Jump to content
🌙 COLDPLAY ANNOUNCE MOON MUSIC OUT OCTOBER 4TH 🎵

What's wrong with white men? In search of an explanation by Kevin MacDonald


WendyGirl33

Recommended Posts

What's wrong with white men? In search of an explanation by Kevin MacDonald

 

In my previous column, I attempted to analyze two important sex differences in political behavior: Women’s tendency to be attracted to wealthy, powerful men, and women’s relatively greater attraction to close relationships, empathy, and nurturance. These differences make women less likely to be attracted to white racialist movements given the current political context.

 

But these differences are not the main cause of our malaise. A correspondent writing to me about my last column said that I should ask why white men are such wimps that they are basically lying down and allowing themselves to be displaced.

 

It’s a good question. How could a race of people that conquered the world suddenly lose confidence and voluntarily cede power? What explains the culture of Western suicide?

 

White men have to look in the mirror when thinking about our ongoing dispossession. After all, even though there is a preponderance of men in societies of people who explicitly advocate the interests of European-Americans, these men represent a miniscule percentage of the European-American male population. One such society, the Charles Martel Society, is named for Charles Martel, a man who stood up for his people by leading an army against invading Muslims. This is what one should expect from men. But such men — and people willing to follow such a man into battle to preserve their people and culture — are vanishingly rare among contemporary Europeans, whether in Europe or the European Diaspora.

 

Consider again the evolutionary theory of sex. In my last column, I sketched out how it explains the general contours of female behavior. Here I draw out the implications for male behavior. Females are the sex with a high investment in reproduction — pregnancy, lactation, and child care. Since the act of reproduction costs little for men, a general rule of nature is that males must compete with other males for access to females. This results in the prediction that males will be more aggressive than females and that the main targets of their aggression will be other males.

 

Male aggression over access to females is common in nature. Males fight each other, and the winner gets to mate with the females. For example, a coalition of male lions taking over a pride drives off or kills the resident males and then commits infanticide on the offspring of the males they displaced. They then mate with the females. In nature, males who were not aggressive and didn't try to control territory did not leave offspring. The cowardly lion is a literary invention, nothing more.

 

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Men.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pitchfork Time By Patrick J. Buchanan

 

Pitchfork Time By Patrick J. Buchanan

 

Any wonder native-born Californians are fleeing the Golden Land?

 

In his campaign and inaugural address, Barack Obama cast himself as a moderate man seeking common ground with conservatives.

 

Yet, his budget calls for the radical restructuring of the U.S. economy, a sweeping redistribution of power and wealth to government and Democratic constituencies. It is a declaration of war on the Right.

 

The real Obama has stood up, and lived up to his ranking as the most left-wing member of the United States Senate.

 

Barack has no mandate for this. He was even behind McCain when the decisive event that gave him the presidency occurred—the September collapse of Lehman Brothers and the market crash.

 

Republicans are under no obligation to render bipartisan support to this statist coup d’etat. For what is going down is a leftist power grab that is anathema to their principles and philosophy.

 

Where the U.S. government usually consumes 21 percent of gross domestic product, this Obama budget spends 28 percent in 2009 and runs a deficit of $1.75 trillion, or 12.7 percent of GDP. That is four times the largest deficit of George W. Bush and twice as large a share of the economy as any deficit run since World War II.

 

Add that 28 percent of GDP spent by the U.S. government to the 12 percent spent by states, counties and cities, and government will consume 40 percent of the economy in 2009.

 

We are not “headed down the road to socialism.” We are there.

 

http://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/2009/03/03/pitchfork-time-by-patrick-j-buchanan/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's wrong with white men? In search of an explanation by Kevin MacDonald

 

In my previous column, I attempted to analyze two important sex differences in political behavior: Women’s tendency to be attracted to wealthy, powerful men, and women’s relatively greater attraction to close relationships, empathy, and nurturance. These differences make women less likely to be attracted to white racialist movements given the current political context.

 

But these differences are not the main cause of our malaise. A correspondent writing to me about my last column said that I should ask why white men are such wimps that they are basically lying down and allowing themselves to be displaced.

 

It’s a good question. How could a race of people that conquered the world suddenly lose confidence and voluntarily cede power? What explains the culture of Western suicide?

 

White men have to look in the mirror when thinking about our ongoing dispossession. After all, even though there is a preponderance of men in societies of people who explicitly advocate the interests of European-Americans, these men represent a miniscule percentage of the European-American male population. One such society, the Charles Martel Society, is named for Charles Martel, a man who stood up for his people by leading an army against invading Muslims. This is what one should expect from men. But such men — and people willing to follow such a man into battle to preserve their people and culture — are vanishingly rare among contemporary Europeans, whether in Europe or the European Diaspora.

 

Consider again the evolutionary theory of sex. In my last column, I sketched out how it explains the general contours of female behavior. Here I draw out the implications for male behavior. Females are the sex with a high investment in reproduction — pregnancy, lactation, and child care. Since the act of reproduction costs little for men, a general rule of nature is that males must compete with other males for access to females. This results in the prediction that males will be more aggressive than females and that the main targets of their aggression will be other males.

 

Male aggression over access to females is common in nature. Males fight each other, and the winner gets to mate with the females. For example, a coalition of male lions taking over a pride drives off or kills the resident males and then commits infanticide on the offspring of the males they displaced. They then mate with the females. In nature, males who were not aggressive and didn't try to control territory did not leave offspring. The cowardly lion is a literary invention, nothing more.

 

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Men.html

 

 

you crazy racist you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Society" is just a collection of individuals, each distinct from the other. Any attempt to categorize, classify, or otherwise segregate groups of people should be viewed with extreme skepticism, because the end goal is always the same: to turn us against each other, so that we can be taken advantage of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...