Atir's Talebok

Emulate Success, Not Failure: The crux of the Dissident Right movement is our obsession to emulate failure, simply because it fits with our infatuation with certain ideologies and past movements, regardless of their objective merit. The past century has been a continuous streak of failures, simply because we emulate failure and reject success. We need to understand that just because we like a certain group, doesn't mean we must emulate everything they did, including their failures; just the same as rejecting everything, including successes, from groups we dislike. White advocate movements the past few decades have tried a range of things: territorial separatism, marches, terrorism, books, ideology building, clubs, organisations, etc. And have done so, so many times across countless different groups, and the end result is the same: it doesn't work. None of it has worked anytime and it will continue not working, so those methods must be rejected entirely. So what does work? Simply look at highly successful groups and emulate them, specifically their successes: the Jews. Emulate Success: The Jews. Study what they did to go from marginalised minorities to ruling the world, and emulate that. Separate their successes and their failures, and learn. Their successes appear to revolve around a few things: - higher education. - higher employment: medicine, finance, law, politics, entertainment (running, not acting), etc. - extreme in-group bias (Our Only Issue Is Whites Aren't Ethnocentric Enough) - victim deflection. Emulate Jews Success, Not Morality. "You want us to be Jews!! What's the difference if we turn into them." (because it will inevitably be said). You can emulate success, be wealthy, influential and powerful, without being a pedo, or having any part in other degeneracies. No need to claim success is innately a Jewish trait. Higher Education and Employment. The reality is you will not change the world, nor have any say in how the country is operated as a redpilled tradie. This isn't an insult to tradies, but this is how it is. Dream bigger, do more. Historically no peasant revolution has been successful, without elite backing. We need to replace the elite with ourselves. "Uni is for blue haired liberals! I don't want to go somewhere that'll turn me gay!" You're already redpilled, you shouldn't need to worry about the "possibility" of being brainwashed at university. Many normies go through university without turning gay or becoming anti-racist; you'll be fine. Victim Deflection. A bizarre yet seemingly powerful method to dismiss criticism and scrutiny, is calling anyone who raises concerns to them "anti-semitic" and point to the "holocaust" as a plea of noble victimhood. Whites need a universal "holocaust" to point to when criticised, with no political affiliations that could poison it; and just call them anti-White. Comment if you've got ideas. Modern Success. We have none. Most of our groups are very small, fringe groups that will achieve nothing in the long-run, aside from littering cities with stickers. Depressingly the most successful is probably Nick Fuentes and his AFPAC, while extremely anti-semitic and mostly pro-White, it's goals are colorblind. What I don't understand is why these various WN groups instead form law syndicates, where a group of like-minded men all attend university together and get law degrees, to form White SPLCs, ADLs, etc, to protect their and other White's legal rights; and to advocate for Whites in the legal/ political theatre. Take the same idea and focus the group on finance, politics, entertainment, etc. A lot can be achieved, if we are smart and work in groups. We need to move from the mundane to the professional realm. Rome Wasn't Built In A Day. Meaningful change is going to take decades of dedicated work from us all, so don't give up because Santa didn't leave the "ethnostate" in our stocking at Christmas. You won't get your goals tomorrow and large goals like an ethnostate may genuinely never occur for centuries, and that's okay. We persevere and never slow down.

Which of his followers didn't already know this?

What color was the skin of Europeans during the Mesolithic era (14,000 to 8,000 years ago). 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔 Well, they weren’t all one color. Ancient DNA shows that skin color varied between different regions back then. Specifically, it varied from WEST to EAST Western Europe had BROWNER skin than eastern Europe. Eastern Europe had WHITER skin than western Europe. The further west a population lived the Browner their skin was. The further east they lived the Whiter their skin was. In the far west in Britain, the Mesolithic people were very Brown. Probably as brown as Ameridians (“Native Americans”). In the far east, in Russia, the Mesolithic people were very white. Probably as white as modern Europeans. But overall, no population was entirely brown or entirely white. Most regions had an intermediate skin tone on average.

No one is oblivious to this, the problem is first of all the untrustworthiness of basically every major movement, you've no idea who will sell out and when because there are no moral obligations in any of these organizations. Secondly there is the issue of midwit arrogance, most of these movements lack deep substance because they are led by brainlets. Having a perfect ideology isn't necessary but these leaders need to accept they aren't going to be the leader and the smartest person in the room at the same time. If they pretend like they are no one with an IQ higher than theirs is going to submit to them.

Too Many Chiefs Not Enough Indians: Dissident Right Politics.

To a man's perception (and even a woman's) the height of pleasure is the womb and the first year of life. All other pleasures are compared to this original pleasure. The woman wants to be looked after by the man as her mother looked after her in her infancy. The pleasures a man seeks are all proxy to the pleasure he originally enjoyed. But for the man it is necessary to reject this pleasure in order to gain his independence. Because the mother is the embodiment of pleasure and pleasure is the forbidden fruit man must avoid, the mother becomes the embodiment of temptation, the Whore of Babylon that has ensnared every ruler. The man thus moves in the opposite direction, defying his natural impulse and moving towards Christ.

The Pagan world held both the Earth Mother and Sky Father in reverence, the intention must have been to maintain some kind of balance between these two polarities. However anyone who has tried balancing the material (Earth mother) with the spiritual (Sky father) can testify that any harmony achieved is temporary. In the end one pole must dominate the other. Consequently the Christian world redefined the Mother as Temptation and the Father and God/Christ. If the Mother completely dominates, you are separated from God and are thus in hell. If the Father dominates you will achieve salvation. A man is made through his denial of temptation, this is the masculine message of Christianity. Christianity is fundamentally the hard path. It is in almost total opposition to what is deemed "Natural". People call it weak because it tells them to "love thy neighbour", but it is in many ways harder to love them than to hate them. When you fall victim to your nature you are relaxing into the Mother and thus falling further and further away from the father. Christ advocates for the poor because the lives of the rich breeds the man-child. He advocates poverty because it is in austerity that he triumphs. Some of his followers even practice celibacy because this totally detaches women from their world, they no longer have use for them. Those that aren't celibate enter into a monogamous marriage and thus lose any need for the approval of women at large, only their wife matters to them. Once one understands this dynamic, much of Christian moral law can be justified. You wait till marriage so there is no desire to seek female approval for the sake of casual sex etc.

At birth, even though the Child has left the womb, he is still entirely dependent on his mother. This state of total submission lasts for about a year. Throughout this period the Mother seems all powerful, the source of all pleasure and nourishment, absence of the mother often equates to pain. After this period the child begins to gain autonomy. For daughters this period is easier, their new identity can be centered upon the model of their mother. The son meanwhile has to reject his mother in order to grow as a man. The greatest of men are those who managed to totally reject the temptations of pleasure and security, in favour of struggle and heroism. Within this natal process lies the root of the "Earth mother" and "Sky father" mythos. The world accepting matriarchy and the world denying patriarchy. To leave the Earth mother (provider of all your basic necessities) and to strive for the Sky father (who promises nothing but fame and glory) is a process that defines the man. Few males ever engage in this process, most males fail to attain manhood. The man-child is an example of a man totally enthralled by his mother, an archetype I'm sure we are all familiar with. However most of the population exists in the the state of a half-man. He is not dependent on his mother, but he is dependent on women. All his actions are centred around the goal of pleasing women, his self esteem is tied up in female approval. Real men reject the need for approval from women entirely, they have declared full independence from the mother.