.

  • Race-ism is best foundation for social-capitalism. Swedish model of social-capitalism was working just fine too… until Diversity came along.

    In a way, Mormons became the way they are because they excluded others, but it was also because others excluded them. In this, they are like Jews who were excluded by others but also excluded others. Thus, Mormons developed a ghetto mentality.

    There are two meanings of justice.

    1. Righting wrongs. So, if Bob does something wrong to John, Bob owes John something. It is about redress and punishment for violation of the law. This concept of justice is represented by ‘eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth’ in the Bible. By this concept, if someone didn’t do you any wrong, there is no injustice, and he owes you nothing.

    2. A sense of shared survival and success. This concept of justice is found in the Exodus. Moses feels a need to lead ALL Jews out of Egypt. He doesn’t owe them anything as he didn’t do any of them wrong on a personal basis, but as a Jew, he feels responsible for other Jews. This concept of justice says it is not enough for a person to be successful as an individual and care only about himself. He must belong to a community and work for the common good.

    Greek mythology is more individual oriented. It’s about the rare hero who rises above others and demonstrates his superiority, like Perseus slaying Medusa. To be sure, in doing so, he saves others of his kind. And Theseus aids his community by slaying the Minotaur who feeds on the girls. Still, the emphasis is on the individual feat. In contrast, the stories in the Bible emphasize how every individual’s deed relates to the family and tribe. Communism, a secular form of Judeo-Christian worldview, tried to create this Jewish-communal-sense-of-justice on a universal scale, at least for all the workers of the world, but it was too much. This kind of communal justice works on the ethnic or, at best, on the national level IF the nation is racially and culturally homogeneous. Anyway, this idea that a people must all ‘make it together’ is found in the Yimou movie NOT ONE LESS, a kind of ‘no child left behind’. It works best within a shared racial community.

    Mormon capitalism is tied to their brand of social-culturalism. But this will fray if the Mormon community becomes diversified.

    When it comes to family formation, it seems like Mormons have this sense that generating children is a kind of future-socialism or bio-socialism. In a way, having children is ‘socialist’ in the sense that you have to share your earnings with others. Purely from an economic viewpoint, children are ‘parasitic’. They do no work and suck on the wealth of parents. Parents must buy them food, spend time with them, clothe them, provide medical care, and etc. It is very taxing. So, why do it? Why is future-socialism rewarding in ways that paying taxes to take care of strangers isn’t?

    Because there is a bond of love and happiness between parents and one’s own children that are unlike any other. Also, unlike strangers who live off the tax revenues of others(via the confiscatory state) and show NO gratitude but just demand MORE, children are happy and grateful for anything they get from parents, even just an apple or orange.

    Also, if children are raised properly with healthy development of identity, culture, history, values, arts, culture, and appreciation of nature, they carry on the heritage of the community even after their parents pass away. And in earlier times, they took care of the parents. This was a big theme especially in China. Kids were social security. Parents had to provide stuff for them, but kids provide stuff for parents grown old.

    So, family formation is bio-cultural socialism into the future. Parents share their wealth with kids, but kids are later required to do their duty to parents and culture.

    This sense has weakened over the yrs because the state now provides for old people. Also, with the fading of identity and culture, people no longer feel that there is something to pass down to their kids as heritage and obligation. If a people no longer believe in what they are racially, ethnically, culturally, or historically, there is no need to pass it down to kids to keep the torch lit and going. Today, most young people culturally identify with celebrities and what Chris Hedges calls the Empire of Illusion.

    Orthodox Jews and Mormons still have a strong identity, and they feel this identity must be kept alive through the ages. And the ONLY way to ensure that is to have kids.

  • With regard to the debate in the comments, I thinks it’s important for the Alt right to remember that while both we, and Putin/Russia, may despise the bulk of the ruling establisment in the West this agreement is purely incidental, and is contingent upon are position as opposing force to the
    (((establishment))). Were we ever to become the establishment ourselves, Russia would continue to oppose us. Russia serves Russia alone (the Russian state and not necessarily ethnic Russians). That’s why RT will put out propaganda supporting eurosceptic and and right wing populist parties in Western Europe, while at the same time putting out pieces sympathetic to BLM. They will support whatever they perceive to undermine the ruling order in the the west, so long as said order is not simply made up of Russian proxies.

    On an unrelated note, you should follow this the link at the top of this article to where it was originaly published, to view an image of the author.

  • 21st century feminism is merely an embracement of 19th century Victorian female histrionics. The irony…

    • I don’t believe that’s true. The original Feminists were still living in a world that didn’t cow tow to tantrum politics of women. As a result, the extreme childishness of women was kept in check. Today is the result of unchecked Feminism. There are no men to stand against it because it is illegal to do so.

      • The howling pink pussy hatted women are the same as the screeching histrionic women: neither had much to with reality and both claim imaginary sexual oppression.

      • Btw- just to clarify, I didn’t mean the original feminists per se, though some Victorian literature by women leans that way (ugh… The Yellow Wallpaper…) I just meant to draw an interesting parallel to the modern hyperventilating feminazi and the histrionics of yesteryear. Seems quite cyclical.

  • 1) The beginning of International Women’s Day is bound to the February (Gregorian March).Revolution, which paved the way for the Soviet Union. That in itself is reason enough to not celebrate it.
    2) Abortion has been legal in the West for (more or less) 50 years or so. Abortion has been legal in Russia since Lenin’s time, with a 20-year period from the 1930s when Stalin made it illegal again after a demographic crisis began (much of it his own doing).

    Of course Russia has problems. If anything due to their Soviet history, they’re worse off than the other ex-Warsaw Pact countries. The thing is, though, there are signs of revitalisation, however small they may be. At least they have some kind of direction. In Western Europe, we are still sinking in the mud, & in the New World, we have no leg to stand on.

  • The horror. The oppression. Feminism saved women, now they’re free to slave away for some giant corporation that doesn’t give a fuck about them, allowing them to buy useless bobbles, pay taxes, and die alone. A woman only has value if she acts like a man. Finally, women are liberated from being women. Evolution was wrong.

    • Why would women want to have babies and raise children when they can become smarmy human resources office workers?

      • Because the idea of “letting go” and being happy are terrifying to these women. What is a life without struggle? Living a peaceful content life is of no use to global capitalists and the propaganda indoctrination has specifically targeted weak women.

        (Yes, I said it. You are a weak woman if you are an intentionally nulliparous “career gal” or are a working mother who sold her babies to daycare at six weeks old. Why? Because you believed the feminist lie that somehow working a salary job will someone how create a dream life and fulfill all your wishes. Wake up. It’s not true.)

  • It’s funny… Some feminist classmates have accused me in the past of being misogynistic for hating Hillary.

    But they have nothing to say when I tell them I want Marine Le Pen in France to win, or that I think Virginia Raggi really loves her country of Italy.

    Liberals look for any opportunity to accuse you of racism or sexism, but have nothing to say when it’s apparent that you’re just a conservative that wants the best for his country.

  • More russian agitprop. Russia aborted its future and is a divorce ratio lies with 51, slightly over every second marriage. Don’t serve me some used up post soviet garbage heep as some Blondes in Grainfields phantasie. Also Petry and Le Pen are divorced.
    You are not ready to do what it takes to establish a traditional society with birthrates around 6 children per women and this bullshit 2.0 gets us nowhere anyway, except binding down resources. It needs to get worse before its get better. In Europe it took the black plague.

      • I wasn’t talking about Ukraine, but sure they have a fucked up culture since they were under soviet control for so long. The soviets ruined every place they occupied economically and sociologically.

        • “The soviets ruined every place they occupied economically and sociologically.”

          Then explain why the Visegrad nations resist the Migrant invasion. It appears that Western Europe is more fucked up due to cultural Marxism and Economic liberalism than the former East Bloc nations.

          • Simple answer is that there is nothing to parasite off for the refugees. Even Rumania invited Refugees but they don’t wanna go there. The cultural marxism you critize was supported by the same establishment that rules russia today and now you want me to believe that russia has all of a sudden an interest in a healthy western europe and a healthy family structure? They are the ones who flood europe with refugees. These people ain’t your friends, they hate you and want you dead and to achieve this everything is legit for them.

          • “Simple answer is that there is nothing to parasite off for the refugees.”

            That’s not the point. The EU wants to “distribute” the migrants among EU nations, requiring countries to take their fair share. The Visegrad nations have all refused.

            “They are the ones who flood europe with refugees.”

            Russia is not flooding Europe with refugees. Ridiculous. Refugees are the direct result of American/Israeli meddling, resulting in the Arab Spring and influx of refugees, first through Libya and now from Syria. What role does Russia play in that? Russia support Assad and wants a return to normalcy in the Middle East.

          • The Visegard Nations refused to take the Numbers the EU demanded from them, they didn’t refuse per se. Also, as i said, there is nothing to parasite off and when they bring refugees there, they leave.

            “Russia is not flooding Europe with refugees. Ridiculous.”
            Russia brings in Refugees to russia and then pushes them over the Border to Norway, Sweden, Finnland. Look it up, its bizarr. I urged you to read Dostoyewski “The Demons” because there is no such thing in russian thinking as “ridiculous”. The KGB didn’t became a pro Organization cause they rejected things as “ridiculous”. At the moment they do it again in through their proxies in Libya.

            Also, who was involved in these wars? France, run by a socialist. The US, run by a socialist and who had a progressiv hag as SoS that sold russia uranium. Che Guevara said something along the line that the west needs to get dragged into many vietnams. If they don’t swallow the bait, your own agents need to give them a little push from the inside. They did this in vietnam infiltrating the S-vietnamese government.

            For gods sake read a book you noob.

          • Sure, Putin tricked France and America into taking out Gadaffi. Your conspiracy theories are whack as fuck.

          • You have no idea with what kind of a cunning and ruthless enemy youre trying to play footsy with cause they talk sweet. Read a book.

          • Or is he in fact on to something? See:

            The Jamestown Foundation, ‘Russia Placing Itself Above the Fray in Libya’, 29 Apr 2011 (emphasis added):

            Russia made the US/NATO military intervention in Libya possible in the first place, by abstaining in the UN Security council vote on resolution 1973, rather than vetoing it. Russia’s March 27 abstention was a diplomatic masterstroke, poorly understood at that point by the Obama administration, which credited its “reset” for the Russian green light. As Konstantin Kosachev, chairman of the Duma’s International Affairs Committee, spelled it out: By abstaining, Russia has positioned itself to demand full observance of the resolution’s provisions by those who voted for it, and without sharing responsibility with those countries for the political consequences of their intervention (EDM, April 25).

            But why would they behave in that way, you ask? Look at:

            The Jamestown Foundation, ‘Russia Unveils Political Objectives In Libya’, 21 Apr 2011 (emphasis added):

            Moscow would undoubtedly welcome a stalemate of indefinite duration in Libya. The Western belligerents, after serial misjudgments, need a speedy solution to vindicate a humanitarian mission, economize their scarce military resources, trigger regime-change, and re-start Libya’s oil and gas production as fast as possible. Russia, however, can exploit a situation in which neither side wins or loses, the US and NATO need Moscow’s cooperation for a face-saving solution, and Russia profits from higher energy prices in Europe while Libyan production dries up (Andrew McGregor, “It Didn’t Start This Way, but It’s a War for Oil Now,” The Jamestown Foundation, April 18).


            Russia gains from the unexpected interruption of those supplies and is interested in a prolonged halt. This has become, tacitly but indubitably, a Russian objective in the Libya crisis. Thanks to this conflict, Russia free-rides on higher prices for its oil and gas; it can increase its market share in Italy, Austria, Germany, and potentially other European countries; and gains more lobbying power for Russian energy projects that increase European dependence on Russian supplies.

            Beyond the objectives linked directly with this conflict, Moscow has a broader interest in seeing the US and NATO tied down in wars of choice and other protracted confrontations. These increase Russia’s leeway for action in ex-Soviet territories [in Central Asia], Russia’s top priority. Moscow must welcome the disproportionate allocation of Western resources to expeditionary wars from shrinking defense budgets in NATO Europe, where lack of military investment stands in contrast with Russia’s ambitious military modernization program.

            And additionally:

            Reuters, ‘Libya’s oil output down 252,000 barrels per day due to armed protests’, 28 Mar 2017 (emphasis added):

            National production has still more than doubled since last year to reach about 700,000 bpd. Three eastern oil ports were reopened in September, and Sharara resumed operations in December when a two-year pipeline blockade was lifted.

            Production remains far below the 1.6 million bpd that OPEC member Libya pumped before the 2011 uprising in the North African nation.

          • Soros/Schwartz is russias 1984 style Emanuel Goldstein and you eat the bait cause you can’t think one lick conspiratorial and cause you don’t read books you dumb noob.

          • Yet at the same time Russia pushes migrants into Finland:

            YLE UUTISET, ‘Russian border guard to STT: Russian security service behind northeast asylum traffic’, 24 Jan 2016 (emphasis added):

            Finnish news agency STT reports a Russian border guard’s confession that the transport of asylum seekers to Finland’s two northeast border crossings is being orchestrated by the Russian Federation’s Federal Security Service, the FSB. Families with children are given priority, the source said. Finnish authorities have suspected for some time that the transfer of asylum seekers from Russia to Finland has been part of a carefully organised operation.

            The Tampere-based newspaper Aamulehti reported on Saturday that a Russian border guard told the Finnish news agency STT that the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation (FSB) has arranged asylum seeker access to the Finnish border. The FSB organises the traffic in concert with the Kandalaksha district administration of Russia’s Murmansk region and the Russian Border Guard.

            The border guard source says the FSB decides which car moves at what time and how it can proceed to the border. The state-sponsored organisation gives priority to families with small children, the source reveals.

            An STT photographer who visited the Russian side of the Salla border crossing told the Finnish tabloid Ilta-Sanomat that he had seen asylum seekers waiting in their cars in the Russian city of Alakurtti, located about 70 kilometres from the border. The photographer said there were dozens of cars with asylum seekers waiting there, cut off by a boom that allowed other cars to pass.

            The Finnish commercial television station MTV says the photographer later picked up a Border Guard employee whose car had stalled in the cold. During their journey together, the Russian guard told the Finn about the Russian asylum seeker operation.


        • You are wrong as usual. The USSR was a very socially-conservative state with socialist economics.

          • Bullshit! !!!! The whole thing was based on godless materialism!!!!! You think divorce and abortion didn’t rise with communism?

          • Have you ever actually opened an academic (not “popular”) history book on this subject? After Stalin took out the Bolsheviks, divorce was strongly discouraged, whereas abortion rights went back and forth, including being outright banned in 1930s-1950s. Birth rates were high. In general, USSR was a neo-traditionalist society, of course, without pre-revolutionary property rights. It helps to not compare modern American dumbasses sporting hammer and sickle with the Soviet era (where these dumbasses’ equivalents would have been jailed.)

          • Communism and crony capitalism both are about materialism. You really think that what has transpired just happened since the 90’s? Alcoholism was a problem in Russia pre 1991, so was drug abuse. A spiritual vacuum will cause this.

    • I’d hate to ruin your attempt to come across as an ignorant moron, but it would be helpful if you didn’t cite 1990s data when Washington and the IMF brought all the joys of liberal capitalism to that country. Russia’s current birth rates exceed most of Europe.

      • Russias birth rate is by around 1.61, most of them not slavs. Russia tries to bribe its population with vouchers and “give birth to a patriot day” but its no use.

        • It was obvious that you’re a Russophobic troll right off the bat, but you discredited yourself as a Soros puppet with “Russia is responsible for refugees” bs. Will have to look into getting you banned. 🙂

          • I fight communists all my life and now you clown come along and do their subversion for them. You don’t understand anything and you use the same terminology of -phobia and bullshit like the radical left wing does who was build up just like you are now. You don’t know shit about Soros, who wouldn’t do one thing differently then he does if he would be an openly russian agent, yet thats your idiotic-goback formula for everthing you don’t understand. Youre a clownshow and you will destroy everything cause youre too stupid for basics.

          • So much for honest debate huh!!!! America, and the rest of the first and second tier world are all in the grips of the post industrial age/economy. Women aren’t having kids now as they are considered a major economic and time drain. Feminism is just the frosting on the cake. Paris refugee take does smack of him falling for
            Western propaganda, but the rest of his screed does have a lot of truth to it. The truth is rarely what we wish it to be. Russia is doing a lot better than
            Europe in general, but it faces pretty much the same problems. My 80’s analogy holds water to a certain degree.

        • Actually biggest birth rates in Russia are among Cossacks, and they’re Slavs. Although you probably wouldn’t stand them.

          • Not true the highest fertility rates in Russia are found amongst the muslim populations of the the Caucasas (the Ingush 4.05, Dargwa 3.476, Chechens 3.456, Avars 3.319). This data is a bit old, but I’m sure they are still some of the most fertile, and I know that the fertility rate for ethnic Russians is between 1.6-1.7. I couldn’t find any data on the fertility rates of Cossacks, but only about 150,000 people (or 0.1% of the Russian population) identify themselves as Cossacks, so they are, at least for now, relatively insignificant.

            While I am almost certain that these muslim population’s fertility rates will collapse in the near future, as many white or off-white muslim populations already have (Bosnians 1.2, and Russians own Tartars 1.7), it is something you must remain vigilant of.

          • Not all Bosnians are Muslims, but yeah they have collapsing birthrates , same as Albanians on Kosovo and Metohija now because they don’t have Yugoslav welfare. And Tatars are different breed of Muslims now, and they actually always had same birthrates as Russians (plus most of them are loyal to Russia).
            About Cossacks, most of them identify as Russians on census, thus only 150 000 of them, nobody knows real data actually, my wild guess that those that identify primarily as Cossacks are Cossacks of Don.

          • Besides that what White Dragon already stated, the life expectancy in Russia is pathetic. Its more like a subsaharan african country then eastern europe. Your attempt to sell the west your rotten trojan horse is pathetic.

          • Better then Russia where Hospitals don’t have indoor plumbing and there are feral street orphans in the Metro. xD
            West is the best.

          • Well you can always use block option :-). Meanwhile can you name one city in Russia that looks like “Paris if the west”?

          • Why should i block you, cause youre boring? You show all the typical pathologies russians have. Its like a list with checkmarks about “what bullshit will he bring up next?”

          • In the end of the day i don’t give a fuck about what you are, youre a pathologcial fanboy and thats good enough for a judgement.

          • Ah i see, whole this time i was chatting with a freaking dumb woman (or faggot)

          • Russia is the old drunk down the street who leaves his garbage everywhere and calls everyone faggot while he touches little boys and pimps out his granddaugther while the whole neigbourhood just waits that he finaly dies.

          • Well girl only one that’s dying is so called “west”
            Paris- feminist mayor, and chimp out right now
            London- gypsy mayor, and English below 50%
            US- had african president for 8 years, and it’s one democratic president away from doom
            Swedes are becoming minority in Sweden
            i could continue for almost every country in what people here consider as “west” , but something tells me you don’t really care about it.

          • lol you wanna play this RT AngitProp bullshit about failing Infastructure in the US and meanwhile Russia has a shit ton of car accidents, the roads are shit and russian dashcam videos are the butt of every joke. xD “mimimi the west is so bad and the west is dying”. Russia has a smaller economy then fucking Dutchland, if the west dies this russian patient is done for anyway. Youre like one person of two who jumped from a roof and now they nag each other which one will land first. Fucking Russia. May it perish.

          • With regard to the Cossacks, I think you’re right, and the actual numbers of people descended from Russian/Ukrainian Cossacks are much greater than reported. It however appears to me, that the contemporary Cossack identity is primarily cultural with respect to its distinction from the broader Russian or Ukrainian identity; namely those Cossack-descended Russians and Ukrainians who are much more traditionalistic, religious, and live more rurally, are also those who self-identify as Cossacks.

            It seems like in general the whiter or more East Asian a muslim population is the lower their fertility rates (Tunisia in North Africa has sub-replacement fertility, and is the most European, both culturally and genetically, country in that region). Albanians in Kosovo seem to have notably higher fertility rates than other off-white muslims in Europe, but that is probably due to their ongoing antagonism with the Serbs (both the Anglo-Scottish Protestants and the Irish Catholics in Northern Ireland have significantly higher fertility than their co-ethnics in the rest of the UK, probably for a similar reason).

          • Albanians in Kosovo and Metohija are losing numbers check Prizren demography on wiki for example, and before whole Balkan route was opened, 100 000 Albanians from KaM tested it in january 2015. Whole thing was carefully planed from the beginning, and supported by various NGOs and USAID. Hopefully Trump will cut all funding to it (and i’m sure that you don’t like your tax money being used for Muslim migrants). Current active NGO there is Refugee Action Support (RAS) with bunch western European volunteers.
            Anyway about Cossacks, there is a video about them on The Great War you tube channel uploaded three weeks ago, it’s not perfect but you will get idea how they’re formed. It’s Cossack pre-ww1 history.
            And about your other comment, Putin himself told that he’s not friend of anyone, he’s president of Russia.While he could have some sympathy toward movements as alt-right, he surely wouldn’t mind minorities swallowing USA, because right now US is equal if not bigger threat for Russia than Muslims.
            And yeah some Asiatic people( as author of this article) are into Rossiyane indentity (and are loyal to Russia), which is different from russkie (Russians). Eastern Europe is a bit different than western Europe in those matters ( civic and ethnic nationality).
            Btw i’m not Russian, nor i’m expert for Russia, but again i know some stuff. And sorry for my broken English.

      • True, but it is still well below replacement levels and Para State is right, the non Nordic/Slavs are the ones cranking out the kids. Abortion is still a big problem in Russia as well. All that is happening in Russia is that they are going through the Russian version of the American 80’s. The Religious Right has a president that gives them a big voice to spread the lie that a religious awakening has occurred, when in reality is quite the opposite. The 80s in America was the era of patriotism and televangelists. Family values were the in thing now, even though it was a crock with hedonism getting to new heights. The current US President made a name for himself during that era. In fact, it was the only era that he actually made a name for himself in.

  • “They don’t want you to be free.

    They don’t want you happy.

    They want you working.

    They don’t want you to be a mom.”


  • There’s nothing more fulfilling for a woman than motherhood. Those are the 9 words a feminist can never say because they are golem.

    • I like that. Im going to use that, but of course citing you.

      The 14 Words: We Must Secure The Existence of Our People and a Future for White Children.

      The 9 Words: There’s Nothing More Fulfilling for a Woman than Motherhood.

    • I am unfamiliar with the word “golem” in this context, so it is possible that I’m misunderstanding your point. But, when you say “There’s nothing more fulfilling for a woman than motherhood,” do you presume to speak on behalf of ALL women, and if so, on what basis? thx.

      • the confusion about the role of women is a marxist construct, they’re happiest being mothers, because nature has given them the gift of being baby makers… imagine not knowing that… so odd?

        • Marxists oppose women being owned by their husbands, not motherhood. Marxists see child rearing and homemaking as valuable and important.

          Capitalism demands the devaluation of motherhood and child rearing, not Marxism.

        • ok, but I’m not talking about “Marxist constructs” or abstract theories about nature. My question was about actual women, OUR happiness, and do you presume to speak for ALL of us? Clearly many women would disagree with you, based on our own personal experience. That being the case, it sounds like what you are really saying is you believe, “women SHOULD be happiest being baby makers.” Since your belief does not correspond to reality as experienced by actual women, are the women mistaken about their own feelings and if so, how would you know? Or is it possible that your theory might be an over-generalization?

          • Uncorrupted, not-fucked-up-by-yid-influences-and/or-sickos women is what we’re talking about. Clearly, many if not most women in society today aren’t fit for motherhood duties. They spend their entire adult lives trying to get the attention from men or their own aging mothers that their children actually warrant and need. God damn, do we really need to spell it out?

          • My question was directed at Katebushfan’s statement, “they [women] are happiest being mothers.” I don’t know what “yid-influences” are, but based on the rest of your comment, your answer to my question appears to be: Yes, in fact, women SHOULD be happiest being baby makers, and women who fail to live up to your expectation in this regard are “corrupted,” “fucked-up” and/or “sickos.” Got it. Thx for the clarification.

      • okay laughter is pretty fulfilling too … not gonna lie… but children are everything; they’re miraculous

        • they can be great, and all life is miraculous, but they’re not everything.
          and promoting that women have them, and look after them no matter what, doesn’t do children any favours.
          and what’s golem supposed to mean here?

Leave a Reply