Just the other day, I happened upon a YouTube video by a young fellow who obviously not only lacks “identity” (which is why he calls himself an “identitarian”, I assume; I hear he is even the leader of one such branch of this ridiculous movement), but also orientation (in more than one respect, I suspect), and — worst of all — any sense of decency and reason.
He made a video, offering three questions for any fellow identitarian to raise in a discussion with “leftists”. The points of this exercise seem to be protraction of a discussion and distraction of opponents, and by such snatching rhetorical victories from the jaws of logical defeat.
Now, I’m arguably not the kind of “leftist” he had in mind, but I’m involved in mankind, a part of the main, and therefore must not care for whom the bell tolls; the bell of rightist sedition, it always tolls for me. Thus, I shall try my best to answer these questions.
Why Is It that only “White Pride” Has Negative Connotations, While “Gay Pride” and “Asian Pride” Are Considered Positive Movements?
Well, the answer should be obvious enough. You are preaching to your own choir, and you have nothing but hatred and contempt for anyone who is not openly and genuinely of your opinion. You think you are superior to others — which, in itself, is a questionable notion — but you cannot bring any evidence of your superiority to the table, and you most certainly do not act the part.
Certainly, there are some homosexuals, and also Asians, who prove to be “ideological jerks”, but the majority are decent people who just want to be recognised and accepted for who they are — without being intimidated, subjected to hostile or prejudicial remarks or actions, emotional or even physical pain for the sole reason of their colour of skin or sexual orientation. If they rally, they do so for their right to be acknowledged as fellow humans and to fight being discriminated against.
You, on the other hand, are, without exception, “jerks with an (adopted) ideology”. You may be intimidated, now and then, and subjected to hostility and prejudice, but I honestly doubt that you have ever experienced emotional or physical pain at the hands of anyone outside your own community, without having kindled the struggle by word or deed. If you rally, you do so against fellow humans, and you do not care whom you discriminate against as long as the targeted group is smaller in numbers than you are.
When or where exactly did a white heterosexual ever have to stand his ground against a hostile majority? When did you sacrifice to earn the right to be proud of being you? When did you risk your life to remain you? And, last but not least, when did you stop being a mindless follower, and stand up to support your own cause?
Why Is Europe Not Supposed to Insist on Racial Homogeneity, While Others, Like Japan, May Do So?
Well, first of all, I don’t know who brought around the myth that Japan (or any other somewhat civilised country, for that matter) is allowed to insist on “racial homogeneity”. Every country who ratified the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is expected — if not legally bound — to observe the rights and provisions stated within.
Granted, Japan did (and still does) have human rights issues, but this is also true for a great many others countries — including some European nations; the connection between these issues and “racial homogeneity” is far–fetched.
Also granted, Japan is certainly not a “melting pot” of people from a wide variety of nations. Yet this is owed to geographical and historical facts rather than policies and racism.
It must not be forgotten that Japan is an island state with a population equal to Germany, Poland, and Slovakia combined on an area smaller than Germany and Slovenia combined, while Europe is a continent with a population of 740 million (roughly six times that of Japan) on an area of ten million square kilometres (roughly 27 times that of Japan). While you actually may “go” where you came from (or to where you please) in Europe, doing so in Japan is quite a challenge — for everyone: citizen, foreign national resident, or refugee.
There cannot be two minds about Europe’s responsibility as regards societal inclusion. Europe, as we know her today (and as we “have known” her for centuries) would have never come into existence without “immigrants” and mutual cultural influence. The idea of a “European culture” or “European identity” is downright absurd; there is no such thing.
No European may rightfully point out any “cultural achievement” still in existence or rite practised today and call it “European”. Romans, Greeks, Germans, the Vikings, and whoever there was at one point in history or another, they all were great nations in their own right, no doubt, but none of them ever populated and influenced all of Europe.
The only cultural group that may be considered pan–European were the Celts, but it’s been a few days since the early Iron Age — and I honestly doubt that any one contemporary European may trace his or her ancestry back to those days, in direct line, without the casual contribution from this or that direction. That much for your purity and homogeneity.
Yet even if one succeeded in tracing his bloodline back to old Identiterix himself, he would have to acknowledge that, ultimately, he is the descendant of immigrants from Asia Minor (which would make him the last in the line of Identiteroglu or Identitorion).
If we all were to go “where we belong” (following your diction, that would be where our ancestors once came from), we would not only face an exodus of proportions that would make the flight of the Children of Israel look like a family picnic in the park in comparison, we would also see entire nations fall.
Sending “home” all “non–white, non–Christian non–Europeans” would certainly be a measure to your taste, but it would also trigger “repatriation” ventures everywhere else — to wit, all descendants of “white, Christian Europeans” would also be sent “home”.
A while ago, someone published a study, stating that some 70 million people worldwide are of Irish descent (compared to appr. 4.6 millions in the Republic of Ireland, at the time of writing).
Shipping them all back “whence their ancestors came” would raise the population of an island the size of Austria (i.e., all 32 counties, not only the Republic of Ireland; and the positively uninhabitable regions of Austria subtracted) to equal the headcount of the United Kingdom and Austria (or France and Bulgaria) combined. And this is one of the smaller European countries. I don’t want to even think about what would happen to the UK, or Italy, or Germany.
If there Are No Races Why Is there Racial Discrimination?
This is a damn fine question, actually. Why do people always look for differences — however minute — in others so they may distinguish themselves, and feel superior? Are we humans just an inherently silly lot? Or are only some of us outrageously ignorant?
Then again, a majority seems to have come to consider anti–Semitism a form of racism today, even though Shem was beyond any reasonable doubt of the same “race” as Noah (his father), or Japheth, or Ham (his brothers). So where does that leave us?
If we follow the tradition of the Tanakh and the interpretations of Flavius Josephus et al., Noah’s eldest son, Shem, is the forefather of all peoples of the Middle East (Jews, Arabs, etc.) — including parts of northern Africa (Ethiopia, Eritrea) — while Japheth is the forefather of all Indo–European peoples and those in central and southeast Asia (including the Japanese), and Ham is the forefather of those having spread from Egypt to populate the African continent.
Unto this point, all would be fine and dandy, if we didn’t have the real — and rather awkward — situation that some (and during this rhetorical pause, I’m also looking at you “identitarian”, “white supremacist”, and “white pride” princesses) stubbornly insist on being of a different — allegedly superior — race by virtue of the colour their skin happens to have or the religious rites they were taught to practise.
Apparently, it doesn’t take a cause to sanctify discrimination — and if all reason fails, just about every pretext is fair enough. If a grown–up person genuinely believes to be a descendant of a superior race because he or she or it happens to be “white” in the face or happens to have been born in a country or continent with a “white” majority, his or her or its face better be white with embarrassment about his or her or its utter ignorance — or one would have to presume to talk to an outrageous idiot.
L is for Loser
And what, I beg, in the name of Dog, is this “Lambda” (your silly logo) about? What affiliations have any of you to Sparta or the Spartans? Name the battles you fought and the sacrifices you made — and publish a list of those of you who perished, heroically defending Europe. Then, we are talking. Until then, I will assume that L is for “Loser”.
Poor old Darwin! To think that you and some of your ilk are even allowed inside a University, let alone enrol and study there. You fellows are proof that our education systems truly are in a shambles.
“Santa Claus” was a Greek–speaking Byzantine
I have good reason to write this piece on the sixth of December of all days. It is the commemoration day of Nikolaos Myriotes’ death; the man known to and celebrated by Christians around the world as Santa Claus, Heiliger Nikolaus, Saint Nicholas, Sinterklaas, Papai Noel, Babbo Natale, Père Noël, Viejo Pascuero, Noel Baba, and many other names.
It is probably safe to state that Nikolaos Myriotes is the most successful integration figure mankind has ever seen. Having been Bishop of Myra (today’s Demre in Antalya, on the southern coast of Turkey) in the early fourth century CE, earning a reputation as a man of extraordinary capabilities and generosity, he is probably more popular today in almost any other part of the world than in his country of origin.
This is insofar relevant as many in the far–right corner of society (including “identitarians”) seem to be anxious to protect “our” culture and “Christianity”. The problem is, neither Nikolaos nor Jesus (yet another Asian, non–white foreign speaker) match their role model of choice, or may be assumed to have shared their idea of heritage.
Granted, Nikolaos was an early Christian (and Jesus’ religious affiliation is arguably also beyond any doubt), but Christianity is a state of mind rather than an ideology.
The part of this “thought model” that has a tradition in Europe is “political Christianity” (what I, much to some people’s chagrin, have long since come to call “Christianism”), the forcible religious alignment of unsuspecting people by suppression of their individual world view and societal values, which is just as evil as political Islam (a.k.a. Islamism).
Where are the hosts of “identitarians” who gather to live up to Nikolaos’ tradition (which is obviously supposed to be “our tradition”) and feed the poor, at least on this one day per year?
Giving presents to those who already have (more than) enough is not much of a treat — especially so, if you may be certain to receive gifts in return. How deep are your “tradition”, your “culture”, and ultimately your “Christianity” running, really?
You want to be a “movement”? Then move, and get your little white behinds out into the cold and bring the homeless, the refugees, or any one needy person a bowl of hot soup, a blanket, or toys and cookies for their children.