Saturday, 28 June 2014


Guest: An Observer

Nick and "an observer" discuss:
  • Race
  • Fascism
  • Immigration
Alex the Serb, Scorpio, VT Saxon and Delcroix eventually join the show which creates a roundtable.
Outside Radio Archive
Circus Maximus Archive



  1. There is nothing wrong with a voluntary Nationalism. Unfortunately, most Nationalism is flawed at its base and self-sabotaging because it pushes tribal principle at the expense of its opposite, which means it willingly sacrifices the basic unit of all social science, the individual, to the tribe. It does not seek a balance between the two VOLUNTARILY through truthful propaganda (nature's dictates discoverable only by scientific method marketed to the masses) or by the necessary corrections of self-defense-force against previously initiated damages only but by INITIATION of its own force. In that way, beyond all the rhetoric, at bottom most WN's seek a return to a system of privileges, national nepotism, a win-lose dialectic of their own against those outside their group, not a return to a 'fair' system. This Observer guy even said it clear-as-day himself in this audio: "some humans are more human than others." What's that supposed to mean anyway? Inequality of individuals The 'pagan' version of CI? In what way is that better than Jew supremacism? Who decides who joins his 'more human than human' club? Let me guess.

    "The goyim people are rascals who bow down to force but are merciless towards weakness in others, unforgiving of their faults and enjoy committing crimes. They cannot bear the contradictions of a free social system but are willing to become martyrs in the face of the violence of bold despotism. It is those qualities that help us become independent" -- Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

    Fascism was basically a defense of European civilization or a political strategy of collective mobilization of 'the price of freedom is eternal vigilance' in emergency mode. To the extent that it succeeded was exactly the extent to which its goal was the defense of the win-win dialectic of European civilization. To the extent that it failed was exactly the extent to which it tried to justify initiations of force as self-defense force or to blur the line between the two. The way of the scoundrel is never the way of nature and nature is the ultimate dictator, the strictest and the wisest. Nature will defend itself against irrationality and scoundrelism and lack of principles by deadly force if it has to.

    The foundational dynamics that ALWAYS have to be kept in mind in political discussions are individualism vs. collectivism and how to achieve the proper balance between the two WITHOUT having to initiate force and put a gun to somebody's head or a boot up their arse to arrive at it. Any physical force that is not a defensive one is outside the human mode of existence; it belongs in the jungle. Obviously, when people have been raped for decades, they have a right to defend themselves by collective force and bring the criminals to justice, but if they become the oppressors in their turn, if they cross over to initiations of force, if they pass laws to give themselves privileges, then they have crossed over to the jungle and will sooner or later be avenged by natural law. Natural law for human beings is NOT the law of the jungle, it is the law that makes possible the maximum use of the human being's ultimate weapon, its mind. And when we talk about human beings we're talking about individuals. Families and any other tribal associations that are involuntary and oppress the individual are not worth keeping and needless to say, neither are associations to bigger tribes of extended families. Of course, there is a big difference between a genuine struggle in search of a worthy RATIONAL, principled ideal and oppression. Genuine struggles are voluntary but hard-sells because the rewards are uncertain and have to be imagined before they are carved out of reality. They can only be carved out of reality if they are OF reality, rational.

    ~ Negentropic MK I

  2. Oops! Correction. What I meant to say at the end of the first paragraph was:

    "What's that supposed to mean anyway? The 'pagan' version of CI? In what way is that better than Jew supremacism? Who decides who joins his 'more human than human' club? Let me guess. Inequality of all individuals is a given but equality BEFORE THE LAW, in no way advocates equality of results and there's no reason to degrade other races and insult them in order to return to a fair system, a system dominated by win-win dialectics.

    ~ Negentropic MK II

  3. Similarly, as long as your ‘taxes’ are involuntary, they are nothing but extortion and a clear violation of the very basis of civilization itself: the non-aggression principle and the win-win dialectic arising out of it lifting humans out of the win-lose predations of the jungle.

    The law of the jungle or ‘might-makes-right’ does not disappear, of course. Far from it. It is because rights-make-the-most-might that rights are instituted amongst men by those who have might. It is this might giving itself privileges through regular returns to the law-of-the-jungle win-lose dialectic that the rest of society can’t check, while it has to rely on the very opposite win-win dialectic of that very society’s ‘rights’ to actually create wealth worth plundering that’s the problem. What is needed are checks and balances, eternal vigilance and self-defense against initiated aggression, not limited extortions of your own pretending to be self-defense. Extortions backed by force, threat of force and intimidation for bogus ‘good causes’ and ‘prices of civilization’ while the very most basic principle of civilization is being violated at its root. It is precisely this sort of compromise that allows predators and parasites to flourish, because once you switch over to the win-lose dialectic and give it a foothold of any sort of respectability, then it’s only a matter of time before it completely devours the win-win.

    The civilized win-win practitioners in society have to make sure that extortions and predatory win-lose arrangements never become the rule by deliberately confusing injustice and natural inequalities. Inequality is not automatically injustice, inequality of individuals, groups of individuals and ultimately cultures is the natural state of flux. If left free of coercion, the most productive groups become the most dominant and only stay dominant through production. By pushing the false ideology of egalitarianism, Marxists (and other elite Jew dupes) confuse injustice with inequality and therefore gain a foothold for their extortions and parasitic activity in the name of ‘equalizing playing fields’ and classes and some such nonsense. The collective-principle within the democracy-racket allows them to use majority vote to inject the law-of-the-jungle, the win-lose dialectic back into society in the form of legislation not just justifying but legalizing for their predations at the point of a gun.

    ~ Negentropic MK III

  4. "It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt." -- John Philpot Curran: Speech upon the Right of Election for Lord Mayor of Dublin, 1790. (Speeches. Dublin, 1808.)

    If ‘democracy’ or the tyranny of the majority is simply substituted for ‘liberty’ which can only ever apply to individuals (the basic scientific unit of human being) or no one at all, then by this simple action of constantly reinforced and psychically driven word-substitution, the entire narrative of ‘eternal vigilance’ is turned upon its head and becomes weaponized to come to mean defending the tyranny of the majority, its elected leaders and all its initiations of force against the non-aggression principle at all times. This is the absurd and deliberately engineered schizophrenic state of all civilized nations of the world today where what the weaponized narrative works to accomplish in reality is the exact opposite (win-lose dialectic) of what it has been taught to THINK it's accomplishing in abstraction: the discipline of freedom and its win-win dialectic.

    "Democracy is the art and science of running the circus from the monkey cage." -- H. L. Mencken

    “The enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan.” ― Carl von Clausewitz, "Vom Kriege"

    "Wealth is the number of forward days a given system is sustainable."-- Buckminster Fuller

    "It might be a basic characteristic of existence that those who would know it completely would perish, in which case the strength of spirit should be measured according to how much of the 'truth' one could still barely endure--or to put it more clearly, to what degree one would require it to be thinned down, shrouded, sweetened, blunted, falsified." ~ FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE, Beyond Good and Evil

    “The individual’s adherence to his group is ‘conscious’ because he is aware of it and recognizes it, but it is ultimately involuntary because he is trapped in a dialectic and in a group that leads him unfailingly to his adherence. His adherence is also ‘intellectual’ because he can express his conviction clearly and logically, but it is not genuine because the information, the data, the reasoning, that have led him to adherence to the group were themselves deliberately falsified in order to lead him there.” ~ Jacques Ellul – “Propaganda, The Formation of Men’s Attitudes”

    ~ Negentropic MK IV

  5. On interview June 27, re. Amer. slavery,
    "Observer" mentioned that "he wished his people had picked their own cotton, and left the slaves in Africa."

    And I observe from REAL historical records, that the "Majority of Southerners WERE small farmers, that did pick their own cotton."
    These White farmers had NO slaves.

    It was the rewriters of "History"- through books like "UncleTom's Cabin", and "THe Story of A Slave Girl" and the "Octoroon", etc., that had a widespread "black-ops" - no pun - propaganda, the impression that Black Slavery was widespread, and owned by the Whites, who were cruel towards their slaves. And later still, this impression was spread in film such as "Gone With the Wind", "Band of Angels, ", and again, the film and several re-makes of "Uncle Tom's Cabin," etc.

    I also observe, that History claims slavery in the U.S. only existed in the South.
    HOWEVER, what"s in a word?
    There was horrible, cruel treatment of the poor workers, the miners and their families, the factory workers. Those workers had no choice in their jobs. One could say, they were free to leave their work anytime, BUT to go where? All the jobs, anywhere these people would go, they would be treated as cruel.

    So, in fact, the White people in the North, were slaves, also!