Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
No bio...
User ID: 732
Okay, that’s fine, but it does mean that conservatives had a pretty massive blind spot that they hadn’t even tried to consider very deeply, doesn’t it? You’d have to be a special sort of blinkered not to look at the actual semantic content of the National Anthem itself - not to mention the larger constellation of military- and state-affirming symbology which surrounds the presentation of the anthem at a sporting event - a presentation that very often includes not only the physical presence of active-duty military personnel but also a fly-over by genuine military-grade aircraft - and think, “This doesn’t contain any ideological content about citizens’ relationship with their government.”
This is what so frustrated me during the whole Kaepernick situation, because like every other American here, I was around during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and I saw firsthand the consequences of just rubber-stamping everything your government and your military decide to do. (“They’re fighting for our freedom,” etc.) I would have thought, naïvely, that maybe conservatives would have at least developed some awareness that there is actual political/ideological content behind all the flag-waving patriotic stuff, but apparently even all these years later they’re still using the patriotic symbolism as a license to turn off the analytical part of their brains entirely and fall back on “none of this is political, I just want to grill.”
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
2yr ago
This is something I’ve certainly thought about. What if instead of absorbing Jews into Whiteness, the only really viable long-term hope is to absorb Whites into Jewishness, through a calculated long-term campaign of intermarriage? It’s not something I currently advocate, nor do I have any hope of it getting off the ground as a widely-accepted cultural program, but it’s not clear to me right now whether or not it would be a bad thing.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
5mo ago
Again, you’re asking everyone to just play along with these retarded polite fictions, in the belief that if everyone just converged on the right metapolitical narrative, there would no longer be any compelling material/geopolitical reason for conflict. Any person with a modicum of historical knowledge of the region would be well-aware of the extremely complicated cultural, linguistic, and political realignments within the patch of territory currently known as “Ukraine”. Putin’s casus belli isn’t made any more or less valid by Zelenskyy refusing to conduct an interview in a language which everybody already knows that he speaks. Nor is Ukraine’s desire to resist forceful reabsorption into the Russian Federation made any more or less justified by crafting an easily-falsifiable narrative about the proud and independent history of the Ukrainian/Ruthenian-speaking nation. None of these things are actually materially important.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
9mo ago
Have you been to Japan? I spent two and a half weeks there, spending time in various parts of the country, and I think I can count the number of police officers I saw on one hand.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
10mo ago
No, they’re not. I criticized right-wing Twitter accounts, @crushedoranges replied with “splinter in my eye, log in yours”. Which I interpreted as an accusation that I am not criticizing progressive media figures for doing the same thing, or at least not to the same extent. So I think it’s appropriate and worthwhile to point out that I have leveled the exact same criticism against the left-aligned media vociferously and frequently for the same behavior. I hate it when progressive Twitter starts making wild knee-jerk accusations against, for example, police officers who used deadly force against a black person; that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t also hate it when right-wing Twitter starts making similarly wild and knee-jerk accusations. Both are bad! “The left is more powerful than me, so their bad behavior matters more than mine” is left-wing logic.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
1yr ago
These complaints are reasonable against, for example, Greg Johnson, but they are very odd complaints to make about Gregory Hood, because he is a very vocal critic of liberalism and of Enlightenment philosophy, and has written and spoken quite a bit about those very topics. He is not particularly hawkish on Jewish issues; like any white identitarian, he is aware of and recognizes the significance of Jewish influence on the political developments of the 20th century, but he does explicitly place most of the blame on philosophical movements that are pretty much 100% Anglo-European in origin. A perusal of his Twitter account @VDareJamesK will reveal his monarchist and Traditionalist sympathies and his disregard for liberal-democratic ideas.
I don’t expect people who are not personally interested/invested in white identitarian ideas to keep track of the specific positions of various figures within the movement - especially when so many of them happened to be named variations of Greg! - but I think it’s very important not to casually accuse writers of rank hypocrisy without bothering to check if the guy you’re talking about actually holds the positions you’re imputing to him.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
2yr ago
You know, I would have pegged The Infraggable Krunk as the most “based” member of The Justice Friends, but it appears I sold you short.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
2mo ago
the emphasis we place on individual merit is a key trait of Western Civilization.
“The West” had racial chattel slavery for centuries, which coexisted quite comfortably with a robust (far more pervasive and sincere than nowadays) Christianity. (The same “Western Civilization” very comfortably celebrated hereditary monarchy and nobility, again a slap in the face to “individual merit”.) The “West” you’re grasping at is a phantom. That it existed in the heads of so many does not make it real or coherent.
Racism is effectively the rejection of individual variance/merit in favor of group variance/merit.
“Racism”, in the sense that Yglesias is using it in the OP’s linked essay, is simply the recognition that although there is a substantial variation among individuals, it is still not only possible to draw reliable probabilistic conclusions about a given individual’s likely traits based on observable characteristics (many of them immutable), but also that in the absence of detailed information about that individual, it’s often necessary (or at least valuable) to make those probabilistic assumptions. Once more fine-grained detail about the individual is available, then it becomes possible to adjust one’s assumptions. This is entirely consistent with a belief in broadly-predictable population-level averages.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
5mo ago
When the next war errupts with an Asiatic country, the coethnics of that Asiatic country US will again face brutal persecution, which would be lacking if they were white.
I see no reason to believe that this is true. (And, to be clear, the supposed “brutal persecution” of Japanese-Americans during World War 2 was actually nothing of the sort.)
Likewise supporting infinite white immigration into Asiatic countries makes you no better than open border types who consider all socities with functioning credit cards to be equal
I made it explicit in my post that I do not support “infinite immigration” of anyone to anywhere. Immigration numbers should be controlled and manageable, to limit cultural disruption and strains on education, the job market, and public accommodations.
If white nationalists want to be seen as something to conservationists, who can care about pandas without hating snub nosed monkeys, they should refrain from promoting dissolution of non-white peoples. Admixing South Koreans to some subgroups of US whites could increase their average IQ, but it would decrease diversity, and a principled white nationalist who cares about diversity would oppose it, just as he would oppose any attempt to destroy as a nation any ethnicity, no matter how low its average IQ.
I don’t care about diversity in that sense. I want the world to become more interconnected and culturally-homogenous over time; I just want the culture the world converges on to be advanced, Eurasian in character rather than some oppositional Third World miasma, and to value the things I value. I’d be perfectly happy if in 300 years nobody speaks Korean any longer, as long as that means that people with Korean ancestry have been successfully amalgamated into a thriving, technologically-advanced, proud world culture. This will mean a flattening and merging of white cultures as well; I don’t care if anyone is still speaking Dutch in 300 years either. This process of cultural blending between the peoples of Eurasia and the Americas needs to take place gradually and not by force or coercion, but I do believe it will take place.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
9mo ago
My understanding is that the homicide rate in 1900 England was either higher than in modern England, or at best about the same as today.
You have made this claim multiple times, and I have pointed out to you before that it is blatantly false. Homicide rates in Victorian and Edwardian England hovered consistently around 1 to 1.5 per 100,000 people. Meanwhile, last year in the UK the murder rate was 9.7 per million people The pre-WW1 UK genuinely was a drastically safer place than the modern UK in terms of crime, despite considerably sparser and less effective policing and infinitely worse standards of medical care.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
11mo ago
Seems that Crooks may have been prematurely fingered.
There’s some DR Twitter speculation that the real culprit is Pittsburgh-based antifa street brawler Maxwell Yearick, who certainly does uncannily resemble the supposed photos of the shooter, but I’m gonna wait and see how things shake out before endorsing any of this speculation.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
1yr ago
I’ve heard the more (if only slightly more) polite word “Afrolatry” substituted when the speaker wants to be a bit less spicy. “Negrolatry” is certainly my go-to, though. That or the even more incisive “autonegrophilia”, in which white progressives desperately wish to be culturally black or to be perceived as culturally black.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
1yr ago
They planned to send all the blacks back to Africa once they were no longer needed. Thomas Jefferson was very explicit about this, as I demonstrated in a reply to Hlynka above. Many of the greatest Americans, from James Madison to Andrew Jackson, and from Daniel Webster to Henry Clay, were members of an organization entirely dedicated to achieving this goal, as, again, I’ve noted in multiple comments in this thread. This effort was a dismal failure, resulting in the deportation of only a few thousand blacks to what became Liberia. So, yes, the importation of a massive population of black slaves was a disaster for this country, and the men responsible should indeed be roundly lambasted for their decision to do so. However, it’s not like it didn’t occur to the smart ones just how big a problem they had on their hands, nor the importance of dealing decisively with that problem at some point. Sadly, their descendants waited far too long and couldn’t execute the dismount.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
2yr ago
If you watch 500 marathons and every time the winner is black, then when marathon #501 comes around and you’re getting ready to place your bets, you would be a complete moron to approach those bets with the attitude, “I have no opinion about which race the winner will be from. It could be the white guy this time, we have no way to know beforehand!” When surveying the slate of runners, you are completely justified in looking at the white guys and saying, “Bad bet, safe to ignore.”
Similarly, in societal terms, if I’m a recruiter trying to hire for a white-collar job, and I have to make a decision based on limited information, I would have to be a complete moron - or a liberal ideologue - not to utilize my understanding of probabilities gained from observation of previous outcomes. If the only information given to me about two competing candidates is that one guy’s name is Connor Przyewski, and the other guy’s name is Anquon Washington, I have to use outside information - like my observations of patterns - to supplement the explicit info I was provided. This means that I have to judge the candidates based on the information I have, which, if skin color has a demonstrated correlation with observable disparate outcomes, would include skin color as a useful proxy for important information.
To be clear, I’m not talking primarily about the boomerwaffen, I’m talking about much smarter and edgier DR figures like, again, Auron MacIntyre, who can normally be counted on to dunk on conservatives for being too naïve and lowbrow. My general observation is that the farther-right a commentator gets, the more intense he is about the groomer discourse. Like I said, I’m observing what to me is obviously a purity spiral, in which “being absolutely obsessed with rooting out pedophiles” is seen as a badge of honor and based-ness. Are you seeing something different?
I actually just recently listened to OP’s (if I’m correct in assuming that OP is himself the author of the linked piece) appearance on Alex Kaschuta’s Subversive podcast, and he is indeed an engaging podcast speaker. Pleasantly surprising to see him posting on this forum!
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
13d ago
Jews do not have anywhere near the level of explicit racial solidarity that whites had in, say, apartheid South Africa, or the Antebellum American South. Whatever covert influence some powerful Jews have to influence things in their favor at the expense of others, surely you can acknowledge that their actions (outside of, arguably, Israel) are of a qualitatively different form than, say, passing laws explicitly forbidding non-Jews from owning property, voting, patronizing the same businesses as Jews, etc. The worst thing a powerful Jew can do to white people in 21st-century America is write a mean book about us, produce a TV series where we’re the bad guys, and attempt (with intermittent success) to legislatively block border enforcement. Contrast that with the worst era of White Supremacy, in which a white person could own a black person as property. The two situations are not comparable.
This doesn’t mean I don’t think discriminating against white people is bad! It shouldn’t happen, it shouldn’t be tolerated, and it certainly shouldn’t be celebrated on grounds of retributive justice, balancing the cosmic scales, etc. I’m white, I’m planning to continue to be white, and I will do what I can to resist efforts to dispossess me or to dissolve cultural norms which are good for me and mine. But I don’t believe that Noel Ignatiev has the power to make me a second-class citizen, or that there’s any realistic American future in which white people are explicitly and systemically oppressed based on group identity. Whereas there are plenty of countries where it’s at least realistic to believe that Jews could suffer that fate again, as they have in the past. (This doesn’t give anyone, Jew or gentile, a blank check to tear my culture to shreds in order to obviate the hypothetical possibility of future pogroms, to the extent that any of them are doing so.)
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
4mo ago
Odd to bring that up when the specific attorney in question, Danielle Sassoon, is very obviously Jewish. (The Sassoon family is a very wealthy and influential Jewish banking clan of Baghdadi origin.)
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
5mo ago
Israel was just founded in a bad place.
This has been my stance on Israel for the entire time I’ve been politically aware. I almost wish there had been some sort of Ashkenazi European equivalent of Joseph Smith, who could have come up with some compelling theological innovation to get some number of Jews to reconceptualize Eastern Europe as the actual (or, at least, divinely ordained) site of the Promised Land.
There’s a tinfoil hat theory on the counter-semitic hard right about Khazaria, the supposed medieval Jewish nation which existed somewhere in modern Ukraine; the conspiracy theory is that (((they))) engineered the Russia-Ukraine conflict in order to depopulate that part of Ukraine in order to make it a viable alternative homeland should Israel fall. Maybe the hypothetical Jewish Joseph Smith could have built something around a mythical vision of Khazaria.
It will be no great new beginning, but it will also be no final end, and its decline (destruction or not) will represent the end of the age of Ashkenazi Jewish overcontribution to modernity that began with the Haskalah.
I’m not sure about this. Now, my stance toward Jews is that, in the fullness of time, I would like them to lose their distinctive identity — built on a sense of separateness and specialness — and to become absorbed into a conglomerated elite world culture. For Jews to just become one of the constituent ancestries of the new dominant world ethnicity which is only just beginning to be forged. This will require the end of Israel as a sovereign entity, but I don’t think it will mean a decline in the overperformance of individuals with Ashkenazi ancestry. (If anything, it will help spread Ashkenazi ancestry even wider, albeit in an admittedly diluted form.)
In five hundred years, I can imagine the esoteric right-wing androids will promulgate knowledge of haplogroups, treating Ashkenazi ancestry as a somewhat-tongue-in-cheek badge of honor, the way right-wingers crow about their R1b ancestry nowadays.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
5mo ago
I don’t think you addressed the core of my point. I’m saying that the extent to which a given racial group has common interests worth coordinating around is extremely context-dependent. White advocacy potentially makes sense in a context in which white people are being systematically acted against, regardless of a given white person’s other characteristics.
To some extent, this is true of the current American political context. It does not appear to be remotely applicable to Europe. Hood wants Europeans to coalesce around a shared supranational White identity, but the current political and racial conditions in Europe simply do not seem conducive to this. Whites are not under attack as whites in Europe. There is nothing like the DEI edifice, the mass affirmative action disfavoring whites, etc. If current demographic trends persist in Europe, that could certainly change, but as of right now there is no strong external pressure compelling Europeans to defensively adopt a shared white identity.
The comparison to reparations is instructive, I think, because it reveals the cracks in the “black” racial coalition. When blacks feel collectively besieged, as though their collective destiny hinges on remaining in solidarity, then “blackness” is a meaningful identity to them. This has certainly been the case throughout the entire history of the black American experience. When things like affirmative action were introduced, it introduced another vector incentivizing blacks to stick together and to adopt a “big tent” understanding of blackness. However, reparations introduce a countervailing incentive: the reparations money is a finite resource, and the more people qualify for it and split the pie, the less each individual black person has to gain. Suddenly solidarity is the wrong approach. Suddenly the question of whether someone like Kamala Harris is black becomes very relevant. The question of whether Obama was black was at one point a live-wire question; once he became elevated as a figure around which blacks could politically coordinate in order to secure power and resources, it ceased being a question. But if he’d been trying to claim a limited resource to which another more “authentically black” person could have credibly laid claim, it would have stayed a potentially divisive issue.
Many whites in America understandably feel that way about the issue of who counts as white. Different camps of whites recognize political sovereignty as a limited resource which cannot be shared between groups of whites with radically different political and cultural sensibilities. There isn’t enough political and economic power to go around, such that every subset of white people gets an acceptably large share. That’s a recipe for division among whites, not solidarity, and people like Hood need to present a compelling case why white people should sacrifice their more local interests in order to secure resources for other whites whom they don’t even like.
Would you rather live in 1950's California as a white person or future California in a post-racial one where everyone is mixed and from all around the world and there is no unifying culture or set of values other than "diversity is our strength". Obviously that ship has sailed, but if I had a time machine I know which one I'm choosing.
Time machines aren’t real, and nobody has the option to return to 1950’s California. That ship sailed and is not coming back. All I can do is look toward the future, try and game out how different trend could possibly develop, and do my small part to try and make sure the better outcomes are realized rather than the worse ones.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
9mo ago
Yes, actually that’s pretty much what I’m suggesting. Putting up a spirited defense to help a guilty person escape justice is a bad thing. I am not accusing all public defenders of intentionally committing acts which they believe to be immoral; I’m saying that the moral hazard created by forcing them to do this is a terrible thing. I cannot understand what value is created for society when a defense attorney concocts elaborate arguments and exploits loopholes in order to stop somebody from being punished for something that person did.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
1yr ago
I have made it well into my thirties without ever being arrested nor ever even receiving so much as a traffic ticket. I live my life in an upstanding manner and do not involve myself in situations that could lead to me being suspected of criminal activity. The two times in my life that I’ve been questioned by police officers, I calmly and respectfully explained what was happening and allowed them full leeway to obtain all the information they needed in order to ascertain my innocence, after which they let me go on my way without issue.
For example, in my trespassing case: - I was found on the sidewalk adjacent to the property I was supposedly trespassing on (I was going for a walk for no particular reason, far from my home)
I had been seen peering through the slots in the walls surrounding the property (it was a cool building and I am a curious soul).
This is shady behavior. When taken in combination with the fact that you had visible scrapes on both your body and clothing consistent with having hopped a wall, I think it’s entirely reasonable and proper for the police to have arrested you and assumed your guilt.
There have been at least 4 times in my relatively short life that I have been falsely accused by police, and one of those led to an arrest.
I think you should probably consider making better decisions and acting less shady/suspicious.
"If you're not guilty you have nothing to fear from the system, even though they have already proved their lack of scruples by pressuring you."
How does that indicate a lack of scruples on the justice system’s part? If they believe that you’re guilty, and that getting you to take a plea deal is a more reliable way to ensure that you’re punished rather than risking the possibility that a sympathetic/gullible jury makes a poor choice, it’s entirely reasonable for them to lean on you to take the plea deal. This isn’t unscrupulous at all.
"If you're innocent you have nothing to hide."
This but unironically.
While I understand where you’re coming from, I will point out that America has something - a certain demographic issue - that none of the countries you named have pretty much any of. And that the exacerbation of that particular issue, which is one of the main reasons that 21st-century America cannot have nice things, is being sustained largely by women voters in this country today. And that the European countries which have spent the past decade importing that same issue - some of which are finally applying the brakes to that process, and some of which are still proceeding full steam ahead - have also done so in large part because of female political preferences.
Now, I’m not saying I necessarily favor the OP’s position. And I do appreciate you pointing out that there are at least some countries left where women are still somewhat based. (Once upon a time, not too long ago, even in America women were considered to vote more conservatively than men on a lot of issues, but a combination of factors has destroyed that forever.) Obviously I pray - not only as a straight man who would benefit immeasurably from a peaceful and happy resolution to the War of the Sexes, but also as a person who needs to live in this society - that women can be salvaged as a political presence and brought back into harmony and balance with men, and I’m perfectly fine if that doesn’t have to involve “repealing the 19th.” Still, I’m not as confident as you are that Polish women won’t catch the same mind virus that women in the rest of the industrialized world seem to have pretty much all succumbed to already.
More options
Context Copy link