All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 9, 2020 - Radio Free Nortwest - H.A. Covington
52:28
20200109_rfn
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Oh, then tell me, Sean O 'Farrell, tell me why you hurry so.
Hush, O 'Farrell, hush and listen, and his cheeks were all aglow.
I bear orders from the captain, get you ready quick and soon, for the pikes must be together by the rising of the moon.
By the rising of the moon, by the rising of the moon, For the pikes must be together by the rising of the moon.
Oh, then tell me, Sean O'Farrell, where the gathering is to be, In the old spot by the river, right well known to you and me.
One word more for signal, token, whistle of an arching tune, For your pike upon your shoulder by the rising of the moon, By the rising of the moon, by the rising of the moon, Which of my pike upon your shoulder, The date is Thursday, January 9th, 2020.
I'm Andy Donner, and you are listening to Radio Free Northwest.
This was rubbing for the blessed warming light.
The farmers passed along the valleys like the man she's lonely crooned.
And a thousand blades were flushing at the rising of the moon.
At the rising of the moon.
At the rising of the moon.
And a thousand blades were flushing at the rising of the moon.
Greetings, comrades, and a belated Happy New Year from all of us at the front to each and every one of you.
Before we get into today's program, I need to make a brief yet critical announcement.
The party has moved its mailing address.
The new address is P.O. Box 21933, Seattle, Washington 98111.
For those of you that use the box on a regular basis, and we appreciate all of you, I'll repeat.
The new address is P.O. Box 21933, Seattle, Washington, 98111.
Don't worry if you didn't catch it.
It's up on the party website, northwestfront.org.
Don't worry if you sent mail to the old address in the recent past.
We've taken care of that.
Nevertheless, please update your records.
Thank you.
Today's episode is a panel discussion had by some of the comrades in the HQ group in response to the issue of responsibility and whether or not Jordan Peterson should appear in Radio Free Northwest at all, even in tiny bits.
I would like to thank Comrade Jason, who did the editing on this program.
It turns out the audio we recorded was not the best, and you'll hear that.
Jason spent quite a bit of time making sure it was as usable as it is, and that's deeply appreciated.
Having said all that, here's the program.
Enjoy.
Okay, so we're recording.
Audio levels look good.
This is going to start with Jason introducing this and doing what he needs to do with it.
So, Jason, take it away.
Okay, well, I did a piece using Jordan Peterson and gave my thoughts on Jordan Peterson.
And as I said in this recent RFN, I like Jordan Peterson.
I like his style.
I like his energy most of the time.
And he's a very smart man.
He knows quite a lot.
And he has balls.
He has the courage to say what a lot of other people won't say.
And he's a fighter.
He's an intellectual fighter.
He fights for freedom of speech, and he fights for the truth of things.
So he holds a lot of the values that we have in common with regard at least to the differences between left and right.
One of the things that is different between the left and right is that the right values truth over compassion.
It is a hallmark of the left to value compassion over the truth.
It is the old saw of, if you want to make a conservative mad, lie to them.
And if you want to make a liberal mad, you tell them the truth.
There's a lot in that, and it is basically correct because of the emotional immaturity of the left.
The damage and the emotional insecurities that people have and develop in life drive people to the left.
So, Peterson, in his temperament, he's kind of a man of the left in a lot of ways.
But at least in regard to his own internal motivations and sympathies, he's a man of the right because he does value truth over compassion.
He'll tell it the way it is.
But regardless, I used Peterson and I got a little bit of flack about it.
To be completely objective, though, your piece demonstrated that he won't always tell it the way it is.
No, absolutely.
Yes, thank you.
And so this was my point.
There's a lot to like about Peterson.
There's a very good set of reasons why he became an international figure.
And the people respond to him.
So, if we're looking to have relevance with the people and the population as a whole, it pays to analyze Peterson and why he has become an international phenomenon from a relatively obscure professorship at the University of Toronto, then becomes a best-selling author, a multi-millionaire, and is flying all across the world giving speeches to sold-out lecture halls.
That's an amazing thing, and we should analyze that and understand it for our own use.
Maybe it's not as obvious as it needs to be to everyone, and so that's why I'm telling you.
You pay attention to things like that, and you learn from it.
So anyway, I used Jordan Peterson, and clearly he's a polarizing figure, even with people who might very well be sympathetic to a lot of the things he says, like I am.
I said in the RFM, I'm a fan of Jordan Peterson.
But he certainly does not have it right on race, and he is cowardly, and in some respects, you know, unfortunately, kind of stupid.
At least the things he says are stupid with regard to race.
Now, very clearly in my mind, this is because of emotional conditioning, sociological conditioning.
He is a Canadian.
Canadians don't actually have freedom of speech.
They say the wrong things.
They are subject to penalties, including jail time, for going against the thought police in Canada.
Clearly, he's under constraint.
That Americans don't have and don't feel.
So I think that's important to keep in mind when considering Jordan Peterson.
But with regard to race, he clearly is not correct.
And he clearly has a lot of fear and cowardice about speaking things he does know.
In some of his other conversations, it's clear he knows the truth about race, intelligence, differences in character, in temperament.
He knows these things.
These are all basic fundamental tenets of sociology.
And he knows all about those things along with psychology.
Of course, he is a clinical psychologist, and he's well-steeped and well-versed in the scientific and academic literature about racial differences.
He knows, and he avoids really, truly talking about it.
He will not illuminate this subject for many of the reasons mentioned.
Social conditioning and threat from the fact that he's a Canadian and doesn't actually have freedom of speech, even though he tries his best to defend freedom of speech.
We got some feedback on that.
I want to talk about the response that this generated so far.
And he has a lot of things to say about the basic fundamental.
The point of some of Peterson's best stuff, which is the personal responsibility for your role in life and the fact that until you decide to take responsibility for yourself and for something important that is worthy of you and worthy of your life, your life is essentially meaningless and shallow, not really worth your effort.
Young men, especially in this modern day, respond to that message in a very strong way.
There's a lot for us in that to pay attention to, but with regard to the whole conversation about responsibility, Andy's got a lot to say on that.
The guy who wrote us has something to say about that.
We're gonna talk about that.
You know, I want to point out that I especially enjoyed the Peterson piece you played later, where he was just hemming and hawing, and he may not even know what he was doing, but there are certain neurological PTSD treatments I've heard about that actually involve looking up to the ceiling and rolling your eyes back in a certain way to actually help reset your nervous system.
Oh, I think that's what was happening.
He might have been subconsciously employing that technique, but I have seen the video clip that you play the audio of.
And it's absolutely amazing to watch happen because anybody that is well-versed in those types of therapies, and I'm not, I just happen to know about them through some friends I have, it was a dead giveaway what was happening where somebody, someone who's as educated about the field of psychology, you have to know certain things about the nervous system and the brain to even handle the field correctly.
He was deliberately doing something.
Yeah, he had to reset his brain because he tripped over the propaganda that he began to spout in order to try to get out of the trap.
Actively having to talk about race and racial pride and a feeling of connectedness that white people feel.
And this was the segment on race where we talked about when he knows what he's talking about, when he's in his own field, he's really, really good.
And you certainly don't hear the kind of hesitation and hemming and hawing that you heard in this response.
But when it comes to the matter of race, he's out of his depth and he doesn't really know.
Just what to do with it, and he hasn't figured it out yet.
But he knows he's out of his depth.
But he proved that.
Yeah, he knows he's under threat when he gets to some really important things in this world that he hasn't quite figured out how to massage.
And that's because you're only going to understand race when you accept what the world tells you about it, basically when you come to where we are.
And what's especially interesting about the way Peterson was acting...
And one of his previous mini lectures that he gave, I think this is from years and years ago, during his classroom days, that he became famous for after the speech incidents that he dealt with.
One of his earlier points that he made repeatedly was, don't say things that make you weak, where you have to verbally give up ground.
And the only thing he did during this particular episode was...
That!
And he knew he was doing it, too.
You could tell.
Yeah, and he tried to cover it in the way you would expect, which is with bluster and emotion.
And if you're really listening to what he was saying, though, it was pathetic.
And that's the thing, you know, when you're caught off guard for something you really don't know how to respond to, you feel trapped.
This is precisely the kind of thing that you get from someone, was Peterson's response.
And this is why I played it last, because it was in total contrast to everything else that had come before.
The prior two clips showed him...
Completely confident on solid ground.
He knew what he was talking about and he wasn't feeling trapped.
I just thought it was a great contrast and it shows that, you know, we're not all perfect.
Part of my point in making this piece on RFN was of course to, and I think I said this, which is you do have to appreciate the things that are appreciable.
Things that are worth your time, energy, and effort to pay attention to and listen to and use and learn from.
You know, I know a lot of people don't want to give credit where credit is due.
But why should you not give credit where it's due?
Don't give it where it's not due.
Don't praise things that are not worthy of praise.
But everyone has something valuable for other people.
If you look at the writings of Chairman Mao, who's responsible for the deaths of, you know, tens of millions, okay?
They're Chinamen, so they're, you know, less of a concern to us.
But, you know, the point is, massive death and misery from that man.
He has a lot of things to say.
That are useful to any sort of revolutionary movement or countercultural movement.
You know, one of his best dictums that I like so much, he put it very simply, political power grows from the barrel of a gun.
And it's absolutely a fact.
It's absolutely a fact.
And if you're going to reject intelligent things that are obviously useful and obviously correct, I don't know what to tell you.
You're not going to be a whole lot of use to us because we're looking to use everything that's useful and usable.
In the fight for our racial survival.
What else would you expect a proper, mature, developed, intelligent, racial, political soldier to do?
Except precisely that, which is to use every available rhetorical or intellectual weapon until such time, hopefully not, comes to use actual real weapons, right?
You use the intellectual, moral, and rhetorical weapons at your disposal, and you don't worry about where they come from.
You use them if they're proper, if they're good, if they're correct.
Effective.
A tool is a tool.
Intelligence is a tool.
You can correctly apply tools.
A tool is a tool.
Yes.
It's guided by a mind.
Well, and more importantly, to what Jason just said, those of you that have actually paid attention to the party's recommended reading list that Harold assembled so many years ago will understand that the majority, all but two or three, a relative handful.
...of titles on the theory of revolution were written by our racial and political enemies.
They're better at it than we are.
We learn from that, and we know what needs to happen in terms of just the general theory.
When I was deciding whether or not I myself was going to come home, a lot of the reading I did was on, is this even possible again, the way we're talking about it?
And it turns out, yeah, but you have to put this idea you have aside that we can't learn from people that disagree with us on important things long enough to understand that, hey, they know more about the subject than I do.
I should listen to what they've got to say because I'm going to need it.
Frankly, there are an awful lot of people that get a hold of us that say, I'm not going to read novels, I'm not going to read this, I'm not going to read that, I'm not going to go over the subject.
You're going to have to adjust your attitude long enough to make yourself useful to somebody else.
And as much as I cannot stand Jordan Peterson for a whole bunch of reasons, if you actually need his talks on responsibility and other things, then go listen to them.
I've made a point to Jason that, look, I had a whole bunch of other white nationalists of various stripes.
We're never really fazed by Peterson, but that's because we had worthwhile father figures such that we know the stuff he teaches.
Okay, coming from that perspective, Jordan Peterson is kind of blah to me in a lot of ways, but I recognize that that's not everybody.
You know, the proof is in the pudding, as they say.
Peterson's success shows the thirst for the kinds of things he's been saying among young white men, primarily.
And it's very interesting.
Peterson himself, on occasion, acknowledges that it's the young white men who are gravitating to him.
He doesn't talk a whole lot about the niggers and spicks that listen to him because they're really not in evidence.
They aren't really smart enough or cognizant of their own psychology or...
They don't have the brain power to be introspective enough to want to change themselves.
That's it.
That's exactly right.
They don't have the brain power to be introspective enough to be interested.
And so, Peterson himself, it's funny, it has slipped out.
His biggest following is white men.
It's kind of like...
Who's the biggest following of Star Wars?
It's white men.
Who are the ones who have been most disaffected and written out of Star Wars?
White men by the social justice warrior, Kamal, in Hollywood.
You know, if you're a white man and you still give a shit about the new Star Wars, I don't know what to tell you.
You're probably not going to be much used to us.
Orange man bad and purple lady good, right?
Oh, yeah, exactly.
It operates on such a simplistic level.
It's pure propaganda at this point.
I'm calling AJ out.
He didn't get that reference just now.
There's a social justice warrior looking woman in one of the new Star Wars movies that has purple hair.
It's your standard, like, you look like she would fit right in on the scenes of any, like, San Francisco, whatever else, like...
Screw up, social justice warrior convention.
And the thing is, she's played by Laura Dern, and Laura Dern is a total social justice warrior type.
Well, she looks exactly like that in the film.
I don't know anything about that actress.
The actress is as a person, so the casting is symmetrical there, and it aligns, and that's purposeful.
That's exactly by design.
Regardless, we don't necessarily need to digress too much into Star Wars, but the thing is, with that example, her purpose there was to, apparently, I have not seen the movies.
I will not.
But it's clear from online sources and reviews.
Poe Dameron, I think, was the character.
And he was trying to...
I've never actually seen the film.
I don't know.
Well, the only...
I saw cameras that said no.
Well, the only almost-looking white guy, almost-looking white actor, is trying to get this dumb woman commander to explain what the plan is to escape or whatever.
And she just won't tell him.
And so the entire structure of the scene is...
Trust women.
It's like an extension of the Me Too movement.
Women, of course, never lie about rape.
They never lie about anything to manipulate men and to damage men, right?
So, it's the background conversation of you just trust the women.
And, you know, that's what was going on in Star Wars for that moment.
Anyway, that was kind of a digression.
But regardless, Peterson needs to be, in my estimation, Evaluated and appreciated based upon the effectiveness that we see from his conversations.
And he's got a lot of great stuff to say.
He is a good clinical psychologist and he expresses extremely well his use of myth in our literature.
Myth from our culture.
Why those things, mythological stories, etc.
from Greek antiquity, from the Roman times, those things speak to certain fundamental aspects about human psychology.
And he makes really good use of those.
He's quite skilled at that.
I have no problem giving credit where credit is due.
And once again, I'll come back to this.
If anyone out there has a problem giving credit where credit is due, I'll just say it right now.
I'll lay it out.
That's a personal problem with you.
You need to get over that because the task is to make a use.
of everything that is useful for the future of our race.
You know, you need to get over your own little foibles about your preferences in that, you know, and your own discomfort and you make use of what's useful.
I repeatedly said I can't stand the man, and I stand by that, but the one time he genuinely surprised me and pulled out an archetype that I didn't know existed was the evil queen, like in fairy tales.
Because why didn't previous iterations of society want people to know about single mothers or the children of single mothers were stigmatized and so on and so forth?
Why is that?
And the answer is, in old fairy tales and old myths and legends, the evil queen is always single.
Oh, yeah.
And at the end of these stories, the evil queen always dies.
Previous iterations of society did not want to see single women survive and exist and thrive because that's not the message you want to send to young people in society that this is an okay way of being.
Interesting.
Because the things that made the evil queen the evil queen are, you know, Stefan Molyneux will talk about this and Jordan Peterson, to a lesser extent, will talk about this, that bad things about those women...
Are almost always, not always, not universally, but almost always the cause of their single motherness is the evil aspects of their own character.
And so that's why the evil queen and her children are shunned, because society needs to reinforce the archetype that the evil queen dies.
Very fascinating item.
Anyway, just to give him the credit where it's due, because there is one time he actually surprised me and introduced something I hadn't heard before.
Another one that comes up is Mullen.
Even though he's a kike, he's got some pretty interesting ideas.
There's absolutely no reason why.
Is he a kike?
Yeah.
He's pulled it back later, but he's repeatedly, accidentally admitted that his mother has Jewish roots.
Alright, so he's a partial kike.
He's a partial kike.
He certainly doesn't look like a kike.
By their rules, he's a kike.
I'll say this right now.
Fuck their rules.
We decide.
The white man decides.
Party policy is Jewish ancestry is Jewish ancestry.
It's a very immediate Jewish ancestry.
The thing is, though, you have to kind of know what you're talking about.
There are reasons they don't look like us.
Sometimes, and sometimes they do.
It's because, you know, they could very well be actual Aryans who are just being co-opted by the religion.
But it's how they operate, it's how they think, it's where their loyalties lie.
More than not, it's stolen genes.
Yeah, it could be.
In any individual case.
Another very important example of how that happens is that lots and lots of mental disorders are almost exclusively Jewish in terms of, like, inherited insanity and so on and so forth.
A number of people I've heard this from, and it seems pretty accurate that...
The big book of Jewish diseases?
Not necessarily that, but the issue that they have to go steal genes every once in a while, or else the inherited inbred crazy takes over.
So that's how, over long periods of time, they started to look Aryan, and they've stolen genes.
That would make you think they're European.
Yeah.
I'm not surprised.
I mean, the Aryan woman is the most beautiful on the planet.
Why would they not target her and target us?
By their own rules, since, you know, to be a Jew, all you have to do is have a Jewish mother, it allows for them to try to improve themselves with a superior strain, which is us.
Yes.
You know, it's unfortunate from our perspective, it's not something you can completely guard against.
It's just part of it.
And they've always been parasites.
There's no reason why.
That's their strategy.
That's their strategy.
Anyway, it is what it is.
We've taken a few digressions here.
We want to talk about responsibility.
Yeah, I definitely want to hear what you're talking about.
That is one of Peterson's major bailiwicks.
So one, it objectively works.
He's objectively right based on the response he gets and based on how people have lived their lives.
A lot of people actually document their process of quote-unquote cleaning their room.
And, yeah, actually having a responsibility, especially as a man, you're responsible for something on a regular basis.
That is a more driving factor.
And this may not resound much with millennial men, because millennial men have been so screwed by society.
But those of us that have attained some position or some ability to hold an important job or something like that understand that, yeah, this is what drives people, this is what drives men, is the ability to fulfill responsibility.
And the millennials are the ones responding to him, so I think it certainly does resonate with them.
And honestly, the rap millennials get is overblown.
And here's the thing, the millennials are healthier than the boomer generation in a lot of ways once you really look into it in terms of their social attitudes about certain things.
Millennials have reacted to the craziness of our society by pulling back from the brink.
In many respects.
So, you know, I actually do have some respect for the millennial generation.
What you're saying is valid, which is that you wouldn't necessarily expect it of them.
And so they're kind of surprising us in certain ways when you do look into it.
And one of the surprising things is their incredible response to this message of purpose and responsibility that Peterson is pushing.
Yes.
And that's, I think, a lot of your point.
Well, and responsibility specifically has had an interesting...
You know, the way people talk to the Northwest Front about responsibility over a period of years has been absolutely fascinating.
During the heyday of the alt-right, Harold and I would talk about how it's individual people's responsibility to come home and help the party because the white race is either going to get the NAR or nothing.
And that's just the reality.
We ourselves have to accept that this is our responsibility and that we're the ones that are going to handle this.
Because if you don't, you're implicitly saying it's somebody else's problem, which is, I mean, that's absolutely wrong regardless.
On its face, that's wrong.
But the feedback we got mentioned that, no, it can't just be responsibility.
It's got to be responsibility and authority.
And I understand that perspective because no man likes responsibility without authority.
Well...
The Northwest Front, the entire point has been, okay, let's go take state power.
We can make that happen.
It's not as if what we want is undoable.
Quite the opposite.
History has shown that what we want is very doable.
But the way we have been at we, and I mean Harold and I specifically, even though he's gone now...
The way we have been addressed about responsibility by people that are kind of just coming into this thing of ours has been very telling because the feedback we've gotten is that we don't want to hear about responsibility because they have been lectured all their lives by their boomer parents and their boomer uncles and aunts and everybody else that...
Oh, it's your individual responsibility to succeed in the world.
And it's really easy to say that when you've been given a fantastic economy and you shat on everybody else that came after you.
Right?
That's a little too convenient for a boomer to say, oh, well, you're not doing well in the world.
It's your fault.
Like, well, we're in the world.
You make boomers.
And I understand the criticism entirely because there are major problems with the boomer generation.
And my parents are boomers, and they're some of the earlier boomers.
I mean, I might tell them I'm mid-range millennial, so I know what we're talking about here.
We cannot shun responsibility.
You have responsibility even if it's grossly inconvenient.
Otherwise, responsibility and commitment wouldn't be responsibility and commitment.
And so there was one point where it seemed like the entire alt-right, and a few people specifically told Harold and I on social media that no, responsibility isn't how anything works because the boomers were pushing responsibility on us.
Responsibility is what boomers say.
We don't want to hear it.
And it's kind of like, well, you can't go anywhere from there because...
Because again, the essence of masculinity is forward motion in line with your responsibilities.
It's your responsibility to drive society forward as a man because the women can't because they have other things to do.
That's the essence of masculinity.
Yeah, and when you hear foolishness, you have to try to figure out where it comes from and why it exists.
This notion of rejecting a conversation of responsibility in the world because you don't like the generation preaching it to you or whatever.
Kind of goes back to you have to use your own brain to evaluate the argument on its own merits.
You can't escape the need to do that.
And so, as an adult, you have to know your own internal conversations and the reasons why you do certain things and think certain things in order to compensate for those to have effective action.
And so, you have to think your way to a proper solution.
And thinking is not dependent upon your own emotional baggage unless you let it be corrupted that way, right?
Thought processes need to be divorced and be objective.
And so, when you're letting your own internal turmoil confuse you about the way you need to think and approach a certain problem or a goal, you've got to learn to not allow that to happen.
That's just a skill that every adult man or woman has to acquire for themselves.
It's experiential, too.
I will note that there are certain things that can't be taught.
You actually have to rise to the occasion and deal with the subject so you can navigate it for yourself, and this is one of them.
Yes, people can tell you this, but you have to determine that it's worth your time, energy, and effort to figure it out.
And then you actually do need to figure it out and apply it properly, especially to our needs for future survival.
I did want to ask, Andy has a visceral and very strong reaction when Jordan Peterson really is brought up.
I wouldn't mind hearing a little bit more.
It depends on what the subject is, because I've made this point on RFL.
I had the conversation earlier today with AJ, and I'll have it with you all now.
What is rat poison?
Rat poison is 99% good food and 1% poison.
Right.
And that's the reason the rats fall for rat poison is because it's 99% good food.
Kind of like Fox.
Basically.
And my gripe, and I understand some people really hate Jordan Peterson, and I'm kind of in that camp, but...
The people that you want to get bent out of shape about are people who claim to be of us and then betray us in various ways.
Because Jordan Peterson doesn't even claim to be a white nationalist.
No, he's not.
Overall, I'm nonplussed about him.
But there are elements of his presentation that I do despise.
And that is when he gets so close to the truth but can't say it.
And I understand...
That again, he's in Canada, and anything resembling racial reality is de facto illegal in Canada.
Canadian judges have said so.
I understand that.
I don't expect someone to legally sacrifice themselves just to go nigger, nigger, nigger, kite, kite, kite.
I'm still not a fan of him, though, because there are a number of times he's gotten so close to saying something really crucial, and he deliberately pulls back.
And I don't know if...
You know, it could be that his mind, he's calculated that that's the best way to say something without saying it.
I don't know.
But I get viscerally upset whenever anybody gets that close to saying something important and it just crumbles.
Is upset the right emotional response to that?
I wonder about that.
I have a little bit of a problem with that, at least from the perspective of your own emotional state should be your emotional state.
And we can control our own emotional reaction to things.
Is it a good thing to get upset?
I agree it is.
I think it is.
Okay.
I shouldn't say I agree because you disagree, but I think it's appropriate to get upset at that.
It's a good way of training yourself on, no, when somebody does this, I need to acknowledge it as a problem.
Okay.
You can actually train your own emotions to help you see problems ahead of time.
You can actually objectively teach yourself to handle a certain subject a certain way, and sometimes it has value.
Certainly.
I can see that.
If you find that as a useful strategy, kind of as an early warning system for your reaction to things...
A.K.A.
a bullshit detector.
Sure, why not?
My perspective on this is I have no problem being disappointed, certainly, with anything or anyone if they are disappointing.
I wouldn't castigate Jordan Peterson or anyone else for not being able to get to the complete full answer.
This is what I might need to ask about.
So, I'll ask that here in a second.
Is your generalized perception of him.
And, of course, that gets built up over time for each one of us from the things that we see, know, and do.
I can respect that someone who really, really, really likes a lot of his material for various reasons is merely disappointed when this happens.
But bear in mind, I'm meh on him.
So I'm much more ready to, when something like this happens, I can very easily go to the place of being viscerally chance.
Because I don't have a strong attachment to him in the other direction.
Okay.
Well, it might.
It would seem to me normally that if you're actually a fan of someone and they disappoint you, that is the point where you might very well have a stronger reaction.
So, you know, people respond in different ways to things.
My point is just that...
My point really just is that if you have too high a standard that no one can ever meet and you reject people because that standard is so high...
Is that really necessary?
Because that person might be very valuable to what you need done and value to you personally in your own life.
You know, this is both political and personal.
We all have our standards.
Standards are important.
But rejecting things too out of hand because that person is not quite good enough, not able to quite get there, you know, it's a balance.
With regard to Peterson, I wouldn't expect him to be able to get there.
He would not be able to have the following and do all the good that he does do and is doing as an international figure if he were one of us, okay?
There's a lot of good being done by a lot of the things Peterson says.
And he's able to say it because he isn't as advanced as we are.
It's up to us to rebuild the type of society and the social environment that would allow for one of our kind to be an internationally recognized and acclaimed figure, right?
You know, 90, 80, 70 years ago, there could be an internationally acclaimed figure who is a strong proponent and defender of the white race on a racial basis, right?
That's not possible now in the world that we have.
We've lost that.
I'm thinking about eight years ago, yeah.
Yeah, 75-ish, yeah.
Yeah, 75, 80 years ago, there was a completely common part of life and completely possible, right?
So, we have to change that.
But in the meantime, as we change that societal acceptance, we have to, in my opinion, acknowledge the people who are doing good work against the system, against the horrible place that we've come to.
I think Peterson is one of those who is doing some damn good work.
Against the system.
And so, I think acknowledging that is perfectly fine, at least in my world.
Well, in listening to what you did broadcast, I do appreciate you calling him out as, let's say, vanilla.
That needed to be put in with his speech.
In what respect?
Where you called out his limitations that needed to be expanded on.
Well, thanks.
I think so.
It gives us context.
I think it's part of the analysis of who the man is and what he's doing, what he's able to do, right?
He doesn't have the full solution.
We do.
But we don't have an international audience.
So it's not like he has nothing to learn from us.
He clearly does.
Because on race, he doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about.
Well, I gotta pause you.
But we can learn from him.
Because I just did get three letters from the UK.
And one from Australia.
Nice.
We actually get a strange amount of international mail.
It comes in bursts for some reason, but it does happen.
Every once in a while when I would do a mail run for Harold in the old days, there would be a number of those.
That was always interesting.
Let me ask you, Andy, with regard to Peterson specifically, I want to flesh this out a little bit, this issue of, what do you think about the kind of things I've said?
There's an element of this in white nationalism that is very clear, which is the tendency to reject, castigate, and attack those who kind of disappoint us by not getting to the full solution without giving proper respect to the fact that they got farther than most of the fools in our society.
Credit to the people who do get a long way and have a little bit of sympathy for the need for them to go a little farther.
I don't actually think he's gotten that far.
And I will say this...
I'm asking both generally, and I don't mind hearing about Peterson in particular, but I'm asking that also as a general question.
Well, about generally, I think these things happen on a case-by-case basis, largely.
Because there are commentators that I know are out of the trash that I'm going to listen to.
Like Rush Limbaugh.
I will listen to Rush Limbaugh, but I'm fully confident of the fact that three-quarters of what he says is actual conservative trash.
And it's just trite, and it's ridiculous all the time, because he's touching on racial matters.
He's further than a lot of people on stuff like economics, but everything else he talks about is, like, completely out of fail.
You know, but generally with, let's say, Jordan Peterson, I just pulled him out as an example, like, that's how I feel about him.
And a lot of people may be arriving at similar places for different reasons with each individual, because a lot of it is personal.
You know, a lot of this is person to person, even if the celebrity doesn't know you exist.
It's still person to person.
I wouldn't mind hearing a little bit of the details as to what has engendered this feeling in you about Peterson specifically, and maybe what you've heard from other people that give them such a negative opinion of it.
I've not seen it, so I want to hear about it if it's there.
I can tell you what I don't care for about Peterson is he's too smart for certain things, for him to not understand what he's saying in certain cases.
Because bear in mind, he's a classical liberal.
Classical liberal only works in a situation where you have a true society that the founding felons had themselves where actual freedom works because people are deliberately self-restraining.
You know, they don't need to be forced to do the right thing.
They're doing the right thing because it's best for them personally to do the right thing from the word go.
You can have classical liberalism in that type of society where people are deliberately...
Compelling themselves with no one else to be good.
Sounds like a society where people take responsibility.
For themselves.
Yeah.
How about that?
Which is, again, I mean, that's...
If somebody really, really, really wants that sort of society, they have to be hypervigilant about compelling themselves.
They have to take the responsibility, 100% responsibility, for their own behavior and prevent themselves from going off the rails.
Certainly.
There are certain forms of society that are only possible if the population is advanced enough.
Clearly, the white man's form of advanced technological society is completely beyond niggers on their own, right?
This is just one example.
Well, there's also, and I know some people don't care for these words, and I understand why, but...
You know, morality and self-discipline are advanced tools in and of themselves.
And you have to know how to use them.
And a lot of people, and I absolutely blame the religious elements among us for this, that they've gotten so hypocritical that everyone looks at particular things they have to say that are very important as ridiculous.
Because it goes way beyond hypocrisy when you're doing whatever you want, but the instant somebody else does something wrong, you whip Jesus out of your back pocket and slap him down.
It's kind of like, no.
Religion was there for you to fix yourself first and foremost.
And if you're not using it that way, I really don't want to hear about it.
Because once you've done that, you can actually help other people in a way that they might actually find better because you're more capable of supporting someone.
Because again, this isn't about keeping any one person down.
It's about how we as a society react.
When someone among us does something wrong and what we do to make sure it doesn't get worse.
And that doesn't even mean punishing someone necessarily.
It just means we all collectively agree that we're going to arrest something wrong when it happens so it doesn't snowball.
Anyway, so back to Peterson.
This is relevant.
This business about, you know, classic liberalism, which again is a dead position, and the libertarian ideas that come out of it that, oh no, we're all individuals and there is, you know, groups or abstractions and they don't actually exist and so on and so forth.
Well, if we're all individuals, what are we individuated out of?
You literally can't use the language.
Does that make sense?
That even using the word individual implies that there's something that you've been individuated out of.
The language that even libertarians use belies the fact that there is a group that an individual has to be somewhat concerned with.
Yes, I wonder, libertarianism, just like anarchists, anarchy, kind of to your point a little before, has to...
You know, when you see how these people talk online, it's very clear they're assuming a level of maturity and adulthood that society does not possess.
A lot of the practitioners and believers certainly do.
And they have the bias that we all do, which is to assume ourselves in other people.
So, the only people they're thinking about are people like themselves.
And so, that doesn't really work when you've got a society as multifaceted and certainly as multiracial and multicultural as we do here in America nowadays, unfortunately.
The raw material from which you're going to build your society...
Completely determines everything about the possibility of that society.
It determines the outer envelope of capability and possibility.
The raw material, that's what does that.
And so, if you could select the people to leave this earth and go rebuild on another planet, you could have, you know, any number of advanced societies that we couldn't even conceive of now if you did that selection properly at a high enough level.
Okay, this is something we have to concern ourselves with, the overall quality of the race.
Over the long term, there is absolutely a place in the future of the white race for properly used genetic manipulation or guidance of the population through any number of means that might be available to us.
But I think it's going to be a part of the future.
We can talk about that at some point.
But clearly, why should the intelligent creature, once it understands how it comes to be in its own physical being, not take some role in the propagation into the future of its absolute best attributes and the suppression of its worst attributes?
That seems perfectly rational and reasonable to me, and I think it's coming.
I think it will be a part of the solution over the long term.
What responsibility is, in a lot of ways, is suppression of your own bad attributes.
Very good, yes.
And that's the perfect way to phrase it, because...
Especially somebody that has a chip on their shoulder, and I can relate to that in a lot of ways, but the fact of the matter is that just because somebody else is getting away with something or is doing something doesn't mean you can get away with it when you do it.
And you should not think that way.
Just because the vast majority and nearly every single member of the boomer generation had a great situation handed to them that they hadn't learned how to manage and destroyed it by making all sorts of bad decisions because...
Here's the thing.
Responsibility and obligation kind of go hand in hand.
Because if obligations weren't difficult, you wouldn't have a responsibility to fulfill them because you would just do it because it'd be easy, right?
These terms mean things.
You're obliged to do something.
Well, that means you have to do it.
You have to step up and have the ability to do so because you've done a lot of work on yourself and have come to a place of maturity and capability that you might not have had when you were younger.
This is what development and advancement means in both life and in society.
Well, and it's also why.
in previous iterations of Aryan society, young men were expected to have some responsibility right off the bat.
Because especially as a teenage boy, your primary duty is to get childishness slapped out of you.
Yes.
Okay, that's...
When you want a psychologically normal young man, it's because his teenage years...
We're full of being told, no!
Yeah, I do think this is kind of a perspective that parents should have when they're thinking about their child is the perspective that you're not raising a child.
You're raising an adult, right?
And the language can guide us in many things in life.
Having that perspective, I think, could be valuable.
The childishness needs to leave your child at some point and that child actually needs to become their own fully formed adult.
Now, a lot of children have problems leaving the nest that they need to be pushed out.
A lot of parents have problems letting their child go and they don't let them develop the way they need to.
And in part, it's because of this perspective that it's their child rather than their own autonomous person that you have a responsibility to develop.
You are raising An adult, that child is going to go away.
You need to understand that, accept that, and measure up to your part in allowing that to happen and understand that that's good very clearly.
The adolescent factor of our modern society does not support that.
We are a very juvenile, emotionally adolescent society overall.
It's like, where are the adults and why the hell aren't they in charge is something we have to think about a lot of the time.
It's just the way we are.
Life is so soft and so easy.
Because the white man has mastered the natural world.
The threats to our survival are so low as compared to all of history.
Or we perceive them to be so low.
Well, which is an interesting distinction.
There is.
They are growing again in many, many ways.
Antibiotics are less effective.
You know, there are new diseases and new mutations happening.
I guess this was found on the border not too long ago.
What?
Robotic plague again.
Oh yeah, right.
Robotic plague's making a pass.
The plague's coming back!
Thank you, shitskins!
Yes, and so the part is there are sociological issues because of the breakdown of modern society.
Actually, that's in San Francisco now.
Jesus Christ.
Unbelievable.
Thanks to Nancy Pelosi.
Well, there we go.
So the point is, society, civilization...
Humanity can regress.
This is the piece to understand.
We can regress.
My family always had a wide social circle, whether it be churches, work, whatever else.
And the most effective, and for some reason I was always, my parents were almost always among the oldest of their social group, which meant I was almost always among the oldest of the kids of that social group.
And what I saw that worked the best, I was always fairly easygoing as a kid, but what I saw that worked the best...
Was, you know, when you're in puberty, you have a child brain that is shriveling and rebuilding itself with adult frontal lobes.
That's just the biology of puberty.
Right.
Which is why things get weird, because you actually have a good, fully formed child that's becoming something that isn't a child or an adult, that is becoming a fully formed adult.
And so, what worked, and what was the most effective discipline, especially for people in puberty, is to be told, okay, you're becoming an adult.
If you act like an adult, you get adult privileges.
If you act like a child, we're taking your adult privileges away.
And that seemed to work as a motivation fairly well because, you understand, you have the capacity to be better, but if you're not going to be better...
You're going right back to how we treated you when you were 10. That's the element of socialization and social conditioning.
It's a very powerful influence on people, especially in the developmental stage, which children and teenagers, of course, are still in.
Because the person that has, as a part of that person, a human animal, has to learn to use their new brain hardware.
And that's a large part of...
If we want to look at the biological purpose, not just like the reproductive organs coming online and all that stuff, but a lot of the purpose of puberty is learning how to use an adult brain.
To go without something you want.
And so that goes right back to it, because you have a responsibility to do that.
And another reason I can't stand, because this is a very Jordan Peterson thing to say, is like, no, look, you're an individual, and any sort of collective anything is automatically wrong.
And the answer is, well, no, because you're individuated from something, and that something doesn't go away just because you're individuated from it.
And is it possible?
This is racial nationalism in a nutshell.
And why it's not compatible with libertarianism is that listen up people that are having trouble with responsibility.
This might help you understand.
You know, you tell me what you think about this, Jason.
Is it possible to have an obligation that you didn't choose?
Because at the very least, I have an obligation to the white race to not increase the other race's numbers.
You know, I have an obligation to the white race to not do something that's bad for the race.
And I didn't choose that obligation, but it exists.
You know, I have an obligation to the group I come from.
I think on a practical basis, the answer is no.
Except on a moral basis, it has to be yes at some point.
Well, this is the thing.
Morality is defined by other people to get you to do what benefits the group.
The basis of morality is survival.
It's not laws handed down by some power over you, whether that is Hammurabi or, you know, God himself.
Religion is not necessary to a code of morality, codes of morality.
Have existed without and apart from religion forever.
The basis of morality is survival of the individual and of the group.
It's both.
And so, things which would not be considered moral if they were done strictly for personal reasons, such as killing, right?
If you were to kill to strictly personal advantage, society as a whole denotes that as immoral.
If you are to kill in defense of yourself and your loved ones for Everyone.
Or your group.
Or your group.
The point is, society deems that, you know, justified and moral because it wasn't strictly for personal advantage, not related to survival.
That's the key.
And so, morality is survival-based.
When we talk obligations, a very interesting question you posed, Andy, which was...
Can you have an obligation thrust upon you?
Well, people can say you have this obligation.
It can be thrust upon you, but do you really have that as an obligation if you don't choose it?
In a practical way, you don't because the only thing that we have in life is our decision to do something or to not do something.
I'm actually going to accept that answer, but follow up with another challenge to the audience.
Okay.
Very good.
You know what?
I'll accept that answer.
But if you don't accept an obligation to come home and implement the only plan that will save the white race from genocide, then don't talk to me about how you're a white nationalist, and especially don't talk to any of us about how your opinion is wrong.
Well, the very essence of white nationalism is...
The need to create white nations that are exclusively ours as a preserve for our race.
It's a biological imperative and necessity to be separated from the other races in order to preserve what we are.
Because as I mentioned in one of the previous RFNs, how this comes out in the social sphere is that because the overall superiority of the white man and of the white woman, we cannot be who we are and who we need to be in close living conditions with other races because we will naturally be superior.
And so, our natural abilities will be suppressed in any multiracial society.
And that's what we're seeing nowadays.
White people cannot even be who we are because then that's too white.
That's whiteness and whiteness must be destroyed.
For God's sakes, even in Canada, I saw an article not that long ago about using the phrase, the unbearable whiteness of the cannabis trade up in Canada.
You know, marijuana has been legal in Canada for a long time and there are some very large companies that are forming and have been working the cannabis trade up in Canada, but it's all the white people.
Just by the fact that in the modern world that whites created, we have to tolerate the insult.
And the outrage of having to look at headlines in our own media talking about the unbearable whiteness of anything is an outrage.
There's nothing unbearable about white people and the societies we set up.
Everybody wants to come and have a piece of our action.
This insult is maddening and utterly ridiculous.
The people that are kicking the door.
Down to get in, then proceed to insult the hell out of us when they couldn't stay out if they wanted to.
Yes, it's a power play, and this goes to my point of the fact that in order to be free, whites must live alone, because there will always be wanting somebody to take what we have, take a piece of our action, and denigrate us and badmouth us along the way, and they'll always have Jews coming along with them to facilitate that.
You know, I want to look back around to that Peterson piece that you played and just destroyed.
I actually agree with full-on 99% of what he said.
Which piece?
You're talking the racial piece?
Yeah, the racial piece.
But, here's the thing, is that he's still wrong.
He's still dead wrong, and he's wrong for a very specific reason, because his ultimate conclusion was, no Western pride, no Western heritage, none of that.
And the answer is, okay, look, certain elements.
That left the alt-right and certain long-term elements in white nationalism have correctly pegged a phenomenon called race worship.
And some white nationalists outright fall into race worship.
And what I find especially interesting about it is that, okay, it's, you know, race worship only...
It's a very specific thing, and we may not have...
Can you define it so we can get a grasp on it?
Basically, the best way I know to define it is that...
It's when somebody is trying to externalize their own insecurity about something by pretending they're the shit just because they're white.
Now, Jordan Peterson was dead wrong because he was slamming every form of taking pride in Western heritage and white heritage, and I'll loosely call it Western or white chauvinism because am I a white chauvinist?
Absolutely.
I advocate for what's good for white people.
I like being white.
I would not be white, and I'm going to advocate for what's good for white people first.
I'm a white chauvinist.
You can call it whatever you want, but that's literally the meaning of that word, chauvinism.
And yeah, I am.
I'm not going to make any pretense that I'm not, because I hate dishonesty.
I don't see a reason for us in this medium to not be quite plain about that.
What Peterson was doing is slamming every form and every rationale of that.
The thing is that...
Could a white society rend itself in twain immediately if they wanted to by screwing up all sorts of things?
Yes.
You're not the shit just because you're white, but on the other hand, did we inherit what our ancestors left us?
Absolutely.
Did they do an amazing job creating civilization after civilization after civilization that they had to recreate from scratch because somebody screwed up, let the muds in, and it got wrecked?
That's 100% true.
That's historically established.
Yes, we have had to recover many times from the foolishness of multiracial.
And what has happened, the current generation of white people, what they have inherited is, if we want to put it in a non-scientific term, in a way that people can relate to on a human level, we have inherited the potential to be the next generation of that, and only we have the potential to be the next generation of that.
So should we be proud that we're white?
Absolutely!
Race worship, on the other hand, is this idea that I'm so wonderful because I'm white, or I can do no wrong because I'm white, or white societies can do no wrong, and the answer is that there are some people that slip into that, and it's really weird because it's blatantly false.
It sounds like just bad thinking from bad thinkers.
Well, it is, because a white society could rend itself in twain by adopting, say, communism.
Or, you know, you could have an all-white ethnostate that could collapse the next day because they make a seriously bad decision.
Yeah, it's not like white people don't have the capacity to be stupid or immature or...
Or to utterly correct something.
No.
So, to be perfectly plain, why am I proud that I'm white?
Because nobody else can be.
No other race of people has inherited the potential to do what my ancestors did.
Now, does that mean we need to live up to the potential?
Absolutely.
Would I say that from a societal standpoint, we have an obligation to those who came before us and to those who are going to come after us to make sure we had them the same or better?
Yes.
I think so, too.
We are racially obligated to make sure that those who come after us in the race get at least what we got as good as we can make it.
Radio Free Northwest is brought to you by the Northwest Front, P.O. Box 21933, Seattle, Washington 98111.
You can visit the party on our website at northwestfront.org.
Until next time, comrades, hail victory!
▲
Export Selection