An Open Letter to Students Against Intolerance

100_2345Dear Students Against Intolerance at Indiana University.

Recently, I have seen some chalked messages left by your group dedicated to opposing to the Traditionalist Youth Network. Unfortunately, it appears as if this new group bent on “stopping racism and xenophobia” does not seem to be acquainted with any of the members of our organization, or even seem to be familiar with the Philosophy of Perennial Traditionalism.

The mislabeling of our organization as a “hate group” by the southern poverty law center and the our portrayal last semester in the Indiana Daily Student newspaper has left many believing that we are armed and ready white power skinheads. So on behalf of the rest of the Traditionalist Youth Network at Indiana University, I write you this open letter in hopes that our two organizations can begin dialogue. With a spirit of dialogue, we hope to both clear up misconceptions about our organization and any answer any criticisms that remain.

Our group is open to anyone of any background, any race, sex, creed, or nationality. One does not have to agree with doctrines of the Traditionalist school of thought to join us; one only has to have an interest in studying Traditionalist thought.

The Traditionalist Youth Network is not a neo-Nazi organization, nor are we the Ku Klux Klan, American Nazi Party, or any other so-called “third position” organizations. Our organization does not promote racial hatred, sexism, or any form of bigotry. Nor do we advocate violence or illegal activity of any kind. We do not endorse White Supremacy, Jim Crow laws, or any other kind of discrimination towards anyone based on religion, race, or sexual orientation. We do not advocate violence of any kind, nor do we believe that minorities should be excluded from campus, let alone this country.

Our organization is primarily concerned with promoting the philosophy of Traditionalism. That is to say, we believe in studying and appropriating the insights of the little-known yet highly influential 20th century academic renegades into our lives. A question I received from a member of the Students Against Intolerance group was “what is a Traditionalist? It can mean anything.” The kind of Traditionalism we advocate is the Traditionalism with a capital T. Traditionalism, spelled intentionally with a capital T, is the philosophy elaborated on by luminaries such as Rene Guenon, Ananda Coomarswamy, Julius Evola, and Frithjof Schuon.

These aforementioned thinkers are considered to be the primary representatives of this obscure school of thought. A number of other names include Martin Lings, Wolfgang Smith, Rama Coomarswamy, Titus Burkhout, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Aleksandr Dugin, and many others. We are also students of luminaries like G.K. Chesterton, Francis Parker Yockey, Alfred North Whitehead and Martin Heidegger. None of these aforementioned thinkers were members of the Traditionalist school, but their philosophies are similar.

An important distinction must be made between Tradition with a capital T and tradition with a lower case t. Tradition with a capital T signifies the intuitive mystical sciences which are the bedrock of all traditional civilization. Meister Eckhart, Ibn Arabi, and Adi Shankara in their own day wrote prolifically against the moral decay of their own cultures and respective civilizations. We believe in the transcendental unity of religion and civilization. Besides the 20th century traditionalists, our inspiration comes from Mystics of almost every tradition who have asserted the universality of their mystical path.

What are the “intuitive mystical sciences” you ask? They are the realms of being that are accessed by individuals who choose the path of asceticism and transcendence. While the human condition differs across the globe, what unites the world’s religions is the belief in higher realms of reality outside our own. The mystics of all of the world’s traditions travel the same hierarchical path until they stand face to face with God himself, and achieve a simultaneous annihilation of the ego, and a spiritual renewal.

In Christianity this doctrine is known as Theosis and comes from a statement by Christ when he tells his disciples that we must all take up our own crosses and follow him. In Islam this doctrine is known as the Marifa, which comes from a hadith of the Prophet Muhammad, where God says that the slave who draws near to him becomes the hand which he walks, eyes which he sees, and foot which he strikes. In Hinduism this doctrine is known as Moksha, whereas in Buddhism, it is known as Nirvana.

Shayke Al-Akhbar Ibn Arabi calls this the “Al-Insan Al-Kamil” or universal man, who has mastered all the states of reality and now has become the most fully developed individual. We believe in the distinction between the esoteric and the exoteric, we believe that the transcendental nature of humankind is expressed in its beauty and diversity. We believe and respect the religious traditions of Muslims, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Shinto, Taoists, and Amerindians. Of course, such a description here does not even scratch the surface. For a more thorough explanation, we recommend Transcendental Unity of Religions written by Frithjof Schuon. The article “Mysticism” by William Stoddard, which can be found in the anthology The Underlying Religion, would also be of interest.

The Traditionalist School of thought rejects the dichotomy of the individual verses the collective that defines the modern left-right dichotomy. Instead, we believe in the overarching, all-encompassing transcendental of unity of religion and civilization. We believe that the Truth is not something which is contingent upon the whims of the masses or the so-called “collective.” Therefore, we reject, as did America’s founding fathers, the very idea of “democracy. That is to say a mob rule. While at the same time, we reject attempts to limit and reduce an individual to itself, and that a human is simply a biological organism without purpose or meaning adrift in the cosmos.

As Rene Guenon wrote in his article generally translated as “Eastern Metaphysics,” which can also be found in The Underlying Religion, Man is so much more and so much less than what the West assumes of him. He is so much more because has within himself the potential to attain a state of supreme illumination, to have one’s essence washed away in the face of the Absolute reality. However, he is so much less, because he owns nothing, has nothing, which God does not grant him. He is so much less because his proper position is that of humility and awe before the Creator, and not that of a ruthless conqueror.

In the Traditionalist worldview, it is not race, class, or gender which is the defining attribute of civilization, it is transcendence. The Traditionalist school of thought believes that in every virtuous civilization, there is a proper hierarchy which establishes those who have the most intimate connection to the higher levels of being at the top while those who are unable to process the intuitive philosophy at the bottom. This is best illustrated, as argued by Guenon in his seminal work Introduction to the Study of Hindu Doctrines and Italian noblemen Evola in Revolt Against the Modern World, in the Caste System of India.

According to Guenon and Evola, the Caste System, was a more or less universal construct and ideal system of government. The Traditionalist school of thought sees history as a decline beginning with the so-called “renaissance.” Through a series of regressive revolts, the Caste system in the West was leveled, which has left the modern West without any proper vanguards of culture, and all but impossible means of accessing the higher levels of being.

Traditionalists are not closed-minded, black-and-white reactionaries yawning for the “return” to society which exists largely in our imagination, but we do stand opposed to moral relativism and hedonistic culture which ravages the West. We stand wholly against the dead end of moral relativism, as well as the degrading and damaging lifestyles which are propagated by modern media en masse. We are opposed to the rabid drug use and alcoholism on college campuses. We are opposed to Glamour and Cosmopolitan magazines which promote an artificial standard of beauty. We are opposed to the promiscuity which has created an epidemic of unwanted children and sexually transmitted diseases.

We believe that every human being exists as the creation of God, in the image of God, as the spiritual reflection of God’s attributes. We believe that everyone has dignity and should treat themselves with respect. We believe that the ideology of consumption (that the only thing which matters is the acquisition of material thing) is an illusion, and that in reality, the ancient mystics of Chinese Taoism, Italian Catholicism, Russian Orthodoxy, and Iranian Sufism were right when they said that happiness does not come through the accumulation of things.

To be happy is to be content, to be content is to return to the source, to achieve a state of annihilation and illumination in the face of the Absolute reality. We encourage those who are interested to read Crisis of the Modern World and its sequel, Reign of Quantity and the Signs of Times by Rene Guenon. We also recommend Looking Back on Progress by the founder of organic farming and prominent Traditionalist thinker, Lord Northbourne, excerpts of which can also be found in The Underlying Religion.

Contrary to the teachings of either Marxists or racialists, Traditionalist believe that humankind is free to pursue their own destinies. We do not believe that a human being is a slave to one’s so-called “class” or “genetic code.” We believe that Man’s destiny lies above and beyond the confines of materiality and that trying to look for Truth without a transcendental basis is impossible. Traditionalists interpret literature, art, music and culture in the way it reflects the relationship between God and man.

Traditionalists admire the architecture of Byzantium, Andalusia, Mesopotamia, and Tenochtitlan while rejecting the Modern cosmopolitan compartmentalization of humans into tiny boxes. We admire the Lakota Sundance and Naqshabandi Hadrah while we reject the lack of self-respect prevalent in public places today. For more information on this subject, we recommend the article “Religious Art, Traditional Art, and Sacred Art” written by Seyyed Hossein Nasr featured in The Essential Sophia.

Traditionalists agree with Alfred Whitehead North’s and Nicholas Maxwell’s rejection of “scientism” and belief in unfettered progress that dominates the Western world. We do not reject science or the scientific method, but we do reject attempts to reduce all forms of knowledge to the empirical. While we respect the scientific method and it’s applications towards helping us solve problems which threaten us on the home front, we also acknowledge that grander questions like purpose, meaning, ethics, and morality, and what other realms that exist outside of the physical world are outside the domain of immediate sense perception. More importantly, in the Platonic sense, materialistic science cannot give us anything other than true opinion. This reduction to try to measure everything towards the scientific method is a symptom of this decline for it has taken away wisdom from the world. For more information, we recommend again Rene Guenon’s Reign of Quantity and the Signs of Times. We also recommend Phillip Sherrard’s “Modern Science and the dehumanization of man” also featured in The Underlying Religion. We also recommend the any of the writings of prominent philosopher, mathematician and physicist Wolfgang Smith, who has been arguing for decades on the necessity of reintegrating modern science into scholastic ontology.

We believe that the modern environmental crisis is largely a product of the shift towards a materialistic world view. In place of a world which is ours to take care of it, we have a world which is easily exploitable. We look for inspiration in the indigenous communities of America who have an intimate relationship with the natural world, as well as the stewardship commanded in both the Book of Genesis and in the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad. We believe that the horrors of Modernity speak for themselves in acknowledging the folly of this mode of thinking.

The Traditionalist Youth Network believes that this greed, this drive to destroy the planet, to become a so-called “self-made man” are driven by a misguided attempt to achieve paradise on earth. Humankind is dominated by the goal of achieving perfection through transcending the higher spheres of being, if we are cut off from it, we look for substitutions here on earth. We have tried to find replacements but cannot, which is why every successive generation sinks even lower.

We reject, without exception, the White Man’s Burden attitude that is at the core of neo-liberal cosmopolitan foreign policy. Something which appears fairly obvious is that the Modern liberal West believes it has the superior culture to Africans, Asians, Arabs, and Europeans. However, our spiritual leader, Rene Guenon, foreshadowed Edward Said in denouncing the theory of a linear civilization. The horror of colonialism from the 18th through the modern day 21st century was driven by the belief that humanity needed to be forcibly assimilated to fit a single mode.

While we acknowledge the hierarchical realms of being and the mysticism within all civilization is one that does not mean we believe in forcing a homogeneity or uniformity of the 6 billion denizens on this planet. We reject implicitly supremacist and culturally imperialist campaigns like “Kony 2012.” We reject the patronizing attempts to “civilize” the non-Western world. Our position is simple; it is the position close to the Founding Fathers and the first generation Traditionalists. America does not have any right nor obligation to tell those in other countries how to live. We do not support military intervention in Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Uganda, Ukraine, or anywhere else on the globe. We respect the right of those in the so-called “third world” to decide for themselves how to govern their own nations.

Traditionalists believe in understanding and appreciating our cultural heritage. Understanding one’s cultural history allows one to have a sense of purpose and identity, which is a step towards the process of transcendence. More importantly, it allows us to understand how other luminaries that we can relate to also transcended and achieved a state of spiritual illumination, through the guidance of luminaries such as Homer, Dante, William Blake, and countless others.

We believe that everyone in America has a right to exist, whether working together or in self-segregated enclaves. We do not wish to see the diversity within America destroyed, rather, we wish to see it protected, and when we say protected, we literally mean it to be protected. We respect the contribution that African-Americans have made, admiring luminaries like Ralph Ellison, Malcolm X, Marcus Garvey, Frederick Douglass, James Baldwin, and countless others. As our mission statement says, we are not a hate group which promotes white supremacy, rather, we seek to build bridges with students of any religious and/or racial background who is interested in learning about the Traditionalist school of thought.

So then, with this understanding, I invite you, Students against Intolerance, to come to one of our reading discussions where we discuss any number of the thinkers of the Traditionalist School.



An open response to Trad Youth, from your BFF, Spelunker: Nice try, I see you guys like playing the “I’m not a White Nationalist” game too. Not gonna work. You can plaster your pages with all the pictures of crosses and quotes of saints you want. Brad Griffin has been having quite the case of amnesia as of late. Joe Adams (Hayward) is scared to death of the words, even banning them from being spoken. Trad Youth thinks it can lay low for a little while and “Poof”! Nobody will remember Matt Parrott helping to raise crosses that were to be burnt. It’s not going to work. Grow your Orthodox beards, talk about your Dark Enlightenment, and veil your beliefs under the guise of being something they aren’t, it won’t work. A White ethnostate in North America is never going to happen. Americans don’t want it. If they did, there’d be rioting in the streets to undo the Civil Rights Acts. There is no way to deny the ethnostate you want to create is a return to segregation, period. It won’t happen, period. Ever, period. Love, Spelunker

P.S. Can’t wait to see you on mayday. I’ll be the one there that isn’t a Communist and isn’t a White Nationalist.


The funny thing about anonymous web-hipsters…

…they’re seldom able to accurately predict the future…

Matt Parrott


I’m a White Nationalist. I just published an article a couple weeks ago about being a White Nationalist.

From my earliest articles several years ago, my position has only evolved incrementally. I have always argued both in private and in public for a “neo-tribalist” variant of White Nationalism which is respectful toward other peoples and actively promotes dialogue and collaboration with non-whites and non-christians who are united against globalism and decadence.

I have indeed networked very broadly, including with klansmen and neo-nazis. You can be expected to infer from that evidence that I’m a secret klansman or secret nazi, or whatever bogeyman you wish. But the full weight of our work, both rhetorical and on the street, confirms that this is not and never has been a supremacist or “hateful” project.

This isn’t my article, so Skanderbeg and I can be expected to differ. What I can confirm is that the article is fully and entirely within the letter and spirit of the Traditionalist Youth mission.

Leslie H. Higgins

I believe he said he was not a White supremacist; he did not say he was not a White nationalist, so there is no point in critiquing that. Moreover, he made clear that racial separatism is an accepted current in the group, so there would be nothing to conceal. Lastly, one can be a White nationalist, a Christian, and an admirer of non-White thinkers all at once, so there really was no point to your post.

On that theme, look at how well Russian nationalists and anime-style artists are working together!


Matt. I’ve never once (that I can recall, but you’re welcome to refresh my memory) called you a Neo-Nazi or Klansmen. Unfortunately, you are collaborating with Neo-Nazis and Klansmen. Do you deny this? From what I’ve seen, you deny your collaboration while collaborating. I’m glad that you accept the phrase White Nationalist, it proves if nothing else that despite my belief that your ideas are wrong, that you have the balls to accept what you are. That puts you one peg above a lot of the rest. I can somewhat respect you for that. I don’t respect your beliefs.

There are some things (very few) that I can agree with you on.

Look, if you want to say all you want is a peaceful separation and a bright White ethnostate, fine. I’m not here to say you don’t have a right to work for that. Clearly your speech is protected. I’m not here to silence you. Your speech will not go unchallenged. You won’t get a free pass and there will be resistance. I am not Anti-White. I am White. My entire family is White. Almost all if my friends are White. Jared Taylor is absolutely right when he says that people do tend to self segregate. I don’t disagree with that point. Even in my own life I find that to be a somewhat natural thing. Humans are going to naturally, in most cases, tend to associate with what they know and what they are comfortable with. Sometimes, people need to step outside of their comfort zone, myself included. I find that stepping outside of my box has enriched my life. I’m sorry that you don’t seem to share the same opinion.

What is the difference between what you are advocating for and what life was like in the US prior to the Civil Rights Acts? In your model Whites would not co-mingle with other races at all. Instead of there being “Blacks only water fountains”, there would now be “Blacks only States or regions”. In that respect, what you are advocating for is more extreme than the segregation pre-1960’s and likely to be twice as unpopular.

Brad Griffin is one of the few who have even taken a guess as to how this would happen. You guys don’t even want to talk about what the process would look like, I think, because you know it will be a mess, and is probably never going to happen, period. Your one sliver of hope is a complete collapse in the US providing you with the void to fill. Other then that happening, you know there’s not a snowballs chance in hell any of this will ever happen. The ethnostate is a “Hail Mary pass”. Still, you trod on.

Matt Parrott

you are collaborating with Neo-Nazis and Klansmen.

I work with some groups which are kinda/sorta symbolically and historically associated with violence…along with a ton of other groups. All of this is while sincerely and consistently making a case for non-violence and discouraging violence. You work with some groups which are actually/factually right here and now instigating and engaging in violence. You do your little secretive shtick, but it’s as obvious as night and day that you’re actively and directly feeding information to people who are openly and explicitly violent.

I’m not here to silence you. Your speech will not go unchallenged.

You gloat when you think we’re harmed and your work is primarily a database for use by people intent on harming us. You might sleep like a baby because your division of labor in your movement leaves the dirty work to others, but everybody save for perhaps you sees through your bullshit.

Sometimes, people need to step outside of their comfort zone, myself included.

I honestly suspect that my friends and associates in my daily life are more diverse in both identity and ideology than the posturing hipster clique you probably sit around being all snarky and ironic with.

You guys don’t even want to talk about what the process would look like, I think, because you know it will be a mess, and is probably never going to happen, period.

I discussed scenarios in my Hoosier Nation book, and I’m happy to discuss scenarios, now. I largely refrain from doing it because it’s idle speculation, not because I’m afraid of it. History is loaded with examples of peaceful and equitable separation of different groups into different communities. There’s plenty of history of integration turning out violent, too.

In the final analysis, your null hypothesis is that doing nothing for the preservation of my identity will be guaranteed to result in a fair and non-violent arrangement. As such, my “rocking the boat” could only possibly result in an increase in violence relative to the zero violence that you presume will occur as whites endorse and accept their declining demographic and political position. My position is that the least violence and the most fairness will come with representatives of the distinct communities (and the communities which choose to be diverse) to begin constructive dialogues and develop mutually respectful relationships.

That’s exactly what we’ve been doing here at TradYouth, encouraging and promoting an identitarian vision which respects and protects the rights of all peoples to exist. I know you really have a hard time with white people also existing, and I hope you can eventually work through that. I totally wish to respect and protect your decision to remain in a diverse community. Go for it. More power to you.

[T]here’s not a snowballs chance in hell any of this will ever happen.

According to my analysis, the declining resources and leverage of the federal government and the international oligarchs in the coming century will open a pandora’s box of identitarian and secessionist opportunities which are difficult to imagine in this dark hour for every traditional community and identity.

Though, if you’re as sure as you suggest that we’re all fools pointlessly wasting our time, why are you all up in our grills?


“You work with some groups which are actually/factually right here and now instigating and engaging in violence.”

Ten points if you can name one example and provide proof. Good luck!


“Though, if you’re as sure as you suggest that we’re all fools pointlessly wasting our time, why are you all up in our grills?”

Somebody doesn’t like opposition. Poor Matt. Do you hear that? It’s the worlds smallest violin playing entirely for you.


“I work with some groups which are kinda/sorta symbolically and historically associated with violence…along with a ton of other groups.”

Kinda/sorta, now that’s funny. A ton of other groups? Like?… I’m drawing a blank here. As a matter of fact, I’ve emailed spokespeople for some “other groups” you’ve claimed to have support from and/or networked with. Guess what? In every instance they said something to the effect of, “Not in a million years”. So again, examples…


“You gloat when you think we’re harmed.”

Yes, I do tend to gloat. What’s your definition of “harmed”? If you mean by your having to scale back your rhetoric and photo ops because it’s backfiring on you and I’m helping with the backfire, then sure, ok, I guess I’m “harming” you. Despite having a considerable amount of personal information on certain people, what I do is quite different from what others are doing. You don’t give me much credit for that. Even if I had your private address or other private information, I wouldn’t share it because I don’t feel it’s relevant. Can you cite some examples of my sharing information that’s not public already that’s “harmed” you? Furthermore, are there things that I have posted in regards to you or Trad Youth which aren’t accurate? You might not agree with my interpretations of certain things, but is there a quote perhaps that I’ve posted that you take issue with? If so which one? Are you denying the information that’s been posted? Are the things that I have posted not public information already? Isn’t it really true that you’re just trying to paint what I’m doing as something it’s not?


“the posturing hipster clique you probably sit around being all snarky and ironic with.”

Hipster clique? No, I’ve told you before, you’re way off in your estimation. I’m more “normal Joe Sixpack” than you and Thomas. I’m actually your target demographic. That’s the real kick in the testicles, isn’t it?


“I know you really have a hard time with white people also existing, and I hope you can eventually work through that.”

Yep, I’m having such a hard time with my existence. That has got to be the dumbest statement you’ve ever made. People tell me I’m White and I believe them, why? I don’t know. Does it really matter? Not to me. Just as it doesn’t matter to me what anyone else around me is. Wanna know why? We’re all human. I’m not concerned with the existence of one “group” over or even alongside another. A lot of people see the inhabitants of this planet as all being of “one” group, despite our cultural divisions and differences. Do you deny that Jews (which are both a religious division and a racial division), Blacks, Whites, Asians, etc. are all human? I don’t think that one must believe that they all must exist separately in order to exist. My DNA is a big mixture, as is yours. I am not 100 percent anything. Neither are you. Do you consider yourself human? I seem to be existing just fine, as is the rest of my “White” family. We must be a special case, because none of us are feeling the effects of the “genocide”. We all have good jobs. Fairly nice homes. Our children all go to the “horrible” public schools. Our children are all happy and healthy. They have friends in school and in private life of all shapes, sizes, and colors. It’s amazing. It’s as if you and I exist in different worlds. I think I know why too. It’s because we do. I exist in reality, and you exist in the fantasy world that your beliefs are dependent on. It’s a backstory that you have concocted. The real reason why you don’t have more “Whites” on your side is because the vast majority are enjoying a very similar privileged existence like my own.

James Bulls

You folks can write all the open letters you want explaining to us what you “really” are and what you’re “really” trying to achieve, but until you make significant amends to address your group’s past statements, previous affiliations with openly racist and white supremacist groups, and the overtly racist history of the Matts and Thomas running this show, nobody will take you seriously. I think that the folks calling you “crypto-fascists” may be missing the mark with their name-calling because unless you clear up your past statements, affiliations, and leadership issues, it’s more correct to call you liars.


Did a god reveal to you some standard of ethics, Mr. Bulls; and did this god tell you to force your ethical opinions on others?

I’d like to hear the good news this god has revealed to you …

James Bulls

To the contrary: I don’t believe in any deities at all. JC, his Sky Daddy, and the Ever Present Snoop aren’t part of my theology, and the “good news” you’re referring to isn’t part of my vocabulary, so I’m not quite sure I know which page of the Big Book you think I’m going to quote.

My position regarding TradYouth and others of its sort is that the Bill of Rights affords freedom of speech, religion, assembly, and so on. TradYouth is free to say what they think, believe what they want, and gather where they like, but their freedoms stop where my freedoms begin – and so, too, do my freedoms stop where another’s freedoms begin. You’re free to say that you want to have a white ethnostate, but you’re not free to tell me where I have to live. If you prefer to keep to yourselves, then do that – but you’ll forgive me if I get pissy when you think you have the authority to tell me where and with whom I’m permitted to live.

TradYouth, in all its rambling about creating a white ethnostate, would do well to consider just how the borders to that ethnostate are going to be drawn. You say you support a white ethnostate for the “whites,” and a black ethnostate for the “blacks,” and presumably a different state for every color of the rainbow. But who decides in this cosmetic partition to whom will be given the arable land? The clean water? The sea ports? And so on.

TradYouth does a good job saying what they want – a separate land for separate people – but they’re either naive or fibbing when they won’t say how they’re going to get there. There will undoubtedly be substantial disagreement when the time comes to decide who’s going to get the arable land where we grow food, and who’s going to get the irradiated land where we tested nuclear bombs. Or who gets to live upstream for first shot at the drinking water, and who has to live downstream for second shot at whatever isn’t used for irrigation (and so on.)

TradYouth seems big on the idea of people living where they came from, and with all this talk of states being partitioned according to skin color and place of origin, I wonder where the white people in North, Central, and South America will live? Last I check, the Americas were originally populated by Native Americans and they’d probably cheer at the idea of reclaiming everything that once was theirs.


Wait, wait, wait…

So, … whomever wrote the “Bill of Rights” has some divine authority, in your view? I thought you didn’t believe in any deities at all?? But now you’re saying a handful of Enlightenment scribblers have magically created a universally-binding set of obligations?

When you speak out against certain political theories like “fascism”, it seems as if your words are tempered by a religious zeal, as if you think fascism were evil…but again, you “don’t believe in any deities”, right?



Lunker: Thanks for putting these bigots in their places. Yes, indeed we are all humans, which means we all must unite aginst the inhuman racist race of “whites.”

It’s sickening when these racists complain about being displaced from their countries by immigration, affirmative action, transfer of their wealth, and defamation in the media and education. Do they imagine that they have any legitimate interests or concerns? Susan Sontag was so right when she called the so-called white race “the cancer of human history.”

We progressives must excise this malignant demographic. Then and only then will peace, love, and tolerance rule the globe.



Did a god tell you that “racism” was evil? Or are you trying to impose your arbitrary emotional whims onto the rest of us?


I’m not too sure the comment by John is legitimate opposition, it actually sounds more like baiting to me. Regardless, I don’t support Johns comment. My views are pretty well known, and they don’t involve violence or hatred against anyone.


They don’t seem to involve coherency or systematic thought either.

Care to set me straight?


Hard to read John’s “joke.” He can’t possibly believe that white racism is the cause of all the war and poverty in the world, since human beings have been poor and/or violent for millennia without any white involvement whatever, and will continue to be. Yet his anti-white hatred seems genuine.

Obviously white and blacks have difficulty living together. Many blacks cannot cope with the requirements of white run society, and in a black-run society, whites are reduced to prey. We muddle along with our failed integration. John and Spelunker want to keep muddling and floundering, while Matt and Matt are looking for an exit.

It’s a very speculative situation. Will the situation get worse before it gets better? Will it get so bad that an all-out race war breaks out, that could have been avoided with a higher degree of separatism (not necessarily ethnostates)? I don’t know what the liberals are hoping for. I think they are blinded by their image of virtuous tolerance to the ugly, mutually destructive side-effects of forced integration. So they don’t see the pressure building and don’t have a plan for reducing the pressure. They don’t believe the pressure is legitimate, so for them it’s not real, or it will go away when the old racist generations die off. Liberals typically can’t think historically and they think antagonisms are temporary maladjustments in the eternal, smoothly-running social machine that can be fixed with a few tweaks. They don’t get that history has always been a struggle for supremacy, of cultures, peoples, and religions, and always will be. They think their ideology is simply the “truth” or the “good,” and that nobody could reasonably believe other than they. But they are in history too, in a struggle, trying to impose their views and their allocations of resources, and the political and economic supremacy of their faction, and they are making a lot of enemies the more their promises fail and the more people suffer as a result of their oppression.

LIberalism/progressivism is unsustainable. It cannot create wealth adequate to meet its distributional promises. It will fail. The big question is whether we have to ride the failure all the way to the bottom of the pit of impoverishment and war, or whether we can change course. Traditionalists know that both are possible. So they should prepare for the worst and work for the better.

Leave a Reply