Louisiana Lawmaker Forced to Clarify There Was No ‘Good’ in Slavery

[Alizia Tyler]

Biology is entirely relevant to notions of race and proper identity. If you want to counter the notion that race is a social construct then present objective facts rather than an endless parade of opinion from racists and white supremacists.

My larger concern, and very certainly the larger concern of the Dissident Right (which I must distinguish in this way because ‘conservatism’, now, often does not seem to have concern and conserves little if anything), revolves around the larger idea of the existence of and the survival of Europe.

It is quite possible that other nations and regions have intellectual classes that are concerned for cultural and social survival, but in my case my focus of interest has been in the Occident, and thus my categories of concern are OccidentalM as I have made crystal-clear.

Europe, as I hope is obvious to you, is really a metaphysical notion if we were to be precise. The *idea of Europe* is an idea, a vision, an ideal, a concept. It should be obvious to you (and if it is not I won’t be able to help you) that the most important categories that I talk about are categories that have to do with both metaphysics and, when it comes to *spiritual realities*, with the transcendental.

Biology, as such, is not irrelevant and this should be quite obvious. Except biology as a reduction, tarted up into something it isn’t and can’t be, is.

If by *biology* you mean the physical structure in which we all live our life. It would be impossible to say that our body is irrelevant. Our body is our heredity. And heredity is a complex idea and not mere something to be reduced to *biology*.

But there is more to a body, and to the locale where a given body has existence, and to the heredity of that people, than what you mean to imply when you use biology as a reductionism.

I do not regard ‘race’ and the substantial differences between people, which largely developed on the various continents, as irrelevant, though I do understand that you indeed do. And as I say there is a modern ideology which asserts that the *body* is exactly the same wherever it might be located, even if it is uprooted and transported, dropped, somewhere else. That is what biological reductionism will do, of course.

But we need to clarify what we are talking about when we talk about the Culture Wars and the modern crises that are now manifesting blatantly and I think undeniably.

Ultimately, in my view, we are talking about IDENTITY. And related to identity is the idea, and the fact, of ownership and control, but also heredity, cultural purpose, social and cultural trajectory, and a great many additional things — all of them extending far above mere *biology*.

If identity is weakened, and if it is eliminated or defeated, one will have no means to defend oneself. In a sense one ceases to actually exist, if existence is understood to be a metaphysical process and event, which really it is.

And in the current, modern project which I have indicated as being post-Sixties, one can easily discover and label the project of undermining American identity. And pages have been written about the how and why. This project, as it were, is connected with a range of different trends and influences (social, economic, military, industrial, global). But the important thing to say about it is to focus on it as an outcome: what results from it (or what is resulting from it).

And what results from it, what is resulting from it, is the destruction and the undermining of Caucasian-European America. And there is a present danger to Europe as well (and other place I assume). For this reason I describe (and we describe) the project of Americanism and of the Americanopolis in the critical terms that I do.

 

[Alizia Tyler]

[cont. from previous]

Multi-Culturalism is not an inevitability, as if ordained by Heaven, but a set of policy-choices which arose out of ideological predicates. So, the issue is not entirely about *race*, and yet race (and culture) when it has to do with the importation of entire populations and the dilution of demographics within the context of economic-industrial eventualities, is questionable and challengeable because it tends to destroy culture, undermine social structures, and ‘level’ all things down into or toward one thing. And I can submit, as an example, the cultural social and civic changes that are clearly afoot in the United States today which, as I say, show the *outcome*.

So is ‘race’ the thing that has relevance? It certainly would seem to be a relevant feature when, for example, one considers the situation in France (where there is strong and vital debate going on about all these questions). It is a factor, but not the sole factor.

So my view is now and has always been that the larger picture, the larger questions of meaning & value are what is really *the topic*. I do not exclude *race* and for this reason I also reject your label of me as ‘racist’.

For you any identity that has any sort of protectionist inclination, if it is practiced by any Caucasian-European nation or people, is equivalent to *white supremacy*.

The reason you have this particular stance is because it serves you and your larger (unethical and immoral) project. And I have already exposed and explained, clearly, time and time again, what your project actually is, why it is unethical and immoral, and why it is destructive.

 

[Ouroboros]

Are you trying to ask me if I think math is racist? The answer to that is no and I have never claimed otherwise.

Learn to present coherent evidence. Where is your proof of any of these claims?

I was initially asking if you deemed "math is racist" as a simple difference of opinion, rather than something you believed in, and you said that you did deem it to be a mere opinion. which I've shown to be utterly incorrect. Your definition speaks to your lack of actual belief in science, which you make so much noise about. If you reject "race as a social construct" because you think it contradicts science, then you would be able to reject the rhetorical absurdity that math as a discipline has some unfathomable racial component. But you can't reject the rhetoric, because it makes your side look bad.

I'm still waiting for you to cite chapter and verse on your statement-- what, a month ago?-- as to how the European philosophy of Individual Right derived from Judeo-Christian doctrine, much less "Middle Eastern mysticism." You supplied zero coherent evidence for that conviction-- which is, to be sure, an opinion rather than rhetoric. However, your meaningless demands that others should supply evidence that suits you-- that is a rhetorical device and not just an opinion.

 

[Ouroboros]

Socratic questioning is useful in exposing sophistry. That you have no answers to these questions is telling.

Which individual? What investments? In what ideas exactly?

I feel very little challenge in your vague assertions.

You haven't been able to counter the science or biological realities presented by me or @vanceen.

Present these lies and counter them with objective facts if you can.

What ideas specifically are you referring to?

Who here supports America unquestionably? Certainly not I. Are you referring to @vanceen?

Are you the arbiter of everyones identity?

Aren't notions of what is proper and who is the original demographic also an example of social engineering?

Are you now also the arbiter of what is good for all individuals?

It seems fairly obvious you are invested in notions of white nationalism.

I don't really care who you write to, I'm not at all concerned about you expressing ideas. In fact it seems every time you try to express your ideas outside of this thread you are met with laughter and disagreement, so by all means, have at it.

What possible source could you be drawing on, that informs you as to how others outside this thread receive AT's ideas? Is there one?

 

[Alizia Tyler]

Which individual? What investments? In what ideas exactly?

Yes, I began to realize, as I examined the Sixties and the post-Sixties, that public relations and propaganda were employed as tools to modify and mold the ideas that people held. The reason I focused on this should at this point be obvious and in any case I always state it openly: I see the United States now experiencing the *outcome* of various sorts of social engineering processes that have led to the present situation of open social conflict, ‘fracture’ of national identity, confusion and chaos around questions of *identity*.

As I have stated many many times, there is a low-level ideological war being waged against *Whites* and *whiteness*. And very definitely one must take into account one visible and tangible result of this *war* which, as I have said so many times, is demographic take-over. The displacement and dispossession of America’s original demographic: the demographic that built America and, in my view, the demographic that would and could maintain it.

So what I have said (and I am sure that you do in fact clearly and definitely understand what I say and have said!) is that in America, over an extended period, the idea of what America is has been molded and modified through public relations, propaganda, and education. You are completely aware of this because you all the time crow about it!

And what I have said is that the individual receives ideas but more importantly a moralized message that certain ideas are *right, proper and good*. For example for a nation, this nation, to have porous borders and that mass-illegal immigration is in some ways a *good* and is *American* or part of American values. Or that it is a *good* for people — Caucasian-Whites in this case — to put aside the preference they have, which is in fact natural and good, for their own kind, and to believe that in order to be moral and good people they have to accept a group of ideas that undermines not only their self-identification, but all their propsects, and eventuates in becoming *a minority in their own country*.

You have not demonstrated that you are the brightest bulb shimmering in the long hallways of argument — but you obviously grasp what I first meant and what I mean now. And over the course of months you have gloated about what your presence represents and what you are *doing* in America: undermining it.

Aren't notions of what is proper and who is the original demographic also an example of social engineering?

You are a very tricky, a very sophistic liar. Everything, every single and isolated idea and topic in your argument is devious. You entire position, at a foundational level, is extremely unethical and immoral (you openly state that these values mean nothing to you whatsoever).

The definition of what America was, according to the people who brought it into existence, is of course an example of how idea, idealism, concept, vision and intention all come together within a metaphysics that is brought out and manifested in this plane of existence. It is not *biology* that does any of this, as if comparable to some body-function, but rather all of this comes out of higher dimensions of mind.

So, time and again you have stumbled over what ‘metaphysics’ means and why it is crucial to reinvigorate the idea of it (as against your absurd reductionism designed to thwart idea and undermine meaning & value), but I cannot see how even someone so committed to dullardry cannot plainly see how the creations of our world are really expressions of metaphysical notions.

But what you actually sort-of get at, and in any case what I will bring into the clear light of day, is to the very notion of ‘patria’ and ‘patriotism’. These are old notions, I would say universal and ever-existent, that are bound up with one’s physical self, the soil in which one comes into existence, the valuation and appreciation of one’s fathers and mothers; heritage and ancestry, traditions and accomplishments, and they are also part-and-parcel of the concept of ownership, which as I have said, and should be clear, has a metaphysical and not purely a physical dimension.

You are an enemy of this sort of identification. The function of your *biology* argument is so that you do not have to think about reality. You trick yourself and you trick others with your biological sophistry!

Your purpose is to have come here, or to have been dropped here by your mother as an *anchor baby*, and instead of serving the republic and contributing to a proper sense of patria, you have made yourself into an agent of its undermining and destruction. This has all been expressed by you in dozens if not hundreds of posts!

 

[Ouroboros]

I would note that “biology” can play a role in the formation of a national ethos. Consider that the people who colonized America largely came from the temperate zones in Europe and gravitated to the same zones in the New World. Without advocating biological determinism, I can see some influences of climate on culture, which would then be recapitulated as if they were entrained biological responses.