Through Winks and Nods

Why We Deny Reality


I recall the first time I viewed

It was years ago when the site was still in its old cumbersome and difficult to read format. My mind was awash with guilt and foreboding as I realized, to my shock and horror, that I had landed on one of those racist, white supremacist websites. I shirked away in sullen guilt, overwhelmed with shame that I had allowed myself to cast a glimpse at such disgusting content, even though I hadn’t actually read it.

Later, I learned my assessment of was wrong. That false impression was subtly implanted in my mind by external sources, critics whose agendas were contrary to those of American patriots.

Fortunately, my curiosity drove me to investigate. I discovered that the web site’s publisher, Peter Brimelow, was a highly respected and well-known investment guru. He was hardly one of those hooded hillbilly caricatures concocted by the left. Furthermore, Brimelow is not even from the South. He is of British birth.

My second look at included a few moments of actually reading the content. Still a bit of flush tinged my face from residual brainwashing encounters that flood the media, I tepidly proceeded only to learn that had been grossly misrepresented. It’s content had little to do with race, but focused instead, on immigration. Racial aspects were, of course, included.

What I previously presumed to be brain poison turned out to be the cure for latent traces of Marxism that tainted my otherwise libertarian-conservative brain. A lust for reality and quest for truth compelled me to continue to visit the site almost daily.

In time I discovered other web sites, such as and the coarser, but honest (Stuff Black People Don’t Like), and the more docile but ever-so-sexy No longer restrained by chains of guilt, I was free to explore in search of simple truth.

A question arises:

Where does the guilt sensation come from when we encounter bits of reality that conflict with the prevailing cultural Marxist agenda? Who laid the mental track that our minds are to run on? Why are we awash with guilt when we allow ourselves to consider reality regarding racial and other matters? Why did our great-great-grandparents thinks so differently? Are we truly enlightened? Or has our thinking been dulled and darkened?

…Our environment, particularly entertainment television and cable news, are an ongoing sensitivity class that instructs us what to think and what thoughts are taboo. When public figures defy those taboos (think Michael Richards and Don Imus), they are presented to us as demonic examples; evidence that abject evil still exists in this world in the form of racism (always White racism!) Their sins are greatly exaggerated while more serious racism — such as the epidemic of black-on-white violent crime — is ignored. In time our minds are molded so efficiently that we think their thoughts are our thoughts and, eventually, they actually become our thoughts.

I recall traveling down a similar road. It started, in early 2009, with an innocent suggestion, concerning race and behavior, made to one of my brothers …and with the ensuing explosion of moral outrage that this comment set off. Never in my life had I experienced such an eruption of indignation — and I have been caught doing many a shameful deed. So, being one inclined by nature to inquire into the things below the earth and in the sky, how could I resist investigating such apparently heretical matters — matters which, until then, I had only a vague intuition about? But I started out timidly, fearfully. I recall daring to click on the then odious to me — But why so? Who had taught me to feel this way about this site? — Amren sometime late in 2009. In the days following, I too was filled with a strange guilt-like sensation — Where did it come from? How was I trained to feel so about something which I had been hitherto only vaguely aware of? — but also with that mischievous delight that comes from peeking into dark places, forbidden and secret. No one instructed me that these topics were unclean and impure but somehow, through winks and nods, they implanted this understanding.

It has taken some time to unlearn these strange, sickly ideas.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Through Winks and Nods

  1. Julian says:

    I found the former gnxp blogger godless capitalist made some interesting points about this brainwashing process in this discussion at 2Blowhards (after the James Watson controversy). The metaphor of the West being like a man with a sabotaged immune system seems scarily correct. Sadly the original link no longer appears to work, but some of the main extracts are preserved on heartiste’s site:

    “The only way to maintain a holy lie is by persecuting the truth tellers. Such persecutors are not interested in the long term fate of Western Civilization, but only in short term stability. They are like people who “protect” a dying patient from the bitter medicine that will cause momentary discomfort but lasting remission.

    The priest class which controls the media and which coordinated the attack on Watson and Summers is not making a hard decision to produce the greatest good for the greatest number. After all, they have promoted ideologies and policies like no-fault divorce and forced busing that have caused untold misery for millions. They care not about the plight of the vast majority of inhabitants of the country; they care about the stability of their sinecures. […]

    But here’s the thing. You’ve seen hundreds or thousands of hours of footage of events in which rightist ideas of one stripe or another are causing harm to minorities. The Holocaust, My Lai, Bull Connor, the Japanese internment, Operation Wetback, Columbus, Guantanamo, etc. Literally trillions of dollars in capital investment has resulted in a reflexive, emotional association of rightist action by whites with mass murder in your mind. I know it has because I have the same association. How could you not, when you have been strapped into a chair with the Holocaust beamed into your eyes for the K-12 years and beyond?

    But bear with me for a second and imagine what would happen if the polarities had been reversed, if the footage on TV was of the people manning the White Sea Labor Camps, of the Killing Fields and the laogai, of South African crime and Saudi Arabian fanaticism, of Mexican illiteracy and pre-Columbian savagery.

    In short, imagine if the Blank Slate Asymmetry were inverted — if the footage were intended to spur the immune system of Western Civilization to action (and overaction) rather than to disable it. No doubt such a world would be blinkered and biased in many aspects…but it would in major respects be closer to reality.

    It’s a vertiginous thing to even contemplate, because it makes you realize the extent of the unreality you’ve internalized. For example, everyone has been told — over and over and over again — that blacks are victims rather than victimizers when the reality is the complete opposite. The realization that the media has been lying to you comes too late, only when you or your loved ones have become the victims…only when your friend is lying dead on the ground and there is no TV camera to put falsehood before your lying eyes. […]

    The whole point is that h-bd is the one determining aspect which is not publicly discussed. Of course marginal tax rates affect tax receipts. But so does IQ. Of course bilingual policy affects immigrant assimilation. But so does IQ. Of course the educational curriculum affects achievement. But so does IQ.

    Yet IQ is the factor that cannot be publicly mooted, let alone debated. And as for the reason that it cannot be debated – that reason is even more doubleplusungood.

    Anyway, by now it’s a moot point. These taboos are not going to change anytime soon. Civilizations *do* die. The West had a 500 year run in which it was characterized by being the most willing to jettison holy lies in favor of truth. That willingness to embrace truth, regardless of where it may lead, lead to world beating power and unmatched material wealth. And eventually, it lead to contentment, relaxation, and subsequent immunocompromisation….

    Bottom line — like a man with a sabotaged immune system, the West can no longer make self/nonself distinctions:

    At the heart of the immune system is the ability to distinguish between self and nonself. Virtually every body cell carries distinctive molecules that identify it as self.

    And like a man with a damaged nervous system, the West’s internal perceptions are out of sync with the external reality. Consider a hand on a hot stove. It does not matter if the lowly epithelial cells are burned by the million if the nerve cells refuse to communicate this truth to the seat of conscious action.

    Similarly, the media is the nervous system of a civilization. The signals it chooses to amplify, dampen, or interpret control the response of the body. If paralyzed, it matters not if the body is hale and hearty and theoretically capable of action. A malfunctioning nervous system will leave an otherwise healthy body jerking around in response to phantasms of racism — or directing its efforts against its own cells.

    But sawing off heads is a bit of a chore. Parasites are not accustomed to exerting themselves if they can coerce a stand-in. My favourite character in Wilson’s The Insect Societies is Monomorium santschii. This species, over evolutionary time, has lost its worker caste altogether. The host workers do everything for their parasites, even the most terrible task of all. At the behest of the invading parasite queen, they actually perform the deed of murdering their own mother. The usurper doesn’t need to use her jaws. She uses mind-control. How she does it is a mystery; she probably employs a chemical, for ant nervous systems-are generally highly attuned to them. If her weapon is indeed chemical, then it is as insidious a drug as any known to science. For think what it accomplishes. It floods the brain of the worker ant, grabs the reins of her muscles, woos her from deeply ingrained duties and turns her against her own mother. For ants, matricide is an act of special genetic madness and formidable indeed must be the drug that drives them to it. In the world of the extended phenotype, ask not how an animal’s behaviour benefits its genes; ask instead whose genes it is benefiting.

    Witness the reaction to Katrina: the fact that whites had to defend themselves against black looters somehow became an indictment of white racism. The obvious facts on the ground, the facts sensed by those lowly epithelial cells, were simply inverted by a compromised nervous system.

    By selective signal amplification or damping one can make overlaps appear to be equalities. The signals exist — they need not be made up out of whole cloth. One need only turn up the volume on (say) poor migrant workers stranded in the desert and turn down the volume on (say) anchor babies to achieve the desired effect without obvious fingerprints.

    …anyway, I’ve gone on long enough. The West’s time in the limelight is fast coming to an end; the West will be known for fractious infighting in the years to come, with the taboo looming above like a solar eclipse, with “decent people” tasked with blotting out truth for as far as the eye can see. Hate speech legislation will come to the US. Sensitivity demands it.

    And as America continues its descent into Mexico Norte, I will mourn the civilization that produced Bach and Beethoven and Shockley and Watson. […]”

  2. Gorak says:

    Lol, no genes in humans can go extinct by mixing or being liberal. Any gene that Beethoven or any one of your beloved “geniuses” had can be found in any “race” of person or passed on to “them”. All the genes a “white person” has can be found in a non white. The genes of geniuses won’t go anywhere, if there even is such a thing.

    Crime in America has been going down steadily since the 90’s, the entire world is in fact getting better. in 2012 the actual number of poor people on earth declined.

    There are no world wars, no real large scale wars in recent history at all compared to previous times when you guys were in charge. It was literally hell in Europe and the entire west the further back you go.

    There’s more technology now than ever. Even Nigeria has fucking space program now… Nigeria…

    I don’t where you guys are getting this end of western civilization crap. US economy is rebounding, UK economy, rebounding. Crime there has been going down too.

    • Chuck says:

      Try not to be such a nitwit. Patterns and distributions. As for your other comments, they all sound strange and incoherent.

      • Gorak says:

        World is better now that people like you are out of power. It was much much worse before when you were. As a whole. Your “race” cannot exist if another “race” can carry all the genes and give birth to people from “your race”. How much more simple do you need it?

        • Chuck says:

          I don’t know what it means to say that “the world is better now that…”. Do you mean that the world is more enjoyable on average? I take life expectancy to be one measure of life betterment. By that, a major improvement occurred around 30,000. Another jump began at the start of the 1800s. I don’t know who people like me are, but if we were the people who invented the modern world (i.e., age of discovery, the scientific revolution, etc.) life was much worse before us. Is it better now after us? I don’t know who we are and when we stopped ruling, so it’s difficult for me to evaluate this. But imagine that it is. This wouldn’t support your thesis because we have collinearity between time and improvement: After “we” came into power things were better; after “we” came out of power thing were better. All that this tells us is that betterment is correlated with time. In short, we need to control for time — to look at different societies within a given time. Tell me who people like us are and give me a time frame and we can try such a comparison.

          As for your statement about mixed race persons and genes, look up the concept of “natural classification“. Races as typically defined in biology are natural classes. Let’s take some definitions:

          Dobzhansky (1944): Mendelian populations (i.e., reproductive communities of sexual and cross-fertilizing individuals which share in a common gene pool) that differ in gene frequencies
          Gam (1961) : “a population, a population of men, women and children, of father, mothers, and grandparents. Members of such a breeding population shared a common history and a common locate. They have been exposed to common dangers, and they are the product of a common environment. For this reasons, and especially with advancing time, members of a race have a common genetic heritage.
          Hulse (1963): “populations which can be readily distinguished from one another on genetic grounds alone. They are not types, as are a few of the so-called races within the European population, such as Nordics and Alpines. It is the breeding population into which one was born which determines one’s race, not one’s personal characteristics.”
          Vogel and Motulsky (1986): a large population of individuals who have a significant fraction of their genes in common and can be distinguished from other races by their common gene pool
          Crow (2002): groups that split and became separated, typically by a geographical barriers, and gradually diverged genetically
          Molnar (2002): geographically and culturally determined collection of individuals who share a common gene pool
          Leori (2005): populations that share by descent a set of genetic variants in common that are collectively rare in everyone else
          Hooton (1926) Great divisions of mankind which vary as a group in morphological and metrical features derived from common descent
          Pearson (2002): “an inbreeding descent group” or “a large extended family that inbreeds to a sufficient extent that its members share distinctive identifying biological characteristics”.
          Sarich and Miele (2002): Reasonably discrete groups delineated based on phylogenically related characteristics
          Mayr (1963): “A race that is not formally designated as a subspecies is not recognized in the taxonomic hierarchy. However, the terms subspecies and geographic race are frequently used interchangeably by taxonomists working with mammals, birds, and insects. Other taxonomists apply the word race to local populations within subspecies. ”
          Wilson and Brown (1953): “[S]ystematists are faced with the fact that there is no real lower limit to the subspecies category. It has been affirmed repeatedly in a variety of animal groups that racial populations show all degrees of divergence from the lowest level of statistical reliability of mean difference to complete differentiation, with no particular tendency to fall either way. Obviously the only way to resolve this situation taxonomically is to establish an arbitrary lower limit above which populations will be formally recognized as subspecies.
          UNESCO (1964): Geographic races can be characterized by all kinds of morphological or physiological or ontological inherited properties, that is to say with similar gene pools, inhabiting a certain geographic area. In some cases, for example, in animals living on a very small island, on a single mountain, in a single lake, etc. the race can consist of one population only.
          Brues (1972): A division of a species which differs from other divisions in the frequency of certain genetically conditioned traits
          Brues (1992): race is the fact that geographically separated populations differ in their gene frequencies and range of phenoype variation, which therefore may be used to estimate the probability that an individual’s area of ancestry is more probably one place than another place.
          Allaby (2012): An interbreeding group of individuals all of whom are genetically distinct from the members of other such groups of the same species. Usually these groups are geographically isolated from one another, so there are barriers to gene flow. Examples are island races of birds and mammals, such as the Skomer vole and the St Kilda wren.
          Cavalli-Sforza and Walter Bodmer (1976): “[R]aces could be called sub-species if we adopted for man a criterion from systematic zoology. The criterion is that two or more groups become sub-species when 75 percent or more of all individuals constituting the groups can be unequivocally classified as belonging to a particular group.”
          Mayr (2002): A geographically defined aggregate of local populations which differ taxonomically from other subdivisions of the species.
          Groves (2002): populations, geographic segments of a species, that differ from each other on average, not absolutely
          Coyne (2012): Races of animals (also called “subspecies” or “ecotypes”) are morphologically distinguishable populations that live in allopatry (i.e. are geographically separated).
          Allaby (2012): Technically, a race of a species that is allocated a Latin name. The number of races recognized within a species and the allocation of names to them is somewhat arbitrary. Systematic and phenotypic variations do occur within species, but there are no clear rules for identifying them as races or subspecies except that they must be: (a) geographically distinct; (b) populations, not merely morphospecies; and (c) different to some degree from other geographic populations.
          Kurten (1968): Subspecies are formally recognized subdivisions of species, representing temporal and/or local populations that are more or less clearly distinguishable morphologically from other populations of the same species.
          King and Stansfield (1990): Race (within a species) genetically adapted to a certain environment.’

          Notice a pattern? A race, in its most basic form, is a set of individuals which share, by descent, a common gene pool, not a common gene. (A pool of genes is defined as the totality of all genetic information). Also, race is relational in that it characterizes a division of populations; in biology, you can have, at some level of analysis, either zero or more than one race (i.e., it’s impossible to have one race). A mixed race is a mixed gene pool which has meaning relative to unmixed gene pools (contemporaneous or historic). For example, most Caucasoids are descendents of mixes between Neanderthals and modern humans. And most African-Americans are descendents of mixed of between Negroids and Caucasoids. Is the African American gene pool different from the Negroid and Caucasoid gene pools? Do I need to try another metaphor?

          • Gorak says:

            When I mean people like you I mean ….That is what you are no?

            [Probably. Just seen through the looking glass.]

            There is a temporary difference in genes in any group too. you can randomly take a group of “whites” from anywhere, draw some random arbitrary lines between them and then see how the frequencies in the same god dam things differ temporarily.

            [Sure, and if the difference was large enough you would have temporal subspecies.]

            You are just choosing at which point a race starts out of coincidence, out of something extremely temporary and ever changing.

            [There obviously is no “true” way to carve up or to think about the manifold of human variety (though there more and less consistent ways); and, of course, there is no “true” way to identify. You seem to agree. So in what do we disagree?]

            You are claiming that as a race and then claiming which ever part you chose as “your race”.

            [No, I am classifying races somehow and I am noting the races which I am a member of given my various classificatory systems. I am also reserving the right to emotionally attach myself with any or multiple races as I choose.]

            By your logic any family can be a different race to another, any single human being actually, as they are different in frequency of the same genes by the millions to one another.

            [Again, in biology, the term “race” is used in context to multiple populations (i.e., a division of a species) each of which have multiple members (and so a pool of genes). By the most basic biological concept of race, given some classificatory scheme, a race is a set of individuals that share by descent a set of genetic variants and races are sets of individuals which differ in descent and which differs statistically in genetic variants. What makes races different and makes individual a part of the same race are but two sides of the same concept. So a biological race classificatory system requires: multiple populations which differ in ancestry and in genes and which have multiple members. From here qualifications are added e.g., Hooton (1926): “Great divisions”; Hulse (1963):”readily distinguished”; Vogel and Motulsky (1986): “a large population” ….”a significant fraction”; Leori (2005): variants that “are collectively rare”; Pearson (2002): ” a large extended family” …”share distinctive identifying biological characteristics”: Sarich and Miele (2002): “Reasonably discrete”. These qualifications, though, are arbitrary in a way that the fundamental race criteria which I noted are not, given a biological e.g., evolutionary genetic understanding of race. So, for example, singly individuals don’t evolve, rather populations do, so for race to make sense in an evolutionary genetic sense, an individual can’t be a race.

            So to reply: No. Everyone is not their own race since races are sets of individuals with common gene pools. And every family is not its own race since mom and dad do not descend from each other. Since races are sub-specific divisions, there can’t be one human race. Assuming there isn’t zero, we are dealing with greater than 2 and less than …(I would have to think about the upper boundary as members of races are supposed to be freely breeding, so I don’t think that sibships would be races).

            Typically, people add extra criteria to cut the numbers down e.g.,

            A Family Tree in Every Gene

            Yet there is nothing very fundamental about the concept of the major continental races; they’re just the easiest way to divide things up. Study enough genes in enough people and one could sort the world’s population into 10, 100, perhaps 1,000 groups, each located somewhere on the map. This has not yet been done with any precision, but it will be. Soon it may be possible to identify your ancestors not merely as African or European, but Ibo or Yoruba, perhaps even Celt or Castilian, or all of the above…The identification of racial origins is not a search for purity. The human species is irredeemably promiscuous. We have always seduced or coerced our neighbors even when they have a foreign look about them and we don’t understand a word. If Hispanics, for example, are composed of a recent and evolving blend of European, American Indian and African genes, then the Uighurs of Central Asia can be seen as a 3,000-year-old mix of West European and East Asian genes. Even homogenous groups like native Swedes bear the genetic imprint of successive nameless migrations….Some critics believe that these ambiguities render the very notion of race worthless. I disagree. The physical topography of our world cannot be accurately described in words. To navigate it, you need a map with elevations, contour lines and reference grids. But it is hard to talk in numbers, and so we give the world’s more prominent features – the mountain ranges and plateaus and plains – names. We do so despite the inherent ambiguity of words. The Pennines of northern England are about one-tenth as high and long as the Himalayas, yet both are intelligibly described as mountain ranges. So, too, it is with the genetic topography of our species. The billion or so of the world’s people of largely European descent have a set of genetic variants in common that are collectively rare in everyone else; they are a race. At a smaller scale, three million Basques do as well; so they are a race as well. Race is merely a shorthand that enables us to speak sensibly, though with no great precision, about genetic rather than cultural or political differences.


            Whites are mixed race now? Lol… and the mixed are mixed?.

            [Could you imagine anyone criticizing the idea of “populations” on the grounds that a population in one set [derived from one level of analysis] is a mix of populations in another set [derived from another level of analysis?]

            Point stands you are claiming some frequency which is not fixed, none of the traits in it are are fixed on any level and most importantly not exclusive. It is not your frequency.

            [What is this fixation with fixation? Genetic frequencies “are set” relative to a specific time and a specific place. This is a generic biological phenomenon. Hence a species is defined as a spatio-tempoal specific entity e.g.,

            Species are spatio-temporally localized. They occur at specific places and at specific times. A given species taxon cannot occur on earth and also on the Andromeda nebula. Within their spatio-temporal localization species are on the whole continuous and it is this continuity which often permits in cases of doubt the inference as to what belongs to a single individual. For instance, that caterpillar and butterfly are the same individual is inferred not from any similarity in their appearance, but from this continuity. The continuity of different organisms within a species is provided by their historical (common descent) connection. Ghiselin (1974b: 536) correctly stresses that the spatio-temporal continuity does not need to be physically continuous. The fact that Alaska and Hawaii are not physically contiguous with the other 48 states does not exclude them from being parts of the “individual” called the United States.

            Do we not then have species? Is it illegitimate to delineate groups from the pan specific spatial-temporal flux of Terra genetic variation.]

            All you have done is wasted an immense amount of time measuring random averages.

            [During a conversation about being and identity in the summer of 2004, a monk in Malaysia told me that he identified with the universe. Jokingly, I thanked him for creating me. And he smiled.]

  3. panjoomby says:

    i was a well-intentioned lib in my late 20s & fervent believer of gould’s lies in the mismeasure of man. i got a PhD studying (lack of) “test bias” – & discovered that behind the scenes there is no doubt: “g” is a reality. academia is uncomfortable if one can’t play into the shared delusional belief system (hey, isn’t that the definition of religion?) overlapping normal curves are difficult for well-intentioned young libs to understand. yet the vast amount of research cannot be explained away by “poverty, institutional racism, da terrible legacy of slabery, etc.” the truth is quite uncomfortable. nature is brutal. biology is rude. that’s the way it IS. expecting all groups to be exactly the same on all variables with all the normal curves lining up perfectly – is insane. then if a smart person died in one group, a smart person would need to die in the other group, to keep those normal curves superimposed perfectly. & that is the ridiculous assumption at the core of the PC/liberal belief system.

  4. Chuck,
    Brilliant post! Saying anything that disagrees with the ‘progrom’ of the psychopathic, post-Modern world view is considered worse than being a kiddie diddler. Many people have experienced the phenomenon of struggling against the mindfuck they received from birth, in order to get to the truth. It’s sad when we’re not even free in our minds.

    The Cult/’Religion’ of the Egalitarian, Politically Correct, anti-“Racist”, Liberal/Marxist, anti-Science, Feminist, Homosexual, Transgendered Psychopath is being mocked and derided more than ever. More and more, people are coming out of their hypnotic state–even though we’re still being bombarded by the inescapable psy-ops of the enemies. It’s always darkest before the dawn, but remember that the light of truth will break through that poisonous fog of bullshit, and the world will upright itself. Skoal!

    Gorak, you’re an ass.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s