Meta-Political Mannerbund: Racism, Sexism, Antisemitism and Homophobia

Meta-Political Mannerbund: Racism, Sexism, Antisemitism and Homophobia

Greg Johnson once remarked that the current White Nationalist priority is meta-political; specifically, defining who we are. The regime of globalist multi-culturalism (really, multi-racialism) wants everyone “mixed” into a One World coffee-colored people with no distinctions of race, or even sex. In the United States, forced integration of whites with blacks was an important, perhaps decisive, victory for the globalists. Whites and blacks are so obviously different – immediately apparent by skin color alone – that it requires a massive psychological effort to “not see race.”

But even though whites accepted integration with blacks, it of course was not enough. Any and every interaction with blacks left whites open to charges of racism, and now this process has become the self-parody of “hipster racism” and the like. Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white; therefore, racist is a code word for white. This is the important formula to remember:

Racist = White.

So let’s use the process of exclusion to get a cognitive understanding of Mannerbund. Let’s do this with a visualization exercise.

Imagine a map of the United States. Every person in the USA is represented on the map as a grey dot. Now, imagine the color of the dot changing to represent what race that person is. We now have white dots, black dots, brown dots, red dots, and yellow dots. Imagine all but the white dots fading out. Now the map has about 30% less dots, and all the dots represent white people.

That’s our racism. Now, step two, sexism.

Imagine all the dots that represent men are colored blue, and all the dots that represent women are colored pink. Imagine the pink dots fading from the map. Now, we are left with white men only.

Now comes step three, and this is a little bit tricky. Let’s connect the white dots to each other by family relations. Draw a line between each white man, and his father, brothers, cousins, and sons. We’ve now got patterns of interconnected dots.

Imagine all the dots that represent Jews are little stars, and all the dots that represent homosexuals are little triangles. Before we fade these out, look at the distribution – especially, family connections. The stars are related to each other, live in urban areas with each other, and are somewhat isolated from the rest of the white dots. They form a “tribe,” a cluster of interrelated dots, that while it’s spread out over the country geographically, form their own network in the whole. The lines that connect the stars (family relations) are mostly connected to each other, with few connections to the other white dots. Isolating (and fading out) the Jewish cluster is relatively straightforward, precisely because the Jews are so ethnocentric.

But look at the triangles that represent homosexuals. They are about the same in number as the stars. They are dispersed throughout the population and connected to the white dots; they do not form an independent cluster, as they are not a tribe. So, isolating the stars will have little effect on the white tribes, but isolating the triangles will affect just about every white tribe that’s big enough.

Traditional Judaism pronounced a death penalty for all non-Jewish homosexuals, in practice, this means going into the white tribes, and isolating the homosexuals. Modern Judaism also attempts to isolate the white homosexuals, but this time with “gay rights” where the white homosexuals renounce their white identity and join the anti-white coalition. (Feminism is essentially the same thing for women, changing their primary identity from “white” to “woman,” implying they had more in common with black women than white men.) Catholicism told the white homosexuals to be chaste and join the priesthood, not coincidentally, the celibate priesthood is right at the center of the Western institution the Jews blame for 2,000 years of persecution. Protestantism rejected any special place for homosexuals (i.e., celibate priests) and probably not coincidentally, invited the Jews back into our countries.

I’m not making any moral judgements for or against homosexuality, or whether to include or exclude them, merely pointing out the pattern. Oogenhand once said any men’s group is likely to tend towards polygamy or homosexuality. Compare and contrast two historical mannerbunds; the Catholic Priesthood and the Mormon Priesthood. It’s kind of obvious, isn’t it?

What we have left is the white Mannerbund; White men, with two identities sort of half-in, half-out, Jews and homosexuals. (Remember, Jews have white skin and mostly look like us. The White Rabbit folks call Jews “pink rabbits” and if Jews all wore the Hassidic outfits, turning on the TV would look a whole lot different, and our people would be immediately enlightened.)

Now, repeat this process of visualization by imagining yourself walking down a city street in a very diverse crowd. First, all non-whites vanish from view. Then, all white women vanish from view. Then Jews, then gays. It’s a lot less crowded now, and you’re walking down the street and only see other white men.

That’s “us,” that’s our team. Or better, that’s our Army. We eliminate the women because the Army is a man’s institution, not a woman’s institution. We need to visualize the Mannerbund because cultural conservatives can only see “family values” so their model tends to be the nuclear family. But families do not go to war, men do. The nuclear family works great for raising children, but it has no place on the battlefield, obviously.

Steve Sailer calls race a large, partially inbred extended family. If you look at the families ties between White men, it’s a complex, interconnected group, with many smaller sub-tribes. Once your model is the Mannerbund, you see issues like racism, sexism, antisemitism, and homophobia in a new light, and you can see why the powers that be are opposed to racism, sexism, antisemitism, and homophobia.

And why white men aren’t even allowed to have our own golf clubs anymore.

Some wag at Counter-Currents once wrote that fascism is just the Mannerbund deciding that they should be the rulers. Once the White Mannerbund takes power, we can decide for ourselves questions about women, Jews, and homosexuals.

14 thoughts on “Meta-Political Mannerbund: Racism, Sexism, Antisemitism and Homophobia

  1. Good article. I agree with changing the focus to mainly white men. The white women who do tend to be racist are older and Christian. I think in WN we are organically developing a mannerbund. MWIR is the hub of it.


  2. Lol about Hasidic outfits, for a while whenever I see Jews on TV (including Zuckerberg, Bloomberg, etc.) I imagine them with side curls and a black hat. It works with Jewesses too: the hatchet faced harpies of CNN are good for a laugh. CNN must have an affirmative action program for horse face Jew broads.


    1. That was from Lew at OD, he mentioned the idea that if they were all wearing the outfits on TV, it would be immediately apparent to people.

      Have you ever seen (NSFW, it’s a bunch of pictures of naked women, comparing and contrasting various jewesses and white women.)


  3. Mentoring younger white men and boys is a big part of the Mannerbund. Anything from formally coaching a friend’s son at something you’re good at, to chatting up a fellow white parent and throwing a ball around with his kid. Links must be intergenerational too.


    1. Mentoring younger white men and boys is a big part of the Mannerbund. Anything from formally coaching a friend’s son at something you’re good at, to chatting up a fellow white parent and throwing a ball around with his kid. Links must be intergenerational too.

      That used to be normal. That was part of the Protestant, American, “householder system” that Kevin MacDonald talked about. It worked like this: if your father sent you to work for a neighboring family, there’s no favoritism. You had to do your job, and be harshly and objectively judged for your performance. That’s exactly how the male hierarchy forms.

      But that is our way of doing it, not their way of doing it. So when we were “integrated” the whole system broke down.


  4. White boys do not have institutional moral support because they are foreigners in America. So with everything they get from schools and television, many float around with a vague feeling of worthlessness. Gotta talk to them.


  5. Helping young Whites is a good idea. When we simply allow them to be deluged with the current society without at least helping them see the opposing view, they’ll be more likely to simply go with the flow… down the toilet with society’s waste.

    I don’t think spending 5-10 hours helping with academics or athletics is a high price to pay, and the return on investment will be huge when they displace the victim types on their own merits in spite of their non-complicity with the failing culture.


  6. The American military combat arms are basically the young man’s white mannerbund, the welfare soldiers go into support MOSs to sit on their asses for a paycheck. Doubt me then go spend a day doing a youtube loop of combat footage. White men and coloreds who want to be white men.

    At altright there is a poster who is ex-Army infantry officer who basically said the same thing I just wrote. All white and when they get out many of these immediately go ex-pat to other countries because ‘Murika is basically a cage for them.

    The situation is not hopeless, the anti-white left only has wordism and that wordism relies on the bullshit that it is morally superior, crush that stupid notion and it will collapse faster than the Berlin Wall.


    1. Yes, I would think that the ultimate mannerbund is the military, or a squadron. So are the police, the firefighters, etc. Well I would see the mannerbund as separate from the official institution itself, it’s sort of the unofficial, interpersonal ties.

      I very much liked Whitakers “wordism” idea and you’re absolutely right, the left poses as morally superior. That’s why they have to control the language so much.

      The left uses wordism to create taboos, but taboos have a specific mechanism to them and can be broken easily.


  7. For a year or two now I have imagined many White men as WNs. I also have a couple of fledgling friendships with young scrappy White men. They are the decent sort who don’t think I’m a “cougar” (perish the thought!) I have not broached the topic of race yet with them. I want them to trust me like a mother or aunt then I will see what I can do to connect them with older WN men.

    This happened rather organically and is not something I have planned out. Since I have never had sons, I think I just get my “son” fix from being around them but as (pretty much) my whole focus in life is winning this war I am always thinking about how to get this young person on board.


    1. Maureen, that’s interesting because I had a conversation with a friend not long ago, and she mentioned that her entire family is girls, her parents had three girls and each of them had 5 or 6 girls between them.

      The old saying is that a boy wants a girl like mom, and a girl wants a boy just like dad. But I’ve read studies that say your opposite sex siblings often have more of an impact on the type of the opposite sex you like. Which just makes sense if you think about it, they are the first opposite sex peers that you know.

      So I wonder about dynamics in families that have just girls, or just boys. My family is almost evenly balanced between boys and girls.

      You could of course also do that visualization exercise and swap out the men and women, you’d have the White Sisterhood I guess. It would be interesting for a WN woman to write about how they see that.


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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s