Friday, September 11, 2015

Cucks and C..nt's

Recent events, and their commentary, have caused me some concern and I must admit that the direction Neoreaction has been taking in the past few months has left me profoundly depressed.

On one hand, one of the most positive developments in the Neoreaction has been the rise of the Cuckservative meme as it quite accurately monikers a certain type of the "Right" who has led it to defeat throughout the 20th Century,  However, the success of this meme has come with a more depressing development, namely the co-opting of it by the other element of the pseudo-right, particularly those of a crypto- Nazi disposition.  For this second group, the axis by which all things are judged is according to their position on the purity of race.

It's also strange to note that the Left  has played into this frame promoting a  definition of cuckservative which synchs with the racial emphasis that the Natsoc types wish it to have. Strange bedfellows, No?

What we're seeing is the entryist invasion of Neoreaction with a attempt to semantically shift the meme.  Other bloggers have noticed this as well.  For the sake of distinction I call these entryists Cuntservatives, and just like cucks they're not the real thing.

The success of these entryists has come about because the Right has always valued Identity, whether it be in the individual or groups. Identity taking into account matters such family, kin, nation and race. But the right has understood that identity is not the sole defining feature of man. Indeed, the Right has always though that identities are subsets of an overall humanity which in turn was subordinate to the Law of God. It's interesting to see that racially motivated politics became an issue with the rise of democracies and a collapse of the faith. The subsequent cognitive simplification that came about as a result of these developments mad it a perfect ideology for the cognitive miser: Mass-man.

Race is a reality, but it is a reality which needs to be seen in the context of other realities, however the racial supremacists elevate it as the ultimate standard but this conceptualisation ultimately puts it at odds with Christian civilisation. One of the things these genetic Calvinists fail to take account of is that Western Civilisation until recently was a Christian one and it's whiteness was coincidental. Europe is the Faith and the Faith is Europe, as Belloc said, and their hostile attitude to Christianity means that their ideology is just is another variant anti-Christianity and therefore outside the European tradition.

Some of them, acknowledging their hostility to Christianity grope about for inspiration in Ancient Greece or Rome. But what these dumb bastards fail to recognise is that Rome and Athens were failing cultures which Christianity supplanted, ensuring that the best traditions of the past were kept alive.  By the way, despite the intellectually feeble attempts at Aryanist revisionism,  it was the latin wogs that produced these cultures.

By reducing everything to the racial axis they are theologically set against the foundation stone of European culture which is Christianity. This blog is premised on the truth of Christianity. Christ died for the sins of all men, that includes niggers, kikes, slopes, gumleaves, wops, dagos, chimps and slitty eyed gooks. They are all the children of God, and therefore conferred with a certain God given dignity.  Hence, there are certain minimum standards we owe the rest of humanity by virtue of the Christian ethos irrespective of our natural repugnance towards them. In the eyes of God no race assumes a superiority and a Right that defines itself primarily along racial lines is a Right that is outside of the European tradition. It's simply not Conservative.

However, given the human dignity that is conferred by Christ on all men, it does not mean that because every man is my brother in Christ he gets to live in my house, or gets a place in the lifeboat. Or that he has the right to enter my country. Furthermore, if he is a risk to the stabilty of my country or has duties at home he should be performing I have a duty in Charity not to let him in. Christianity compels me to love but it does not compel me to be stupid.  The virtue of Prudence, not racial superiority, is enough. As for being Catholic, Papal comments on immigration are beyond his brief.

The whole racial superiority angle serves to divide conservatives in other cultures from ourselves, multiplying our enemies and keeping our house divided.   Now who do you think would benefit from that?

Furthermore, racial supremicism seems to attract a certain type of arsehole. A few days ago, in my Twitter feed, I got an image of the young drowned Syrian boy, captioned "One Down".

Now, I can understand the revulsion by all of pseudo refugees claiming asylum in countries which they are culturally opposed to,  but it's one thing to argue against the uncontrolled influx of economic migrants, quite another to cheer the death of a child who was not responsible for the circumstances he was found in. The mainstream left may be guilty of malign stupidity, but these Cuntservatives are psychopathic. There is something profoundly wrong in a man if he can't feel pity even for the most helpless simply because the other person is of a different race. And this psychopathy is profoundly repugnant to potential converts who are intelling to the reactionary right. Yet the current political debate in the West driven by the heartless and the bleeding hearts. It's a tug of war between dumb and nasty.

It's my opinion that these entryists are the greatest threat to Neoreaction at the moment, and if left unchecked will take it down.

23 comments:

Senghendrake said...

I'm pretty sure Neoreaction has *already* been co-opted by single issue cryptos.

That said, emotion over a carefully chosen propaganda photo does not justify being invaded en masse by theological opponents who have no more to do with traditional Christendom than the secular alt-right pseudo-Natsocs do.

August said...

I think they've rejected the identity their schoolteachers tried to give them, but they are nonetheless progressives, because they've essentially just put on whiteness onto the identity construct the cultural Marxist's shoved into their head. They talk about being triggered and safe spaces, just like progressives. The over the top comments are aimed at triggering other people. I suspect many of them just need a little deprogramming.

The identity construct has to come out though. The elite benefit, for instance, from childless feminist who thinks having children will destroy her identity, because she becomes a good little worker, consumer, and voter. If the elites ever felt threatened, they could figure out how to pander to people with white identity too.

Anonymous said...

"The mainstream left may be guilty of malign stupidity, but these Cuntservatives are psychopathic."

Preference for the mindless left over the heartless right is cuckservative. I would prefer for Catholics to regain the strength needed to rule the West. However, the heartless right has served as a kind of backstop when the Christian right lost its prudence.

Ingemar said...

This reminds me of a saying of your "rival," Zippy Catholic--seeing through one of the lies of the Left doesn't mean you have it all figured out (What About the Infrared Pill?)

Arthur Peeters said...

"Cuckservative" has little to do with nrx. The term was coined and the meme spread on My Posting Career (aka MPC, mpcdot.com) and The Right Stuff (aka TRS, therightstuff.biz). Both sites had their crews hype it on Twitter and in the comments sections.

TRS is a generally edgy/racist site with a fedora-libertarian twist and MPC is a niggerdeath body building forum. Neither is particularly neoreactionary with MPC having several threads dedicated just to mocking nrx and a word filter for neoreaction (changing it to judeo-reaction). Although there is always cross-pollination on the alt-right.

Nrx had a related term "conservakin" which didn't catch on. Pretty clever but only for people familiar with tumblr instantiates.

Julian O'Dea said...

I think some preference from one's own people is consistent with Catholic teaching, at least traditionally. We are all one in Christ Jesus, Greeks and Jews, but we do not cease to be from our origins. Arguably each form of Catholicisms: Irish, Italian, English, French, and so on: has brought something unique to the church.

A certain amount of ethnic identity - like an extended family identity - is natural to human beings.

What people are being asked to do these days is not simply accept others as part of the Brotherhood of Man under the Fatherhood of God, to coin a phrase; but to almost prefer the Other to his own. That is manipulative.

Why, for example, should I want to see more Muslims in Australia, when a proportion of them will detest me, my family, and my beliefs?

As for "cuckservative" and Donald Trump, the time was ripe. I have watched with dismay as even the most conservative, "respectable" organs of opinion have slowly capitulated to every item on the progressive agenda. I gave up on National Review Online when they started accepting women in combat, for example.

I was thinking yesterday that sometimes a man has an idea, sometimes an idea has a man. Trump represents an idea and a feeling. The reason why Chateau Heartiste is so keen on him, and why the anti-cuckservative meme has so energised them and given them purpose, is that young white men in America in particular have legitimate concerns. I mean read, just read, that recent article on that (I hesitate to call him) man who wrote that anti-Trump article laying the boot into white men for their "failure" and positively gloating about it. With that kind of abuse, of course they are upset.

SP, you have I think suggested that feminism was built on genuine grievances. I have my doubts as to how serious they were, but let us assume that was true to an extent. Surely modern white men have serious grievances too. There is now official, vicious discrimination against men in America, much more malicious than anything women were anecdotally subjected to.

Imagine being a young white man in America, patronised by a shit like that older white male writer CH gave their recent "award" to. With the prospect (admittedly fading) of having that ghastly shrew Hillary Clinton as their president; lied to by the media about racial crime; discriminated against in the workplace in favour of women; and with the prospect of having to compete for resources with a mass of illegal Hispanic aliens. Of course Trump looks good. He is also the only candidate who has shown some balls in handling feminist journalists.

They fear being "cucked" (and as I have written before, they mostly are in the sense that the women they will eventually marry - and there is another source of grievance, the absurdly unfair divorce laws - will be very well-used indeed by other men before they ever see them.)

The whole of the culture hates young white men. In the circumstances, their revolt and their bitter language of "cuckservative" is long overdue. In fact, I am amazed that American men have put with it all for so long.

Hoyos said...

A thousand times yes, thank you for writing this. I have a theory that once many men "detox" from leftist lies they become uniquely vulnerable to other mind viruses, "They lied about everything else, maybe Hitler was right!" For those of us from the Christian tradition, we have a natural immune system. This has been one of, if not the, biggest problems that has developed in the manosphere. Actual, no joke, racism is indeed vile. The problem comes from the Left redefining racist to mean someone the Left doesn't like, regardless of the truth.

I think the example of the right in France is something to look at here. In the fight against communism, many strange bedfellows were made over decades with tragic results. Communism was still a heinous threat, but pairing yourself with Nazis to fight them is like the cops allying themselves with the Bloods to fight the Crips. Yes, we share an enemy, but...

SanguineEmpiricist said...

Love this, subscribed to your blog on my rss feed.

The Social Pathologist said...

@Senghendrake

There's always single issue many groups but what's alarming me is the influx of "Stormfront" types into NRx en massse. The "centre of gravity", for lack of a better turn, seems to have drifted towards stupid and I think there needs to be a pushback.

emotion over a carefully chosen propaganda photo does not justify being invaded

It was typical Cathedral psych-ops. Immigration policy should be based on reason, not emotion. So the death of the child is kind of irrelevant with regard to letting illegal migrants in. However, cheering the death of child is a kind of psychopathy that separates a man from the human race. Once large numbers of these types begin to invade your group, calls for "final solutions" are not far behind.

@Anon

However, the heartless right has served as a kind of backstop when the Christian right lost its prudence.

Yep, this is true.

@Ingemar,

I agree with Zippy on this point and I think this deserves some further elaboration. Too many of the Right feel that just because they're opposing the Left all is right in their own house. Truth can only be done "one way", the ways of error are multiple. My own view with regard to the failure of the Right in the 20th C is that they did not recognise their own "in house" errors because they were fighting the Left, allowing the foundations to crumble beneath them.

@Arthur

It's my recollection that whilst the moniker originated elsewhere the idea behind it was well established in NRx. Conservakin is a different concept, something I plan to elaborate more on later when I get the time.

@Hoyos.

but pairing yourself with Nazis to fight them is like the cops allying themselves with the Bloods to fight the Crips.

Comment of the week!

I agree, detoxing from the blue pill leaves doesn't confer red pill wisdom, it simply leaves a space other ideas can invade if no "immune" system is present.

The Social Pathologist said...

A certain amount of ethnic identity - like an extended family identity - is natural to human beings.

There is a great passage in Chesterton's Orthodoxy which I feel is relevant to this point.

This is what makes Christendom at once so much more perplexing and so much more interesting than the Pagan empire; just as Amiens Cathedral is not better but more interesting than the Parthenon. If any one wants a modern proof of all this, let him consider the curious fact that, under Christianity, Europe (while remaining a unity) has broken up into individual nations. Patriotism is a perfect example of this deliberate balancing of one emphasis against another emphasis. The instinct of the Pagan empire would have said, "You shall all be Roman citizens, and grow alike; let the German grow less slow and reverent; the Frenchmen less experimental and swift." But the instinct of Christian Europe says, "Let the German remain slow and reverent, that the Frenchman may the more safely be swift and experimental. We will make an equipoise out of these excesses. The absurdity called Germany shall correct the insanity called France."

What people are being asked to do these days is not simply accept others as part of the Brotherhood of Man under the Fatherhood of God, to coin a phrase; but to almost prefer the Other to his own. That is manipulative.

There seems to be a desired to "suicide our identities". Multiculturalism, when complete, will result in a monoculturalism, because there will be no differences amongst peoples anywhere in the world. It's the death of identity.

Surely modern white men have serious grievances too

Agree, there are a host of white male issues which are not given fair treatment. I have no problem acknowledging that. But the issue is one of justice not race. As to why American men have put up with it so long, there are complex reasons for this. The movie Falling Down is quite pertinent to this phenomenon.

As for Trump, you're right, "sometimes an idea has a man. " and are spot on, but it's a mistake to advance white interests over the legitimate interests of others. We need to advocate a just solution that's fair to all and is thereby in accord with Christian teaching.

Julian O'Dea said...

I don't think Trump wants to advance white interests over others' legitimate interests. I think he wants not to see white interests ignored in favour of illegal immigrants. The "illegal" point keeps being elided.

I genuinely believe, although perhaps I am being naive, that white men in America (and here in Australia under the recent Gillard government, which tried some of the divisive tactics of the American Left) would be grateful simply for equal treatment, including in the rhetoric. Albeit possibly with some recognition of the good things they have done historically as well as the less good; a recognition that they effectively created America in the material sense; and a recognition that they take on extra responsibilities under the military draft. And in providing for their families (I cannot count the number of feminist complaints about how men don't do more housework that simply ignore the fact that men do the bulk of the breadwinning, although that is how women expect it to be and prefer it.)

To use an American expression, men can't win for losing.

Many men seem a bit masochistic in this area, willing to cop all sorts of unfair abuse. I have NEVER seen the sense in that. Instead, I could see this problem (abuse of white men) as a problem that would only get worse. In some ways, I think Trump is the last hope for some kind of end to this. The self-abnegation of the other Republican candidates, as reported, is pretty pathetic. The Democrat males, of course, all got "fitted for their tutus" years ago, in Ann Coulter's arresting expression.





Tom said...

> The whole of the culture hates young white men.

And yet, I have yet to meet the white man who mourns the fact that they were born either white or male.

Life may not be easy as it used to be for us white males, but it sure as hell isn't *more* difficult than the alternatives. "White male" is, as the SF author John Scalzi so eloquently put it, the easiest difficulty setting there is.

Should I mourn the fact that my sons will only have it twice as easy as everyone else rather than five times as easy? Not if I respect their abilities.

Anonymous said...

Okay, I get it. You don't like Nazis. Holiness signal received.

But let me ask you one question:

Do you believe that the traditionalist, christian, Neoreactive society that you dream of is likely to be created in, and thrive in a population that is majority African, Arab and Amerindian in descent & culture?

My suspicion is that it is very unlikely indeed. Historically, those groups have not done so yet & wherever they live now they currently show very little interest in trying. So, realistically speaking --- insofar as the word "realistically" can be applied to the idea of a successful neoreactive movement --- we are stuck with white people creating, or at least leading, that movement.

If you agree with that, even silently to yourself, guess what? To the progressive, you are racist and consequently no better than the RightStuff Stormfront Nazi fascist rabble you just derided. You can expect no extra helping of respect or courtesy from them because of your self-righteous sniffing you just did about the bad elements in the neoreaction movement.

So you just alienated people who agree with you on most things, for nothing.

Tom said...

> You can expect no extra helping of respect or courtesy from them because
> of your self-righteous sniffing you just did about the bad elements in
> the neoreaction movement.

You think SP holds *any* of his positions because of the respect or courtesy that it engenders from the left? You must be reading a different SP than I am.

I read his condemnation based solely on his principles (or more accurately, the principles of the institutions he holds dear). And do I read you suggesting that he abandon those principles in order to build a society that enshrines... those principles?

Something does not compute :-).

The Social Pathologist said...

@ Tom

Thanks for your defence.

And yet, I have yet to meet the white man who mourns the fact that they were born either white or male.

Dunno Tom, I've got two boys in University and there's a lot of discontent brewing, especially in the STEM fields. A lot of guys reckon they've been given a bum deal.

@Anon

Do you believe that the traditionalist, christian, Neoreactive society that you dream of is likely to be created in, and thrive in a population that is majority African, Arab and Amerindian in descent & culture?

No, not in a multicultural society.


To the progressive, you are racist and consequently no better than the RightStuff Stormfront Nazi fascist rabble you just derided.

That is correct. My audience is not the Left and I couldn't care less about their opinion of me. No, my objective is to stop the Right from self destructing. You see, the problem in political philosophy, as in medicine, is diagnosis. Get that wrong and the treatment fails. The "White community" seems hell bent on self destruction, the evidence is all around you, therefor the notion that "whiteness" will somehow save us is repudiated by the facts.

The SJW's are nearly all white, the leadership of the western world is nearly all white, the university professors are nearly all white as are the bankers, cathedral workers and lawyers. Seeing a pattern? Whiteness has not stopped these people from being stupid. The invasion is a symptom of the disease not the pathological process.

You see, what gets me about guys like you is you never go deeper, trying to understand the rot. Closing the borders simply delays the decline, as demographic collapse rears it's head. Societal cohesion fails, because of poor family formation and so on.

Ultimately a society is made up of its individual members, and if they're stupid or of poor moral character the society fails. No matter how well you organise it. The character of its constituent parts is effing important.

This blog is not advocating the widespread importation of people who are not assimilable, rather, a society made up of men that cheers the death of children is a society that is rotting from the inside. All the barbarians need to do is wait until it implodes and then walk in.

Alf said...

Per usual thought-provoking post.

It seems to me NRx has always struggled with who is a part of it and who isn't. Right now my money is on Hestia society as the vanguard of NRx - so far they seem able to keep the entryists outside.

Julian O'Dea said...

Tom, I was going to ignore your remarks in the spirit of dialogue, and SP seemed to partially address them; but then I noticed that you had quote John Scalzi!

Seriously, John Scalzi!

He is precisely the kind of man whom the young white men detest. He has done very well out of pandering to social justice warriors and, frankly, ratting on his own sex.

A terrible example. In fact, one of the funniest cases of a self-destroying argument I have seen in months.

Martin X said...

It's really not that complicated. At this stage of the game you are either pro-white or you are pro-white genocide. The left has declared war on whites of all political persuasions everywhere they are found on earth. And what do I see here? More shooting people on the right in the back. The left is winning because they NEVER shoot their skirmishers in the back, they never disown their cadre regardless of how extreme. Meanwhile cuckservatives spends 90% of its energy trying to make sure they don't seem "racist". Really? They want you dead fellas. It's that simple. This isn't a conversation or debate. This is pure psychological warfare.

How about you take a lesson from the left when it comes to defending those on the right and simply say, "Yes that's not what I believe, but really can you blame them for feeling/thinking that way". But by all means, keep spending all of your energy policing the right while you get rolled up like a dirty carpet by the anti-white left.

You quoted Scalzi? Wow, I suggest reading vox day if you don't realize how embarrassing that is.

Anti-racism is just a code word for anti-white.

The Social Pathologist said...

@Martin

At this stage of the game you are either pro-white or you are pro-white genocide

Being pro-white does not mean being anti-human and liking white doesn't mean hating everyone else. I know that the Left are nuts, but so are the racists. There is a line that a man must walk between the two. I'll write more in the next post. BTW, I didn't quote Scalzi.

esoterictrad said...

That Syrian boy with the One Down comment I first saw posted by Radish Mag who's done quite a lot of good work and produced good material.

Are we afraid of the reality of what this fight means? Because unfortunately dead children are going to be part of it, they already are part of it thanks to the left importing non-Europeans into Europe. Honour killings, female genital mutilation, all problems directed against children the West have allowed to happen in their lands.

I don't see this as entryist takeover, the cuckservative meme has brought people into the wider alt-right sphere but NRx remains 'pure' - whatever that means at this late stage in the game. There has always been tension between the Christian champions and those who oppose Christianity, your post just seems to serve up evidence this split isn't going away and will deepen.

The Social Pathologist said...

@esoterictrad

There has always been tension between the Christian champions and those who oppose Christianity, your post just seems to serve up evidence this split isn't going away and will deepen.

Yep. There's a fundamental incompatibility.

Anonymous said...

Than you for the diagnosis. Those who disagree with you --- even slightly --- do so because they are racist, hateful, morally inferior & stupid.

Definitely condemn them for the 10-15% difference of opinion, in terms indistinguishable from those used by leftists. Because principles.

That is definitely going to advance the broader rightist cause.

By the way, defending a nation's whiteness may not be sufficient, but it sure is necessary. Hungary is turning rightward as we speak, because they are still white & can. That's going to be a lot harder turn to make in multicultural Britain & France.

But perhaps you are right & Hungary should be working on improving its citizen's moral character instead of putting up fences.



Anonymous said...

Regardless of intent, when someone uses leftist terms to attack a rightist they are doing the leftists' work for them.