How To Weaponize The Black Pill Against Anti-Whites

Submitted by Nathan Gate


When conversing with the Alt Right’s political opponents, especially those of the ‘Skeptic’ variety, I’ve noticed a common tactic utilized by these people is to resort to nihilistic statements when they sense they are losing the argument. These statements are typically devoid of any real meaning and are simply an attempt to destroy your morale and weaken your allegiance to pro-white values. What I have found is responding in kind with weaponized blackpills of your own is the most effective way of dealing with them, if only to highlight the absolute stupidity of their own statements via irony. Let’s explore a few, shall we?

Statement: “In the future, everyone will be brown, one race and one people. It is inevitable.”

Response: “No, in the future everyone will be white, one race and one people. It is inevitable.”

Statement: “How does it feel being part of a fringe movement? The Alt-Right will never gain any traction.”

Response: “The Alt-Right is an inevitability and our victory is certain. How does it feel to be on the wrong side of history? No matter, you will be assimilated in time.”

Statement: “Women’s rights are the future, feminism isn’t going anyway. This isn’t the 1950’s and we’re NEVER returning to that misogynistic era.”

Response: “Whether Islam conquers the West, or our homelands are restored by a traditional ethno-nationalist uprising, either way women are going back to the kitchen. The only question you need ask yourself is whether you want that to happen with a loving, dominant husband by your side or a bearded haji who throws acid in your face when you annoy him. Feminism is dead and it’s not coming back.”

Moral of the story: inane statements merit aggressive responses. No doubt that during your time in the Alt-Right you have encountered such people who wish you to believe that the White race’s death is a certainty. Simply remind these people that dropping anti-White blackpills aren’t going to stop us from winning, and merit them nothing more than scorn and ridicule. Rub our success and fantastic growth in their face and laugh while you do it.

Guest Writer
the authorGuest Writer


  • Jinkies!

    The fact is, civilizations change and progress. A hundred years ago this author would have been screaming about how stupid it would be to try to run electricity to rural areas. 75 years ago he’d have said that a man would never land on the moon. 30 years ago he would have said cell phones will never be a reality. 10 years ago he would have said that a black man could never be president. Wrong on all accounts.

    Instead, he should look around at this amazing country and be thankful that there are people in government trying to make it even better. It’s never a black-and-white issue. It’s all gray. Just keep being thankful for what we have and tell your family you love them. The rest will sort itself out. Peace.

  • As for women and the kitchen, I’ve been using that line about women and the vote for a few years now – the only two options are the two identified by the writer – feminism may not be dead, but it has peaked and women will not have the vote soon enough.

  • I had an incident like this on an infowars article. He was like, “you live in a fantasy land if you think America will be completely white again.” I basically stated the alt right is growing by leaps and bounds every day and White America is waking up and is deciding we do not want to be minorities in our own countries.


    Guys, this is a blog I wanted to bring to your attention.

    He’s a korean who claims all alt-right chicks bow to him. On “ask me anything” you don’t need to register. I just want you to not be angry or threaten him, but rather point oit his hypocrisy since he condemns af/wm couples as a fetish, yet he reblogs am/wf porn and even impregnation pictures.

    Tell him how Korea value racial purity so much ( maybe you can cite that article about the half-black guy weho complained about racism there) and yet we are condemned for wanting the same for us. Tell him we appreciate the fact that Korea doesn’t bow down to the NWO, but he supports Kalergi in his hashtags.

  • Yeah, skeptics really have no business mocking the Alt Right as a fringe movement, when their gatherings attract barely enough bodies for small Texas Hold’em tournaments; many of them look like neckbearded white incels.

    I’d compare the Alt Right in 2017 to the so-called New Atheists about a dozen years ago. A handful of bestselling writers circa 2005 started the national conversation we needed to have about the nature and role of religion in the modern world, and they got a lot of attention in the mainstream media for a few years because, frankly, many people in our elites agreed with them. We don’t hear so much about the New Atheists these days, not because they lost the argument, but because their openness about these issues shifted the culture in a direction which made atheism more socially acceptable.

    The Alt Right in our time faces more of an uphill struggle because of elite opposition, but events in the news keep validating our world view while discrediting our elite’s childish utopianism. We just need to figure out how to frame our message for maximum impact.

    For example, the more I think about it, the more I like the idea of presenting the Alt Right’s world view as a source of spiritual fuel for white people who wonder why they should keep on living in an environment increasingly hostile to their very existence. In my case, lately I’ve wondered why I’ve felt renewed zest for living, and I think my discovery of white nationalism accounts for part of it. I’d compare it to the effects of finding a young girlfriend after a long stretch of aloneness.

  • I’ve noticed a common tactic utilized by these people is to resort to nihilistic statements when they sense they are losing the argument.

    Over at TRS they call this Tactical Nihilism. Usually I think you can just explain the concept and point out that it is being employed. Throwing their own arguments back in their face can be fun but I think a lot of people would just see that petulance and miss the actual point being made.

    Critiquing and labeling the tactic as well as negatively stereotyping the debater who uses these tactics will pay larger dividends as honest debaters will recognize the validity of the critique and internalize it.

  • The best thing to do is to use Jewish Freudian nonsense against them.

    “Are you afraid of white people?”
    “Are you insecure about being great again?”
    “Are you xenophillic?”

    • Of course they’re afraid of white people. Notice that despite all the propaganda about “equality,” absolutely no one worries that a POC could become Literally Hitler because even the dopiest progressive degenerates know that only a white man could have the goods to pull this off.

      We white men might be a race of super-villains – but at least we’re super!

  • I find that committed normies have a two-stage response to black pills. First, they deny the prediction. Then they say it doesn’t matter. The one constant is that they never allow themselves to stand up for white group interests.

  • Good advice. I’ve grown rather skeptical of the skeptic community. Just kidding, I’ve always thought they were dirty liberal homosexuals.

  • Liberals have a horrible track record when it comes to predictions. No liberal prediction has ever come true.

    They said Hillary would win with 95+% confidence. They talked about the inevitable Communist future from the 50’s to the day the Berlin wall fell. They said there would be a wild west bloodbath if honest citizens were allowed concealed carry permits. They said black test scores would equal white test scores after integration. They said integration would end racial strife. Movies like Soylent Green said white countries would soon become horribly overpopulated to the point of cannibalism. They said coddling criminals would reduce crime. They poured billions into “urban renewal.”

    No one can predict the future, but we know from history that when a place goes from white to brown civilization collapses and the people become desperately poor and backward -permanently.

    • Liberals never get anything right even on accident because they’ve rejected at such a deep level what it is to be human so all you get with them is the opposite of what they say we’ll get. You know, clown world, HONK HONK!!

  • Jew: “Post modern Europe is inevitable”

    Me: “When Christian Europe is dead, all that will be left is Muslims and National Socialists”

    • I actually saw a delightful article about this, amusingly enough written by one of the old dying breed white “conservative” christian types.

      In it he bemoans the “evil racist right” of course, but he also points out that when leftists laugh about him and his fellow white “conservative christians” dying off, they never stop to think about who’s replacing them, and how they’re in for a very rude awakening.

      Spoilers: We are, and we’ll get the last laugh.

          • Marshall Lentini – Keep sucking brown dicks to virtue signal you’re not a racist homophobe.

          • Truth hurts, boys. You’re going nowhere, and the retreat into cutesy rebuttals betrays it most painfully. PS – I was racist before you were on the internet.

          • Marshall Lentini – You’re a dickless retard with a bleeding rectal prolapse. Truth hurts, faggot. PS – Nobody gives a shit about you especially your parents.

          • No. Some, and I mean very few of you, will luck out, but in exact proportion as you’re not wasting your time on clever internet repartée – or the vulgar nonsense you deleted and replaced with something more sensible. But this is already exhausting. Cheers.

          • If you had any wisdom to share, Mr. Ancientracist, you would have 30 years ago, m8y.

            Bye, and don’t come back. You had your chance and blew it.

          • There was nothing to be done. There’s even less now, hence recycling – and dumbing down – our work and calling it “altright”.

            But because I sense an actual mind in you, let me clarify my original jest and without (much) rancor:

            The assertion that Europe will be left with only Muslims and nationalists is what biologists call competitive dimorphism, that is, when two forms of either sex are produced by competition for mates through different reproductive strategies.

            The problem is that such dimorphism depends on the relative frequency of the female forms with which the males are supposed to mate (the cohort), if there is to be any stability (i.e. reproductive success over time) for the secondary form.

            Inherent to the original assertion is, of course, the assumption of stability — which in fact is not warranted.

            The reason is that Muslim males mate with both their females *and* European females (poaching), while there is intense sexual selection by the latter of European males, if they decide to breed at all.

            In other words, Europe will have its nationalists, but they’ll be even lonelier than the current crop of ornery internet trolls.

            Europe will be left with mostly just Muslims, in short.

            How’s that for a black pill? Swallow some of your tears to help it down, maybe.

          • Black pills are good if they lead to useful ideas.
            So what do you think is the best strategy? Fuck the hottest Muslims chicks + our own women?

          • So you agree there will be only muslims and nazis. Instead you try to demoralize us with ratio. You are probably correct, but you see ratio is not the problem. Whites were historically able to defeat muzzies at 1:100 ratio and with modern technology it can be done at even higher ratio.
            The thing that is stopping us is losers like yourself and you are a dieing breed.

          • You have no idea what you’re talking about scrub.

            You think you’re powerful. We’ll see about that.

      • Interesting “opinion” but we don’t need your pessimism grandpa. Don’t you have other sites to browse?

      • An odd opinion, considering every poll done of white populations (at least in America) shows that people who self-identify as ‘far right’ always have a fertility rate above the replacement level.

        • Obvious diversion, as the subject was Europe first, and alt-right trolls second, neither of which is beating a path to eternity, as no one is able to dispute. But what’s not odd at all is that those conservative Americans, whom you deliberately confound with the far-right of MSM propaganda, are typically *not* trolls: i.e. they have a cohort. But I realize using exact language leaves too little room for the customary self-deception of these quarters. Everything is going to work out for the best, of course. That’s the moral of every history book.

          • I wouldn’t be surprised if right wing european birthrates were like white american ones. But I have yet to see any hard data on it.

            It’s unfortunate that you think the alt-right is “trolling”, but not relevant.

          • Because there is no such data. The decline of Europe birthrates is a well-established, decades-long phenomenon with plenty of data behind it. You’re just wilfully obtuse.

            If anything, white Americans will reach their level in the coming decades as they run out of options. And I’m sure that, even then, there will be some wishful-thinking little blog out there full of earnest nobodies believing that it’s all about to turn around, that everything will be ok …

          • There is for white americans, so I doubt it would be different for white europeans, I just haven’t seen the info. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

          • Actually it does. And it means you just don’t want to see it. Do you think Europe hasn’t been counting births or something?

          • You’re being willfully obtuse. I originally pointed out that studies show that right wing white americans have above replacement fertility rates and said it was probably the same for right wing europeans, or at least that it would be higher than their left wing counterparts – because this tends to be a rather universal tenet. I never said anything about “all europeans” or “all white americans.”

          • The fault is mine, I forgot the qualification of right-wing. You’re not wrong actually, but it isn’t to an appreciable degree. Germany keeps tabs on this as the German nationalists harp on childlessness and have networks of support for young families, etc.

          • Just last week I went out with a young Walloon girl. Not only was she a scion of the founders of Leffe beer, to my amazement, she has three siblings! Grew up in the country. She expressed a desire for many children, but is 25, and said not for a few years — the magic ovaries of the modern white woman.

  • At the end of the day we can argue as to who and who isn’t responsible for the horror of this PC multicultural nightmare we are living but the fact of the matter is ..WE are to blame, WE allowed the Jews to direct our countries into this mess , WE allowed these foreign hoards to our shores, WE listened to the politicians and the MSM when they said it was going to be great and much more, WE created this Monster and because we created it therefore we can destroy it and destroy it we must ASAP.

    • A lot of people feel more comfortable giving Jews superhuman powers over us. The truth is they found a weakness in our character and exploited it to their own advantage. We need to address that weakness and correct it. Then the Jew holds no power over us.

      • Spot on, I cannot understand how most Americans are not sick of Jews slamming their dicks on their faces with their “Nobel prizes” and other superiority bullshit.

  • I used to get into arguments with the skeptic community all the time, but lately don’t bother. The Mouthy Buddah video didn’t really inspire me to get back into that ring. Some on the Alt-Lite who are willing to have an honest conversation about race and demographics can be brought closer to our side. The Skeptics are far to attached to their classical liberal values. It’s like arguing with a brick wall.

      • Their just classical liberals who are very middle of the road. They came to be around the time of GamerGate. They saw Feminism and Leftism overreaching and stepping on peoples personal freedoms, and aimed to decontruct their arguments with their youtube videos.

        Their main problem is all they do is criticize others without ever really offering any solutions of their own, besides classical liberal values and tolerance is a virtue. To their credit they will debate us, as open discussion of controversial issues is something they believe in. Sargon of Akkad has debated and had discussions with Millenial Woes a couple times, and I think that these are Woes’ most viewed videos. A lot of people probably got their first exposure to the Alt-Right through these discussions.

        I’ve never listened to this whole video at 4+ hours, but listening to the first 20 minutes or so, should tell you everything you need to know about the skeptics.

        • Ahh, Gamergate. So basically these people whined about some video games a few years back, got some mainstream press coverage, and are now totally irrelevant.

          • Intellectually their irrelevant. Sargon has almost 700,000 subscribers on youtube, his videos consistently get over 100,000 views, so their most well known figures are worth debating. Mouthy Buddah, not so much.

          • Sargon is an idiot. He once sent Alt right twitter accounts interracial porn when he was stumped in an argument. Some logician and rationalist Sargon is.

            I managed to send Sargon and his followers into a tailspin one day on Twitter when I said his opinions were musty rehashed crap an Enlightenment fop muttered at a Paris salon in 1770. I brought up Carl Schmitt and the need for the government to assume extraordinary power and he screamed “Nazi!” These tools are no different than the left.

          • I agree. But they are willing to debate us. Using their platforms to our advantage is worthwhile. Personally I think Millenial Woes is too passive and friendly. I want to send a Natt Danelaw or Chris Cantwell to destroy him on his own channel.

          • True. Depends what we’re going for I guess. Converting normies or total destruction/humiliation.

          • his opinions were musty rehashed crap an Enlightenment fop muttered at a Paris salon in 1770

            Heh, we must have read some of the same books about the Enlightenment. A lot of what we call “Cultural Marxism” now actually originated from discussions around the Baron d’Holbach’s table in 18th Century Paris.

        • I had. See my post below. I’ve interacted with Sargon on Twitter. I didn’t know he had his own weird cult of followers and that they had a name.

          • Oh ok, I gotcha. Bet ya didn’t know there were so many pedophile apologists in his cult. I suppose we could call this phenomenon AIDS Rationalism.

  • “How does it feel being part of a fringe movement? The Alt-Right will never gain any traction.”

    Organized atheism started out as a fringe movement in the 19th Century. It has become nearly mainstream now, though not because atheists won a lot of intellectual battles. Instead it turns out that people become religious out of existential anxiety, and they lose interest in religion when their lives become more secure in developed countries with social safety nets, like when a country offers universal health care.

    This sheds light on why Obamacare made conservative Christians so uneasy; they know on some level that it would continue to erode the appeal of their beliefs in the population. When you get sick, you can go to the doctor instead of relying on prayer.

    • While that may be true to an extent. These atheists came from a trendy wave of the New Athiest movement the lasted from the mid-2000s to about 2015. It’s thankfully begun to die out over the past couple years. It was trendy and edgy so millennials bought into it very easily, however it was also vapid and unintelligent. It’s where the “neckbeards and fedoras” came from. It was because of these losers that YouTube was dominated by teenage atheists for so long. That no longer seems to be the case anymore.

        • My point was not necessarily to argue but to provide some background on the not-so-skeptic community. They’re self-glorifying millennial trend seekers. A trend that is best left to die out. I’m not an athiest myself, but I don’t hate the “new athiest”/YouTube athiest movement because of that. I loathe it because it’s retarded cancer that needs to be destroyed. And yes there are more athiest and irreligious people out there than we might think.

    • “Instead it turns out that people become religious out of existential anxiety…”

      Kevin MacDonald is always right.

  • Mike Enoch describes the goal of the anti-white social engineering: “Ultimately, everybody’s going to be androgynous mocha-colored nothing persons.”

    • Who work at Starbucks to buy McDonalds and Wal-Mart.
      What disturbs me most is that some people think this would be a fine life.

  • The best approach I’ve found is to point out the Left’s biggest hypocrisy: ‘lands for everyone except white people.’

  • BTW, skeptics claim they admire Charles Darwin as a great scientist and thinker because he gave them ammunition for attacking traditional religions. But look at how Darwin lived, and ask yourself why these skeptics don’t want to model their lives after his:

    He and his cousin Emma Wedgwood married around the time they both turned 30, and I’ve never run across anything to indicate that Charles had any premarital sexual experience, though he could have gotten that in the brothels in the South American ports he visited while voyaging on The Beagle. So, it looks like Charles and Emma married as adult virgins.

    But despite their late start, they had ten children, and seven of them lived to adulthood – a pretty successful survival rate by Victorian standards.

    I’d advise against marrying your cousin for eugenic reasons, but just imagine now if a white guy lived sexually abstinent until he turned 30, then he married a virginal white woman and they made a family the size of the Darwins’, kind of like the Christians in the Quiverfull movement. Skeptics would mock this guy as a loser and a religious nut.

    • The anti-whites only pretend to believe in “Darwinism” when they are attacking red state Protestant Christians – in reality they are “liberal creationists” that believe evolution stops at the neck.

      They are actually Lysennkoists and believe in the psuedo-science that he promoted

      The pseudo-scientific ideas of Lysenkoism assumed the heritability of acquired characteristics.[1] Lysenko’s theory rejected Mendelian inheritance and the concept of the “gene”; it departed from Darwinian evolutionary theory by rejecting natural selection.[2] Proponents falsely claimed to have discovered, among many other things, that rye could transform into wheat and wheat into barley, that weeds could spontaneously transmute into food grains, and that “natural cooperation” was observed in nature as opposed to “natural selection”.[2]Lysenkoism promised extraordinary advances in breeding and in agriculture that never came about.

      Joseph Stalin supported the campaign. More than 3,000 mainstream biologists were sent to prison, fired,[3] and numerous scientists were executed as part of a campaign instigated by Lysenko to suppress his scientific opponents.[4][5][6][7] The president of the Agriculture Academy, Nikolai Vavilov, was sent to prison and died there, while scientific research in the field of genetics was effectively destroyed until the death of Stalin in 1953.[2] Research and teaching in the fields of neurophysiology, cell biology, and many other biological disciplines was also negatively affected or banned.[8]

      The word “Neo-Lysenkoism” has occasionally been used by hereditarian researchers as a pejorative term in the debates over race and intelligence and sociobiology to describe scientists minimizing the role of genes in shaping human behavior, such as Leon Kamin, Richard Lewontin, Stephen Jay Gould and Barry Mehler.

      • A lot of these damaging ideas started in the Enlightenment. The doctrine that education can turn anyone into anything comes from a specific philosophe in 18th Century France named Claude Adrien Helvétius, probably the most important bad philosopher you’ve never heard of:

        “All men,” Helvétius maintained, “have an equal disposition for understanding.” As one of the French Enlightenment’s many Lockean disciples, he regarded the human mind as a blank slate, but free not only from innate ideas but also from innate natural dispositions and propensities. Physiological constitution was at most a peripheral factor in men’s characters or capabilities. Any apparent inequalities were independent of natural organization, and had their cause in the unequal desire for instruction. This desire springs from passions, of which all men commonly well organized are susceptible to the same degree. We thus owe everything to education. Social engineering is therefore an enterprise unconstrained by the natural abilities of men.

        This natural equality applied to all men in all nations, and thus the differences in national characteristics were not the result of innate differences between the people therein, but rather a byproduct of the system education and government. “No nation,” wrote Helvétius, “has reason to regard itself superior to others by virtue of its innate endowment.”

        This radically egalitarian aspect of Helvétius’ philosophy caused Diderot to remark that if it were true, De l’esprit might just as well have been written by Helvétius’ dogkeeper.

          • Some white nationalists blame these bad ideas on Jews, who of course lack the intellectual creativity to have thought up these notions. Instead Jews cribbed their ideas from white philosophers and applied them to subvert white societies.

          • White philosophers got their ideas from their DNA. Regardless, “egalitarianism” isn’t “the problem” causing anti-whiteness in the modern West – Jewish hostility is causing the problem.

            Before the era of TV, which was run by Jews from the beginning, Whites were perfectly secure in their racial heritage – despite hundreds of years of “egalitarian philosophy.” So clearly, it isn’t the “egalitarianism” that is the problem. It’s Jewish anti-whiteness that is the problem.

          • To me it seems this way: Yes, due to their strong group identity paired with their global spread across other people’s nations, the Jews caused and experienced a reciprocal field of interest divergence towards their embedding cultures. Consequently, postmodern deconstruction and relativism helps them weakening their surrounding cultures’ ties, which in turn yields potentials to further extend Jewish stakes within these surrounding cultures. However, I consider this a natural plot of interests allowing for a mutual equilibrium in so far, as there is no reason to assume that Jews systematically and consciously strive for finally destroying their host nations. It might seem to be so, as Jews dominate the multiplying knots of social communication and their incentivism might drive them to do so. But they are not necessarily evil as such and they do not benefit from muslimination at the end of the game. To my understanding they didn’t invent enlightening or post-structuralism. Yes, their impact is a problem, but this is not due to their race but due to the systemic (post)modern communication. In this structure, you find enough whites who outperform any Jew if it comes to anti-white propaganda. The root cause to me seems to be the fact, that a: Media drives public opinion and through this politics, b: Media attracts a certain type of human work force who obviously has preferences towards self-aggrandizement through broadcasting bossy moral instructions, c: Media is owned by a handful of global capitalists (of which many but not all are Jews) who have no shared interests with the local middle-class.

            We need to revolutionize the media sector and kick out their owners and top managers, all other will follow.

            Anybody who is profound in German might want to listen to this old media sector analysis:

          • I agree completely that Jews are not “evil” nor that they have some sort of “master plan” to destroy their host nations. I don’t think that Jews are some sort of “magic” people with some unbelievably tight “conspiratorial” organization with Abe Foxman on “David’s Throne” as the “Chairman of the Elders of Zion.”

            It’s far more pedestrian than all that. In fact, Jewish leaders are rather open about their interests. They want a multi-cultural/multi-racial society because there is less of a chance of them being singled out as the “outsider.” In some cases that tendency leads to their own demise, as we see with increasingly anti-Jewish attacks by Muslims in Europe – or the Catholic Mestizo Democrats in America with none of the worry about “anti-semitism” or a care in the world about the Zionist entity in Palestine.

            I suspect there may be a somewhat “genetic” tendency to certain behaviors among Ashkenazis and most certainly their culture has selected for certain traits that are very undesirable from our perspective.

            I’ll admit to extreme annoyance among ostensibly pro-white types that always want to come up with some long and complex explanation for things that are rather simple. You hardly need to go back to the “Enlightenment” or medieval Judaism to understand modern anti-whiteness, in Europe but especially in America. It was mass media – especially the TV – under the control of a very tight knit and ethnocentric group of Ashkenazi immigrants from Eastern Europe – that propagated anti-Whiteness to America.

            If the TV networks had been under the control of these types, we wouldn’t be having these problems:


          • “They want a multi-cultural/multi-racial society because there is less of a chance of them being singled out as the “outsider.””

            This is MacDonald’s line, and it isn’t true.

            They don’t want multiculturalism, they want the annihilation of the host society. Multiculturalism is the excuse. Once the host society no longer resembles itself through mass immigration, the j-ws don’t care what happens after that.

            The jewish goal is pure destruction. Their behavior is rooted in an fathomless hatred of the whole world, but particularly of Europeans. This hatred is continually reinforced by the lies of their religious elders.

            If j-ws didn’t want to be singled out as outsiders they would keep their heads down and go with the flow. Instead they work to destroy the societies they infest. This is not some sort of evolutionary strategy, it’s the behavior of a war tribe.

            “I agree completely that Jews are not “evil” nor that they have some sort of “master plan” to destroy their host nations.”

            This is the historical folly of Whites: not believing the j-ws are evil. This is the mistake we have made for 2,000 years. This is why the j-ws always beat us, because we refuse to see their behavior for what it is: willful, conscious evil.

            You cannot read about j-ws like Shlomo Morel, Genghrik Yahoda, Ana Pauker, Ilya Ehrenburg, Henry Morgenthau, Leon Trotsky, Felix Dherzinshky, or any number of these parasites and not see them as evil.

            We cannot beat them until we come to terms with the fact that yes, jews are evil. Maybe not every single last one- that is utterly irrelevant- but as a tribe, they are an evil force in the world.


        • This guy was clearly an idiot, but I’m not going to sit here and disavow the whole enlightenment because they had some ridiculous ideas. Failing is part of learning, what us important is not letting our failures kill us.

          • This shows the contradictory nature of the Enlightenment: The philosophes and their American followers appealed to “experience” as the ultimate guide to knowledge and action, yet they advocated radical changes in society that they didn’t have any experience with to see if these changes would work as intended.

            So, for example, why do we have patriarchy? If you think like a philosophe and you want to dismiss this institution as a product of ignorance and superstition so that you can replace it with feminism, then you have to explain why so many generations of men around the world who didn’t know each other across space and time, and who all had similar experiences with women, all agreed that men need to exert authority over women to maintain a workable society. Did these men – I mean, all of them, without a known exception – all mysteriously make the same mistake about women’s nature?

            If experience offers the best guide to life, then patriarchy by far has the longest track record of experience of anything.

  • Where will the “feminists” in this hypothetical progressive future come from, if today’s feminists don’t have kids and die as sterile cat ladies?

    Seriously, these skeptics need to stop this snapshot way of thinking about time, and go back to read up on evolutionary theory and demography. The women in Future World have to come from fertile women in the here and now; and the female descendants of traditional white women who have large families will form the bulk of these women in the white population in a few more generations, while the feminists all die off as evolutionary dead ends.

    • I fear that this line of reasoning may be flawed. The reproductive strategy of most on the Left seems to be indoctrination: conversion through mass culture, academia, the (a)political zeitgeist, and so on.

      Consider the following: the worst generation in the history of sentient man (the Boomers) were born to the Silent Generation, most of whom, by today’s standards, would make Spencer look positively progressive. Just food for thought.

    • There’s an interesting parallel with the demographics of cities here. In all of history, cities have never had stable demographics and constantly rely on migration from the countryside to maintain a stable or growing population. As soon as the migration stops for some reason (war, economics, etc) the city declined and eventually disappears.

      As James notes below, the progressive model is indoctrination of naive children. If we can stop that, their movement will collapse in a matter of years. The youth alt-right culture online is a great start but we need more.

  • If anyone calls me a Nazi, I say, well, perhaps I am one, but I’m not a very good one; I haven’t read Mein Kampf yet, and I’ve never killed a single Jew.

      • Well, the math doesn’t work out, does it? White men way outnumber the Jews in the world, so I might never have the opportunity.

    • Here you go. Of course you can still claim you’ve never “read” it. Volume 1 Chapter 11 is my favorite.


  • I’d like to see some Alt Right “testimonials,” where white people come out to say that they despaired of the future because of the diversity forced on their countries at the point of a gun, and how they found hope and a renewed zest for living when they discovered the Alt Right.

    • This is a good idea… It’s not too difficult to produce, assuming some people are willing to put their faces out there.

      • It would certainly confound the Jewish nonsense that the Alt Right attracts “haters.” Stories about people who lost their way and then got back on right path appeal to women, especially.

        • I don’t want to come across as whiny victims, but the alt-rights grievances are legitimate. Technically out grievance is universal but libs don’t see it that way.

  • I’d just play the humanism card with these people: The Alt Right presents a vision of human flourishing and the good life situated in the humanist tradition, but oriented towards white people’s interests. We reject the outdated, failed universalist ethics of 20th Century humanism because that view of ethics assumed 20th Century pseudoscience about human fungibility.

    And these “skeptics” have the burden of proof to show that forcing diversity into traditionally white countries at the point of a gun makes any humanist sense for white people, because the project so far has made white people’s lives demonstrably worse. How could skeptics defend an ethical position which has the effect of promoting anti-flourishing in the white population?

  • It’s called “Mind War” and it’s an official doctrine of the US military:

    Vallely also co-authored a 1980 paper with then PSYOP analyst Michael Aquino entitled From PSYOP to MindWar: The Psychology of Victory. MindWar is defined as “the deliberate aggressive convincing of all participants in a war that we will win that war.” The paper contrasts a use of psychological operations such as propaganda with a new approach. The paper contains this passage:

    Unlike PSYOP, MindWar has nothing to do with deception or even with “selected” – and therefore misleading – truth. Rather it states a whole truth that, if it does not now exist, will be forced into existence by the will of the United States. The examples of Kennedy’s ultimatum to Khrushchevduring the Cuban Missile Crisis and Hitler’s stance at Munich might be cited.

    A MindWar message does not have to fit conditions of abstract credibility as do PSYOP there; its source makes it credible. As Livy once said:

    The terror of the Roman name will be such that the world shall know that, once a Roman army has laid siege to a city, nothing will move it – not the rigors of winter nor the weariness of the months and years – that it knows no end but victory and is ready, if a swift and sudden stroke will not serve, to preserve until that victory is achieved.Unlike Ellul’s cynical propagandist, the MindWar operative must know that he speaks the truth, and he must be personally committed to it. What he says is only a part of MindWar; the rest – and the test of its effectiveness – lies in the conviction he projects to his audience, in the rapport he establishes with it.

  • i have no doubt that white people will rise up and remove non whites from their lands not a case of if but a case of when? I’m just not sure when, perhaps it will be in the next 50 to 100 years, we are planting the seeds today, keep on planting. And remember this, as a minority on this planet we ruled most of it for many hundreds of years therefore as a despised minority we could be 20 or 10% of the population and we will still have no problem removing the hoards of non whites from our lands or any land that we want!

  • Actually…

    Pretty good!

    We need to propagate the 14 and the 9 words both in the positive sense, but also in the negative! Our enemies need to tremble us and the rest need to think that their ideas are dead-ends! We must secure the future of our people and a country for white children. Women are happier with a family than a job! Spread them, nail them, make them inevitable!

Leave a Reply