No Means No

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. Han Fei says:

    I think that a better way to phrase the content of this video would be to observe that you can’t form a coherent world view, let alone a political platform, on the basis of the refutation of a negation. Now to make sense of what I just wrote I shall use a few examples. Picture somebody comes up to you and all of a sudden tells you to go fuck yourself. Are you going to stand and ponder about the impossibility of such an act? No, you are going to get livid and reply with something like “ok well, fuck you too pal”. A fisticuff will presumably ensue and a video is uploaded on to youtube with the title being something like “drunk slavshits engaging in their daily activity”. Alternatively, if I were to inform you of the alleged fact that gobbledygooks go wigglywonk, you’d have no way to refute that statement. You would simply call me an idiot who is making no sense which would be followed up by yet another scuffle.

    A healthy national reaction is not this public activism or web debate or social media outpourings of what should be blatantly obvious. A healthy national reaction would be something that was observed in the Russian port town of Murmansk when a bunch of “southern” guys started to grope and fondle local girls at nightclubs. Imagine what the locals did to them. Take a guess. Go to any non-western country, like say Thailand and start screaming at the top of your mouth that ethnicity and nationhood are nothing but a social construct, a figment of the imagination of the racist oppressor majority. At the cost of your many broken bones and several months in gypsum you would get to experience an impressive Muay Thai performance staged free of charge by the locals. For good or ill, this is “nationalism” in its purest sense – not an ideology of some sort, not some biological “aspect” of behavior, but simply the way healthy people are supposed to act when presented with an absurdity.

    None of what I just described above however, can ever be observed in any so called progressive, liberal Western societies. Instead we get…white nationalism, which generally consists of memes and timidly written manifestos spread over the internet, which are of course treated as the worst acts anyone can possibly commit by the handlers of public opinion, which in our day and age are ideologically driven administrators of the social media platforms. I could go on twitter and advocate cannibalism, non-white racism, drug abuse, burglary, murder fantasies and criminal paraphilias of any kind and enjoy the furthest extents that free speech would allow me. But were I say something positive about Trump, or cite criminal statistics data that throws a wrench in the “systemic racism” bullshit and bye bye goes my social media account. The question that we need to ask is why? Why is an attitude normal for any non-white non-Western society is considered a dangerous revolutionary act here? Every day we are hammered home the notion that the nothingburger of white racism and supremacy somehow present a “public health” concern, and that for fuck’s sakes sharing a video which criticizes forced mask wearing somehow makes one party to it?

    The answer is that the essence of contemporary Western society is founded upon an absurdity and negation no less than the one I described in the opening paragraph. This is the essential statement that Being as such does not exist. Only the sensual is real, and only those senses which are processed by our individuating mind into linguistic constructs (notice I don’t say “language” here) can be considered subjects of rational discussion. Moral norms or objective truths are nothing but contingents of historical processes that are subject to ever present flux. What’s good or bad, what’s true or false is decided by those who have power, which in our society is not the state, but the financial means to fund activism and buy out official institutions. Only what is useful in that extremely narrow regard is what ends up mattering, hence the predominance of the realm of technology. Politics, statecraft, religion, the economy, social organization and social theory are thus reduced to the illogical negations of their original purpose and nature. This obsessive attempt at imposing an absolute and total control over everything sensed, thought and conceived, in its extreme political form, can only be associated with what we would term as the “left” . Right wing movements that attempt to ground their basic principles in what they see as the persuasive language of materialism, scientism and rationalism will always lose out to the sheer intellectual violence of the left, and even if they do happen to somehow gain political office they will not substantially differ in their inherent absurdity, as the governments of people like Putin, Trump and Bolsonaro expressly demonstrate. What the white nationalists don’t seem to understand is that the left is essentially an uttermost expression of the ontological state of White western civilization in the 21st century. This is not a question of them being right or wrong, but rather the reality. For all you weaboos out there reading this comment, it is “jijitsu”. There is no white western world to save because there is nothing that unites white European peoples on a substantial, organic level. In fact quite the opposite, the very nature of contemporary white civilization is such that it necessarily atomizes society and promotes the division of people into individuals via commercialization of every aspect of our lives, rendering them ultimately powerless to affect the outcome of any unfolding historical process.

    This idea that you can somehow bring about this great political awakening of Europeans on the basis of their (very loosely) shared ethnic identity doesn’t make a shred of sense. This is because nobody in history ever gave a damn about race. National identity was always based on language, religion, social class and familial tribe in that ascending order of precedence. These are all manifested, concrete products of historical experience, not reifications of biological realities by no means of which can we make a substantial relation with other peoples in our group. Race is no more a social construct than your body is, but at the same time, it can’t be a chief determining principle behind your behavior, beliefs and life goals. There needs to be something else that forms the basis of a unity between people out of which a genuinely transformative movement can arise, something that is neither material, nor rational, nor “utilitarian” and is thus not subject to the ubiquitous reductionist mentality of our age which renders everything placed before it into an absurdity.

    • Mihai says:

      Seriously now, about the rest of your comment: there will be no serious movement arising any time soon unless there is a return to the roots. This return is not something a conservative imagines- going back to past forms- but a reawakening of the inner life, a metaphysical return to the center. From where i come from and for what i know, this can only be the way back to one’s local church and one’s personal striving to killing one’s passions and practicing of the virtues. The main virtue we, in the Christian countries desperately need to recover is the readiness for self-sacrifice, understood not only in its ultimate, final meaning, but a general state of mind present everyday. Example: not moving away to a distant place where you can make a lot more money just because you have family here, elderly people who depend upon you.

      Speaking of which: i regard this secular individualism discussed in this video as quite the worst impediment here. But this can only disappear if the nihilistic worldview disappears, which means the recovery of : belief in God, supra-sensible realities, apirit, traditional metaphysics and so on. So we come full circle: the personal undertaking of this journey, with intention pointed beyond this life. If this becomes a wider trend in the population, social changes can ensue, but they must never become the main goal.

      Ehat is important to understand: the Christian way of handling perversions or deviations in the natural order of things is not through sestruction, but transformation. Not denying that which came to pass and attempting to revert to a previous state, but transforming the present state, changing its direction. A kind of inverting the invertion, if you will

  2. Mihai says:

    “A healthy national reaction would be something that was observed in the Russian port town of Murmansk when a bunch of “southern” guys started to grope and fondle local girls at nightclubs. Imagine what the locals did to them. Take a guess. ”

    My guess is that they bought them a vodka with orange juice and sat them at a table reminding them of the virtues of temperance and self-restraint, strengthened with appropriate quotes from Aristotle and Plato.
    Then they bid them farewell and wished them a nice stay in the Third Rome.

    There was also something about a Kalaşnikov i wanted to say, but i forgot what….hmm

    • Han Fei says:

      Would that be before or after you’ve beaten them to an inch of their life? I never said that a “healthy” native reaction was a just and moral one.

      What WN’s and the like don’t realize is that there are certain aspects partial to a genuine national character that are simply insufferable to those who have the insight to reflect upon it. The worse it is when you find yourself everyone around you locked into this type or pattern of behavior that seems to be prompted by something that lies deep within the blood. This is not always a good thing and sometimes it leads to national self destruction. Of course reading this comment, most of them (especially Americans) will retort with their usual accusations rather than addressing the problem. I think people who have lived through a civilizational collapse or a catastrophic civil war like what happened in Eastern Europe or Syria have a greater perception of this.

  3. Robber Chih says:

    Rousseau stated in his visions on nationalism that the first thing that must be broken down is the family unit. Then the state will take the place of the family etc etc.
    Basically all micro groups have been eviscerated in the west.
    On a very pedestrian level, one looks at whatever evils surround them, crime, homelessness etc and doesn’t even notice them because “it’s the govermnent’s responsibility” not mine.
    Any virtue begins within. How ever you treat yourself is how you treat the world. If you respect yourself you’ll do others, if you can forgive yourself likewise you’ll do others and the same goes for responsibility or any other virtue because only then can you know how real and how vital and transformative these acts actually are.
    If you don’t grow them up within yourself you can never deploy them in the social realm.

    Regarding the present nihilism and modern technological mass society, without any viable metaphysics everything is propaganda. The destruction of the micro communities has thrown ‘the individual ‘ into a mass society of which he has no means of adequately coping or of having any agency over his life. He adopts whatver opinions are in vogue out of necessity because that’s the only way he can feel that he has any participation in the community.
    It’s absurd but he has no choice.
    Of course rationally speaking there is no way that my friend from Scotland, living in Korea could have any opinion whatsoever about BLM or whatever, yet that doesn’t stop him from having quite a few opinions. How? Media. Why? Because a hollow principle compels him.

    Propaganda is the elephant in the room when talking about nation state and mass technological societies and the accompanying nihilism. This sociological phenomenon, this necessity to adopt opinions not your own of which you can’t possibly make yourself is what moves people to action. The point of propaganda is to move people to some desired action and reason alone cannot do this (Buridan’s asses?) but emotion works. Funny how emotions represent a make-believe world to reasonable modern man but try having a reasonable discussion which becomes a shouting match by the third sentence.
    Emotional much?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *