The Vocabulary of Leftwing Journos: A Critical Examination

I’ve put together a helpful guide to my stance on all the important issues.

1.) RacismPrejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.

the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
“theories of racism”

I’m a race realist. I believe in the existence of racial differences. I do not, however, believe that the White race is superior. In fact, I believe it is in sorry shape. I think racial differences are real because at this point it is kind of an open secret.

I don’t “hate” people of other races. It is exactly like saying that I hate the Russians or Syrians because I am ethnically British. I’m actually an ethnocentrist in that I am more interested and care more about the welfare of my own people than others. This doesn’t mean I am opposed to anyone else. I studied international relations while I was in college.

2.) White Supremacythe belief that white people are superior to those of all other races, especially the black race, and should therefore dominate society.

I consider this an antiquated 19th century term. I was called the other day by a reporter who wanted to interview me about “white supremacy.” She seemed disappointed to learn that I wasn’t a white supremacist. Now, I do believe that my own people should remain ethnically dominant in our region, but this is a natural human sentiment. It doesn’t bother me that the Japanese are ethnically dominant in Japan or that the Poles are ethnically dominant in Poland or Mexicans in Mexico. I don’t think we should be trying to dissolve the nations of Old Europe.

3.) Nazia member of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party.

a person with extreme racist or authoritarian views.
a person who seeks to impose their views on others in a very autocratic or inflexible way
.

I’ve never been really interested in the Third Reich or 20th century history because it is so damn depressing. It’s true that I lean toward authoritarianism. It’s true that I believe in the existence of race because most smart people secretly already do. I’m actually sort of a Tory at heart in that my ideal system of government would be a kind of benevolent absolute monarchy.

4.) Fascistoften capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

I’m a collectivist who rejects the liberal paradigm.

I do exalt the nation over the individual because the common good or general welfare should be of supreme importance in statecraft. I do think we need a centralized autocratic government, but I think a monarchy would be much more stable and enduring than some kind of party. I do reject free-market capitalism because it is a dumb system that concentrates wealth in the hands of a few billionaries. This is completely consistent with being inclined toward High Toryism.

5.) Bigota person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

A bigot is a synonym for a SJW fundamentalist or a leftwing journo. I get offended when I am called a bigot because nothing could be further from the truth. I’m a thinker (an INTP Scorpio) who likes to experiment with ideas. I am always happy to trade a bad idea or paradigm for a better one. I am always doing historical research and looking for a better paradigm. I prefer members of my own group to others, but who doesn’t really? That’s ethnocentrism and patriotism, not bigotry.

6.) Neo-ConfederateNeo-Confederate, or Southern nationalist, is a term used to describe the views of various groups and individuals who use historical negationism to portray the Confederate States of America and its actions in the American Civil War in a positive light.

I don’t really think of myself as a neo-Confederate. I have never been one of these people who are fans of the structure of the Confederate government and spend all their time talking about the ins and outs of constitutional government. I do believe that the demise of the Confederacy was a bad thing because it plunged my country into poverty for 75 years. We’ve also never managed to overcome wage slavery which Lincoln introduced at the South to exploit our people for the benefit of the North, but I have been given new hope that this long ordeal might be over soon.

7.) Southern Nationalist – Absolutely. I think the South would be much better governed as an independent nation because it is more culturally homogeneous. This is because the current system we have now is like trying to govern Babylon. It is hopelessly dysfunctional because it is brimming with warring tribes who are perpetually at odds with each other over identity politics.

8.) White NationalistWhite nationalism is a type of nationalism or pan-nationalism which espouses the belief that white people are a race and seeks to develop and maintain a white national identity. Its proponents identify with and are attached to the concept of a white nation

I think a White ethnostate is a great idea.

Diversity is not a strength. The history of Europe shows that homogeneity leads to peace and cultural cohesion. How would you get to a White ethnostate from here though? A violent rebellion to bring on the collapse of the system is a terrible idea. Working through mainstream politics and aligning ourselves with conservatism has been equally unfruitful for decades. Perhaps there is a path forward though that hasn’t occurred to us before which is more benign.

9.) Nationalista person who strongly identifies with their own nation and vigorously supports its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.

I find nationalism problematic.

I’m a nationalist in that I am concerned with my own people and their interests first, but American Nationalism has decayed into something that I don’t really identify with. I think it rapidly decayed over the 20th century time into nothing but liberal slogans and nostalgia. If American Nationalism is one big shopping mall or marketplace, then I have no interest in it. As an intellectual and historian, I can trace the arc of this decay from the Revolutionary generation down to the present day as the space of liberalism was expanded to the point where it consumed every aspect of society. Americanism as liberalism is poison.

10.) Populista person, especially a politician, who strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.

Yes, this is definitely me.

11.) Alt-Right – The Alt-Right has always thought of itself as an alternative to mainstream conservatism which is populated by dumb grifters who conform to whatever donors want them to believe. I’m still Alt-Right in that sense, but not too strongly attached to labels. I think of myself as being in between labels at the moment.

12.) Far Right – It is true that I am “Far Right” in the sense that I am somewhere in the middle of the electorate and disenchanted with both parties and their stupid retarded ideologies. I’m on the fringe of conservatism because I am a moderate.

13.) Anti-SemiteAntisemitism is hostility to, prejudice, or discrimination against Jews. A person who holds such positions is called an antisemite.

I think Jews have far too much power and influence in our society and that it is an open secret and that it desperately needs to be curtailed. This is why I have a negative attitude toward them. It is sickening to see Congress prostrate itself before Israel. If you don’t know that Jews are the most powerful group in American politics and culture, you’re probably dumb.

Note: It is beautiful Spring day. This is what European culture used to be. This is what we should inspire to be. Listen to this and relax a bit and don’t be mad. We really need to start working on injecting some better vibes into this movement.

About Hunter Wallace 9628 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

18 Comments

  1. I’m glad I’m not the only one who doesn’t believe the White race superior. Superior at what exactly? If it’s a question of survival, communal instinct, and identity, then at present the White race seems very inferior.
    Perhaps we really are superior at muh civilisation. But civilization is not an ends in itself. It is a means to the creator, and once again, the White race is failing that charter. So what exactly am I supposed to be so proud of??? Pride is a weakness. I want my people to survive, but in all honesty I don’t feel very much a part of any people. There is no sense of solidarity or continuity among whites. Just consumption and lifestyle strategies to maximize that consumption. Discussing these strategies is what passes for a social life in the West. Sad really.

    • Matt,

      Whites have advanced far beyond any race. If it was not for whites, blacks would still be in a primitive state, and moslems and orientals would still be in the middle ages. The whole modern civilization of non whites comes from white people. The huge numbers of Africans is only possible due to white technology and medicine that was given to them.

      Whites continue to help and educate non whites by the millions. Being controlled and brainwashed by your liberalism and false principles of equality does not negate that. A controlled and degenerate race still has the same core strengths even when it is rolling in the mud. Whites, especially the anglo types live under international rules that seek to create a one world society. To do that, the non white has to be elevated and the white brought down.

      Pride in ones accomplishments is not a weakness. The way whites are acting now is unusual and NOT inherent in anyone’s behavior. Just consider that the white world is governed by its enemies. View the USA as a demented USSR (only worse) and you can understand.

      By the way I am not even one of you by your definitions and I find anglo whining disgusting.

      The definition of superiority is usually based on IQ and accomplishment. Not on having a different human nature than others. The Japanese and Chinese have not been targeted like whites have. Otherwise just imagine where they would be as well.

      Get rid of your universalism, your liberalism, your cowardice, and for heaven’s sake lose weight !

      Christina Romana

      • Christina,
        A woman talking about cowardice. That’s rich.
        And why the essay on civilization; what does that have to do with my point?
        I said the point of civilization was connecting to the creator and that whites are failing that charter. What does accomplishment have do with that? It’s all materialistic futility if it’s not religiously centered. How’s accomplishment working out for the White race’s survival prospects right now?
        And yes, pride is a weakness. It’s a form of vanity. And vanity detaches you from reality; the last thing White people need right now.

        • Some women have more courage than men. And being proud of accomplishments is no sin as long as it is kept within moral boundaries. And I quite clearly said what the problems you have are. Ignore them or not that is your loss.

          Nor did I ever say that all that matters is technology and wealth. All that means nothing without the wisdom and courage to keep it while using it wisely.

          Of course I believe a country and its society should be God-focused. You could influence some people by example. When one acts with decency and dignity it makes an impact.

  2. I believe the white race is superior when it comes to creativity. I believe the white race is inferior when it comes to defending and preserving itself.

    All races have superior and inferior aspects and to say otherwise is ridiculous.

  3. > but I think a monarchy would be much more stable and enduring than some kind of party.

    Not sure about that one. Monarchies degenerate. The grandson of the God-emperor becomes a moron.

    OTOH, one-party states can be corrupted by grifters who take control of the Party.

    #Conflicted

      • I agree with monarchy. Even a weak monarch will have advisers. A country is like a family or should be. Running a campaign is without dignity and decency in order to get elected. Usually monarchs are constrained and can only become queens/kings if they are of sound mind and body. At least under Christianity. There are exceptions but with democracy? It is a farce. There are 3 types of monarchy in christian lands———–absolute, constitutional, and medieval style. Take your choice.

        Monarchy is more christian. When monarchs had power did they ever allow abortion/homosexual marriages and everything else to happen?

        As long as there are some constraints on the monarchy like Church, nobles, merchants with their wealth etc. I choose monarchy.

        Plus monarchs are crowned and blessed by a christian denomination. That makes them better than unblessed Presidents. Unless one believes that christianity is worthless of course. A monarchy also helps a society to prevent the devastating evil called human equality. Modern republics support such nonsense.

        Christina

      • A further way I agree with you is that there is no democracy nor should there be democracy in the Family. the Church, businesses, the Military, and in Schools so why should there be democracy in politics? I am ruled by my parents, my priests and my teachers and it does not matter whether I am smart or not. Also, will not my future husband be my master according to the laws of God, Church, reason, and natural law? Where is there democracy there?

        Christina Romana

    • “…We mostly elect morons through democracy. Look at the president…”

      Let’s not pretend that there’s NO alternative but full one Man, one vote Democracy and a stupid Monarch. Fuck Kings.

      We had a perfectly good system, Republican Democracy (a Republic), and it was destroyed by the courts. In fact this is a manufactured crisis. It used to be that most States had a Senate just like the Federal government that had regional representation. The Supreme Court ruled this illegal. Destroying this regional balance in the States and causing friction. Friction where now it’s a winner take all instead of a compromise. This can be changed by a better than 50% vote in the House and Senate to limit the Courts decision on this. The Legislature of the US can TELL the Courts what they can decide on. They can not just decide on any laws what so ever if the Legislature tells them not to.

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii

      “…In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make…”

      “…with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make…” The important part. The earlier part declares what powers they have but it ends with control of these functions by Congress. Congress could tell them to butt out of anything they wish too. All we need is a Congress with the balls to do so and we could turn the whole country around in months.

      Another bad decision by the Courts was to declare that there could be no test for voting. This means no pole taxes or intelligence test. Think if we made you paying positive amount of taxes into the treasury a requisite for voting. We could turn the whole country around in months. Lots of major rioting and trouble but at some point this would calm down.

      Of course the Republicans when they had the House, the Senate and the Presidency could have fixed both of these, stopped illegal and corrupt voting but did nothing. They could have reigned for a decade easy and pushed for laws in Whites interest.

      If the whole thing is going to crumble anyways then at least give me a piece of it. My Wang bucks.

  4. With all due modesty, I meet or exceed the requirements to be a member of all 13 categories listed above.

    • Well said. I am number 1,2,4, and 13. I tolerate NS because my religion had a 1933 Concordant with Germany and NS is not a sin in itself. Unlike Communism which traditionally got you ex-communicated if you voted for/or supported it in any way. The last traditional Concordant with a country when the Church was still Catholic was in 1953 with Fascist Spain.

      A concordant means that the country in question is in conformity with basic Catholic doctrine and is not evil in itself. It must be really upsetting to Catholic conservatives that the last officially approved countries (to the best of my knowledge anyway) were Nazi and Fascist countries. I am not conservative but Traditional.

      It must be obvious than no Concordant is possible with a protestant/moslem/jewish/communist country that would pass muster under traditional catholic beliefs and practices.

      Christina Romana

  5. White Supremacy to me is only geographic/demographic. In America at 61% we are still supreme in number here. In this understanding the leftists are right that destroying whiteness destroys White Supremacy. Congratulation whites, we are almost no longer “Supreme”

    “I find nationalism problematic”

    Nationalism isn’t partial to any particular form of governance. It just identifies our borders and the people within those borders. In theory you could have Anarcho-Nationalism. So you saying you have a problem with nationalism because of American Nationalism is too narrow of a focus. In fact America doesn’t even have nationalism. The masses are preaching utopianism/idealism.

  6. I am, by the terms imposed upon me in the current modern vernacular, a White Nationalist, a White Supremacist, and a Racist. The natural survival instinct is being repressed by associating these “isms” as some sort of White-only psychosis. This natural instinct of in-group peference is only demonized and forcefully repressed in White people. ..not in the other races who revel in and are celebrated for their racism and supremacy.

    • Carl Green,

      This was also well said. I support latin/Mexican/Hispanic issues openly in school and in society as do others and no one dares criticize us. Probably only a few ultra conservatives anglos like Ann Coulter might not like it but we do not listen to what our enemies say nor do we go by their standards,

      I do not understand the WASP but I do prefer your society to what your enemies have in store.

      Christina Romana

Comments are closed.