The Fear Mongering Charade

If you have been following politics recently, you've probably seen plenty of the circumstantial ad hominem "fear mongering," usually directed at those who even slightly oppose cultural Marxism or other establishment nonsense. This farce would be hilarious if the consequences were not so tragic for nonwealthy Westerners. Alleged fear in arguers is, of course, usually irrelevant, as are other emotive states

But the contradictions. Oh, my! For decades, establishment political parties have relied on fear, groupthink, repetition, and media dominance to keep individuals from facing facts, from deviating from the crypto totalitarianisms of Republicanism, and Third Way Democratism.

"Ooga booga. He opposes invasion and annihilation. He must be a r*cist, b*got, and goose st*pper."

So we have the establishments, the same establishments who have been bombarding us with preposterous terror alerts, telling us to be afraid of the moral facts, to freak out about terrorism, but to seldom mention the far more massive threats of egoism, globalism, nihilism, dysgenics, militarism, oligopolies, creeping Sharia, super volcanos, nuclear war, legalized bribery, biological weapons, biocultural Marxism, and one sided mass media.

Those inclined to grandstand offer dire global warming pronouncements when it is still an open question whether global warming is harmful or beneficial. Meanwhile, more important environmental issues (smoking, overfishing, deforestation, overuse of fertilizers, indoor air pollution, outdoor air pollution, antibiotic overuse, overpopulation in poor countries, asbestos in poor countries) get little attention.

(By the way, stop quoting the Pope, celebrities, and natural scientists on public policies. Logic, ethics, and public policies are not their areas of expertise.)

"Ooga booga. Don't use fiscal policies or a trillion dollar platinum coin. The economy is self-correcting."

Of course, the hands off economists are often silent when it comes to the thousands of policies that redistribute money to the top.

We're told to fear whites most of all, despite the fact that individuals from some other ethnoracial groups are many, many times more likely to commit stranger on stranger interracial crimes.

"Ooga booga. White tr*sh. White privilege. White terrorism. Whoops! It's past my bedtime. Let me retire to my mansion that happens to be in a gated community for no reason at all."

I'm so effing sick of establishment egoism, propaganda, contradictions, and gradual mass destruction.

Signs of Life and Death

I have scant evidence for the following claims since little research is done on these things, but it appears white political thinking is moving in slightly better directions, at least outside of wealthy circles.

Signs of progress compared to several years ago:

The popularity of totalitarian neoconservatism among ordinary citizens declined, especially the version supported by the Bushes, though Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio or Hillary Clinton could steal the executive office.

Race realism and counter jihadism often united, brought on by the situation in Europe. Ten years ago counter jihadists bombarded race realists with slurs as if counter jihadists thought they could escape establishment opprobrium by throwing race realists under the bus. Fact facers realize genes and cultures both matter, though some counter jihadists (Robert Spencer) still act as if culture is almost everything.

Despite his massive defects, Donald Trump has redirected many Republicans from knee-jerk economic redistribution to billionaires to nonwhite invasion issues.

Pan-European ideas are spreading.

Signs of decline:

The latest Pope provides full bore support for antiwhite totalitarianism. Western militaries do likewise. Establishment propaganda is turning into an exact science.

What little democracy existed in the Western world is almost gone.

Living standards continue to decline, and the decline is covered up with hedonic pricing, statistical redefinitions, and other fallacies.

Self-described neoreactionaries are no help. The word reaction*ry is a slur used by ruling groups and followers of Marx. No movement that describes itself as a widely accepted slur has ever gained power. Would a majority support a party calling itself the D*mb Party, no matter the content of their characters? The millions of individuals tarred as reactionaries and murdered would be spinning in their graves (if they could) at the thought of people willingly calling themselves reactionaries. Neoreactionaries blame democratic systems that don't exist while praising the kings and queens who got us into this mess.

Chinese, Russian, and Western rulers are more similar than different, almost all are devoted to egoism, militarism, and biocultural Marxism.

The tribal fanaticism of white multiculturalists keeps increasing, impervious to ethical reasoning. Years ago multiculturalists would cite Eisenhower as an example of a moderate Republican. Now they regard Eisenhower as a pariah for not being antiwhite enough.

More oligopolies. More dysgenic breeding. More environmental destruction.

The Visitor

During a break at a contract job, I tried to visit a tame, obscure ethnoracial realist web site (I forgot the name of it). The site was blocked because spurious h*te accusations. Somehow that obscure website had made The List. Every mass media political site I visited was not blocked. The wifi belonged to the company, so the company had a legal right to block sites. The company probably buys the blocking software and has only a vague idea of which sites are blocked.

The contradictions are what bothered me. Mass media political sites spew millions of antiwhite slurs, yet mass media sites were not blocked (the hard bigotry of low mass media moral expectations).

I visited Salon. I could have read the Salon article calling for whites to be burned alive. (No problem!) I could have read thousands of other articles devoted to antiwhite totalitarianism on other sites.

But if I wanted to read about whites peacefully seceding, no way.

The mere idea that nonwealthy whites might have claims for ethical autonomy and full human rights is anathema, but antiwhite demagoguery is treated as normalcy. And judging from their behaviors, almost all multiculturalists have no inkling they are doing anything wrong.

Big Families

Whites should be churning out children. Who will protect you and your spouse if stuff really hits the fan?

Liberal and conservative multiculturalists with their zeal for antiwhite totalitarianism?

Random Christians?

Today's Christians are more concerned with the afterlife, most being multiculturalists. And multiculturalists are definitely not trustworthy.

Your neighbors?

You're unlikely to have trustworthy, fact facing neighbors.

Let's face it. Most contemporary whites are unpredictable, no band of brothers, easily indoctrinated, pretending to be rebels while absorbing unrelenting ideological garbage from schools, churches, media, corporations, and governments. The results show in poor character.

In collapse situations, unrelated acquaintances will kill for food. Hamilton's rule, altruism is proportional to relatedness, applies all the more in survival situations. Harm doing is inversely proportional to relatedness.  (For example, the probability of a stepfather killing a child is dozens of times greater than that of a married biological parent, partly because stepfathers and stepchildren have bad genetic and environmental backgrounds. But the rest results from biological altruism or lack of it.)

How many unrelated friends, trustworthy in even the worst circumstances, do most whites have? Maybe some have 20 white friends they should trust no matter how bad things get. But given the nihilistic, hedonistic, xenocentric, and misanthropic tendencies of most modern whites, that trust may be misplaced. All it takes is one infiltrator to open up on the rest with a fast firing weapon. Multiculturalists and their allies are excellent at infiltration, Machiavellianism, and free riding. Subtle and thorough indoctrination in cultural Marxism causes most whites to feel extreme, unreasoned shame for thinking anything other than xenocentric ethnoracial thoughts. Organizing a group of unrelated, contemporary whites for anything other than establishment narratives is exceedingly difficult,

So have numerous children. If you have a decent job, what else can you do with your money? Hedonism is a self-defeating end. Establishment charities are crooked and destructive. Organizing ethnoracial fact facers is a great idea but doing so should go hand in hand with family.

If a few children support cultural Marxism, let them flee to San Francisco or elsewhere. You still have the good children left. Give the gift of life.

Larger groups have the highest probabilities of surviving and thriving in survival situations.

Most misbehaving teenagers eventually conclude that mom and dad are not so bad after all. Hollywood exaggerates conflicts in white families because drama sells. A TV show about a cohesive white family would have almost no viewers.

The important things parents give (love, discipline, food, water, and exposure to worthwhile careers) are inexpensive. The other important thing, a good nonparental environment with little cultural Marxism, can be expensive, depending on where you live.

Helicopter parenting is a morass of fallacious nurture assumptions. Consumer goods won't make your children better. Vacations, dance lessons, and other expensive activities have little impact on how children turn out. The IQs and non home behaviors of children are the result of genes and nonparental environments. Baby Mozart crap and other gimmicks have almost no impact on adult IQ and behavior.

A prepping family of 14 has a much better chance of surviving than isolated preppers. Add grandchildren and your family self-defense becomes even stronger.

The fact that you are reading this article indicates you are probably more ethical than most individuals, though our rulers tried to indoctrinate you with white ontological guilt. You will give your genes for ethical behavior to your children.

The xenocentrism of contemporary whites can not and will not last. Either nonwhites, with their devotion to tribalism and other ingroup favoritisms, will destroy whites or whites will face facts and organize.

For Those Who Have Not Figured It Out Yet

What contemporary "American" political parties support in practice:

Republican Party: cronyism, austerity, globalism, super militarism, super robber baronism, cultural Marxism

Democratic Party: cronyism, austerity, globalism, militarism, robber baronism, super cultural Marxism

Libertarian Party: cronyism, austerity, globalism, militarism, super robber baronism, cultural Marxism

Green Party: cronyism, globalism, welfarism, super militarism, super cultural Marxism

Constitution Party: cronyism, austerity, globalism, militarism, evangelicalism, super robber baronism, cultural Marxism

Justice Party: cronyism, globalism, welfarism, militarism, financial reformism, cultural Marxism

American Populist Party: cronyism, austerity, globalism, militarism, super robber baronism, cultural Marxism

Communist Party USA: cronyism, globalism, economic Marxism, super militarism, super cultural Marxism

Freedom Socialist Party: cronyism, globalism, economic Marxism, super militarism, super cultural Marxism

Reform Party: cronyism, super austerity, globalism, militarism, fair trade, robber baronism, cultural Marxism

Objectivist Party: cronyism, austerity, globalism, militarism, super robber baronism, cultural Marxism

On the plus side, the Justice Party claims to support financial reforms, the reform party fair trade. On the negative side, almost everything else.

Then there's Kevin MacDonald's American Freedom Party. The platform on its website looks better than almost all current political parties, but given the Occidental Observer's preoccupation with wrongs done by Jews rather than the platform, the party's commitment to the platform seems unlikely.

Some may object that I'm cynical. But the above is truth, and the truth matters more than any ad hominem tag thrown at me. The above practices are not short term fads. Most political parties have been doing those isms for decades. The ultimate cynicism lies within those casually rejecting well-reasoned evidence, replacing the search for evidence with group beliefs, feel good beliefs or belief in what gets repeated most often in the media.

Note that any party supporting legalized bribery also supports most of the atrocious things above, no matter the rhetoric. Legalized bribery overwhelms scruples in current politicians.

The major parties in other Western countries are variations on the same themes.

That's why it is crucial that we form separate organizations and communities.

Thousands of reforms should be done, and current political parties are rent seeking, not reformng.

The Altruistic Punishment Error

Some nonmulticulturalists (Kevin MacDonald, for example) call punishment of fact facers by multiculturalists altruistic punishment.

Altruism consists of actions by yourself to benefit others, not yourself.

But most punishments doled out by multiculturalists simply cause mass harms to nonwealthy whites or benefit the multicultural punisher's own wealth and status (egoism). Multiculturalists want to throw fact facers in jail for thought crimes because doing so helps them get richer through divide-and-screw practices and gives them more status among their allies.

Ordinary nonwhites get little or no benefit from having fact facers punished. And if the genocide of whites completes itself, nonwhites will be stuck in societies without democracy, without freedom of speech, and also without new medical, agricultural and other innovations by whites. The full forces of divide-and-screw will be turned on them, as has happened in many in lands where colonialism by whites was abolished but not the more frequent colonialism and parasitism by nonwhites.

There will be no Pax Whatever. There will be the rules of the jungle.

And on the One Hand

How one sided are the mass media?

Consider this: most people in the mass media don't even know what nonmulticulturalists call themselves. If you asked most multicultural celebrities what an Identitarian is, you'd get blank stares or wrong answers. Most of us have never seen anything in the mass media that referred to nonmulticulturalists as anything but abusive ad hominem attacks-- r*cist, b*got, Isl*mophobe, f*r right, white supr*mecist, right w*ng populist, and so on, including media outlets that supposedly ban their writers from using slurs. Media bans on slurs are merely bans on slurs directed at nonwhites.

Groupthink bubbles are pretty darn fanatical and despicable when you don't even know what your alleged opponents call themselves. Or what their actual beliefs might be.

For those who don't know, critics of multiculturalism call themselves: Race realists. Immigration patriots. Real conservatives. Counterjihadists. Pro Westerners. Identitarians, Paleoconservatives. Traditionalists. Pan Europeans. Fact Facers. They almost never call themselves abusive ad hominem terms.

Thus we are stuck with the contradictions of nonmulticultural intellectuals (JP Rushton, Thomas Jackson and so on) providing overwhelming evidence for their sides while the alleged paragons of tolerance and brilliance resort to barrages of ad hominem and straw person attacks, not to mention piles of other fallacious rhetoric.

But slurs do more than demonize well reasoned opposition. They create knee-jerk responses in adherents, causing adherents to automatically feel revulsion at well reasoned dissent. And if individuals go so far as to consider changing multicultural beliefs, they will feel anxiety, not cognitive dissonance anxiety, but anxiety from indoctrination and social pressure.

Oddly, poorly reasoned dissent gets lots of publicity. The Westboro Baptist Church and its rotten ideology, gets lots of publicity, serving as straw person fodder for establishment totalitarianisms. Almost everyone gets to feel superior to the Westboro Baptist Church. Just don't mention to the multiculturalists that the Westboro Baptist Church consists of fellow multiculturalists. The same goes for multitudes of similar groups.

The lesson: if you want publicity for your views, get out a tin foil hat or recite ruling group nostrums. Or both.

Third Wayism

The evil brilliance of third wayism, the ideology of contemporary Democrats and similar parties in Europe, was figuring out that you don't need tax shifts to redistribute trillions of dollars to the top. You merely deregulate, support globalism, support austerity, support oligopolies, bail out the rich, provide tax entitlements, fail to enforce regulations, keep unemployment excessively high, and employ token punishments against crimes committed by the wealthy.

Third wayism indoctrinates the wealthy and upper middle classes to feel morally superior for believing in poorly reasoned biocultural Marxism. Thus, to be a respectable person, one supports wrecking the lives, jobs, families, schools, cultures, and neighborhoods of nonwealthy whites, while Third Wayers themselves stay safely away from nonwhites with harmful tendencies.

Third wayism pretends other arrangements are impossible or impractical or endlessly stymied by Republicans. But as we saw in 2009 and 2010, when Democrats controlled Congress and the White House, contemporary Democrats' commitments the people are far more word than deed. Bait-and-switch keeps fooling Democratic Party voters. Having lots of social junk science around also helps the third way cause.

Contemporary Republicans, Libertarians, and Constitution Partiers, of course, are even worse, supporting the above plus massive tax shifts away from the rich, onto nonwealthy individuals and future generations.

The ultimate paradigm case of third way gradual totalitarianism was Joe Lieberman, the former Senator from Wall Street, who hilariously pretended to be centrist and independent, grandstanding of minor issues while enriching the wealthy.

The Short Guide to Finding and Keeping a Wife and Family for Shy, Awkward, Ethical Men

Dear shy, ethical guys: you exist for good reasons. For generations, women and their parents in the Northern Hemisphere, chose guys like you because of your abilities to be faithful, work hard, provide resources for children, and feel anxieties when doing something wrong. Stop feeling inferior.

Unfortunately, in today's societies, devoted to egoism, hedonism, and Machiavellianismyour strengths become mating liabilities.

The game literature is little help. Game literature is unspecific, contradictory or unsupported by evidence, the sort of advice that leaves shy guys confused and under confident, exactly what you don't want to happen. Worse, the self described pick up artists slur more ethical men as betas. Fortunately, there is help in Sex Signals: The Biology of Love by Timothy Perper, an old, overlooked book.

Sex Signals shows the step by step flow of initial meetings. Look for Perper's book on Worldcat or an online bookstore.

Some other points to remember:

1. Which is better? Asking one bad woman on a date, knowing she will say yes? Or asking 100 good women on dates but only one says yes? The second, of course. Those who ask women most get the best women. Some men use rejection therapy or make a sport of rejection, taking perverse pride in being rejected. Once you know enough about psychology and body language, you easily notice when women want to be asked out.
2. When a woman backs off, you back off. Never become obsessed with any woman who rejects you or seems indifferent or reveals bad character. Thousands of other women exist. Desperation almost never works. Let it go and distract yourself with other activities.
3. Walk with confidence, groom well, get in shape, work on your voice.
4. If you have a hard time keeping conversations going around strangers, pull a George Costanza. Put conversation crib notes in your wallet.
5. If you feel overwhelmed in a situation, laugh inside and imagine you are wearing the Fecal Vision glasses from the old Saturday Night Live skit. Or imagine you are talking to a puppy or a lost soul. 
6. Stick to your strengths. Focus on your ability as an earner, potential father, and ethical person. Women unable to appreciate those things are not worth your time anyway.
7. Stay away from night clubs. You won't do well on the alpha's turf. The advice in Perper's book works just as well on casual dates as it does in night clubs. Go where women outnumber men: classes, churches, and stores popular with women.
8. Remember that relationships always come with costs. A woman is unlikely to solve your other problems.
9. Remember: the cool guys have feet of clay. Their shtick wears thin with most women because they have few moral pursuits and edifying interests. Even being a male friend of cool guys gets boring and odious. Whether conscious of it or not, the cool guys are using an evolutionary r strategy, as are most of the women interested in them. Neither group has much to offer you.
10. Read John Gottman's advice on how to make a relationship work. 
11. Read up on body language. With some aspects of your personality and body language, fake it until you make it. For example, I once touched my face and neck in neurotic ways. Doing so was unconscious for me then. But after years of not doing those neurotic self-touches, I feel perfectly fine never doing them. (But with some aspects of personality, if it constantly feels too awkward, stop doing it.)
12. Avoid self-deprecation. Women thought self-deprecation was humorous 25 years ago. They don't any more.
13. Don't misrepresent your character. It's unethical and you probably wont be able to fake it for long anyway.
14. Don't fall for nurture assumptions. Your parents' parenting styles didn't affect you and yours won't affect your children. Raise your children in larger environments with little Randism, militarism, cultural Marxism and other evils, then don't worry about the rest. Some kids turn out good, some turn out bad, not much you can do to directly mold them. Fortunately, more of your children will turn out decent than the children of r practitioners. Your children will be unlikely to turn your life into a living hell because they have your genes and you wisely—I hope!—engaged in assortative mating, choosing a spouse with similar ethical characteristics.