Category Archives: American

Blacks in Restaurants

In response to this post, Tulio writes:

Tulio: If anything, I thought blacks have a reputation for being spendthrifts.

But seriously, who in 2016 would even use the word niggardly. Forget the phonetic similarity to the n-word, it sounds like such an antiquated word that it has no business coming out of someone’s mouth in the 21st century. It would be like a teenager referring to someone as a curmudgeon. You’d probably have to do a double-take.

Blacks don’t tip. You did not know that? Black people are notorious for not tipping. They have a very bad reputation that way.

Most servers hate waiting on blacks. They don’t tip or they tip ridiculously low, like $1 for a $150 bill, they complain all the time – usually about stupid stuff, they make a huge mess at the table, they are way too loud and sometimes even start fights, and they are awful when they order – often going into micro-detail, “little bit extra catsup, not too much, extra onions, easy on the tomatoes, horseradish instead of mustard, relish on the side,” stuff like that – just impossibly difficult and petty orders.

There is a whole set of behaviors that most Whites have internalized for going out to eat. Even poor and working class Whites act this way; they can be even worse than middle class Whites at enforcing manners in restaurants. I know because I have gone out to eat with such folks many times in my life. It’s like Black people never got the memo.

A lot of nonracist non-Blacks start working in restaurants as servers, and after a while, they start hating Blacks. It is quite common.

I would say that if you are Black and capable of being civilized like millions of Black people, you might want to act extra civilized when you go out to eat if for no other reason than to improve the reputation of your race.


Filed under American, Blacks, Culture, Race/Ethnicity, Whites

War Zone: July 4, 2016

I swear it sounds exactly like a war zone out there. I have been watching a lot of combat videos lately, and this is more or less exactly what a war zone sounds like, albeit with some larger explosions now and then. If you want to know what gunshots sound like, well, they sound like firecrackers. That’s the best analogy that I can come up with.

This has got to be the most damned violent Fourth of July that I have ever experienced. I believe the madness started this morning, and the battle has been going on nearly nonstop (just like in a war zone) ever since. Keep in mind that this is a small city of 50,000 people. There’s rarely five seconds without an explosion of some sort. Are people really getting more violent and setting off more of these little bombs, or is it just my imagination? If there are more firecrackers now, why is that? Are people pissed off about something? Are they more violent nowadays?


Filed under American, Culture, Regional, USA

Machismo in a Working Class Mexican City in the US

Jason Y writes:

Not all Mexican guys are macho, and not all Mexican women are knockouts, these will go out with each other. I’ve seen no evidence these Latin nations are full of macho guys. Just as anywhere else, the majority are average, not gay but average.

I am wondering if the commenter lives with Mexicans. I live with Mexicans. All Mexican men are machos, 100%. Pretty much. I believe it is a cultural mandate, and if you don’t go along with it, you are probably in for a rough ride. I am talking about the ones in my city who are born in Mexico. I saw this soft young 2nd generation Chicano at the bank, and his young wife was just pummeling him verbally.

As far as the Chicanos, around here, the men are 100% machos because this area is poor and working class. There may be a few exceptions such as a few young Chicano married men in the 20’s with a couple of kids.

With the White guys, not so much, but still a lot of them are pretty hard.

We also have some Blacks around here, and they are all machos too, regular tough sort of ghetto or Blacks deep into “Black culture.” I think in ghetto or traditional Black culture, all the men have to be pretty macho. It seems like there’s no other way to be. Once you get outside the ghetto or traditional Black culture, Black men can start to vary more.

There are some Arabs who run the local store and they are all badass, hard, macho guys too. The Arabs accept me, the Chicanos not so much, but some of them do.

The Mexicans maybe, but you can’t really talk to them, as they don’t speak English, and they keep to themselves.

Some of the Blacks accept me, but the ones around here are mostly lousy people who you don’t want to know anyway.

With the rest of the Chicanos, I would say that most of them are machos but not all. Once you get to the 3rd generation, you do start seeing some variability that way, but you are never really sure if those men are full Chicanos or only part. Once you get to 3rd generation, you start to see a lot more assimilation, as the Chicanos also started getting mixed in with Whites, especially Med Whites like Italians. You also start seeing Filipino-Chicano mixes and other more exotic types.

This area is poor, and the only way for a man to act around here is to be a macho. In poor and working class neighborhoods, all the men are rather tough and hard. There’s really no other way to be. I assume that most all the men around here have conformed to this behavior pattern because this is how you are supposed to act here. There are probably some unpleasant consequences around here if you do not act that way.

I assume there are gay men who get raised in those environments, but I believe the gay men get out of here as soon as possible and move to some big cities. The gay men I know who came from this town seem like they all split to Fresno or even Frisco once they hit ~18. There are definitely some real faggoty guys in this town, but they all work at more upscale places like the ATT store, Starbucks, places like that. And few if any of them live here. They all live in Fresno instead. This is probably not a pleasant town to be gay in.


Filed under American, Arabs, Blacks, California, Culture, Gender Studies, Hispanics, Homosexuality, Man World, Mexicans, Mixed Race, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Sex, Sociology, USA, West, Whites

Hanging Out in a Tough Working Class Mexican Bar

I used to hang out in the local bar which is full of working class and lower class Mexicans Chicanos, including some gang or street types, illegal aliens, ghetto type Blacks and a very few working class Whites. They had strippers once or twice a week and I used to go on stripper nights. Some of the illegals and other Mexicans (green card holders or citizens) actually accepted me for some reason.

It was a rather tough bar. There were some pretty tough gang types who would come in often late at night. You could tell they were gang types because they wear clothing with insignia on it. For instance, Nortenos might have clothing that has an “N” or the word “north” in it somewhere. Those types were best avoided, as they seemed to be sort of looking for trouble.

Sometimes guys would come in very late at night looking to fight. You can tell because as soon as they walk in the door, they look very mean and angry like they are going to hit someone or kill someone. Sometimes a fight broke out, often very late at night like 1 AM. I like Mexicans because Mexican men actually love fights. They never call the cops like White people do, which I think is often very pussy. They just let men fight it out.

If it looked like a fight was breaking out, the owner would run over there and clear all the chairs and tables out of the way so the fighters had a big circle to fight in. Then a crowd would gather round the fighters, and the owner would be in the crowd. The owner would give a motion to the men meaning, “It’s ok to go for it now,” and they would start fighting. The fights don’t last long. To Mexican men, barfights are some sort of entertainment.

I never had any problems in the bar, but I go into “badass” mode in places like that. Then you just avoid trouble, be careful who you talk to, and you should be ok. I can hold my own pretty well in hardass lower class bars like that.


Filed under American, Culture, Hispanics, Mexicans, Race/Ethnicity, Sociology

Mexican Lowrider and Gang Culture in the 1970’s

Jm8 writes:

I’m curious, how was low rider culture different from the modern East LA Chicano culture (I know vert little about the former)? Was it mainly just less violent and criminal?

They were a lot nicer and easier to get along with. I actually used to hang around with them a bit in high school. I was one of the few White guys who would associate with them. They kept to themselves. They had this certain outfit that they would wear, the women wore way too much makeup and there were a lot of teardrop tattoos. I am not sure what those meant, but I always thought it meant that they felt that life is sad. They had this general sadness about them, both the boys and the girls. But it was a rather appealing sort of fatalistic and resigned sadness.

The boys supposedly had some sort of a gang, but the gang really didn’t do anything. I think maybe they would fight with another gang, but it would just be fistfights and not deadly weapons like it is nowadays. The difference between now and then was that the  lowriders  were approachable and more or less friendly even though they only wanted to hang with themselves.

Nowadays the Chicano are a lot more hostile and standoffish, and they also have a lot higher self-esteem. The lowriders were this low self-esteem, beautiful loser type crowd. The new ones are much more criminal and dangerous and also a lot more machista. The lowrider boys were not that machista. A number of them were skinny as rails, and no one cared. I think the culture was based on souped up old cars lowered to the ground and cruising.

One of my very first girlfriends was actually a Mexican gang girl. She used to get in fistfights with other girls! They didn’t use deadly weapons like nowadays. Whatever gang she was in (apparently some sort of a Chicana girl gang), it was rather harmless as all they did was get into fistfights with other girls sometimes. She was mostly into smoking pot and getting laid (she was a notorious slut).

I was 17 and she was 15.

Chicana gang girls were very different back then. They were far more assimilated, and they were a lot less dangerous and criminal. She was so assimilated she was just about White. And they were not so demanding of a machisimo boy. But this was also the hippie 1970’s, and you really didn’t have to be macho to get girls. You just had to be the cool guy. If you were Joe Cool, goodlooking and had good game, you could get girls. It was not necessary to be a tattooed caveman.

This is proven by the fact that she went for me, but it was supposedly because I was cute. Actually she and her friend both more or less picked me up at a weekend sex education retreat we were on with the Church. They said I was the cutest guy at the retreat, so they were going to grab me and hog me for themselves and keep all the other girls away from me. I later had sex with both of them, one after the other, in a church at 3 AM! Screwing two 15 year old girls in a church in the middle of the night! Yay!


Filed under American, California, Culture, Gender Studies, Girls, Hispanics, Man World, Mexicans, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, USA, West

Mexican and South American Women and Machismo (Hypermasculinity)

Jorge writes:

It’s curious because it is said that many Paraguayan women seek  Argentine men because Paraguayan men are too masculine and male chauvinist (I don’t know if there is an English word for “machista“).

At least this happens with Paraguayan women that live in Argentina, especially in big cities. They have the image of middle-class/upper-class Argentine men as more “sensitive”. Working-class and underclass Argentine men are not so different from Paraguayan men, but they are still less masculine except maybe in northeast of the country where I live where Argentine lower class men are very similar to Paraguayan men. Paraguayan women know this, and that’s why they prefer men from other regions, especially from Buenos Aires.

I am wondering if machista is an Argentine slang word? In Mexico anyway, the word is macho, machismo or machisimo, and it is used more as an adjective. Macho means “macho,” machismo means the same thing, and machisimo means a highly exaggerated machismo typical of Mexican men. I don’t think it is used as a noun much, but you can do that. Once I greeted my Spanish teacher (from Mexico) with, Que tal, macho? and he really liked that. I suppose a good translation would be “What’s up, stud?” It’s acceptable to call a Mexican man macho. It means something like “dude” but with more masculine implications. It’s not used much by Spanish second language speakers because it is very slangy.

The first time I heard the word machista was when I had an Argentine gf. She told me that she was disappointed that I was not machista. It’s true, I am not machista. It was clear that she wanted a machista man. I am wondering if all Argentine women like that? Do they all demand a machista man? The relationship still worked ok.

I am convinced that Hispanic women or at least the less assimilated ones pretty much demand a machista for a man. I live in a town full of Mexicans, and that seems to be the only type of man that they will go for. I can’t get anywhere at all with these women. I think maybe they think I am gay. I cannot imagine what it is like for a Mexican or “East LA” culture Chicano who is not machisimo or a machista. I don’t see how they ever get a date, much less get laid at all, and I surely can’t see how they get married. If they women all demand machistas, a guy who is not a machista is SOL, right?

As they assimilate, Hispanic women seem to become less demanding for a machisimo man, and they start getting more like White women, who are not so demanding of a hypermasculine man. But it seems like the more they stay attached to Mexican culture (here even third generation Chicanos are still deeply into Mexican culture because there are few pressures to assimilate), the more they demand a machista man.

And around here, if they do assimilate, they often assimilate to “East LA” type Chicano culture, which in my opinion is a completely crap culture. This is the culture of gangs, tattoos, drugs, rap music and even crime, often petty crime. This same culture used to be “lowrider” culture in the 1970’s, which I could actually tolerate, but lowrider culture seems to have been replaced by gang culture, and that’s definitely a downgrade.

Not all Chicano culture is this crap gang-type culture, but far too much of it is. Chicano women deep into this gang culture still want a macho guy. Not as much as the Mexican women do, but still more than a White woman.

I had a date recently with a Chicana. She was a lousy person, but she also made it clear that I was not acceptable for her because I was not a “tough guy,” and she only liked tough guys. She was part of this lousy gang type culture, and she was also sort of a petty criminal.


Filed under American, Americas, Argentina, Argentines, California, Culture, Gender Studies, Hispanics, Latin America, Man World, Mexicans, Mexico, Paraguayans, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Romantic Relationships, South America, USA, Women

More Crap about IQ from the IQ Haters

From Facebook, referring to my posts:

I would never deny the value of a High-IQ person over a Low-IQ person. However, there are many things that might easily allow a Low-IQ person to beat a High-IQ person at any skill.

Patience and Discipline are the most important of those things, followed by Experience and Lowered Neuroticism. These are the qualities that can defeat a High-IQ person.

Any skill?

No way, but there is truth to what he says. You can certainly get far in life with a normal IQ or even a low IQ. Charles Oglivy, the founder of modern American advertising, took repeated IQ tests and always scored ~95. He was one of the most successful men in the history of this country. Elvis Presley scored 70 on an IQ in school but he was one of the greatest entertainers of all time. 70 is borderline IQ, verging on retarded, but it didn’t stop him from being famous and wealthy. Muhammad Ali had an IQ of 85. That’s low normal. But he was very charming, had delightful verbal skills almost like a pre-rapper and was funny as Hell. An IQ of below 100 is often not a barrier at all to success at least in America.

America is a nation of IQ haters. It is completely unacceptable to discuss this matter or even write about it. You would not believe the grief I get for even daring to write about it. Most people you meet flip out when you mention IQ, especially high IQ, and start getting upset and angry. However, almost all of these are people who apparently do not have very high IQ’s. Every single high to very high IQ person I have ever run into likes to talk about this subject, and they are not bothered by it at all. The truth is that most Americans hate IQ and high IQ discussions because their own IQ isn’t very high!

I fail to understand why Americans are so bizarre about this.

A high IQ is simply a talent, and inborn one, a gift. So many people are born with gifted talents. Think of all of the musical, artistic, literary, mechanical, thesbian, dancing, singing, mathematical, athletic and even socially talented born geniuses there are out there. Americans admire anyone who has any of these natural inborn talents.

“Ooohhh ahhhhh wow she is such a great artist, oh wow, impressive.”

All inborn talents, even beauty, are respected and even cheered on except for brains!

Yes lower IQ people can outperform higher IQ on many tasks and even jobs, and many lower IQ people can and do still earn a lot of money. Brains, even brilliant brains, will only get you so far in society.

Now to the suggestions in the argument above. I believe they are not valid. I have been around many people in my life, high to low IQ, and I would say that high IQ people are much more likely to be patient and disciplined than lower IQ persons. Yes, lower IQ people are less neurotic, but they also often suffer from other disorders such as mood, psychotic, character or substance use disorders.

I have a hard time understand why some anxiety disorder (neuroticism) is such a big deal. Generally speaking, these are pretty minor mental illnesses, you know.

At any rate, IQ is correlated very well with work performance, attendance, discipline, all the sort of things that lead to success on the job. I would hire a higher IQ person over a lower IQ one in a heartbeat.  IQ is correlated with many things that will help you be successful and healthy in life.

A lower IQ person is no more likely to have a lot of experience than a high IQ person is. Anyway, all of the Renaissance Men I have known who were experienced and very good at all sorts of things had high IQ’s. Your lower IQ guy is often good at one thing, say being a short order cook in a taqueria.

Also, below a certain level, low intelligence is downright dangerous. Dumb people are sort of dangerous solely on account of being dumb. Haven’t you noticed that in life?

Stupidity is dangerous!


Filed under American, Anxiety Disorders, Celebrities, Culture, Dangerous Idiots, Intelligence, Mental Illness, Psychology, Psychopathology, Regional, USA

Do People with 140 IQ See Normal People (IQ 90 to 110) as Stupid?

This is my answer to this question that was asked in the IQ section of Quora. I must say that I really love that they have an IQ section over there. You are not really allowed to talk about IQ at all in US society, and you are not allowed to write about it either, especially if you are writing about yourself. It is seen as bragging. However, society more or less allows or even cheers on bragging about all sorts of other things, so I think the hatred of IQ-talk and the labeling it as bragging is just sour grapes coming from people whose IQ’s are not that high. Also the US is a very anti-intellectual country, and we have always been that way.

Personally I am dubious about how good it is to have a very high IQ, as it seems to have as many drawbacks as benefits. Actually I would question whether it is even a good thing at all. It often seems like more of a bad thing. I like the idea that it is a bad thing because that means that you can’t brag about it no matter how much you talk about it. It’s like bragging about being poor or fat.

On the positive side, a very high IQ is a talent. There are many talents – Mechanical, artistic, athletic, musical, mathematical, social, thesbian, literary, photographic. It goes on and on. There are people who are great fishermen and hunters. And when it comes to acquired talents like the last two, the possibilities are endless. I have great admiration for handymen  who can fix anything and shade tree mechanics. I am always in awe of these people. I have tremendous admiration for anyone who can show me that they are very good at just about anything because it’s never easy to be an expert in anything.

Anyway, Quora is so cool because it is one of he few places anywhere in life where I can actually talk about IQ! You can read and talk about IQ all you want to on there, and no one will accuse you of being a social retard or bragging. I love it!

The original question was Do People with 140 IQ See Normal People (IQ 100 to 130) as Stupid?, which is a rather dumb question. First of all, normal IQ is 90-110, not 100-130. 120-130 is considered bright, and even 110-120 is called high normal. 130 is getting very close to gifted, and maybe ~5% of the population has an IQ of at least 130. Also it should have been phrased 140+ instead of just 140.

I do not see people with normal IQ’s as stupid. However, to me a lot of them are simply not very interesting. That being said, the two best friends I ever had in life both probably had IQ’s of ~100, and I got along with both of them immaculately. However, there were surely things that I could not discuss with them. We mostly just joked and talked about rock music, drugs and women. That’s really all there is to life anyway, right? Sex and drugs and rock and roll?

Around here we have a lot of Mexicans. Their average IQ is ~90. The average Mexican does not strike me as stupid at all.

However, there are some who seem less intelligent than the others. I assume that their IQ’s are in the 80’s. I see some of those lower IQ working class Mexican men in stores sometimes, and they almost seem like retarded people. I know they are not retarded at all, but from my POV, they seem that way. Perhaps a ~100 IQ person would be more likely to see them as more normal than I do?

I worked for a local Indian tribe for a while. I remember that I used to get frustrated with the leadership because they seemed to make what appeared to me to be stupid decisions. It was very frustrating to sit back and watch higher ups make one dumb decision after another and not be able to do anything about it. I would imagine that those Indians had average IQ’s of ~87.

The answers to this question on Quora were mostly dumb and probably disingenuous. Most of the very high IQ people on there answered by saying that they did not find people of normal intelligence to be stupid at all. However, I think they were lying, and genius IQ types do find normal IQ people to be stupid at times. At times. Not all the time. I work very hard to avoid feeling that way because it makes me uncomfortable to think that way about the majority of my fellow humans are idiots.

My answer is below. Free to comment.

I will be completely honest here. I do find most people to be idiots, but I don’t necessarily break it down by IQ, mostly because I do not know most people’s IQ’s. What bothers me about humanity in general and causes me to think that most people are morons is that most people seem to me to lack wisdom.

However, this does include thinking emotionally rather than logically, and I have to admit that lower intelligence people are more likely to think emotionally than logically. Yet the number of highly intelligent people (IQ 140–150) I know who also think emotionally instead of logically is quite high. It seems that most people period simply cannot get out of the trap of thinking emotionally and therefore illogically about things regardless of intelligence level.

But as you get up the IQ scale, you will find more and more people who value logical thinking and disparage emotional and illogical thinking, and yes, they do tend to think that the average person thinks with their heart and not their head and therefore gets the wrong answer.

I do resent being misunderstood, and lower intelligence people tend to misunderstand me more and not get the joke and/or allusive comment and therefore think that I am weird, crazy, dangerous, or maybe all three. I don’t like that, but I guess they can’t help it. If people don’t understand something, they think it is weird, crazy and scary, so if they don’t understand someone, they think that person is weird, scary or crazy. That’s a dumb way to think, but that’s just how people are.

I could care less about their IQ score or how well they did in school. I don’t care whether they know a lot or a little. Hopefully, none of that would make me dislike another human.

But I do fault people for lacking wisdom because to me, most humans ought be able to figure things out enough to arrive at the wise or wiser answer or decision and to reject all the less wise answers or decisions.

The problem really is society. Society fills your head with lies, not only lies but stupid and dangerous lies. Most people conform to society, so they simply incorporate all of society’s lies, even the stupid and dangerous ones. You can’t really fault them for that because people want to be accepted, and a good way to be accepted is to accept all of society’s lies and go along with them.

If you start rejecting society’s lies, you will probably be rejected by most people, and you will always be getting into arguments and fights with people if you challenge them when they spout off the Society Lie Du Jour.

Can you blame people for taking the easy way out?

I do think the people who believe society’s BS actually cause a lot of damage to society and even to people like me. They are always passing judgement on others for silly and crazy reasons, and that makes the world a less fun place to live in.

So if you want to be my friend and not have me resent you, it’s pretty easy. Just be wise, and don’t be unwise! How hard is that? Come on, you can do it. I know you can.


Filed under American, Amerindians, Culture, Hispanics, Intelligence, Mexicans, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity

Why Race Deniers Worrying about Race Realism Makes No Sense

Ultra Cool writes:

Only a very tiny fraction of people care about racial IQ and at least 95% of them are Nazis, this is why I agree HBD will never be relevant in any country.

A lot of Blacks and liberals are on a jihad against race realism. Their attitude seems to be that it is the enemy that must be destroyed because if it ever catches on, it will be bad news for Blacks and some other minorities. Problem with this theory? It’s never going to catch on. Perhaps it will, but I will take bets that it will never catch on in my lifetime. We won’t see this becoming popular in the next 30 years.

I know this because I talk to people about it sometimes. Guess what? No one cares. No One Cares. No. One. Cares. Do I have to spell it out for you?

And a lot of people are out and out offended by the very notion.

It’s even worse than that. No one cares about IQ either, which is the ledge on which this whole argument teeters. Take IQ Roadrunner out of the argument, and the theory falls off the ledge like the Coyote in those cartoons. If no one cares about IQ, why would anyone care about IQ discrepancies between the races?

I got some news for everyone. Most people are not that smart. As George Carlin said:

Now, the average IQ is 100. Now, think about how stupid your average person is. Ok, now think about this. Half the population is even dumber than that!


Truth is that the only people who like to talk about IQ are those who have high IQ’s, and even many of them do not like to talk about it.

It’s more or less a poison subject in Normie Society. There are lot of reasons for this, but the main reason is anti-intellectualism in America and the fact that when it comes to IQ, most people don’t have very high ones. Normies hate to talk about IQ. If you want offend a Normie, say the word “IQ”. The conversation will probably end right there.

Most people don’t even believe in the concept of IQ. This is especially true if they are PC SJW’s who came out of the university system where the very subject of IQ is dramatically disparaged by SJW professors. Now the truth is that that right there is nearly educational malpractice, but if you had to hold professors to educational malpractice, you would have to shut down every university in the land because they are all teaching SJW Theory as truth, and SJW Theory is nothing but lies.

A high normal university graduate will start to recite the usual BS about IQ if you dare to bring up the subject.

  • IQ doesn’t matter.
  • IQ doesn’t measure intelligence.
  • IQ measures book leaning.
  • IQ measures you well you take IQ tests.

And all the rest of the bullshit.

When it comes to IQ, your average person, even your average college grad and certainly your average writer in the MSM, is far behind the consensus of the psychometric community.


  • If you don’t have a very high IQ, you hate the whole subject of IQ with a passion.
  • Most people don’t have a very high IQ.
  • Most people hate the whole subject of IQ with a passion.

It then follows that:

  • If most people hate the very subject of IQ with a passion,
  • Then any theory based on IQ will fail to be accepted by the public, or worse, will not even be listened to by the public, or worst of all, will be rejected by the public with hostility.


Filed under American, Anti-Racism, Civil Rights, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Higher Education, Intelligence, Liberalism, Political Science, Psychology, Race Realism, Racism

Max Nordau, “Degeneration”

Max Nordau was an early Zionist proponent in Europe. What is disturbing though is that like many other early Zionists, he was also a proto-fascist. Of course nationalism in general and in particular ethnic nationalism is typically associated with fascism more than most nationalists would like to admit. In fact, one definition of fascism is that it is simply ultranationalism.

Nordau wrote in the early 1900’s, and at this time, he wrote a book called Degeneration. A lot of people dislike this book because they think it is fascist, and possibly it is.

However, it is still probably a good book with interesting parallels to our modern predicament. In fact, Nordau and especially his book are eerily prescient of the Alternative Right and also of our society itself today. What Nordau was complaining about was exactly the sort of society that the Cultural Left has created, which is of course the very thing that the Alt Left is the backlash against.

I am also thinking of Oswald Spengler’s seminal book, The Decline of the West, which ought to be put on your must read list. Spengler’s modern day avatar, the pseudonymous “Spengler” who wrote for Asia Times, also comes to mind. I also think of James Kuntsler, who you folks really need to read if you are interested in this sort of thing. It appears that Max Nordau was born too soon. This book looks like an interesting read.

I found this short review of the book on the Net. I do not necessarily agree with this review. In particular, there is a type of anti-Semitism here which I find disturbing and unpalatable. But it is interesting how much Nordau’s book resembles the Alt Right of today. That is what I am getting at here; I am not promoting either Nordau’s or this reviewer’s views.

Early Zionist Max Nordau’s Degeneration is an important and insightful book yet not for reasons most would assume. Nordau describes “degenerate” artists as antisocial individuals that lack the normal social traits of his race. The degenerate will dress absurdly just to get a rise out of his kinfolk and lacks the self-control to conduct his behavior in a normal healthy way.

Funny thing is all of this was stated by one of the co-founders (with Modern day Zionist founder Theodor Herzl) of the World Zionist Organization, a movement set out to return the Jews to the mythical heroism of King David’s Kingdom. Back during Nordau’s day, only a small minority of Jews were Zionists. As the brilliant Otto Weininger once stated of Zionism, it “is the negation of Judaism, because it seeks to ennoble what cannot be ennobled. Whereas Judaism stands for the world dispersion of Jews, Zionism strives for their ingathering.” It seems Nordau was doing nothing more but projecting his own newfound cultural degeneracy onto brilliant Europeans minds such as Tolstoy, Wagner, and Nietzsche.

If one were to utilize Nordau’s theories for the modern day, it is apparent that all modern-day institutions now advocate and legally enforce degeneration on their victimized citizenry. This cultural degeneracy  virtually engulfs every aspect of American society: Gender, Race, Sex, Literacy, The Arts, Film, Education, Philosophy, etc. etc.

First World countries now flood their nations with uneducated, unassimilable, and hostile (especially towards the indigenous populations) third world aliens, which academia and the internationalist “Western” media describes as “progress” (despite all evidence towards the contrary). By Nordau’s standards, multiculturalism would be at the pinnacle of cultural degeneracy, a sign of a very sick, confused, and distorted racial collective.

Funny, how the same people that promote Zionism (NeoCONS for example), also endorse the bulldozing of all National borders (except for Israel of course, those borders are expanding) and organic cultures. We live in a world where “Whites” now feebly imitate other races, and it’s considered the height of American culture. Whether it is some white trash wigger like Eminem (Western music is known for it’s complex melodies – RAP has no melody at all) or a world class whore like Lady Gaga (who is weird for weird’s sake), the traits of cultural degeneration are more than obvious.

The claims that Nordau makes against Nietzsche and Wagner are minor compared to what passes off as “art” nowadays. Degeneration is a book that truly puts things in perspective, showing how a certain secular Zionist movement is consciously subverting every aspect of Western culture to its own advantage.

If a degenerate is a racially deracinated individual, that would make Karl Marx (if one were to consider him a German) the biggest degenerate of all. Of course, Marx as no doubt conscious of the fact that he was promoting the destruction of all aristocracies, nations, cultures, and Western civilization with his fundamentally anti-Western theories (a legacy in which Freud, Boas, and Einstein would continue).

After all, Karl Marx (like Lenin) was a failed bourgeois who mostly lived off the generosity of others which included Engels, so if you can’t join them, you might as well destroy them. Of course, Max Nordau makes no mention of Marx in all of Degeneration. Innovating atheist philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer is routinely criticized as a top degenerate.

We now live in a world of complete intellectual abstraction and anti-kultur/anti-organic internationalism. Degeneration was written at a time when the world had yet to be “globalized,” and most Europeans/Americans actually felt proud of their nationality (and back then, they could). Their nations were still producing great art movements, philosophers, writers, and other cultural producers. Now we live in a world of intentionally stupid (and soulless) media/Hollywood, junk/fast food, hyper-consumerism, pseudo-individualism, and other related societal ills that are propagated by an international plutocracy willing to do anything for an extra buck.

When read and put in context with the changing times (both past and present), Degeneration makes for an enlightening read.


Filed under American, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Culture, Ethnic Nationalism, Europe, Fascism, Immigration, Internationalism, Israel, Journalism, Left, Marxism, Middle East, Music, Nationalism, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Ultranationalism, USA, Whites, Zionism