Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* One of the relatively unheralded stories of 2015 is how the Alt-Right became an independent force with the ability to come up with great memes, like cuckservative and #NRORevolt, and push them into the mainstream.

* The difference between The Democratic Party and The GOP Establishment is that the Dems fully embrace their Far Left Wing voting base like Black Lives Matter and Occupy Wall Street. While The Republican Establishment is embarrassed and ashamed of their Far Right Wing base like Donald Trump supporters and The Tea Party.

This is the reason not many Left Wing voters feel betrayed by The Democratic Party. The Dems do a pretty good job of giving their Left Wing voting base what they want. Very few Left Wing voters are going to sit out the 2016 presidential election. If you are the average Left Wing voter, you feel The Democratic Party has done solid by you. During the last 8 years of Democratic rule we have gotten a lot more 3rd world immigration both illegal & legal, legalization of marijuana in several states, legalization of same sex marriage in all 50 states, all big major U.S cities from New York City to Oklahoma City are sanctuary cities for illegals, more affirmative action, more section 8 housing, Obamacare, no Keystone Pipeline, Confederate Flags have been taken down from all government buildings in the South, freedom of speech is pretty much dead on most American college campuses, etc. If you are a Left Wing voter than you must feel like you are on cloud 9 right now. You feel like the stars have aligned. It’s a great time to live in America right now if you are a voter who is politically Left Of Center.

* Catholic (and Jewish) immigration to the USA in the 19th and early 20th centuries pushed USA politics way to the left of where it would have been otherwise.

Without that immigrant wave, Protestant progressives/leftists/socialists native to the USA would have been a very tiny and powerless minority.

Leftism has swept through Catholic countries just as easily as Protestant countries.

Leftists are safely entrenched in power within the Catholic church itself.

* As Vox Day has repeatedly noted, it would behoove the GOP to embrace their extremists, as they are the shock troops. But as we’ve seen repeatedly with all things Trump over the past five months, Cuckservatives would rather fire at their own side than fire at the enemy.

The reigning mindset is that if the Cucks don’t “tone police” right-wing extremists and constantly condemn offensive rhetoric, some liberal might call them the dreaded “r-word”. Thus, they shoot their own shock troops. This clearly isn’t a good strategy for winning a high-stakes, zero sum cultural war for the very soul of Western Civilization, but there are all those lovely beltway cocktail parties to think of.

More comments:

* The Man in the High Castle. Hey look, it’s like Nazi Madmen.

Funny, but the video looks like life in Israel where some people are more equal than others.

Btw, if Nazism shows us the danger of majoritarian tyranny, what might minoritarian tyranny look like?

Well, let’s look at South Africa where minority ruled over the majority with apartheid.

Well, let’s look at West Bank where the minority rules over the majority with apathowicz.

Well, let’s look at India where the British minority ruled over the majority with imperialism.

Well, let’s look at the USSR where the communist elites made of national minorities(with good number of Jews) ruled over the majority of Russians and destroyed 50,000 churches and wiped out millions or sent them to gulag.

By the way, Nazi tyranny was at its worst when it turned minoritarian.

Nazis ruling over Germans in Germany was simply a case of German elites ruling over the German majority. Nazis in Germany didn’t kill many, and many Germans were okay. Nazi majoritarianism in Germany did limited harm.

It was when Nazis invaded other countries and imposed minoritarian rule over them that the real horror began. Ask the Poles, ask the Russians, ask the Jews. Nazi minority imperialists ruthlessly oppressed and killed millions.

So, minoritarian tyranny is worse.

And the reason why US is turning into a hellhole is it is now ruled by a minoritarian elite that is utterly corrupt and unaccountable. This minoritarian elite pushed policies that led to millions of deaths in the Middle East and displacement of millions more.

This minoritarian elite has opened the gates of EU and US to countless foreigners who are totally changing the racial and cultural landscape of the West.

Japanese majoritarian rule over Japan was never the problem. Japanese only became problematic when they imposed minoritarian rule over other nations like China, Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, and etc.

* What are some of the problems of traditionalism? It stifles energies, individualities, eccentricities, and regeneration.

Sometimes, a forest fire does a lot of good. By burning away lot of dead wood and old trees, it provides ash as nutrient for new seeds to sprout from the earth into new saplings that grow into big trees. And since sunlight is freely available everywhere, new plants have a chance to grow.

The problem with old forests is that the existing dominant trees hog the sunlight. Everything below must dwell in the shade, and they get little sunlight So, new plants often wither and die without growing bigger while the old trees just grow older.

Traditionalist power is like that. Why did the Egyptians stop changing and progressing? The established powers hogged everything, and everyone else just had to follow. Why did the Chinese empire fail to make progress? The tall trees commanded the sky and absorbed all the sunlight. And even the communist revolution soon became old and tired because the new giant trees of power overshadowed everything else.

Progress means innovation and invention, and that means better ships, arms, ideas, instruments, technologies. That means power.

But ultimately, what should progress serve? Some say progress should serve progress itself, but constant flux is too unstable for commitment and passion. Ultimately, progress must serve a race, culture, land, and history.
And Jews gained great power cuz they found a way to fuse identity and innovation. Jews preserved their identity and passed it down through the generations. But they were also open to new ideas from all around. In a way, they were compelled to be innovative since they had no homeland of their own. As they had to rub shoulders with different peoples, they came in contact with all sorts of ideas and ways.

Anglo civilization came upon a balance of tradition and individuality.

Unlike the Spanish and Russian elites who insisted only on tradition and kept most people ignorant and submissive,
the Anglo Order not only kept with grand traditions and hierarchy but also created legal leeway and rights by which individuals with talent could prove himself, rise in the world, and contribute something fresh to society while also serving his own personal interest.

UK had tall trees hogging much of the sunlight, but there were also clearings in the forest that allowed some degree of sunlight to reach to ground as well. So, new trees could grow as well. And this led to the rise of the bourgeoisie that was fired up with enterprising spirit and innovative will.

What goes for economics also goes for culture. An overly conservative order that insists on a certain official expression as the only correct one will stifle cultural experimentation, development, and progress. This is why communist culture stopped developing. The cult of officialdom just made thing boring and dull.

And this is why Christian art and Classicism eventually became boring and lifeless. It repeated the established styles over and over and over. Romanticism did much to burn away the cultural deadwood and old trees and clear the way for new voices and visions.

And earlier, the explosion of innovation and experimentation of the Renaissance was possible only because the Ancient World had been lost and destroyed. Since so much of it was gone in actuality, it could only be ‘rebirthed’ through vision, imagination, dream, and fantasy. So, the Renaissance was far more than reconstruction of the past. It was a re-envisioning of it.

It’s like what Burt Reynolds character says in DELIVERANCE. “Sometimes you gotta lose yourself before you can find anything.”

* A man can a lot of things, but he cannot live forever. He must have children and let them take his place with new ideas, new visions, and new challenges. A man who thinks he can and should live forever is a fool. Even if we could live forever, we will lose vitality and sense of wonderment as we grow older and older and older. It requires new people to see things with fresh eyes and senses. Change and regeneration are absolutely necessary.
But there also needs to be a sense of continuity, and this comes from a sense of the flow of identity. Things change and new generations find new ideas, experiences, and images, but they are nevertheless connected by a thread of biology and history. Without such link and without such a sense of historical thread, one’s life has no higher or deeper meaning. If a Jew or Chinese were to only see himself an individual, his achievement would serve no higher purpose. He could say he achieved something for ALL humanity, and it’s true enough that the great achievement of any individual can be appreciated by anyone around the world. You don’t have to be German to appreciate Beethoven or have to Japanese to appreciate Kurosawa.

But the idea of ‘humanity’ is too bland, too generic, and too vague. Even as one can inspire all of humanity, one’s life gains truer meaning by being part of a race, culture, and history. It’s like a particular ethnic restaurant is more special than a world buffet that is just a mediocre sampler of various dishes. For an artist to be really good at something, he must be steeped in its culture and history. It’s like Andrei Tarkovsky’s ANDREI RUBLEV is such a powerful film because Tarkovsky was so steeped in Russian history, art, and spirituality. Had he decided to make something that represents ALL HUMANITY, it would have lacked the richness of ANDREI RUBLEV.
And THE GODFATHER is great because Coppola, being Italian-American, knew something of the culture of the Italian community.

A Jew is more meaningful as a Jew than merely as a member of ‘brotherhood of man’. A black African finds more meaning as an African than as a ‘citizen of the world’. Also, the notion of ‘citizen of the world’ is arrogant and megalomaniacal, indeed as if one’s narrow existence and experiences somehow reflect all the people around the world. I mean what does Obama know about Peru, Vietnam, Madagascar, Bolivia, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Japan, Germany, Holland, Hungary, and etc. to be a part of their nations too? No, Obama is a mixed race child of a black African and a white mudshark who spent his childhood in Indonesia and Hawaii before going to Ivy colleges. He doesn’t know about most people and most cultures around the world. His narrow experience doesn’t constitute ‘citizenship around the world’. I mean how many languages does he know? How many histories of other peoples does he know?
For him to conflate his narrow experience with the entire world is arrogant than humble though he plays at faux humility.
A truly humble person admits that the world is much bigger than one nation and especially one person. A person who claims to be ‘citizen of the world’ is laying claim to the world as if the world should submit to one’s idea of what is right for everyone in every corner of the world… yeah, such as ‘gay marriage’.

We need traditionalism but there has to be break in the branches and foliage above to allow sunlight to reach the ground as well and make it possible for new seeds to grow into new trees.

But globalism is worse than traditionalism. It is a constant uprooting and overturning of the soil itself so that the native seeds are destroyed while the seeds of all kinds of invasive species are scattered all around so that they will gain dominance over the native species of trees, plants, and flowers.

It doesn’t merely burn and clear away the old and decayed to make way for the new and vital.
The Bubonic Plague, as tragic as it was, cleared the way for new economic activity and cultural movements.
Many Europeans died and many institutions were destroyed, but Europe was still inhabited by Europeans. So, new European activity and enterprise replaced the earlier ones.
But now, Europeans themselves are being replaced by Africans, Arabs, and Asians in Europe itself.
While Europeans refuse to have babies and are dying out, non-Europeans are allowed to arrive in mass and take over European lands. Whatever they do, they won’t be Europeans but foreign invaders who will forever change the genetic and cultural character of Europe. They will do to Europe what Han Chinese are doing to Tibet.

Globalism doesn’t clear the forest for new trees to grow. It is a war on the soil itself that is seeded with invasive species that will forever change the character of the forest.

Still, traditionalism is never enough. A healthy society has to master the magic trick of forgetting and remembering at the same time. One must fuse amnesia with elephant’s memory. If one is crammed with too much memory and received knowledge, it actually has a muffling effect. It’s like there is a time to carry the load. But there is also a time to take off the backpack and roam/run freely. A people who are made to carry the weight of the past all times isn’t allowed to think freely or be creative. All his energy is devoted to carrying the load. (This is part of the problem with the French. They have a great cultural legacy, but its weight has prevented them from breaking out in new directions.) Besides, the true genius is within than something gained from without. Orson Welles was 26 when he made his first film CITIZEN KANE. He had far less experience and knowledge of cinema than many professionals, but he had an intuitive grasp of film language. Those with talent don’t need that much to be creative. Even the personal libraries of the kings and aristocrats were smaller than the library of an average community library in America, but consider the great plays of Shakespeare. And consider the great achievements of the Greeks whose biggest cities had far fewer books and such stuff than any small town in the US.

If greater knowledge = great culture, then someone who read tons of books would be culturally most essential. But some of the greatest artist were far less knowledgeable. Many academic scholars who know so much are incapable of artistic expression or a single original idea. But, many great musicians didn’t even know how to read music. Most artists who changed culture itself were not scholars or academics steeped in knowledge.
And this is true of spirituality as well. Jesus knew something of Jewish tradition, but there were Rabbis who knew much more than he did. Muhammad was barely literate, or the story goes. Yet, those two men changed religious history while most religious clerics and scholars didn’t change anything. Scholarship is about maintaining the tradition, and surely there is a need for such people to keep knowledge of the canon.
But for those who dare to change the world, the key is less about erudition than about inspiration and intuition, and it is the human subconscious, tapped properly of its oil or creative fuel, that is the real storage of the genius of a race. Everyone needs some knowledge, but geniuses can do so much with little whereas most people can’t do anything even with so much. Give a genius 20 great books and a pen and pencil, and he may start cranking out masterpieces. Give a non-genius 1,000 books, but even after reading them all, he may be unable to write anything worth reading. Knowledge is necessary but inspiration is what really counts.

This is why, even if all the artworks in every European museum were to be lost forever, there is still the promise that European genius will create more such great visions and works in the future. While the specific artworks can never be recovered, as long as the genius that created them still exist in the European race, something comparable or even better could be produced in the future. (Likewise, even if all the redwood trees were to be cut down, as long as their seeds are in the ground, new trees will grow. But suppose we allow the trees to remain but remove all the seeds. The trees will last for a long time but eventually die. And when they die, there will never be redwoods again cuz the seeds weren’t there to create new trees.)
So, more important than even the preservation of culture is the preservation of the race. If the culture if preserved but the race is lost, the culture is just a reminder of the past. But if the race goes on living(even with the culture destroyed and lost), it is a guarantee of future genius and future creativity.

Conservatism is about preserving the cultural achievements and moral values of the past, especially of one’s own ancestors.
It is necessary as the past needs to be preserved. But all the great things in the past were, in their time, revolutionary, prophetic, or challenging. It changed or shifted the paradigm. Christianity became a conservative tradition, but if Jesus had been an arch-conservative, He would have been just another Jewish Rabbi, not a prophet.
Wagner is now just part of classical music repertoire, but if Wagner had just stuck to tradition, he wouldn’t have changed German music history.

In the end, identity must find inspiration. Cultural preservation is less important than the will to dream and create culture. If we emphasize conservatism and preservation uber alles, we’ll believe we have nothing unless we preserve what has been handed to us from the past. While cultural preservation is important, the prophet or visionary has the will to say that even if the past culture is lost, a new culture can be created from the heart and mind of the race as long as it has the will to fight and survive.
An arch conservative feels, “If my family house handed to me by my ancestors burns down, I won’t have a house since I depend solely on what was handed down to me.” But a prophet-visionary feels that “if the house given to me is burned own, I will use my genius to build a new house, even a better one.” It is that will to create and imagine that is the true source of racial greatness.

So much of Europe was destroyed in WWI and WWII but Europe came back fast and strong in the postwar decades. Why? How could a people have done so much after having lost so much? Because Europeans still ruled over Europe and had confidence as Europeans.
But today, Europeans have so much money and privilege, but they are losing their homeland and unable to do anything about it. Why? They’ve lost their will to survive as a race, their romantic will to create the future as a race. Late Modernism says everything has to be soulless, post-modernism says everything has to be frivolous, and globo-pop culture says everything must be disposable and trashy.

WWI and WWII killed tens of millions of Europeans, but Europe came back fast and strong. And there was also cultural explosion in cinema, music, and literature.

But at some time in the late 60s, a new intellectual trend led to European self-loathing. Today, Europeans are richer and safer than ever, but they have no will to survive, no will to fight, not much will to create.

Japan was smashed in WWII. 1/3 of its economy was gone, and millions had been killed, and more had been maimed. But Japan also came back fast and strong because Japanese still ruled over Japan and had consciousness as Japanese. After so much horror and tragedy in WWII, post-war Japan saw the great flowering of so much energy and creativity. Japan lost the war, Japan was smashed, but Japan was still a nation of Japanese with national pride. And with the new freedom allowed by American occupation, all sorts of things were possible.

But over the yrs, Japanese have grown decadent, spoiled, and soulless. It too is a dying nation soon to be flooded by tons of foreigners as Japan now eventually follows the trends in the West as Jews control all the elites in the world.

Now, how can the Alt Right produce a culture that is powerful? It must attract those with talent.
It is near impossible to formulate an ideological recipe for creativity.
Ideology alone can produce propaganda but not art and culture. Art and culture need genuine talent, genius, and ability.
Some people are born with it, most are not.

So, if a movement wants to produce arts and culture, it must attract those with talent.
Those with talent are not born with ideology even though their parents and teachers could instill them with certain ideological biases.

The Left has more talented artists not because Leftism necessarily is more creative. It’s because Leftism has been more appealing to those with talent. It just feels better to be talking about ‘inclusion’ than ‘identity’. It just feels better to talk of love than loyalty. Inclusion and love seem boundless whereas identity and loyalty sounds limiting.

But with PC idiocy having taken over Leftist ideology, the Alt Right might be able to put forth a set of arguments that might eventually attract people of talent.

Before there was great Christian or Islamic art, Christianity and Islam had to win over the people of talent. Having been converted to such faiths, men of talent created art in service of Jesus or Allah.

Win the moral and ideological argument, and then, dominance of culture and creativity will follow. Those who win the moral argument will attract men of creative talent who will then lend their genius to the ideology, vision, or movement.

Attracting intelligence is power. After all, a company that hires more intelligent people than the next company will win.
Likewise, a team that hires better athletes will beat those that hire less better athletes.

In arts and culture, the Left has been able to attract, convert, and recruit more people of talent and intelligence.
Also, the rules of PC reminds creative people that they will be blacklisted if they violate certain taboos.
Still, the problem of PC is that it may eventually alienate a lot of genuinely talented people who can’t stand the repressive nonsense. I mean imagine if you have the talent of Sophocles or Shakespeare, but the cultural commissars say you can’t do this or that because it might be ‘triggering’.

Libertarians hope that their championing of unfettered freedom will attract intelligence and talent to their side away from PC Liberals. But the reason why most intelligent and talented people reject libertarianism — despite its championing of unfettered freedom — is because people feel a need to serve and live for something ‘greater than themselves’. Libertarianism’s message is simply, “I want my freedom, I want to be free, I want to be me, me, me and I’m the center of the world.” It sounds like the Toys R Us song, “I don’t wanna grow up, I’m a Toys R Us kid”, and such silly vanity doesn’t inspire artists and entertainers who want a deeper sense of meaning in life.
Left may be PC and repressive at times, but it is about big themes like ‘social justice’ and ‘brotherhood of man’. Libertarianism’s message is “hey, I got my gun and my pot and my videogame, so leave me alone.”

But Alt Right can inspire people with something ‘greater than themselves’ that is worth fighting for, serving, and struggling for.

Though Alt Right should concentrate on white issues and insist on white survival, it could develop something like a comintern and make pacts with other races. David Duke has been sensible in this. Unlike some white nationalists who love to bash and put down other races, Duke supports all races and defends them and their right to their own homeland and culture.
Thus, his white nationalism is a kind of universal nationalism that says all peoples’ lands and heritages must be protected.
This bigness of heart, genuine or not, goes a long way to show that Duke-ism is something more than petty nationalism or ‘xenophobia’. Duke’s message is all races and cultures have value, and we should learn from them and share ideas with them. But each people are also owed their own homeland, and this universal nationalism is anti-imperialist.

Such an idea, if remolded by Alt Right, could be appealing to people of intelligence and talent who want both identity but also something more universally inspiring.
So, Alt Right should discourage gratuitous disparaging of non-whites and other cultures. Even as Alt Right needs to insist on the right of the West to remain white and European, it should show utmost respect to other races and cultures.

Also, Alt Right should reach out to all races and cultures and ask, “do you want globalist-imperialism to turn your nation into nothing more than a homo-celebrating decadent Disney-Walmart?” Surely, a Walmart IN a country is okay, but Walmart AS a country is ridiculous. Alt Right should have an international wing like comintern that leads the way in combating the forces of Zio-homo globalism everywhere. It should be the defender not only of white nationhood but national sovereignty everywhere.

Message to the world:

Your sacred heritage & identity OR do you want your daughter to become Miley Cyrus?

Progs say that race and identity are bogus constructs. Therefore, such should be done away with.

But they also say that non-whites need to maintain their identities since such were forced on them and used as excuses to oppress and disenfranchise them.

Following this logic, had it not been for white imperialism and ‘racism’, there should be no reason for any people to maintain their identity or preserve their race.

According to PC, ‘racist’ whites in America forced inferior identities on non-whites. So, some groups were oppressed or discriminated against as ‘blacks’, ‘yellows’, ‘reds’, ‘browns’, and etc.

Such identities of inferiority was forced on these groups, and such categories kept them down.

If the libertarian-conservatives argue that it’s time to end stuff like ‘affirmative action’ and just be ‘Americans’ than hyphenated-Americans, progs and people of color say that identity is still important for non-whites since there is subtle or hidden ‘racism’, and also, the negative legacy of the past will linger for some time.

Since their non-whiteness was invoked to keep them down in the past, non-whites must seek empowerment as ‘non-whites’ because, deep down inside, many whites still see non-whites as inferior, if only subconsciously or subtly.

Using such logic, the ONLY rationale for preservation of identity is oppression and dispossession.

Since white identity was formulated to gain superiority and privilege, it must be done away with totally. It was the identity formulated to oppress.

But since non-white identities were formulated to be oppressed & to be deemed socially and politically inferior AND since this legacy still remains(despite progress in attitudes and laws), the people of color must seek empowerment based on their identities before they can finally let their identities go.

Also, even the Donald has been totally silent on Jews, blacks, and homos, the big three powers of American anti-conservatism.