Archive for January 27th, 2011


A commenter discussed how a pro-white organization that tries to be mainstream discussed white traitors. They looked down from their heights and said calmly that those whites were only hurting themselves.

Damn if I look at them that way. In all of western culture there is nothing lower than a traitor. It is entertaining to look at the lengthy explanations of Dante’s Tenth Circle, the worst part of Hell which is frozen. They use all kinds of explanations like “a person who betrayed his benefactor.”

But the Tenth Circle is very simple.

It is for traitors.

Our Germanic legends tell of men who fought to the death around their dead leader’s body. If Infidel is the curse word of the Levantine world, traitor is the ultimate denunciation of ours.

In fact, the words are very similar. Levantine society is divided into religions rather than territorial nations. Every Moslem people adopts Arabic script. Yiddish is old German, but it is written in Hebrew letters.

An infidel is not just a wrong believer. The actual word means one who betrayed God.

Treason is the greatest crime any social animal can commit.

But there is a tremendous distinction to be made here that no Wordist would think of. It is a big one to us.

You see, a person may be loyal to respectability. National Review and liberals, to my mind, have only one real loyalty, and that is to their consensus. Please listen to me carefully here:

The correct term is not respectable conservative, but conservative respectable. If you truly THINK about that, you will get my point. The person is not conservative first, he is respectable first. He is not only part of the “mainstream,” the mainstream is his only real loyalty.

It is not a condemnation but a definition you need when you are offended by a pro-white taking a lackadaisical attitude toward traitors. He has a sort of Buckley attitude, that nothing is important enough to get a truly sophisticated person excited.

But this is not an act, it is true attitude, because Buckley kept insisting that he was part of the establishment, that his loyalty was with the consensus, a bit politically to the right of the consensus, but when the consensus moved so would he.

These people are respectables first. Buckley was in the conservative part of the consensus, but the moment any opinion was judged to be too far out, or too far back in time, he followed his real loyalty and not only went to the new consensus, but went to it more militantly if it were suddenly a “right-wing” extremist attitude.

So what you see here are the pro-white respectables, respectable first, pro-white as a modifier. They will only get excited when they are denouncing the Klan or some other offense to the consensus where their real loyalty lies.

To all respectables, we are infidels.