White Nationalism Doesn’t Need Planned Parenthood

Patrick Le Brun’s latest article presents an attractive situational defense of American abortion policy in his Counter-Currents article, White Nationalists Need Planned Parenthood, Not the Pope. He relies on a compelling Christmas Carol-style montage of what America may well have looked like if abortion had remained illegal given the high abortion rates in the Black American community. It’s indeed frightening to consider, the haunting demographic spectre of forty more Detroits, but the whole line of reasoning is misleading and misguided, …and abortion is wrong.

Universal morality has become an epithet in identitarian circles. It’s become a codeword for pathological altruism, an excuse for colonialism, neo-colonialism, White Savior grandstanding, and White Genocide. On the lips of globalist clerics and kleptocrats, it’s synonymous with every fashion and flavor of social, political, and economic cuckoldry.

Universal Morality ≠ Mercantile Globalism

Universal morality has become synonymous with mercantile globalism over the past few decades. Aside from abortion, is there any way to tell Pope Francis’ speeches from Barack Obama’s? And even on that issue, can we know for sure whether the Catholic hierarchy’s pro-life position isn’t more due to its institutional imperative, as Patrick claims? The churches have been so eager to compromise every other aspect of traditional Christianity that their steadfastness in defense of demographically convenient lives does appear just a bit too convenient.

But it’s not a question of whether one adopts a toxic universal morality or a healthy particularism. The question is toxicity and health, not universality and particularism. Universal morality can be and historically has typically been healthy, inclusive of ethnic and racial preservation. Conversely, particularist morality is no guarantee of racial preservation. Imperial and colonial projects are typically particularist, and frequently manifest in supremacist social orders which are unstable, unsustainable, and just as lethal to the racial stock.

Whites in Latin America, ancient India, and elsewhere rode their particularist ethnic chauvinism right into the cannibal’s pot of their own extermination. Whether one’s a Christian, atheist, Satanist, Scientologist, folk religionist, whether one maintains that there’s a singular transcendent source of moral order or whether one goes for a situational humanist approach, it’s a simple matter of natural law and natural order that humans exist in tribes and families as surely as geese fly in flocks and buffalo travel in herds.

Christianity ≠ Mercantile Globalism

The proposition that one must betray one’s family and identity altogether in the service of an abstract ideal belongs to death cults, not living religions or adaptive secular moral memeplexes. The anti-Christians in the overarching identitarian cause are exploiting the subversion of our religious institutions to attack our religions. It is fratricidal, dishonorable, and easily reversible. After all, the majority of neo-pagans aren’t identitarian at all. Even the traditions which are supposedly particular to Europeans are dominated by dumpy middle-aged anti-racist women in sweatpants. Stunningly, even the materialist atheists who substitute Darwinian evolution for a traditional creation myth are more anti-White, on average, than your typical White Christian.

My aim here is not to reverse the accusation, but to neutralize it. A toxic notion which neither originated in Christianity nor relies primarily on Christianity has infected the entire West. Our Christian institutions are infected, to be sure. Christianity in general and the Catholic Church in particular have certainly become vehicles of destruction, but they’re in a convoy of vehicles which includes just about every institution in the West. Every subverted institution offers their anti-White spin in their own context and language, and anti-White Christians frame their genocidal project in biblical terms, but neither Christianity nor its secularized derivative habits of thinking and behaving are at the root.

Atheist Hollywood celebrities and Evangelicals alike are equally eager to kidnap non-White babies to status signal their anti-White bonafides to their respective peer groups, peer groups which have both been infected with an anti-White moral imperative which neither originated in Hollywood nor the Evangelical movement. The Japanese, only a couple generations removed from their martial heritage, with little Christian influence at all, are steadily succumbing to the same global disease of degenerate globalism. Anti-Christians are barking up the wrong tree.

Against “Family Planning”

For the human male to function effectively, he must internalize a taboo against masturbation. To the secular degenerate mind, this seems very silly, as masturbation doesn’t directly or obviously harm anybody. The taboo only makes sense from a holistic tribal and intergenerational perspective, as that’s the viewpoint at which the danger of self-gratification comes into focus. The individual male can barely grasp all the subtle ways that his decreased motivation to socially compete for status to procure and secure a mate–generating wealth, investing in his community, and providing security for his mates and offspring–drains the vitality out of himself and his community.

An analogous false pragmatism also exists in matters of family planning. To function effectively, the human female must be encouraged to understand reproduction as a transcendent duty, not a mere option to be considered in pragmatic balance against her ambitions, interests, and anxieties about the pain and sacrifice which comes with reproduction. To encourage women to think “pragmatically,” in selfish individualist and situational moral terms, guarantees that the women will ultimately prove barren, androgynous, and more interested in muscling into traditionally masculine pursuits than embracing their congenitally feminine prerogative.

In short, I’m skeptical about the prospects of purely secular and pragmatic approaches to moral questions, as without a transcendent orientation, the temptation for a male to hang out in his basement with his Internet pornography and idle hobbies will win out, just as the temptation for a female to go to college and putz around at being independent and economically successful will win out. Even within the White Nationalist subculture which is defined by its singular concern for the success of White families, the only ones actually producing large White families are the traditionalist ones. Even when one logically concludes that one ought to make sacrifices, the lack of a sub-logical mythic orientation typically precludes sustained self-sacrificial action.

To encourage fecundity in our communities, we must sacralize pregnancy and birth, not pragmatize it.

Against the Fever Strategy

One of the more obvious ways that the human immune system fights infection is with elevating the temperature beyond what the invasive bacteria or viruses can tolerate. The gamble is that the fever will kill the infection without killing you, and it’s not uncommon for a high fever itself to actually injure or kill people. Politically, that’s the basis of Patrick Le Brun’s argument for legalized and normalized abortion; sure it kills some of our children, but it kills even more of this competing population’s children.

In the reptilian calculus of the pathologically pragmatic mind, tens of millions of dead babies are morally acceptable presuming that the metric tonnage of slaughtered non-white babies pitchforked onto the scale outweighs the dead white babies. This seems like a good time to note that the men who generally promote this perspective are also generally the men who frequently note the comparatively minor infanticides and genocides of the neolithic portions of our sacred texts.

To put it bluntly, and at the risk of alienating our pathologically pragmatic identitarian audience, I would object to legalized abortion even if it did eventually entail our destruction as a people. Call me a moralfag. Fortunately for me, that’s a false framing of the moral conundrum.

Abortion isn’t the question.

The question is for White identitarians what the question has always been; sovereignty and separation. If our tribe is sovereign and separate from competing tribes, then the anti-abortion position will prove fruitful. If our tribe is not sovereign and not separate, then disparities in abortion rates will only buy us a few decades more time before we’re destroyed. No amount of self-harm or degeneracy with the hope that the self-harm and degeneracy will harm the other group more than it harms ourselves will break the fever.

31 Comments

Ezra Pound

I would have posted a rebuttal comment to Le Brun’s article, but Greg Johnson does not appear to allow disagreement on his website anymore. It used to be that if he disagreed with a comment he would post it along with his rebuttal, but it seems like anymore if you post a comment he disagrees with he will simply trash it with no explanation. I’ve asked him several times to point out what was wrong with a comment so I could change it, and I get no answer. I think he trashes the comments that he cannot rebut. I like Greg, and respect him, but he also acts as a gatekeeper – and it is his website, so I guess that is his prerogative, but it doesn’t reflect well on him or his site. When you go to Counter-Currents and see lots of stories with no or very few comments, you can probably guess why. I find myself just not reading it much anymore, which is a shame.

Matt Parrott

As both an editor and a habitual commenter, I see both sides. I’ve always thought Greg’s a bit too tight with it, but it’s ultimately an aesthetic decision with no right or wrong answer.

I’ve tried to err on the side of openness, but that comes with its own perils, with packs of autistic anti-whites copy pasting the same tiresome talking points over and over again until the site’s no longer an enjoyable place to visit or discuss the ideas.

machiaevil

I doubt it is “anti-whites” that he censors, since at least two of your commenters here have said that they won’t visit his site anymore because their comments are deleted. Anything that doesn’t fit into Greg “migrant crisis is an Islamic (not a Jewish) conspiracy” Johnson’s neocon narrative about Islam and Russia is not tolerated.

Sling Blade

He won`t even allow critique of certain fanciful Ukranian nationalist myths he parrots. Even mainstream websites lets me post that type of stuff and more. It does indeed make him look bad.

Ezra Pound

I wish I knew what his angle was because he is damaging his own credibility, in my opinion. I think Ukrainian issue is what started it all because it was right around then that certain people in the Alt Right started accusing anyone who wasn’t critical of Russia and supportive of Jewish-led “nationalist” putsch in Ukraine a “Putinist” and ever since then there has been a clamp down, not only on anything supportive of Russia, but even on things that attempt to introduce nuance into the debate.

machiaevil

Greg Kohnson is a Jew sell-out. He should be purged and isolated.

0Lew1

LeBrun sets up a bit of a false alternative here. The correct position for non-Christian nationalists and European identitarians is to support as much abortion as possible for non-whites and the reverse for whites, not to go in for broad, unqualified support for all baby aborting and planned parenthood.

I’m actually not surprised LeBrun is calling for alliance with a mainstream group like planned parenthood. A lot of his writing seems to be calculated to encourage rightists in some way or another to engage with the mainstream in problematic ways. I’m pretty confident people will notice that if they look for it.

Matt Parrott

I sort of am familiar with him, and I consider him a sincere identitarian, obvious disagreements on this and other issues aside.

In my opinion, the pattern is “cleverness,” an innocent, honest, and common concern in our intellectual circles.

ryu238

“In the reptilian calculus of the pathologically pragmatic mind, tens of millions of dead babies are morally acceptable presuming that the metric tonnage of slaughtered non-white babies pitchforked onto the scale outweighs the dead white babies. This seems like a good time to note that the men who generally promote this perspective are also generally the men who frequently note the comparatively minor infanticides and genocides of the neolithic portions of our sacred texts.” Except fetuses aren’t babies, http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/articles/fetusperson.shtml
“Universal morality can be and historically has typically been healthy, inclusive of ethnic and racial preservation.” Then why deny it. Your reasoning for it is kinda vague.
“The Japanese, only a couple generations removed from their martial heritage, with little Christian influence at all, are steadily succumbing to the same global disease of degenerate globalism” um don’t they have a population decline

Matt Parrott

I was going to delete this comment because I’m tired of your autistic drive-by copypasta shtick. Posting a pro-choice website’s utterly arbitrary claim that the fetus isn’t a baby adds nothing to the conversation.

Of course they claim that, and I claim otherwise.

I don’t care to waste time with anti-whites on this issue, anyway. Opposing comments from secular identitarians are relevant and welcome. Random shitlibs aren’t really welcome in this particular conversation.

But then I saw your claim that Japan has no population decline and I thought to myself, “Now there’s an excellent opportunity to demonstrate what a jackass this guy is.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/07/japans-birth-rate-problem-is-way-worse-than-anyone-imagined/

ryu238

I said “m don’t they have a population decline?” As in I was pointing this fact out that a population decline in Japan is happening….I can’t even look at you.

Matt Parrott

Ah. I misinterpreted your terse remarks.

They still don’t make any sense in context. I was saying that Japan’s becoming degenerate and barren, with all the problems the anti-Christians blame Christianity for in the West.

Bio Niche

what kind of white nationalism will emerge once the gay friendly philo-semites at mencken-vdare-amren die off?

Answer : Greg Johnson, Jack Donovan and Richard Spencer

If you were a Jew trying to split White Nationalism off from Christian Trad Paleos, the natural evangelical white base, could you think of a more effective poison pill than hosting a suicidal gay satanist at your WN event? Flanked by anti-christian atheists and pagans?

Kevin MacDonald and Jack Donovan at This Year’s NPI Spencerfesthttp://www.dailystormer.com/kevin-macdonald-and-jack-donovan-at-this-years-spencerfest/

Jack Donovan: ‘manly’ suicidal faggot to the right
https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/jack_donovan_manly_suicidal_faggot_to_the_right

Ezra Pound

Couldn’t agree more. The pro-homo faction of the Alt Right is deeply, deeply disturbing as is anyone claiming we should work with Jews. However, we should not succumb to divide and conquer tactics.

Todd Lewis

“as is anyone claiming we should work with Jews.”

What do you then make of the Fascist Jews from the 1920s who were members of Mussolini’s government?

Ezra Pound

If they were genuinely Italian Fascists then they – in effect – stopped being Jews. I do not view Jewishness as being entirely bound up with genetics nor religion. “Jewishness” is a nationality, in my opinion. You can have yid genes but reject Jewishness and Jewish religion entirely. I can’t speak for those individuals you reference. If they were genuine, then they were not Jews; if they were genuinely Jews, then they were cynically using the Fascio.

EStriker

There were Jews infiltrated in the Italian government by pretending to be Fascists. Mussolini was aware of them but feared their ability to bring the world’s powers down on Italy. When the Germans arrived on the scene, and a bloc against world Jewry was formed, Mussolini began to curb their negative influence drastically.

EStriker

Forget the password for my other account, which is saved on my other PC. When I get back to it I will post under my old name.

Fr. John+

Mr. P- Apart from the take-away that ‘abortion wrong, no matter the race’ is there much more to this article? What of the concept of Theonomy, articulated so well by the Reformed, now over forty years ago? Does God’s law have a purely ‘in-group’ ethnic status, or does it apply to all hominids, of whatever confession?

The reason I ask this, is that your using the terms ‘natural law’ and ‘natural order.’ But, as God is Sovereign over all things, there is NO POINT at which ANYTHING is ‘natural,’ since nothing operates (even the universe, or the ‘laws of physics’, for example) unless God permits it. The shoddy ‘out’ that [sic] ‘natural law’ allowed for Rome, is the reason for Vatican Eww, and the condoning of Usury, as Michael Hoffmann’s book on that latter subject, clearly corroborates.

If TYN is at least tangentially ‘Orthodox,’ then using Papist terms, and philosophical constructs is not in our/your best interest. You’ve noted the mess that modern “Franky the Heretic” Catholi-schism engenders, but are you not aware that the philosophical reason for this, lies at the very heart of that system? As Dr. Farrell in his book, ‘God, History, and Dialectic’ noted:

“The filioque is the outward, efficacious, and visible symbol of an inward and metaphysical depravity.” – Dr. Joseph P. Farrell

https://dialectic.wordpress.com/2008/02/28/god-history-dialectic-is-available/

Matt Parrott

I’m under the impression that referencing “natural law” is fine as long as one doesn’t imply that God’s subject to it.

What’s the standard way of referring to the fact that Creation has a degree of self-evident and intuitive order which can be understood and obeyed independently of the Church, its Holy Tradition, and its sacred texts?

Still a rather recent convert here, so help me out instead of accusing me of popery. According to this seemingly authoritative post, it appears I’m theologically in bounds….

http://blog.acton.org/archives/56420-fr-michael-butler-orthodoxy-and-natural-law.html

Matt Parrott

What of the concept of Theonomy, articulated so well by the Reformed, now over forty years ago? Does God’s law have a purely ‘in-group’ ethnic status, or does it apply to all hominids, of whatever confession?

Theonomy is a partial and problematic attempt to approach the concept of Symphonia outside of the Orthodox Christian tradition. Much of Protestant and Reformed theology amounts to that, clumsily and blindly walking back toward Orthodoxy.

God’s law is for all, though other tribes should generally be evangelized to rather than forcefully converted, and tribal sovereignty should be reciprocally respected. I would be supportive of an arrangement where we respected the sovereignty of an adjoining multiracial sodomite Cascadian Republic.

Throughout Orthodox history, pragmatic solutions to Mongol, Islamic, and even Catholic neighbors have been blessed and supported by the Church. Global Orthodoxy is an eventual goal, of course. But that can be achieved peacefully and patiently, without confusing the tribes by militarily violating tribal sovereignty.

Tribal sovereignty is found in both…natural law…and in Holy Tradition. Tactically speaking, it’s terribly foolish to get ahead of ourselves in speculating on how we would attack or invade other domains when we’re so small and weak. Though, personally, I would stand by the principle of tribal sovereignty even if we were mighty enough to crush a nation of heretics or whatever.

Ezra Pound

In my personal experience, those in the identitarian movement who are hostile to the idea of a transcendent faith fall into two categories: (1) Those who believe what they believe in good faith and who have simply not been shown or not understood the facts, evidence and arguments and (2) homosexuals and other deviants who are addicted to a lifestyle that is mutually exclusive of a belief in a transcendent faith/reality. These people, the intelligent among them, anyway, have been shown facts, evidence and arguments and simply reject them because to accept them would entail admitting that their lifestyles are objectively pathological.

Todd Lewis

I remember seeing your argue with that Nihilist on Radix Journal. It was not pretty, seeing someone clearly that pathological. You two reasons for rejecting transcendent faith is spot on.

J.j. Cintia

For the enemy this is not really a moral issue, so moralizing against this will not actually crush their false moralising about Womens’ Health. Margaret Sanger was a White Supremacist. She would have supported Hitler and the NSDAP enthusiastically I assure you. Planned Parenthood was started as a eugenics program to sterilise and exterminate inferior people especially negroes. Trying to drum up a Christian perspective on this issue will not be effective. If you want to scare the pants off these baby immolators of Moloch, use the Life Story of Margaret Sanger. She is still recognized as the founder of the organization. She is a Feminist Hero to the bicycle denying fish. If you want to inspire fear and crush the womens’ health and its my body diatribe, you can do it easily by publishing some of old Margaret’s more colorful quotes about inferior human species and the need to improve humanity through sterilization and abrtion programs. Planned Parenthood would have to destroy a feminist hero and appease many protected minority groups if these unfortunate facts about their founder were to become well known.

Bogdan Stancu

Understanding human reproduction in a transcendent way may be more efficient for what you have in mind, but that efficiency is not enough by itself. Transcendent claims must first be believable; if they’re not, then you cannot sacralize pregnancy and birth.

Matt Parrott

Indeed.

If you don’t find the transcendent claims believable, the polite thing to do is refrain from interfering with those who do find them believable. Personally, I don’t think it’s possible to win the identitarian struggle without a transcendent metaphysical orientation, but I abide by a “No Enemies on the White” habit of allowing other identitarians to attempt their alternative strategies without interference.

Anon

Abortion is a problem, but it is the last problem that should be solved. I don’t think(or at the very least don’t want to live through) worse is better, and the problems it causes for us are largely both things we can’t do anything about for the forseeable future, and ultimately self correcting.

“If our tribe is not sovereign and not separate, then disparities in
abortion rates will only buy us a few decades more time before we’re
destroyed.” – Time is not bad, the status whores will inevitably burn themselves out as a result of their own perversions of the fundamental point behind status seeking: doing the best for ones own children.

Leave a Reply