The Great Erasure

Alex Kurtagic, American Renaissance, April 13, 2012

The remaking of white identity.

Those concerned with the future of the white race often talk about defending Western Man. I, however, have never taken to defensive conceptions of whiteness and prefer to talk about it as a creative process.

My problem is that Western Man, as we have known him, led us to where we are. And my view is that what is falling does not need propping up, but rather needs pushing down. I say let Western Man die so he may be reborn, twice as strong and masterful as before.

True: Western Man conquered the Earth, walked on the moon, built the modern world, and developed technology that transformed humanity. But today he is held in contempt: school textbooks spit on his legacy, films portray him as evil, sitcoms mock him as effeminate, and advertisers ignore him or portray him as a loser. Streets are no longer named after his heroes, and planets are no longer named after his deities.

Worse still: universities admit others before him, and when he is allowed in, he is told that he is the “cancer of human history.” His political leaders look forward to a future when there will be fewer of him. Social scientists go even further, and tell Western Man that his race does not even exist.

Yes, Western Man may have once been King of the World, but today he is being erased from the pages of human history. He is the subject of a Great Erasure—the erasure of whites and whiteness worldwide.

It is also true that Western Man faces competition: his homelands are being colonized by settlers from the Third World, who do not look like him and do not like him. They come looking for his money, they breed competitively, they think and act as a group, and they are aggressive and ruthless.

But they are not the main problem—the main problem is Western Man himself, because he is his own worst enemy.

It is he who embraced the values of the French Revolution (the psychopathology of the terrorist Left), he who became a true believer in the proposition nation, he who opened his borders to the rest of the world, he who passed the laws that dispossess him. Western Man sponsored his own decline.

He is the one stepping aside, surrendering, apologizing, on his knees, of his own free will, because of the wrongs a distant neighbor’s friends’ cousin’s employer’s brother-in-law’s sweetheart’s great-great-great-uncle did three hundred years ago.

In fact, he now gets offended when someone tries to look after his interests; he is the most vigorous persecutor of his own best friends—the first to enforce political correctness, the first to call his friends racists, the first to fire them, the first to ostracize them, the first to throw them in prison, and the first to say that there is no place for his friends in civilized society.

Those who come to live among us cannot believe their luck, because Western Man equipped them with all the intellectual tools they needed to take advantage of him. Doubtless, they cannot believe the stupidity of Western Man for giving it all away, turning the Western El Dorado into one big piñata: they would never dream of doing such a thing themselves. In front of us they may put on indignant faces, but at home they must be rolling on the floor laughing—laughing at the idea that Western Man really thinks racial diversity is good for him.


But perhaps I am a bit unfair, because not every Westerner has been a traitor to the Western cause.

Some have not gone with the flow; some, in fact, have identified the error and seek to correct it by mounting an opposition.

The majority are merely ill informed, so saturated with contradictory information as to be unable to tell right from wrong. Determining the truth would require too much time and effort, and since they are under social and economic pressure anyway, they have no motivation to ask difficult questions. These may be guilty by omission.

The truly guilty ones are a small minority. We find them at the lunatic fringe of extreme Left politics: rabid academics, sloganeering pressure groups, balaclavaed Marxist terrorists. We also find members of this minority in the highest echelons of power—corrupt politicians, unscrupulous businessmen, cynical mediacrats, who know better and yet pretend otherwise because there’s money to be made. In short: Egalitarian Man and Economic Man. These are guilty by commission.

Guilty by commission.

And when we look around and see what they have done, and we analyze the implications of their actions, the magnitude of their crime is so staggering as to defy comprehension. You would think that individuals of such mind-blowing immorality would have been thrown into a lake full of piranhas long ago.

But that is not what we see.

From Ape to Man, from Man to God

Western Man made mistakes. He became overly enamored of his own fine ideas—Enlightenment revolutionary ideas of liberty, equality, and brotherhood; universalist ideas with an inbuilt logic that may work in a racially homogeneous society but that, in a competitive racially diverse society, leads inexorably to where we are.

Thus, fanatics and self-serving minorities were able over time to exploit this logic for their own ends, pushing these ideas to their logical extremes in order to gain maximum advantage, either for themselves or their group.

They started out on the margins—a freak show of defectives, alcoholics, thugs, and psychopaths, led by tainted geniuses with pyrotechnic oratory. First they terrorized, then they marched through our institutions, and, for lack of an effective opposition, they made themselves masters of our society, able to wrap themselves in the cloak of institutional legitimacy. And since people admire and are attracted to power, the ideas of the terrorist Left look important to many simply because they come from above.

In this way, their creation, Egalitarian Man, came to represent the finest son of the West—the ultimate archetype against which everything and everyone is measured.

Negative Identity

Egalitarian Man has made himself godlike; even we who oppose him learn, see, and think in ways that serve him. Even the way we think about ourselves, down to the language we use to describe our ideas, serves him: he is a liberal, so we are anti-liberal; he is modern, so we are anti-modern; he is a feminist, so we are anti-feminist; he is democratic, so we are anti-democratic; he is a communist, so we are anti-communist; he is for immigration, we are against it; he is for diversity, we are against it; he is for equality, we are against it; he is for globalization, we are against it; he is for materialism, we are against that too. We seem to be a negation of everything he is. Egalitarian Man sets the vocabulary; we learn it and just say no to everything. Hence, he can portray himself as positive, and us as negative.

In sum, he has got us caught in a negative loop, exactly where he wants us, acting like a bunch of naysayers—angry old men, waving a fist at a world that has left them behind. That is how he wants us to behave. That is how he likes us. The fact is that when we talk about defending Western Man we are playing the equality game.

Just how Egalitarian Man likes us.

Now it may seem strange to conceive the defense of Western Man as a negative. It certainly does not have to be a negative. But it is a negative when the movement that claims to be for Western Man, when the very nature of the struggle, is conceptualized in defensive terms. The implication is that Western Man is paralyzed, comatose, and that it is his attackers who are in motion.

What this says is that we do not think Western Man dynamic, that we do not think he has creative energy, that we do not think he is going anywhere—that Western Man is dead. And that for us he is like an embalmed body, in a sarcophagus, in a mausoleum, that needs preserving and guarding against robbers.

What this says is that our choices are either to hold out inside our own tomb, or be flattened by the enemy charge. This defines the cause for Western Man not as an action, but as a reaction; not as something we do, but as something that is done to us.

This is a concession, and admission of weakness, a cession of the initiative to the enemy. Does Western Man deserve to live, if he’s acting this way—always on the back foot, always on the defensive, always complaining?


There is no denying that Western Man has come under attack. And there is no denying that there needs to be a defense. But a defense alone is insufficient.

Why do we not talk instead about unmaking Egalitarian Man? Where are the lions? Why is he not in the pit with them?

Revolt of the Mind

You may want to argue that negating Egalitarian Man, or his maker, the Left, is admissible because the Left is a negative, and two negatives make a positive. Well, two negatives do not make a positive—not in this case. Two negatives make a positively negative answer. It is off-putting and depressing. It makes people think, “I do not want to be around these cranky old men. I think I’ll go and stand with those smiley folk over there!”

When one defines oneself in relation to Egalitarian Man, as merely the opposite of what he is, one is saying that one has no original ideas of one’s own. One is saying that Egalitarian Man is the most important thing in one’s life, and one is, therefore, trapped in his matrix. One is not a challenger to the alpha male but a parasite that has become attached to him and lives off him.

No. If we want him humiliated, we do not negate Egalitarian Man; we ignore him. We establish our own parameters, and we force him to define himself against us, as a negation of what we are.

The Left as a Negation

If one unlearns his language, one will find that beneath his fine words the equality zealot, the Left, represents the most negative movement ever devised by man.

First of all, the Left is a negation of humanity: the Left reduces societies to economic relations. To its proponents we are not people; we are a balance in a bank account, a social security number, a credit score, and, above all, a UTR (unique tax reference number).

The Left is a negation of identity: “There’s no race but the human race.” To its proponents we are not a glorious people with a destiny but a “social construct.”

The Left is a negation of difference: they want everyone to be the same; they love uniformity and demand conformity. We can see it in their architecture: massive blocks of cement, rows upon rows of tiny little windows, dwellers crammed into uniform cells, gorging on junk food and hypnotized by lowbrow daytime television.

The Left is a negation of quality: in their world everything is standardized; it’s an appeal to the lowest common denominator.

That is why everything they produce is of low quality; that is why their art is a crucifix in a jar of urine; that is why they resent beauty and seek to destroy it, be it through their so-called art or through miscegenation. Beauty is elitist, discriminatory, non-democratic.

Therefore, the Left is also a negation of beauty.

The Left is a negation of excellence. Industry, ambition, and intelligence are penalized with predatory taxation. Laziness, mediocrity, and criminality are rewarded by the welfare state.

That the Left is big on the welfare state is no coincidence, because the Left is a negation of independence: think independently about race and immigration and you are fired!

The Left is a negation of spirituality: for them an enlightened man is a man without religion—a man in a boiler room, selling junk shares to the unsuspecting, out for himself, motivated by selfishness and ruthless calculation.

The Left is a negation of truth. Where science proves inconvenient it is denied. A finding is scientific only if it proves equality. When it does not prove it, it is not science—it is bias . . . hate . . . racism.

Ultimately the Left is a negation of life. For the Left society is not an organism. It is a machine. That is why they seek to engineer it; that is why there are pyramids of human skulls in Cambodia.

The world of the Left is a dead world—a world of dead matter and lifeless abstractions. It is an anti-human, anti-natural, anti-aristocratic, anti-freedom, anti-beauty, anti-metaphysical, anti-truth, anti-life, reductionist, immoral, hateful, genocidal, necrophiliac, mendacious, predatory ideology that has sown death everywhere it’s gone.

A Pack of Lies

Considered globally, it is fair to view the Left as a pack of lies, because it is immoral even by their own professed standards of morality. In their UN charter of Human Rights, for example, they state that the peoples of the Earth have a right to self-determination. That is precisely what American Renaissance conferences are about, and yet proponents of the Left suppressed them two years in a row. In their UN charter of Human Rights they also make it a crime to inflict upon members of a group conditions of life intended to destroy them. And yet pharmacological research is being done at Oxford University on a pill that “cures” people of racial consciousness. Liberal news sources were jubilant. Interestingly, all the experimental subjects were white.

The cure for "racism"?

How do we turn this around? How do we re-assert ourselves in the world and reclaim our destiny?

Understanding this issue begins by examining first how we do not reclaim it, by defining what our struggle is not about.

Not About Party Politics

Our struggle is not about party politics. Politics is the art of the possible, and in a culture where white identity is evil, white identity politics are not possible. Ours is a culture war. And in a culture war, the battleground is culture, not politics. The armies comprise those who produce culture, not politicians or party activists; the weapon is cultural production, not a political slogan.

This is not to say that politics has nothing to do with our cause. It has everything to do with it. Neither is it to say that we should withdraw altogether from party politics. But in a culture war, we must remember, politics is the last battle. Without winning the culture, you cannot win the election. Without cultural power, you cannot achieve political power. Culture defines the politics, not the other way around.

Thus the most we can expect from party politics today is to hold the fort, to maintain a presence in the political landscape, so that the outrages of the Left do not pass without at least a reply.

Not About “The Collapse”

Our struggle is not about “The Collapse.” Today a system collapse may be desirable, but it is desirable only so long as we have something credible and attractive to build following it. The collapse itself is not a solution; it can only be a means to an end—the clearing of the decks that makes way for what follows after. And that’s our destination: what follows after.

It does not follow that a collapse leads automatically to a white awakening. A collapse leads simply to fear, and without an alternative establishment already in place to grab hold of the king’s scepter, a collapse makes way for whomever is strongest at that time. So we must be careful what we wish for.

Not About Competitive Fertility

Neither is our struggle just about boosting fertility. We certainly need to continue the chain of generations, to keep our traditions alive and increase our legacy. But more white births in an anti-white system only makes more anti-white citizens, more guilt-ridden taxpayers who are more likely to help those who hate them than to help themselves.

Our children need a healthy environment first, as well as a habitable planet. We live in a closed system with limited resources. Our civilization is energy intensive. And although whites make up a smaller percentage of the world population today, there are more whites now than there were a hundred years ago, when we ruled the world. The problem is not underpopulation in our homelands, but overpopulation everywhere else. Much of the Third World groans with unsustainable population levels. They are coming here because they cannot live there.

We certainly need to be strong demographically, but if we breed competitively, we will eat ourselves out of an environment, and will end up eating each other. We forget that our civilization is immensely powerful. The others need numbers because often numbers are the only thing they have—and, even then, they need us to sustain those numbers.

Not About Race and Intelligence

And neither is our struggle about race differences in intelligence. This may surprise some, because we are very interested in this. And it is indeed an important area of study: it has serious implications for policy and the future, and we will have to know how to formulate good policy once we are in a position to implement it.

However, so long as the cultural climate is egalitarian, politically this is not a campaign issue for people who score high in IQ tests; it is a campaign issue for people who score low. The data on race differences in intelligence play into the argument of so-called “white privilege.” Hence, when the cultural climate is egalitarian, the data may be scientifically inconvenient for them, but it is politically inconvenient for us, because sympathy is for the underprivileged.

What’s more, in political terms the correctness of the data does not matter. What matters in political terms is how people feel when they talk about it. “If I say that Blacks are, on average, less intelligent, will I look like a bad person?” “Will the people whose opinion of me I care about stop talking to me?” “Will my black co-worker go NUCLEAR?” “Will my employer fire me?” “If word gets around, will I be expelled from my Country Club?” “If I am seen reading this book about the white race, am I going to get nasty looks from my fellow commuters on the train?” “Will a Black man come up to me and make a scene?”

We may want to dismiss people like that as lacking backbone, but we still need their support if we want to represent more than a fringe position. It’s no good to say they need to wake up and smell the taco. People would rather die outright than die of embarrassment.

We also live in an age of information overload, in which complex data can be selectively organized to prove virtually any argument. The result is that people are able to choose the data that suit their convenience and flatters their vanity. That is how science becomes a discourse.

Not About Conserving

Finally, our struggle is not about conserving. Our mission is not about going back to 1912. This is not about restoring an imagined yesteryear that may have never existed, or about conserving things that are now obsolete. We are not antique auctioneers, curators in a museum, or a conservation society.

Not the goal.

To begin with, there is nothing left to conserve. After two and a half centuries of liberalism, even ultra-conservatives are liberals.

Understand this: conservatism is as much our enemy as liberalism, if not a worse one. Conservatism defends the previous revolution, which makes conservatives irrelevant, thus providing a rationale for liberalism. We could even say that conservatives are liberalism’s best ally, because they offer respite before the next wave of liberalization.

Ultimately, conservatism and liberalism are both about death: while a conservative complains that things are dying out, a liberal complains that they are not dying out soon enough. One is a necrophile, the other a murderer.

By contrast, tradition is about life. It is about an idea that has roots in the distant past, but which is constantly renewing and regenerating itself. And that’s very different from conservatism.

New Dawn of Western Man

Therefore, if a political party is putting the cart before the horse, if a hyperinflationary collapse is a double-edged sword, if superfertility is not strictly necessary, if folk choose the science that suits them, if conservatism is the night of the living dead, we must look at different ways to bring about the new Dawn of Western Man.

So the question is—how do we bring about that new Dawn? How do we remake Western Man and the white identity? How do we win the culture war?

First Step

The first step is not to try and win the liberal culture. As I said earlier, the Left needs to be ignored. We do not seek their approval. We do not accept their boundaries. We do not recognize their categories. We do not play by their rules. We do not care about their opinion. We do not care if they hate us. (In fact, if we find that they do not hate us, we are doing something wrong.)

In sum, we do not play their game. In the old Western films, when a cowboy in the saloon saw that the poker game was rigged against him, he did not try to make nice with his fellow players. He flipped the table. If the game is designed to make you lose, you flip the table.

No. We do not play their game. We set our own rules and play our own game. And that begins by identifying who we are and, most importantly, who we want to be. Where are we going? What does our future look like? What do we look like in the future?

Second Step

The second step is about how we communicate that idea. Naturally, we cannot step into a time machine, travel to the twenty-second century, beam back a picture and proclaim, “This is what our world looks like!” (We are not there yet.) But we can evoke what our world could look like, and what kind of people will be running it, through the way we imagine it.

After all, the future begins with fiction, science with science fiction. The sound of their future is the sound of our music. And this presupposes that if you are for Western culture you are involved in producing Western culture, or at least in enabling those who can to do so.

Western culture does not stop with putting a man on the moon. Western culture is also about art, architecture, music, literature, philosophy, and spirituality; but also about things like fashion, design, and manners. Who we are and who we want to be is communicated in this way, as well as through politics.

And, of course, it is also communicated with language. This means that if we are to play by our own rules, we have to develop our own way of communicating our ideas. This begins by developing our own terminology. We do not use the enemy’s words, let alone negations of those words. We do not say we are “inegalitarian”; we say we celebrate difference. What are the Lefties going to say? That they are anti-difference? And if they say they are anti-difference, does not that make them totalitarian? And if they are totalitarian, WILL THEY APOLOGIZE FOR THE GULAGS? We set the rules and we put them on the back foot.

It is important to remember that 99 percent of the culture war is waged with language. The culture war is mostly a war of words. When egalitarians call someone racist 99 percent of their work is done. The rest follows quickly from that. That’s why they focus on language, why they do not care much about the science of race, and why they are big on political correctness.

We first declare our independence with words. We then follow through with deeds.

Third Step

The third step is the most important one: the articulation of a moral case for white racial consciousness. The single biggest impediment in the cause for Western Man is the lack of belief in the morality of white racial consciousness.

Our struggle goes beyond economics, beyond criminology, beyond race relations, beyond biology, and beyond logic—it goes beyond all of these because there are things that are essential for human existence, that are essential for living a good and meaningful life, that are not necessarily logical, inclusive, or profitable.

Our struggle is a moral struggle. Western Man is highly preoccupied with morality, so the cause for Western Man needs to be conceived as a moral cause, and needs to be stated in moral terms.

The Left is strong today because they were successful in presenting their crusade as a moral crusade. The Left remains strong today because no one has made a more compelling moral statement.

That is why it is futile to try and convince anyone about the need for a white racial identity with facts and reason. The only ones prepared to accept these are those who already have a white racial identity. The rest do not even want to listen. They do not want to know the science, even if it is correct because they think it is immoral and believe that being for equality makes them better people. And even if they do not care about equality, they certainly care about being liked—about being liked by their friends, by their family, and by the people whose respect they seek to gain or maintain. In the end they want to feel good about themselves. This makes whiteness a moral issue.

It is evident that most people out there are fed up with the status quo. They want to see fundamental change, and are willing to try radical solutions. That is how the gentleman now residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue ended up there three years ago: in many people’s eyes at the time he represented fundamental change. There is evidence, then, that people are willing to try radical solutions, and that many white people secretly want a solution like ours. The problem is that they dare not say it, partly because they do not know who we are, partly because they do not know where we are going, and partly because they do not know how to assert their identity with a clear conscience.

Before they make the leap, they need to be convinced in the core of their beings of the morality of batting for their own team. Once convinced of the morality of their case, they will not feel uncomfortable when the enemy asks them questions, they will not feel the need to explain or justify their way of thinking, and they will not feel the need to hide behind placatory circumlocutions. They will say, instead, “Yes, this is who I am, and this is what I believe in!”

Moreover, they will start challenging egalitarians with uncomfortable questions— questions for which we demand answers, because ultimately Egalitarian Man needs to apologize for what he has done and get out of the way, because he’s proven he’s unfit to run a society, even by his own professed standards.

Concluding Remarks

Thus remaking Western Man also involves a Great Erasure—one where we are the erasers, where we erase the negativity among us as well as the negation of us.

The remaking of Western Man is not a defensive response; it is an offensive action. It is not a pathetic struggle for survival, but a heroic struggle for glory. And it’s not about embalming the man who was, but about creating the man to come.

Mr. Kurtagic is Editor-in-Chief of the Wermod Publishing Group and author of the novel Mister. This article is a adapted from a speech he gave at the 2012 American Renaissance Conference in Nashville, Tennessee. A DVD featuring Mr. Kurtagic’s speech is available for purchase here.

Topics: ,

Share This

Alex Kurtagic
Alex Kurtagic is a publisher, cultural commentator, novelist, musician, and artist. He is the author of the dystopian novel, Mister (Iron Sky Publishing, 2009), the founder and director of Supernal Music, and editor-in-chief of Wermod and Wermod Publishing Group.
We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Question Diversity

    Sam Francis didn’t write this.  The only way I know that for sure is that Sam Francis is dearly departed.  But for that and the by-line, I would have thought that he did.

  • Danimalius

    Will we see an expanded version of this in the Radix journal coming this June, or will it be the same, I wonder?

    • Alex Kurtagic

      My article in the Radix journal is of a conceptual nature and tackles the White Erasure from a completely different angle. The aim with that one is fundamentally to redefine the way we talk about ‘immigration’. 

      • Dewey

        They have grown too tall.
        As their pillars fall.

        Under every ideology there is a premise structure.

        I like you did, am now laboring in the camp of the enemy, watching their poisonous vines creep forth.
        Always remember, just as zombies feed on brains, tyranny will go after the brains of the most intelligent.   

        Please popularize as you are here,

        how to knock down those pillars.  
        Your structure is superb, now let the verbal battering rams go to work. 

      • Danimalius

        Thanks Mr. Kurtagic, great to hear. I subscribed to Radix, and while I hope for the greatest level of dissemination of ideas such as yours, I wonder how that should square with fairness to those who put their money forth. I opt for the former.

  • Darryl

    too many Nazis? if I have to make a choice between living with Nazis, blacks or mexicans– I’ll take the Nazis every time.

    • StivD

      That would be going backward, reanimating a corpse. New ways should be the focus whenever possible. 

      • Darryl

        I agree… we need better Nazis

    • JohnEngelman

      What about Orientals?

      • Darryl

        Last time I checked, the Japanese were part of the Axis.
        You wouldn’t “like” Hitler’s facebook page.  ha ha I must be funny

  • British Activism

    Another superb and provocative piece, Mr Kurtagic. You always shake things up and challenge the rut we tend to blindly roll down, and this is no exception. The article and the underlying premise sweeps through the nationalist culture like a breath of fresh air, something I increasingly need because I see less and less to believe in and fight for just lately.

    I just wish it was ‘that easy’ to roll all this out on society. It is not easy, and I think it will take some time to even alter the discourse of nationalism and nationalists, never mind make an impact on wider society to the degree that would be necessary.

    However, like your speech last year at the NPI conference, it turns many of our concepts inside out, provides us with a ‘shift’ in how we should view ourselves, gives us a different ‘take’ on how we might go forward, and sows the seeds for a new revolution in nationalism and society.

    For those kinds of reasons, I do like your work.

    It is never heavy reading, too ‘intellectual’ referenced, but it is well presented, well articulated, inspiring and refocusses a bit of clarity when we are bogged down in the usual silly dogfights over ‘Islam’ or newspaper articles churned out by the score, or trapped into niche events like Tram Lady or the recent shooting in America, where we fight like cats in a sack with the opposition and sometimes even each other.

    These kinds of articles are detached from all that, and I find it nice to have a change from the general churn from time to time. I hope we can forge such a successful counter culture as you seem to envisage.

  • 12_laughing_34

    Mr. Kurtagic,

    Your comments concerning the depleted nature of Western Man are spot on.  There is no redemption here, no snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. Instead we are simply witnessing the end of an age. Whether you call it the Kali Yuga ot Ragnarok, the Age of Western Man is at an end. As such, we should not be wasting our energies fighting a pointless battles. Instead we should be doing everything in our power to hasten the end of this age so that a new, reinvigorated one may take its place.

    I would also like to point out that there is no defeatism in this. It is simply the acknowledgement of the eternal cycle of birth-death-rebirth, as found in all Indo-European cosmologies.

    “That which is Falling

    Should also be Pushed

    That which is Crawling

    Should also be Crushed!”

  • bluegrass91

    Absolutely astounding piece.

  • Anthony

    To Everyone here:
    I tell you what. If you want a “white only homeland”, then why don’t get a petition online for people to sign. I’ll be the first one to sign. In addition, i’ll send your movement a few hundred dollars to get started. The sooner you all have your segregated/separated land, the sooner real Americans, such as myself can get on with normal life with other normal individuals. TGIF!!

  • Celestial Time

    I am always pleasantly surprised when I hear someone mention the sad fact that many pro-White people define themselves in negative terms. You ask someone to talk about their views or define themselves, they immediately talk about what they hate or what they’re against. I always think to myself, “hey, is this a normal friendship or acquaintance when I can name a thousand things you’re against, but have trouble naming even a few things you really like?” Maybe it’s just the cynic in me, but I always assume I’m going to have some major conflicts with this type of person the more I hear about what they hate. Unfortunately, I’m usually right.

    One thing I would like to add is that many pro-White people—most of the time the ones claiming to be White Nationalists—have some kind of affliction when it comes to asking questions of others. It’s like everything is already known or assumed in their world. No room for growth… No room for differences… No room for ever being wrong about something. Just rigid and stale views espoused by rigid and stale people. They know everything, and everything known is stuffed inside a mantra; you just have to learn it and never question it, because questions are for those that don’t know, and those that don’t know aren’t yet White Nationalists.

    What Mr. Kurtagic has touched on in this article is of vital importance: Empathy is probably the most potent psychological weapon you can possess. It’s so valuable that media and corporations spend billions of dollars every year just to convince you that they understand you, and that they are doing things for your benefit. Empathy is, in fact, a supreme morality that all of those self-hating Whites cling to. You take that, you remove a great many of them from the equation. It’s their kryptonite.

    The Western World has NEVER been monolithic—certainly not the American version. Though it’s not always for the best, the people that push the envelope are the ones who push society forward by not being like everybody else. If you can’t relate to an audience on many different levels, then you’re always going to be at a disadvantage with a foe that convinces those that push the envelope that they empathize with them in ways you can’t.

    The bad news: You have to learn to be a better listener and empathize.

    The good news: You just have to learn how to be a better listener and empathize.

    • 12_laughing_34

      Honestly, the Right is just as bereft of new ideas as the Left is. So should it be any wonder then that most WN types simply define themselves in the negative. I mean what have they got “positive,” ideologically speaking, to put forward instead? Little, if nothing, as far as I can see. And why is that? Like I said, lack of original ideas. Case in point, the Right spends hour upon pointless hour spinning its heels on how to work within the system, on how to win over the hearts and minds of the people. This is the exact same thing the Left does, but where the Right fails miserably at this, the Left always wins because it sets it sights at gutter level, thereby ensuring a victory every time.

      Ultimately, I think the best and brightest of the “Right” will eventually realize that this tired game of “either or/Right/Left” politicing will lead them nowhere, and they’ll move on to greener, more culturally relevant ideological pastures.

      • REGVLVS

        “Left” and “Right” remain notable tendencies and are still a useful part of the debate. I will never abandon the terminolgy, especially since when ever I think of the “left” I think of the Latin translation: “sinister”. 

  • Slippery

    Absolutely brilliant essay, and couldn’t agree more.  Will be purchasing some of your works Alex…  I want to say this though.  I was once a leftist, and do you know what won me over to my own people, my own family?  It was a moral argument, and that alone!  We are strange creatures here in the West, requiring moral justification for our own existence.  I will add my little torchlight to the great awakening that I’m convinced is occurring right before our eyes! 

  • Slippery

    The homeland idea, and the mantra, are perfect examples of defining the terms of the debate, and offering positive solutions.  I’m sure Alex is aware of these, and if not, I’m sure he’d be pleasantly surprised.  I use them every chance I get, and have NEVER been disappointed with the result.

  • WmarkW

    Trying to predict the long-term future of a cultural or ideas-based movement is more inspirational than practical.  My own opinion is that we should focus on concrete steps based on current conditions.

    Western man pulled far ahead of the rest of the world 500 years ago when he began creating a society based on the marketplace of ideas.   Looking at (the whole) world today, we see that it’s been improved to the extent societies have embraced: capitalism, the scientific method, and republican-democracy; all of which are societal approaches to testing ideas against evidence.

    We need to get our ideas into a fair marketplace.   Let other groups prove their worth economically.  No more speech codes to limit the fair discourse of ideas.  The science of racial differentiation should acquire the same respect as pre-speciation evolution.   There needs to be a white antidote to Al Sharpton, except who makes sense.

    An environment of truth will go a looonnnggg way.

  • holyflower

    Alex Kurtagic: “Thus remaking Western Man also involves a Great Erasure—one where we are the erasers, where we erase the negativity among us as well as the negation of us. The remaking of Western Man is . . . a heroic struggle for glory. And it’s not about embalming the man who was, but about creating the man to come.”


    Well, I am not sure if what is needed is a “remaking” of Western Man or a “rediscovering” of Western man.  Consider this description of a typical Athenian boy’s schooling in A Forest of Pencils: The Story of Schools Through the Ages (1973) by Winifred Trask Lee. After the boy could write letters, words, and sentences:

    “His writings were now passages of poetry dictated by the teacher. It has been said that while boys of other nations were taught by priests, Athenian boys were taught by poets. … The favorite was Homer … whose epics sang the heroic history of Greece. The poems were not only beautifully written, they were filled with high thoughts and deeds. …

    “From writing and reading it over again, the boy learned much of Homer by heart. The more Homer he could recite, the higher his education. One proud father claimed that his son could recite all of Homer——which, if true, was quite a feat, since the Odyssey and the Iliad run to hundreds of pages.”

    Could it be that the innovative capacity of the ancient Greeks——in science, mathematics, visual arts, drama, philosophy, politics, medicine——was nurtured by that culture’s emphasis on poetry and memorization?
    Those who have not actually taught at the elementary level in the awful government run schools (and private school derivatives via graduates of colleges of education) through which each and every”western boy” and “western girl” is processed, cannot know just how efficient they are at conducting their own Great Erasure of history, literature, mathematics, science.  They are an abomination.

    I will illustrate briefly — with some specificity — as regards the subject area known as “social studies”:


    Excerpt below from the National Council for History Education’s curriculum guide, “Building A History-Centered Curriculum for Kindergarten Through Grade Four.” The excerpt was part of longer section which appeared in the monthly “History Matters,” December, 2001:

    “During the first four decades of the 20th century, the presence of history in lower grades needed no special defense or explanation. Along with geography and civic education, history was a recognizable part of both traditional and progressive curricula. Early peoples, heroes, myths, biographies, poems, national holidays, fairy tales, and historical legends formed the heart of K-4 history instruction. As one writer observed, ‘The line between historical literature and general literature was virtually nonexistent.’ But the Great Depression spurred a shift in social and educational thinking, and by the 1940s a content-rich curriculum had been replaced by the sociologically based ‘expanding horizons’ framework, typically: ‘Me’ (kindergarten), ‘My Family, My School’ (first grade), ‘My Neighborhood’ (second), ‘My Community’ (third), and ‘My State’ (fourth grade).”

    “This curriculum became so entrenched that its basis in child development was assumed inviolable. But during the 1980s, psychologists and educators began to reexamine the developmental premises of ‘expanding horizons.’ The researchers were forthright in their denunciations. ‘There is little beyond ideology to commend the (expanding horizons) program and its endlessly bland versions,’ wrote New School professor of psychology Jerome Bruner. Teachers College professor Philip Phenix confirmed what many elementary teachers already knew: ‘Although teaching must obviously take account of where the student is, the whole purpose of education is to enlarge experience by introducing new experiences far, far beyond where the child starts. The curious, cautious, timid presumptions that the limits of expansion are defined in any one grade year by the spatial boundaries defining expanding boundaries dogma is wholly without warrant. Young children are quite capable of, and deeply interested in, widening their horizons to the whole universe of space and time and even far beyond that into the world of the imaginary. And all of this from Kindergarten years, or even before.’”

    • Question Diversity

       Those last two paragraphs, the excerpts, read like something generated by the Postmodernist Essay Generator.

      • holyflower

        Those two excerpted paragraphs aren’t great literature QD.  They do, however,describe what we do to the young Western Child with economy and depth. If you don’t know anything about the Expanding Horizons K-4 social studies curriculum, then you don’t have any idea how vapid modern American primary schooling is.

        • Question Diversity

           Fear not.  Bon has sent me some questions from practice versions of the Cashee tests (the Calif. high school exit exam).  They’re so easy that I propose a new title for those tests:

          Are you slightly smarter than a fifth grader?

  • 12_laughing_34

    Entstehen- sein-Vergehen zum neunen enstehen.

    • William

      Excuse my ignorance, english please.

  • JohnEngelman

    Alex Kurtagic takes pride in this: “Western Man conquered the Earth, walked on the moon, built the modern world, and developed technology that transformed humanity.”

    Then he complains that by embracing, “the values of the French Revolution…Western Man sponsored his own decline.”

    A civilization that Alex Kurtagic thinks has been in decline since the late eighteenth century has obviously achieved quite a bit since then.

    • Question Diversity

      Imagine the most inventive genius you know contracts AIDS unbeknownst to him.  Of course he’s going to keep on inventing a lot of things while he is carrying  the AIDS virus.  But it’s also true that complications from AIDS will eventually kill him. 

      Grok the metaphor?

      Auspiciously, no Western man has voyaged anywhere close to that far from the Earth since our last manned moon mission.

      • JohnEngelman

        I see the metaphor, but I do not think it is a good one. Currently the United States, along with Europe is facing economic problems. Nevertheless, in the United States the over all crime rate has declined since 1980. The rate of violent crime has declined since 1992.
        I do not believe that all change is good. At the same time, I do not believe that the United States is in an irreversible state of decline for which liberals are responsible. 
        The picture at the top of this thread shows New York City in flames. This picture reminded me of a movie released in 1981 entitled, “Escape From New York.” 
        Escape from New York is a 1981 American science fiction action filmdirected and scored by John Carpenter. He co-wrote the screenplay with Nick Castle. The film is set in the near future in a crime-ridden United States that has converted Manhattan Island in New York City into a maximum security prison. Ex-soldier Snake Plissken (Kurt Russell) is given 24 hours to find thePresident of the United States, who has been captured after the crash of Air Force One…
        In a dystopian 1997, crime in the United States has increased 400%, so in 1988 Manhattan was turned into a giant maximum security prison.   
        In 1981 “Escape From New York” portrayed a conceivable future. Instead, by 1997 the crime rate had declined, the Cold War was over, and the unemployment rate declined to 4.7 percent. 
        Currently New York City has one of the lowest crime rates of any large city.

        • Question Diversity

           I don’t think your response totally borks my metaphor.  Even after a person contracts AIDS, for awhile, his immune system can still fight off infections.  It’s just that over time, AIDS makes the immune system’s ability to fight infections less and less effective.  Eventually, it won’t be able.

          The fact that the real modern day New York City isn’t the consummate dystopian hell hole that people thought it could be a generation ago doesn’t mean that we’ve shaken off our figurative AIDS virus, or does it mean that we haven’t.  What it might mean is that we’re taking drugs to plaster over the symptoms, to continue the metaphor.

          • 12_laughing_34

             I believe Detroit qualifies as a dystopian hell hole.

      • StivD

        The seeds were laid for later decline?

  • JohnEngelman

    Alex Kurtagic complains that “universities admit others before” whites. Affirmative action policies are being scaled back. East Asians who get into the best colleges and universities in disproportionate numbers earn their positions through superior intelligence and hard work. 

    • Kallertr

      I don’t care. Firstly I don’t see the benefit of Universities. They seem like horrible institutions designed to make debt slaves of young adults. Second, I do not care about other races “earning” anything or about their “hard work.” I want the best for my race. Other races are on their own.

      • JohnEngelman

        Charles Murray has argued plausibly that too many Americans go to college. What matters is to go to an elite college or university and get either a professional degree, or a degree in mathematics or the hard sciences. Any education past high school needs to be career oriented. Those who love the liberal arts and the social sciences, like I do, should study them on their own.

  • JohnEngelman

    What’s more, in political terms the correctness of the data does not matter. What matters in
    political terms is how people feel when they talk about it. “If I say that Blacks are, on average, less intelligent, will I look like a bad person?” “Will the people whose opinion of me I care about stop talking to me?” “Will my black co-worker go NUCLEAR?” “Will my employer fire me?” “If word gets around, will I be expelled from my Country Club?” “If I am seen reading this book about the white race, am I going to get nasty looks from my fellow commuters on the train?” “Will a Black man come up to me a make a scene?”

    - Alex Kurtagic        
    These legitimate concerns are not advanced by an appeal to emotion which presents few facts, fewer insights, and no practical policy recommendations.

  • Israel Finklestein

     Well, than sorry to break it to you, but you will lose!  White
    congregations in the recent past ALWAYS lose to the Jewish-Multiracial/
    cultural diversity Inc.

    For all the supposed chants of “Southern Pride”, “the south will rise
    again”  etc….what good does it do? The fact is the south LOST! And
    just when exactly did they rise again? Maybe in their dreams. Same with
    the Nazis. They LOST in a rather comical and cruelly humiliating
    fashion. Huh, all the Nazi leaders were humiliated and died in
    disgraceful ways ( they would have never imagined that), and those that
    survived were ruthlessly hunted like street gutter dogs by the Mossad
    and put down like the filthy animals they and their blonde blue eyed
    Nordic germanic ilk really were. That my friend is a FACT, quite unlike
    the comic book fantasy land you choose to dwell in – Amen! The fact is
    no matter how much you resis and how many whites “wake up”….the future
    is inevitable: a non white-Asiatic future, where whites will be
    subservient to Asiatics (Chinese/ Indians) and Jewish power. The North
    west will only give you temporary cover, but sooner or latter you women
    will crave the non white man ( who will have more power) and with
    massive miscegenation that will be the
    end of your hegemony! The non whites will rule over you! The liberals
    are smarter than conservatives for this reason, they are preparing
    themselves for the transition that is inevitable. It will go down less
    painfully for those whites.

  • John Smith

    I clicked the pharmocology link. I’ve been taking propranolol for over 10 years. Certainly hasn’t had the effect of making me less racially aware. If anything, working with and around blacks for the past 20 odd years has made me more so. Maybe another goofy pseudo-scientific study, like linking conservative politics and ideals with low IQ. 

  • 12_laughing_34

     This is pretty much what I took to be the main philosophical thrust of this piece as well.

    If there’s one thing that the history of the last two hundred years has shown is that Right simply can not “out think” the sheer numerical superiority of the Left.

    What the “Right” needs to do is return to the source. Something that will happen anyways as a consequence of the manifesting of the coming new age. When this happens, when Whites regain there lost cultural identity and pride of place, then the older, degenerate age we are living now will said to have passed and the new one will have manifested.

    Once this happens all talk of Right and Left will then be made meaningless, as the Occident will have regained its traditional social structure and values.

    • 12_laughing_34

       Edited by a moderator?!? What, exactly, in that post needed to be edited and why?

      • Mutant_Swarm

         Then why use Disqus? If it’s that troublesome, dump it.

  • Dan

    Mr. Kurtagic gave that speech to the Ameren conference last month and received a standing ovation. We are lucky to have a man as bright as Mr. Kurtagic on our side.

    • 12_laughing_34

       If I heard him give this speech I’d have applauded it as well.

  • kjh64

    While the idea of a White homeland is good, I don’t agree for the simple reason that Whites created the entire USA. Why should we give up part or all of what we created? Would Japan set aside a part of Japan for a Japanese? No, it’s time Whites stood up for All of the USA. I know  a lot of damage has been done, but reverse the damage as much as possible.

    • silviosilver

      Why should we give up part or all of what we created?

      Here are some reasons:

      (a)  The “U.S.A” that you created never originally encompassed the entire land mass of the lower 48.  Had it never done so, it would still have been the USA.

      (b)  The land mass that the USA eventually encompassed was never exclusively white.

      (c)  Insisting that every square inch of America be exclusively white  runs contrary to the goal of creating a moral image for WN.  (This is too obvious for words, really.)

      (d) Even if there was once a chance of an exclusively white America, you lost, so **** off.  On present trends you’ll be lucky to retain anything, so you should be grateful for whatever you can retain, not mourning over spilled milk.

      • REGVLVS

        Indeed, Hawaii is the only state which never had a majority-white population. I think it and the rest of the Pacific holdings can be cut loose with no real loss.

        Puerto Rico needs to be let go and become an independant country.

        The Black question is the hardest to resolve with regards to America. There is also the question of the American Indian tribes, whose lands and rights I think should be preserved.

        Europe is another matter though. 

        • plaintruthforidiots

           “The Black question is the hardest to resolve with regards to America.”

          Really? I would have thought it was easy. Since black people are allegedly ‘the same as whites’, what is the problem with sending them all to live in the lands of their ancestors? Nobody has the right to FORCE themselves into the living space of anybody else, so why are the blacks here?

      • plaintruthforidiots

         First I read this:
        “Insisting that every square inch of America be exclusively white  runs contrary to the goal of creating a moral image for WN.”

        which is obviously untrue, and then I saw the REAL point you were trying to make:
        “Even if there was once a chance of an exclusively white America, you
        lost, so **** off.  On present trends you’ll be lucky to retain
        anything, so you should be grateful for whatever you can retain, not
        mourning over spilled milk.”

        Wow, how nice of you. I take it you are a non-white invader, who hates his own people and knows that they can’t create a first world civilisation, so thought you’d come and FORCE yourself onto white people, who clearly don’t want you around.

        Do you have any REAL arguments as to why you think white people don’t have the right to have their own countries?

      • thomas

        So… are you an illegal invader from south of the border or the spawn of invaders, aka anchor baby?

    • Mutant_Swarm

       The “ship” of the USA is sinking. The Pacific Northwest must be the White man’s lifeboat, to keep us alive until we can rebuild and reclaim what is rightfully ours.

      You might find The Northwest Front website interesting.  As for the claim of “too many Nazis,” if you are referring to the ones who dress up in 1930′s SA uniforms and stand on street corners shouting “Seig Heil,” well, we all know how effective they’ve been.  Simply don’t hang around with them. Do something better. And get used to the idea that you will be called a “Nazi” by the Left, whether you are one or not.

      • Eticket69

        Thank you for the link. I remember growing up in the bread basket where we didn’t start locking our doors until the 80′s. I must admit that I have been a casualty of the liberal propaganda machine and have tried not to be a “racist”. Interestingly enough, not everyone seems to share my sentiment, especially minorities. This year has been a real eye opener for me and I guess I have the Martin/Zimmerman fiasco to thank for it. That event led me here. I am new, I am interested, and I am humble. Thanks again.

  • SarahConnor

    Excellent article. You are a beautiful writer Alex.

  • Kallertr

    The whole idea of “Western man” and “Western Civilization” is dumb. I am not loyal to some abstract “Western man” I am loyal to my race. I am a White man, loyal to my race.  Simple as that. Anyone who attempts to harm my race or so anything to our detriment is anti-White and has declared themselves my enemy.

  • Kallertr

    Imagine an insurrectionary  social structure where loyal Whites supported each other and did not bend the knee to our enemies.

    • 12_laughing_34

       This is how the ancient Indo-European tribesmen lived, and will live again after this age comes to an end.

      As for the idea of Western Man/Civilization being dumb, how do you figure? Is not supporting the idea of of an abstract Western Man/Civilization really not the same thing as supporting your own race?

      And what about those that harm your race? Now there are many Whites around the world who are openly hostile to Western Culture, and are actively pursuing polices to displace and marginalize Whites. But should loyalty to one’s own race then bar them from acting against those who, of similar race, are working actively against the interests of that race? For instance, there are many Whites in the US and Europe that are more concerned about promoting the rights of Muslim immigrants over those of their native culture. Should these criminals then be given a “pass” just because they’re White, or should they be held accountable for their crimes against the abstract concept of Western Man/Civilization?

  • mrwermod
  • mrwermod


  • Alex Kurtagic
  • 12_laughing_34

     The Germans tried that in the 30s, and look where that got them.

    Honestly, the real problem facing the Occident is Jewish cultural extremism. Unless Whites finally say enough is enough and root out these international parasites, nothing is ever going to change.

    • anarchyst

      I would not call it extremism, but supremacism.  From Hollywood to the “movers and shakers” in our financial and business markets, they have much greater influence that is out  the of proportion of the 2% of the population that they consist of.  Our American culture has been debased by this alien force (un-American); our financial markets have been decimated by the greed that this “unique” culture possesses.
      What they fail to realize is that there are more of US than THEM.

  • William

    Excellent article, put a good perspective on things and the way us “whites” must roll.

  • ACE2X

    No other race has the equivalent of the white liberal.  MSNBC features them prominently but they infest other media and academia as well.

  • Mutant_Swarm

     The Vietnamese beat us without air support. They paid a heavy price, but they won in the end. Why? because they were more determined to win.

  • plaintruthforidiots

    It wasn’t ‘Western Man’ who opened the borders to millions of third world immigrants, it was the JEWS who run our countries, the ‘unseen hand’ which runs our banking system, our media, and tells our politicians what to do.
    Why did you miss out this slightly important point? We can’t solve the problem while disingenuous fools are making out that it’s OUR fault this is happening – it’s being done TO us, by our Jewish ‘masters’…

  • plaintruthforidiots

     Another apologist for the Jews, no doubt… “Too many Nazis there”.

    I take it you mean “white people who simply want to live around their own race, without being used as ‘cattle’ by Jews”… Idiot.

  • Henry Steyer

    For an anti-racist, because he believes he can change the man, it is easy to write fine and thick books about a world where the humanity will live forever in peace an freedom. For a white racist, words are rather there to tell something about its peoples and their destiny. Humanity never has been one herd but a multitude of communities, and migration took place between related groups. Now, the migration of Whites between white countries is often surpassed by those of other races between theirs and white countries. Contrary to the promises that ultimately all people will live where they want, the white peoples will more and more be prisoners in they ancestral soil and not allowed to offer a related community refuge even when it is threatened by extinction, because there are many more non-white individuals from which some will be in an even more imminent danger and who, according to the human rights, must be considered first. Because citizenship does not longer say much on who you are, the Whites may choose the scientific measure of genetic distances to identity themselves. When the one peoples Utopia will have made the world colder, it will help them find home.

    Moral has always something to do with the transfer of self-interest onto the group and is usually far away from self sacrifice as the duties of a moral individual include those to preserve himself precisely because he is valuable for the group. In the Darwinian teaching, the moral is attached to a purpose which is the preservation of the group. Hyper-moral is when the moral action goes beyond the group and cannot be directly connected to a purpose. Some argue that this is part of the white man problem today, but it may be his way and to change it were to negate him. It may be better to accept it as a gift of nature for him while understanding that it is a by-product and, like moral, not reproducible through good will alone. A danger that comes with hyper-morality is rather its exploitation. The anti-racist for instance justify the elimination of the Whites by the preservation of the humanity while, in our opinion, it is a pretense. In reality, they are motivated by a self-fulfilling process which has instead moral at its origin and can be illustrated by an example: To justify to their bad conscience the elimination of the Whites, they must represent them as badly as possible or, in culmination, as not existent, as being a social construct, while in return this representation enables actions which lead to their elimination. In short, many Whites are terrified and paralyzed by the question of their own genocide. The anti-racists will join our cause when the crisis will be over and they will be able to correct their assumptions, while, when the culture of our race will be healed, we will easily identify those who have been engaged in anti-racism by hatred and remove them from our middle.

    Some points in this article revoke what I believed a consensus, and relate to things that are directly applicable. We may imagine a society where we are not densely populated because we have the eternity before us and do not want to impact on the environment. — So that the nature can decide which animal and plant will live and which not. That we bring on our soil the animals and plants who do not live in our latitudes and arrange some place where they can survive, so as to bound our destiny with all of them. In contrast to animals or plants, we are responsible for our genetics and we will have to invest much of our science and wisdom in eugenics. Some may further imagine that we will change the orbit and model the other planets so as to create new living space and that we will build spaceships to reach other stars. —  But this is not the present situation. The anti-racists have open the gate to non-white migration and for our genetic interests, in the sens given by Frank Salter, the rational thing to do is to have more children, adapting to a lower budget per child and, perhaps, to be more willing to experiment in education while identifying what can not be changed. In deed, it may be all about having children of good genetics and take them back from those who have stolen them from us. It may also be about not let illusions and fears change the way we count time, which were one generation, the ages at which our women have their children. By giving more consideration to the family, we will better take in account the genetic interests of those who will join our cause. In explicitly white communities where life and science come together, a spirituality will arise which will give all Whites confidence in their destiny and help them in all their political decisions.
    (Sorry for my English)

  • Kurt Plummer

    As others have said (Re: Homelands for Whites) anything which looks decent but can be mimicked without effort, will be.  By the hustlers for the other side.  This means that we have to have an explicit way as -place- to make the ideas solely and wholely our own.

    You can patent ideas that are yours and make a profit which makes the nominal life style that goes with it, appealing.

    If you want to reinvent culture, that’s fine.

    I want to reinvent economics and technology.

    Because that’s how you make whites rich enough to buy out their own chunk of America and make it a winning proposition which is independent of the deliberate manipulation of current economics through ‘the business cycle’ of commercial and national debt vs. currency valueing.

    Anthropomorphic Robotics.
    They have to walk and grasp and lift like us, not look like us.  They don’t have to recognize the world as an ontological whole, only those specific task-oriented objects within it which make it possible to do specialist jobs on a ’1 supervisor, 10 biped tools’ basis of magnifying our work ethic beyond the breeds-a-lot racial competitors.

    Whites As A Self-Help Charity.
    We need to bond together and forge communities of exclusion by wealth.  Most explicitly, by eliminating personal debt so that we can rapidly switch to buying up technology and land enablers to a followon society -away- from the ‘others’.  Be that pushing through a voucher program for schools and then creating miniature schooling systems in neighborhoods at low-numbered cost to replace public schooling.  Or sharing a community mortgage buyout scheme to pay off housing and truly -plan- for our children’s emergence into a ruling upper class, through the property costs which they will not have to generationally pay for, again and again, as we do.  To advertising for specific skillsets to be fulfilled on a community basis.  Be it lawyer, doctor, car rental or home repair/upgrade.  With specific yearly retainers and a -promise- of a decent community.  Even simple things, like finding women who -want- to be mothers.  And then treating them like the hut-mothers of the Kibbutz.  Well paid to allow professional women to rejoin a white-centric workforce.

    Exogenic Genomics.
    We are losing the war to excellence.  100-111 IQs are no longer enough.  Ultimately, if we want to employ our entire population (both genders) and continue to move up the socio economic ladder, we need to invest in breeding the best to the best by screening and through that screening (key parameter matching) develop the database which makes us better, as whites, than we are today.  As soon as the technology for gene splicing, epigenetic hormonal triggers and the artificial wombs to make the process survivable for the mother, becomes practical.  We could start all this off right by setting up private membership fertility clinics and asking only the best and brightest to contribute to them so that a mother who faces a 25,000 dollar a year baby can be implanted with 2 and get away with a 35,000 dollar a year total investment.

    These are all hot-button topics.  They are not ‘learning to speak with a renewed will as common voice’.  But then again, we are so far down the becoming-a-minority track that we don’t need to look at life as anything but a race with extinction as a culture.

    Such is ultimately what I find repulsive about Mr. Kurtagic’s ‘non negative’ desire for the destruction of the white race.  Because ultimately, -he- is not the one pushing down on our chest.  So it’s not a fair ‘fight back and reinvent yourself!’ environment.  Because the blacks and hispanics and and and simply want us dead.  And they are right there beside Alex, pressing along with him.

    In this, I am reminded of the story of the white man who, of enormous strength, able to lift a full grown horse off it’s feet, was accused of witchcraft and, found guilty, killed by having successive weights put upon his chest until he either confessed or died.
    There came a time when, as the rib cage began to buckle, he simply said: “More weight.”  Because the pain of being hated and alone and sadistically treated by friends and neighbors with insanity complexes too deep to ever be accepted or forgiven, wasn’t worth the effort of trying to live.

    We have put enough weight on our alienated young people who will grow up with the fait d’accompli consequences of our foolish liberal Lysenkoist nonsense.  If we don’t act to show WHY they should want to be a part of our system, protected and privileged and _accepted_, the notion that there will be a Western Ethic to recover is what is flawed.

  • Webfoote41

    I have overlooked a very positive aspect of Kurtagic’s piece, and that is the psychological project of instilling Pride in being White.    I don’t find many self-haters outside the Leftish types, but they are out there.  I find that laughing at these fools and pointing out the spectacular successes and achievements of Whites, and yes our intelligence as well, is pretty effective.  

    Mantra I sing out :  Which race abolished slavery?  Which race freed its women, the only race to date?  Which race invented everything?  Which race saves the Whales? and Which race invented liberalism and socialism and human rights, etc.?  Folks love this.

    I tell them to go forth and multiply.  I tell them that they are the custodians of their amazing genes that have been traveling for thousands and thousand of years.  They like that too.  I tell them that we are also the most physically beautiful race, the race that dominates in extreme sports,  the race that enjoys the best sociability,  has the most fun with its kids.  in short the best race on the planet.  White Pride.  Joe

  • Tina Fiedler

    I agree with you. But the author is wrong on a couple things: YES, we need to breed competitively. Also: I only go to a white dentist, white doctor, plumber, accountant, etc. Not one around? Then FIND one!! They’re there. I found them. ONLY AMERICAN WHITES, period

    • Celestial Time

      That’s just the way it has to be. If you do look for White businesses and tradesmen, but still can’t find one, then look at it as an opportunity to learn a new trade.

  • Roderick Bateman

    Anti-Whites said in 1965, they were not trying to change the demographics of America and that demographics would not change. Anti-whites said and forced the same things in every other white country. No vote or discussion was allowed on this issue and Integration was FORCED. Now anti-Whites in America and every other white country are celebrating the coming White Minorities EVERYWHERE, which clearly makes it GENOCIDE. “Anti-racist” is a codeword for anti-white.

  • Eric

    This is a wonderful, well-written article. And it can only be “wonderful”, of course, because it’s message is so true.

  • Jon

    Great piece and goes along very well with William G. Simpson “which way western man”. I agree Western man is dying and should be buried and the man who could very well be reborn is Eastern European Man because they are focused on Marriage and family not greed and materialism. I believe that Russia and Eastern Europe will lead Europe in the coming Centuries but only if they can expel and deal with the 3rd world invaders as well as Islam. Western Man had his chance and as A.K said let it happen and even embraced it. If a rebirth is going to happen then Western man need to die and become something greater.