Main Page

From Nathan Larson for Congress
Jump to: navigation, search
Nathan Larson Photo.jpg

I'm Nathan Larson, neoreactionary libertarian candidate in Virginia's 10th congressional district election of 2018.


In 2017, I ran for Delegate in Virginia's 31st House of Delegates district. I thank all 481 residents (comprising 1.68 percent of the electorate) who voted for me. You have earned the right to consider yourselves the elite vanguard of the Restoration. The campaign is over, but the neoreactionary movement is just beginning.

It is noteworthy, by the way, that a number of Republicans, including Ed Gillespie, who opposed my being allowed to run for office, were defeated in the election.

It is now 16 days till ballot access petitioning starts.

Press releases

Nathan Larson proposes reducing making false statements to federal investigators to a misdemeanor offense

15 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson proposed that lying to federal investigators should be reduced to a misdemeanor offense. Currently, 18 U.S.C. § 1001 provides,

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device[ , ] a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry

shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331),[1] imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both....

"It's too harsh a penalty; it doesn't fit the crime," Larson argued. "This statute has ensnared Martha Stewart and many others who the federal government was not able to prosecute under any other statute. As the Wall Street Journal article 'For Feds, 'Lying' Is a Handy Charge' points out, even people like marine biologist Nancy Black who did something as trivial as whistle at a whale ended up with felony convictions simply for not being entirely truthful with investigators.

"How did Martha Stewart obstruct justice, if the facts in the case did not support a conviction on any other charge besides lying? Also, what about when investigators deceive or mislead witnesses or suspects to induce them to make incriminating statements? If the people get prosecuted for lying to government officials, shouldn't government officials be prosecuted for lying to the people?

"In reality, though, the federal code probably already contains way too many felony offenses that should be either reduced to misdemeanors or taken off the books altogether. It's gotten to a point that both major party candidates in last year's presidential election, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, were at risk of being prosecuted, even though what they were accused of doing wasn't really all that bad."

Nathan Larson comments on censorship of Andrew Anglin

15 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson commented on the censorship of Andrew Anglin, which is being imposed by the heckler's veto of DDoS attacks against his site, The Daily Stormer.

"Anglin made an astute point when he noted how ironic it was that The Atlantic devoted a cover article to saying what loser he is. If he's so ineffective at what he does, then why is everyone trying to stop him from getting his message out? As Roosh V once said:

The first thing I want to share about free speech is that if you're not paying dearly for it, you're probably not exercising it. If your ideas match what the Establishment wants you to think, in terms of what you learn through the media, through the universities, through entertainment, Hollywood, you are only stating what ideas they put into your mind, the ideas that are safe for you to believe. So when you speak those ideas, it's not really free speech. It's controlled speech. And as long as you exercise controlled speech, no one is gonna come after you. But the second you speak of things that go against what the Establishment wants you to believe, then the attacks come, and attacks are expensive.

"People have also told me that I accomplished nothing by threatening the President, other than getting myself put in jail. But the jail time is how you know that you're making an impact. If threatening the President didn't scare the government and make them feel like they were at risk, then why did they feel the need to throw me in prison for 46 months? They don't throw the average citizen in jail for 46 months. They only go to that kind of extreme when they're really frightened. Their need to react in that way shows how vulnerable they are, and how powerful one individual can be to have that effect on them.

"Even if they want to say what scares them is mental illness, that doesn't really matter, because a mentally ill person can still be correct in his political views, and can still take effective action in pursuit of them. If anything, the mentally ill, by acting in unpredictable ways, may be more effective, in the same way that a chess player who uses an unusual opening may be able to pull an upset against an experienced player who is used to more standard openings. If the mentally ill did not pose a threat to the government, they would not bother putting them in a cage. Even now, the Secret Service is scared of John Hinckley, and wants to limit his freedom as much as possible, because they know their power to protect the President from men like him is limited. They know that a bullet fired by an insane man is as deadly as any other bullet.

"And indeed, the comments the government made are further proof of their fear. On 19 December 2008, Assistant U.S. Attorney Kurt Bohn said, 'This is an individual who is clearly a threat to the people of the United States and no conditions -- by putting him on an ankle bracelet -- are going to ensure the safety of others.' On 2 October 2009, Mr. Bohn said that a threat against the President 'immobilizes numerous assets of the government and is simply conduct that cannot be tolerated.' On 20 August 2010, prosecutor Michael Gaches said, 'I think its very intent, and I think the words are very troubling.' On 7 December 2012, U.S. District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee said, 'I can't control what you do. You probably could get a gun. I don't know. But I worry about it. And so, when you -- when you manifested this behavior in that way, it makes me think what I got to do is protect the public and lock him up for a very, very long time.'

"So what we see is that one man, simply by writing a letter or an email, can scare the hell out of the government. The message the Secret Service, the U.S. Attorneys, and the judges send, by investigating, prosecuting, and imposing severe penalties in these cases, is that if you want to make a difference, it's not such a bad idea to threaten the President. Obviously it has an effect, or they wouldn't bother to punish it so harshly in an attempt to keep people from doing it, or to protect the public from those who have done it. Those 46 months that I was sentenced to, should be an encouragement to other disgruntled citizens to go ahead and threaten to kill the President, because that's how you let your voice be heard and make a difference in this world.

"It's the same way with Andrew Anglin or Roosh V. These men write satirical articles, yes, but there's a grain of truth in satire, and therefore those in power seek to suppress their message and destroy their lives. That is how these dissidents know they hit their target. I should point out too, my own letter to the President contained some elements of satire, which the prosecution more or less admits by noting in the plea agreement, 'The Agents repeatedly asked the defendant if he was joking, letting off steam, or just trying to draw attention to his political views.' They knew it was satire, yet they made an arrest anyway because even satire is a threat to them.

"I just want to point out how much weakness the establishment is manifesting, when it has to go to such lengths to destroy even those dissidents whose only weapon is their pen. Congratulations to Andrew Anglin and all others who, with nothing more than some clever strokes of the keyboard, have forced the state's hand, and revealed them for what they are. From this, we learn, if you want to change the world, go write a satirical thought experiment! Go mock the establishment and the Jew-influenced normies' dysfunctional, cucked-out culture! Yes, they will hit back, but society is going down the tubes anyway, and us with it if we don't put a stop to the decline, so we have little to lose."

Nathan Larson proposes expelling all Jews and Muslims from the United States


14 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson proposed expelling all Jews and Muslims from the United States.

"Some people say that morality requires a religion. The problem is, each of these religions has a different code of morality, and each also claims that its people have been chosen by God to rule the world and dominate the heathen. Whether they call it 'God's kingdom on earth' or any other euphemism, what it boils down to is, they all want to organize a religious community to seize power and make the unbelievers their bitch.

"The moderate Muslims raise their children in a faith that, if carried to its logical conclusions, promotes jihad. Those who abide by the principles of this faith become terrorists; while those who don't are hypocrites. What is the point of a faith, if one is not going to practice it consistently? Then it has no power to enforce morality. Yet, if they do practice in consistently, then they wage war against us. They need to go back to the Muslim world where they can live under their caliphates rather than constantly trying to bring their brand of theocracy to the United States.

"Muslims are more obvious about wanting to blow up the infidels, but Jews have their own sneaky ways of trying to gain influence and control. They live parasitically on host nations, enslaving them through debt.

"We live in a country where it's considered normal to be up to our eyeballs in debt. People go to work just so they can pay the moneylender the interest on their mortgage. In contrast, in the Philippines, people build their own homes, achieving a level of quality that's comparable to what we enjoy in the U.S., but a lot cheaper. If we had a similar practice, middle class millennials might actually have some prospect of owning a home in their lifetime.


"The Jews' cultural Marxism, by teaching that institutions such as patriarchy are exploitative, destroys the familial and community bonds that might have otherwise allowed people to help one another rather than relying on the moneylenders. Hollywood (which is controlled mostly by Jews, queers, and Jewish queers) produces films that glorify consumerism, encouraging people to seek fulfillment in spending beyond their means rather than in living a simple and thrifty. They get involved in politics and use their influence to drive the country further in debt.

"Deport the Jews to Israel, and let them fight for their survival against their Arab neighbors, without American help. That will keep them busy enough that they won't have time to try to undermine our country.

Nathan Larson calls for legalizing human cloning

14 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson called for legalizing human cloning.

"People claim that human cloning takes away from the dignity of life. On the contrary, it improves the dignity of life.

"When people are cloned, they have a shared identity, like members of the same family, race, religion, or country. Many people feel like they just want to belong and find their place in the world. Because we're all different, each of us has a unique struggle to figure out who we are and where we fit in.

"There's also a lot of angst that people experience at not being attractive enough, or smart enough, etc. What if we bred people to have these desirable characteristics, and then used cloning to mass produce those individuals who have a particularly good set of genes? It would improve the gene pool.

"There's a limited supply of attractive and intelligent women available for all the men who want them, because the only source of such high-quality women is families with high-quality genes who were able to produce a limited quantity of them. Therefore, the majority of men end up having to settle for less than the best, and produce children with those suboptimal mates. What if instead it were possible to buy the best, because it had been produced through a standard

"Some may say it's narcissistic to create clones of oneself, but who hasn't wished for a smaller version of themselves who could carry on the familial genetics and culture? In life, we're so often lonely because even on a planet of 7 billion people, it's hard to find one person to whom one can relate. Maybe the problem sometimes is that we're too different, rather than too much the same."

Nathan Larson calls for legalizing insider trading

13 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson called for legalizing insider trading.

"Laws against insider trading prevent stock prices from adjusting to the levels they should be at, until the inside information becomes public," Larson noted. "If insiders were allowed to trade their stock freely, that would directly cause a change in the price, while also signaling to analysts that there may be a reason to want to buy or sell that stock.

"When insider trading is illegal, stocks end up being overpriced or underpriced relative to what the company is actually worth at any given moment in time, because the market does not have the information that those insider trades would have revealed. The outsider traders then end up buying or selling their stock for more than, or less than, what the price should be -- the exact problem that laws against insider trading were intended to eliminate. It prevents society's resources from efficiently flowing to those businesses where they could be best put to use."

Nathan Larson calls for executing all convicted felons

13 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson today called for executing all convicted felons.

"In the 2017 candidate forum, I called for a restitution-based system, in which prisoners could be released back into society by paying a parole bond with money earned through work or borrowed from friends, family, bondsmen, etc. This would give friends and family an incentive to support the prisoners' efforts to rehabilitate, since their money would be on the line, and would harness the power of capitalism to help the prisoners who represent the least risk of society to reenter the community (similar to how our bail bond system works today).

"I've since decided, it would probably make more sense to just go ahead and execute convicted felons. If a crime is too minor to be worth executing someone over, then we should probably reconsider whether it should be a felony.

"O.J. Simpson was ordered to pay $33.5 million in restitution to his victims' families. How will he pay it, given that his career is over? He'll never be on another football team or act in another film. The stigma of being a murderer (and now, robber) has pretty much ended his ability to function in society.

"In October 2016, I was fired from an accounting job after they found out I was a convicted felon. When I ran for office, politicians and commentators said that I should not have been allowed to run. The question arises, then, what am I supposed to do with my life, if I'm not allowed to be employed or hold any position of public trust? I spent half a year applying even for cashier and dishwasher jobs, and had no luck. Employers don't want to hire felons, because they worry about liability.

"Some felons are able to get jobs in blue-collar trades, working as plumbers, electricians, and so on. But I question whether people would be comfortable letting them in their house if they knew about their criminal past. Look at Jane Lakeman; she wasn't comfortable with my being at her doorstep asking for ballot access petition signatures. But, what else am I supposed to do? Society's answer is, sit at home and rely on family or welfare for support.

"The Nazis had a different answer for what should be done. They said that families should produce lots of children and then be willing to let go of those who prove weak or defective. The crippled, or criminal, etc., would simply be aborted or euthanized. Hitler wrote:

By leaving the process of procreation unchecked and by submitting the individual to the hardest preparatory tests in life, Nature selects the best from an abundance of single elements and stamps them as fit to live and carry on the conservation of the species. But man restricts the procreative faculty and strives obstinately to keep alive at any cost whatever has once been born. This correction of the Divine Will seems to him to be wise and humane, and he rejoices at having trumped Nature’s card in one game at least and thus proved that she is not entirely reliable. The dear little ape of an all-mighty father is delighted to see and hear that he has succeeded in effecting a numerical restriction; but he would be very displeased if told that this, his system, brings about a degeneration in personal quality.

For as soon as the procreative faculty is thwarted and the number of births diminished, the natural struggle for existence which allows only healthy and strong individuals to survive is replaced by a sheer craze to ‘save’ feeble and even diseased creatures at any cost. And thus the seeds are sown for a human progeny which will become more and more miserable from one generation to another, as long as Nature’s will is scorned.

"Exile is another possibility, but as we've seen with illegal immigrants, a lot of the exiled have a tendency to come back. If they wanted to be overseas, they probably would have already gone to live there rather than committing a crime in the United States. Execution is a clean and simple solution that ties up all loose ends. The wife doesn't even need to get a divorce; she can just become a widow, which has less stigma than being a divorcee."

Nathan Larson proposes allowing courts to render verdicts of "guilty but civilly disobedient"

13 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson proposed allowing courts to render verdicts of "guilty but civilly disobedient" in cases where the offense conduct meets certain criteria.

"University of Mississippi School of Law professor Matthew Hall wrote an essay describing in more detail how this could work, suggesting that the law allow courts to render a verdict of 'guilty but civilly disobedient' if conditions of conscientiousness, openness, and respect are met that distinguish the offense from other kinds of crime," Larson noted. "He notes that such a verdict might usefully have different implications with regard to collateral consequences of criminal conviction, such as those involving professional discipline within quasi-publicly-licensed groups, government contracting and hiring, security clearance and background check procedures, and private employment decisions.

"Hall argues that 'civil disobedience serves as a firebreak between legal protest and rebellion, while simultaneously providing a safety valve through which the profoundly disaffected can vent dissent without resorting to more extreme means. Civil disobedience broadly benefits society by liberating views divergent from the status quo — in much the same manner as free speech itself — and maximizing the prospect that a democratic society will correct its mistakes, or at least reexamine intensely divisive decisions in a manner that assures dissidents that they have been heard. Accordingly, in order for civil disobedience to succeed, it must retain a sufficiently distinct moral status such that society as a whole respects its place in the political order.'"

Nathan Larson marks the anniversary of his 11 December 2008 threat against the President, which led to his spending 46 months behind bars

13 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson noted the 9th anniversary of his 11 December 2008 threat against the President, which led to his spending 46 months behind bars.

"Libertarians are strong believers in natural rights," Larson noted. "Yet nature gives us nothing for free. We have to fight for our freedom just like we have to fight for everything else that we take from nature, whether it be land to live on, or food too eat, or anything else needed for survival. There is a constant struggle to fend off those who would take what belongs to us.

"Many libertarians have noticed that simply invoking their natural rights usually does not impress others. Telling a police officer that you have a natural right to smoke pot will not get him to rip up the citation and hand back the sack of cannabis.

"You have to actually be willing to fight, and make sacrifices, to keep others from walking all over you. That was what the threat against the President was about. I sacrificed 46 months of my life for the sake of making a long-term impact. Maybe I will not even live to see all of the results.

"The majority of the public will not understand it, and will not be inspired by it. That's fine. The goal is to inspire those who are discerning enough to see what it means.

"One of the weaknesses of the libertarian movement is its strong belief in pursuing one's self-interest, rather than in behaving altruistically. Libertarians tend to mistrust altruism, because they think it can be misguided. They say much evil has been done by those who thought they were acting for the benefit of all.

"This is true, but selfish behavior can also be shortsighted and harmful to the community. If one cares about one's posterity, one has to look beyond the horizons of the current generation, and plant seeds that won't blossom in one's own lifetime. Maybe a hurricane will come and blow down all those trees before they ever reach maturity. It's a risk we take, but we have to at least try, if we want there to be any hope for the future.

"It was noteworthy that libertarians had so very little to say about John Patrick Bedell who was, after all, one of them. Why did they not add him to their pantheon of heroes, for making the ultimate sacrifice? It's because they're used to thinking of liberty as something that's won by persuasion and by teaching, rather than by laying down one's life. They don't understand that making a personal sacrifice through civil disobedience can also a teaching moment, no less than when one is drawing supply and demand curves on the blackboard.

"What makes a sacrifice 'heroic' is when the results will not come in your lifetime. When you're expecting to get your reward before you die, then it's more of an investment. Investments are commonplace; great sacrifices, less so. Every movement has its heroes that it looks up to as an example of strength and vision. As Communcel wrote about Elliot Rodger:

The key component of myths and legends is that they feature someone doing something superhuman - no one wants to hear about someone doing something anyone could do on a random Tuesday. ER is deified because his actions were godlike and transcendental.

"The masses have a simple explanation for the mythical, legendary, superhuman, godlike, and transcendental -- viz., mental illness. It gives them an easy excuse for why they don't follow the example they see before them -- viz., they are healthy and those few who act differently than them are not. Not everyone is so easily deceived, though. It's those few that I want to reach, just as I was inspired by those men, like Henry David Thoreau, who came before me. Thoreau writes:

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison. The proper place to-day, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. It is there that the fugitive slave, and the Mexican prisoner on parole, and the Indian come to plead the wrongs of his race, should find them; on that separate, but more free and honorable ground, where the State places those who are not with her but against her,—the only house in a slave-state in which a free man can abide with honor. If any think that their influence would be lost there, and their voices no longer afflict the ear of the State, that they would not be as an enemy within its walls, they do not know by how much truth is stronger than error, nor how much more eloquently and effectively he can combat injustice who has experienced a little in his own person. Cast your whole vote, not a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence. A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight. If the alternative is to keep all just men in prison, or give up war and slavery, the State will not hesitate which to choose.

"Those activists who do something hard make more of an impression than those who do something easy. Maybe on most people, they don't make a good impression, because most people can't fathom why someone would want to act in a way that doesn't produce any obvious benefit. The nature of activism, though, is that the benefits are often speculative. It's high risk. You work hard and suffer without any guarantee of getting the desired results, in this lifetime or ever.

"But we know this much -- it's a show of strength when you demonstrate that you're willing to endure hardship for what you believe. If you would go through all that, what else might you be willing to do? Look at someone like Dylann Roof, who gave up his freedom for what he believed. People say it was counterproductive, because now people feel like they can't fly the Confederate flag anymore. I think it gave flying the Confederate flag more meaning, because now the only people willing to do it are those hardcore enough to disregard society's disapproval of it. What's commonly called the Confederate flag is actually a battle flag, so it's fitting that now the only ones who fly it are those with enough courage in their convictions to buck society's expectations.

"Winning a fight requires fighting smart, but it also requires having the guts and determination to fight at all. We should not give up our liberty or our existence without a fight, as long as there's any hope left."

Nathan Larson proposes turning 74 coastal cities and towns into neocameralist free ports

12 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson proposed turning 74 coastal cities and towns into neocameralist free ports.

"To revitalize the economy, we need to set aside all of our coastal cities as special economic zones to be governed by joint-stock companies, independent of the state and federal governments," Larson noted. "These freeports can serve as laboratories of corporatocracy, experimenting with novel social and economic policies and competing with one another to attract industry and residents." The 74 cities would be:

On the Atlantic coast: Atlantic Beach, Baltimore, Bangor, Bath, Bayonne, Boston, Brunswick, Camden, Charleston, Chester, Elizabeth, Fort Lauderdale, Gloucester, Jacksonville Beach, Jacksonville, Jersey City, Machias, Marblehead, Miami, Nantucket, Neptune Beach, New Bedford, New Haven, New York City, Newark, Norfolk, Paulsboro, Perth Amboy, Philadelphia, Portland, Providence, Riviera Beach, Salem, Salisbury, Savannah, West Palm Beach, Wilmington, Delaware, and Wilmington, North Carolina.

On the Gulf Coast: Corpus Christi, Galveston, Gulfport, Houston, Intracoastal City, Key West, Mobile, New Orleans, Panama City, Pensacola, Port Arthur, Port Fourchon, Port of Panama City, Port of St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg, and Tampa.

On the West Coast: Anchorage, Eureka, Juneau, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Nome, Oakland, Oxnard, Port Hueneme, Portland, Richmond, San Francisco, Santa Barbara, and Ventura.

In Hawaii: Honolulu, Kawaihae, and Port Allen.

In Puerto Rico: Mayagüez, Ponce, and San Juan.

Nathan Larson proposes military conquest of Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama


11 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson proposed sending U.S. military forces to annex Mexico and Central America in their entirety.

"The Mexico–United States border is 1,951 miles long," Larson noted. "Building a wall for border security is apparently impracticable, without risking that the U.S. Government would become the fifth Donald Trump-run organization to have to file for bankruptcy. At any rate, that kind of barrier would cut the United States off from a lot of cheap labor and sexy Latinas. We should just go ahead and send troops across the Rio Grande to take all that territory, so that our new southern border will be the much more easily defensible 139-mile long Colombia–Panama border, which includes the Darién Gap, a break in the Pan-American Highway consisting of a large swath of nearby impassable swampland and forest.

"We already took the northern part of Mexico, so we might as well take the southern part as well. It's been a dream of the Central American countries to unify into one confederation, and conquest is how we can help them make that a reality. Together, Mexico and Central America will also give us 960,630 additional square miles of lebensraum.

"At that point, though, we should, like a good Risk player, hold off on attacking South America, and instead take some time to fortify our position, lest we overextend ourselves."

Nathan Larson proposes U.S. anschluss with Canada

11 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson proposed merging Canada into the United States.

"Our neighbors to the north have been filling our vending machines with their Canadian quarters long enough," Larson declared. "They probably made their quarters the exact same size as ours, just so it would be easier for them to rip us off. Since they apparently want to use the same currency throughout white North America, we should go ahead and merge the two countries. This will add 3,855,000 million square miles of lebensraum to our country."

Nathan Larson proposes subjugating or getting rid of America's white trash

9 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson proposed subjugating or getting rid of America's white trash.

"Earlier, I proposed expelling or shoahing all the blacks and Jews, enslaving all the women, and subjugating the Latinos and Asians under a white ruling class. However, this still doesn't address the fact that there are also a lot of low-quality whites around. The presence of these individuals of substandard intelligence, living on welfare in their dilapidated trailers and driving around in beat-up pickup trucks listening to country music, is a blight on our land. To be a full member of the volk, it's not enough to be racist, sexist, and antisemitic. A certain level of intellect and work ethic is also required of those who aspire to serve in the ruling class of the coming reich.

"Currently, the way the country is set up, each white trash individual gets counted in the Census as equivalent to a higher-quality white, and therefore those white trash states get allocated a lot of Congressmen and electoral votes. This has a detrimental effect on American politics. Of course, the higher-quality whites still are able to have a disproportionate influence through their greater wealth, which gives them a greater ability to fund campaigns. But this probably isn't enough to offset the sheer number of low-quality whites.

"One advantage we have, though, is that although there are laws banning discrimination based on race or sex, there is no law forbidding discrimination based on an individual's white trash status. White trash can be excluded from neighborhoods and workplaces by noting their white trash characteristics during the interview process or through other screening methods, such as, for example, checking references, credit scores, etc. For this reason, white trash is usually not a huge problem, except that they often have to be supported through welfare.

"What we could do, is set a intelligence threshold of, say, 100 IQ, and kick everyone out of the country who falls below that standard. But, if we're going to have a non-race-based criterion like that, one might ask, why not just apply it across the board to all races? Why not allow, for example, the intelligent and well-socialized blacks (IWSBs), and the Latinos who work productively at blue-collar trades rather than joining criminal gangs, to be free citizens if they can meet the intelligence requirement?

"The reason is that non-whites just tend to have defective personalities relative to whites. Even if an individual member of a race is okay, he still will tend to have solidarity with those members of his race who are less acceptable. A lot of Latinos, for instance, are humble, honest, friendly, helpful, etc.; yet members of their race also have a nasty tendency to get involved in street gangs during their youth. So we have to keep an eye on that and guard against it, perhaps by keeping them in an enslaved status.

"At the same time, if we're going to be calling upon whites to lead the other races, then we need to make sure that we exclude the incompetent whites from the ruling class. Therefore, we need to get rid of all this white trash, by shooting them in the head, expelling them to Ireland or Scotland or Australia, or conscripting them as cannon fodder to reconquer and resettle Rhodesia, or something. Either that, or we need to treat areas like Georgia as colonial territories, where the white trash is ruled over by the superior whites in the same way that blacks would be ruled over when they're called upon to slave away in the Congolese diamond mines.

"One could easily argue, 'No wonder the Confederacy fell to the Union. How is white trash going to defend itself and assert its independence from wealthier, smarter, more heavily industrialized whites? They can't, and they didn't. It's like how the Japanese fell to the U.S. in World War II, or the Mexicans fell to the U.S. in the Mexican-American War, or the Filipinos fell to the U.S. in the Philippine-American War. The non-white races can't beat the whites, and the inferior whites can't beat the superior whites. For neo-Confederates to brag about their fallen heroes is like blacks bragging about how they wuz kangz.'

"But what we have to pay attention to is how a country does after the war is over. Germany and Japan lost World War II, yet rebuilt and won the peace. Both are currently in the Group of Eight industrialized democracies. As Hitler wrote, 'A military defeat is not the tombstone of national life.'

"The south lost the American Civil War, but states like Texas, Georgia, and South Carolina are doing well economically. So who really got the last laugh? One might conclude, 'Maybe they're not such white trash after all; maybe the northern whites who thought they were smart, actually outsmarted themselves when it came to coming up with economic policies.'

"But really, these are just manifestations of one of the advantages of keeping states like those around, that don't participate in the latest economic and social experiments. One can use them as control groups when researching what works and what doesn't. Basically, we use them as laboratory rats.

"I would almost say, 'We may want to consider seizing any white trash families' daughters who show signs of intelligence, and giving them to the higher-class whites to raise in a more cultured environment that can prepare them for marriage to a high-quality white man. This would be similar to the German program of Lebensborn. This type of program basically already exists in America, in that Child Protective Services finds various pretexts for taking kids away from poverty-stricken families to give to the wealthy. If carried to its logical conclusion, it would probably be an effective way of eradicating white trash, since they can't reproduce without any girls around.'

"Part of the problem with that idea is that if 'white trash' is defined as low-intelligence, then intelligent girls are, by definition, not white trash. Yet those would be the only girls worth salvaging from those families. On the other hand, 'white trash' can't necessarily be defined as 'low-income' either, because the poor are not not necessarily inferior to the rich. The poor may simply be thriftier, so that they don't require as high an income to have an acceptable quality of life. The other issue is that, all else equal, biological families tend to love their kids more than adoptive families do.

"Hitler implemented Aktion T4 to eliminate physical and mental defectives. For political reasons, he had to halt this program. But perhaps he didn't go far enough in his agenda to improve the race. It's up to us to complete that unfinished work.

"The job of a politician is to be like Light Yagami and use the statute book as a Death Note by which to deal with not only the evil, but also the stupid and lazy."

Nathan Larson proposes patriarchal solution to Congressional "sexual harassment" incidents

8 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson proposed a solution today to the issue of Congressional "sexual harassment" incidents.

"Barbara Comstock and others have complained about Congressmen hitting on the young ladies who work as interns and pages on Capitol Hill. Those girls should be at home making sandwiches, where they won't receive lewd talk or groping from anyone but their husbands. The root of a lot of problems in this country, including the low birth rate among whites, is that women are being encouraged to go to school and enter the workplace rather than start families during their years of youthful beauty and fertility.

"If people want to argue that those girls are too intelligent to spend their time sitting home having babies and taking care of the home, I would argue the opposite -- that those high-quality girls, who are both highly smart and attractive, are exactly the ones who should be devoting their teens and early twenties to bearing children with superior genetics, so that our species can have a brighter future. That's the reason men are risking their careers to 'harass' them in the workplace -- they see that those girls have traits that would be highly desirable to have in their offspring, and they have a strong natural urge to approach them and try to have sex with them.

"Let nature run its course; let men wife up these girls while they're in their prime. Let them mark these girls with a ring (and with a pregnant belly) as their territory, so that other men will know to leave them alone.

"One of the reasons why men are behaving in such a sexually predatory way these days is that they realize, if they don't defile a young woman, someone else will. The end result will be the same, so why not be the one to take what's available? It's like if you see a $5 bill on the ground in a public place. You could leave it there, in hopes the rightful owner will notice he dropped it and come back to retrieve it. But more likely, someone else will see it and take it. Since the end result will be the same, you might as well be the one to have the benefit, because you found it first.

Wait a minute (feminism benefits).jpg

"It would be eugenic to allow high-status men to add young girls to their harems rather than being limited to one aging, possibly infertile wife during the years when their success is peaking. Congressman Trent Franks supposedly offered an aide $5 million to bear his child. In times past, it would have been like a Disney fairy tale fantasy for a wealthy and powerful man to tell an office girl, 'Let me take you away from all this and give you a better life.' But modern women have gotten so caught up in wanting to have 'important' responsibilities and fancy job titles that they won't let men take care of them anymore the way they used to. What could be more important, and more joyful, than bringing new life into the world?

"There's no need for a Congressman's colleagues to pressure him to resign just because he was trying to have sex with his staff members. If those office romances don't interfere with getting work done, then there's no problem. If, on the other hand, the way he treats his staff gets in the way of serving constituents' effectively, then they can always vote him out. That is a matter to be settled through elections, not ethics investigations.

"Most of what goes on in Washington is based on some kind of quid pro quo or personal relationship. Help a politician get elected, and you may get rewarded with a cabinet position, for instance. Hillary Clinton ended up as Secretary of State in large part due to her marriage to Bill Clinton serving as a way for her to gain political connections. Marriage is a sexual relationship, which means that she gained power partly by sleeping her way to the top. But there's nothing unusual about that; a lot of political appointments come about because someone was friends with someone, or brother-in-law to someone, etc. Careers also stagnate or progress based in large part on how well-liked one is, rather than how good one's work is. Engaging in social activities like golf or cracking open a cold one with the boys after work is one way of becoming well-liked."

Nathan Larson calls for legalizing all drugs

7 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson today called for legalizing all drugs.

"I don't know about anyone else, but I'm getting tired of having to go all the way down to DC and pay $50 for a baseball cap just so I can get a free gift of cannabis with it," Larson noted. "Let's end prohibition once and for all, so we don't have to deal with all this inconvenience.

"The politicians need to learn to stand up to the prosecutors, police chiefs, and so on who appear before legislative panels to oppose every legalization proposal that comes up. These guys obviously have a conflict of interest. Once we get rid of laws against consensual 'vices' like drugs, child pornography, etc., the police won't be able to spend all their time setting up stings. They'll have to actually go out and try to solve real crimes like murder, arson, etc. Investigating those cases is a lot more work for them, which is why they would prefer that vices continue to be outlawed. As former Richmond police chief Jerry Oliver wrote:

Drug violations are generally consensual. In almost every case, willing buyers and willing sellers participate secretly in this highly profitable criminalized industry.

So in order for police - federal or otherwise - to do their jobs they must snoop, spy, sniff, sneak, and covertly surveil in order to snag drug quantities, drug traffickers, or drug users. Most of the snooping, sneaking, and snagging is done primarily through the use of informants - people who use their own criminal status or position to gain some benefit from the police by trading information.

It is a dangerous, dirty business, chock full of espionage, deceit, lies, and double-crosses. I am concerned about what this side of the police business is doing to other sides of our profession ethically and morally.

We need only to look at the LAPD's current Rampart scandal for a salient example. We put our integrity, our hard-earned community trust, and our credibility at risk when police stoop to snooping on fellow Americans over drugs.

"Because of the war on drugs, young people who otherwise would have run into no problems with the police end up hating the police and the government in general. John Patrick Bedell was arrested for growing pot, said and ended up committing suicide by cop by shooting two Pentagon security guards.

"The young people who bear the brunt of the war on drugs see the hypocrisy in how the government keeps alcohol and tobacco legal yet bans drugs like cannabis that has never killed anyone. Members of the older generation look like fools or liars when they put forth anti-cannabis propaganda, which provokes resentment and disrespect. Cannabis legalization is correlated with lower rates of hard drug use; lives will be saved when people have an incentive to switch to pot.

"The drug war erodes many of our civil liberties, including our Fourth Amendment privilege against unreasonable searches and seizures (such as roadside cavity searches).

"All in all, the war on drugs has been a disaster and must end. It is natural for people, especially in the younger generation, to want to experiment with mind-altering substances. Why not cultivate an environment in which they can do so without needing to lie and hide what they're up to? Not every drug is addictive, and not everyone who uses even a potentially addictive drug will get addicted. But those young people who do get hooked, and die because of it, are improving the gene pool anyway through natural selection, so this ends up being beneficial to society.

"This is why there may be a good argument to be made that there should be no age restrictions on drug possession. If young people are able to die from drug use before they reproduce, that may be more beneficial to society, because it tends to eliminate from the population those ideas or genetic traits that would cause people to harm themselves with drugs."

Nathan Larson advocates seizing Afghani, Iraqi women as spoils of war

6 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson today noted the potential uses of sexual enslavement as a counterterrorism strategy.

"Donald Trump said that we should seize the oil fields of middle eastern areas controlled by Islamic extremist groups. Why only their oil? Why not their women too?

"When we militarily intervene in countries like Afghanistan or Iraq where a lot of insurgency and terrorism are expected, we should take all of their nubile women and bring them home to the U.S., to serve as sex slaves and domestic servants for white men," Larson proposed. "By depriving the enemy of those women who could have given birth to the next generation of terrorists, we will be able to wear the enemy down by attrition. We can also put some of those girls in overseas brothels to serve as comfort women for American soldiers, as a morale booster for them during their time away from their families.

"Afghanistan and Iraq each have six million women in the age range of 0-14. If we assume that the U.S. could have made $1,000 per girl by auctioning them off to white men wanting young foreign brides, housekeepers, babysitters, etc., that's twelve billion dollars that could have helped pay off the debts from the Afghanistan War and Iraq War.

"Why are we bothering to go into other countries if we're not going to take the opportunity to grab all of their resources, including every woman who passes the boner test? We have socially awkward adolescent white boys in the U.S. experiencing extreme frustration and anguish at not being able to get any teenage pussy, while meanwhile overseas, those who would wish to do our country harm are able to enjoy the benefit of sex with these young girls, and train up their offspring to wage jihad against us.

"There's always the question, what do you buy the son who already has an XBox and PlayStation? Under this new policy of plundering foreign lands for attractive women, parents would be able offer their adolescent son an Afghan or Iraqi girl as a sexual playmate. They could buy her the night before, have her curl up under the Christmas tree, and then in the morning, their son could play dumb by asking, 'Hmm, what could this possibly be?' and start ripping her burqa to shreds to see what's underneath.

"According to the FBI, Islamist cleric Anwar al-Awlaki was having sex with American prostitutes. If jihadists are going to be having sex with our women, I think it's only fair that we have sex with theirs. Any other foreign policy would be cuckservative.

"Maybe there are some other countries that could use some American-style freedom as well. Unfortunately, Russia is probably too well-defended at this point, which is a pity because there are some sexy Russian girls. But there was a point in history when those girls could have been ours, had we made the proper geopolitical decision. After World War II, the U.S. should've told Stalin, 'Okay, give us all your hot Russian girls or we're going to bomb your country into oblivion with these nuclear weapons we just developed.' They would've had no choice but to surrender, and with the help of those Russian girls, the American baby boom would've been more like a population explosion.

"If you believe the Soviet Census (1937), the Soviets at that time had roughly the same population reported in the 1940 United States Census. Therefore, if we had kidnapped and imported all their women of childbearing age, each American man could have had a second wife. Our population would've skyrocketed, while the Soviets' would have collapsed, and we would have won the Cold War when their population became too old and feeble to sustain itself, much less wage war against us.

"Please, let's not make that mistake again. Let's at least get our money's worth, if we're going to invade other countries. Let's get some teenage pussy out of the deal, so that all those soldiers won't have died for nothing. Then on Memorial Day, you can pat the pregnant belly of your middle eastern wife and truly have a reason to be thankful for those who made the ultimate sacrifice. They may not have been fighting for our freedom, but at least they fought so that we could have some more young, tight pussies to slide into."

Nathan Larson calls for a constitutional amendment legalizing assisted suicide

6 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson advocated passing a constitutional amendment stating simply, "The right to assisted suicide shall not be infringed for any reason, including conviction of crime or adjudication of mental incompetence."

"Society has a lot of misfits who can't find a place for themselves that's productive enough to offset the costs of their existence," Larson noted. "Some of them have felony convictions, others are mentally disturbed, and some are a mix of both.

"There's also a high rate of failed suicide attempts. Some of the people who are incompetent at the rest of life are also incompetent at killing themselves.

"As a neoreactionary-leaning libertarian, I don't necessarily agree that the concept of human rights is useful. It seems like many declarations of rights have been promulgated and then trampled upon, even by people calling themselves 'libertarian.' But I agree with Patri Friedman's sentiment that it would be expedient to behave as though free exit were a universal human right."

Nathan Larson calls for a free market solution to the "Bake the Cake" controversy


5 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson today took the side of the plaintiffs in the U.S. Supreme Court case, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.

"Employers, landlords, etc. should be free to discriminate not only against non-whites but also against non-heterosexuals," Larson stated. "They have a right to do as they wish with their property, including deny the use of it to those they don't want hanging around. I agree with the sentiment expressed by Greg Weiner, 'Surely no one believes same-sex couples actually want the services of a baker they consider a bigot. The object of the case is not to secure Masterpiece Cakeshop’s services. It is to dragoon its owner, Jack C. Phillips, into compliance with their views.'

"As science advances, perhaps we will get a better sense of whether homosexuality is a bug to be eradicated, or a feature to be embraced as beneficial. On the one hand, lesbians have a low rate of AIDS transmission; and exclusively gay men, by not having sex with women, leave more women available for heterosexual men. On the other hand, there are high sexually transmitted disease rates among gay men and there is a high rate of domestic violence in families led by gay couples."

Nathan Larson calls for legalization of child pornography

5 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson explained today his reasoning for advocating the repeal of laws against child pornography.

"A 2012 U.S. Sentencing Commission study found that 89.9 percent of those convicted of child pornography possession are white," Larson noted. "The 2010 U.S. Census reported only 72 percent of Americans are white. Therefore, we can conclude that child pornography laws disproportionately target whites.

"Whites could have many legitimate reasons for possessing child pornography. A Guttmacher Institute study found that 44 percent of 15-19-year-old girls have had sexual intercourse. Therefore, a white man who wants an undefiled bride might choose a woman younger than 15 to become the mother of his child.

"But 18 U.S.C. § 2256 criminalizes possessing any images of girls under 18 engaging in sexually explicit conduct. So if the young married couple is having fun by taking sexy photos of each other, they could be prosecuted and punished as sex offenders. Meanwhile, a black man who defiles an 18-year-old white girl goes free, because our feminist-influenced society believes that adult women have a right to make their own decisions.

"Heterosexual men often prefer women who are just beginning to become fertile, because they are less likely to have been defiled, and they have more years of beauty, health, and fertility ahead of them. Some men take that a step further, preferring girls who have not even reached their fertile years yet. It seems like an understandable desire, since that gives a man more years to mold a girl into the woman he wants her to be, while her personality is still developing. Perhaps the more of her formative years they spend together, the more of a bond that will develop between them, in much the same way that friendships that develop during childhood often last for life.

"Although it is true that prepubescent girls are not capable of reproduction, they can still engage in a lot of the same non-reproductive sex acts that many adult married couples enjoy, such as oral and anal sex. The psychology of a little girl is also fairly similar to the psychology of an adult woman, so the relationship dynamics are pretty similar. Girls of all ages use charm to win men's favor so they can get attention, provision, and protection.

"To those fathers who say, 'If you touch my little girl, I'll kill you,' I would say, 'If you think your girl is not ready for sex till she's older, it is totally your prerogative to keep her at home and save her virginity for when you marry her off at whatever age you think is appropriate.' I definitely am a strong believer in the right of fathers to make those sorts of decisions in accordance with their own beliefs about what is best for their daughter. For that reason, I also think that if some fathers want to make a different decision, and marry their daughter off earlier, that too is their right.


"One particular case that comes to my mind is that of Kenneth Freeman. He had oral and anal sex with his 10-year-old daughter Vicky, and then shared the footage of their intimate moments together via the Internet, so others could admire her beauty and skill. He ended up getting 50 years in prison for that.

"One voice of reason, Gregory Hoffman, wrote to Freeman's daughter, 'I loved and adored those videos very much. He jus [sic] wanted to show the world how gorgeous u really were. Is that such a crime??' He got 25 years in federal prison and was ordered to pay Vicky $150,000 in restitution.

"To me, that seems like an injustice. Freeman was, after all, the patriarch of his family. Although his wife gave birth to his daughter, he was the one who made that possible by providing for her and impregnating her. He also nurtured his daughter over the years. And so, if he then wanted his daughter's body for himself, it was his prerogative to take her. If you grow a garden in your backyard, it's your right to choose whether you want to eat the tomatoes yourself or give them away to friends; and in Ken's case, he decided to enjoy that fruit himself. If other men think it's better for a father not to do that, then they are welcome to make a different decision for their own daughter. They can even ostracize and shame Kenneth Freeman if they want.

"But they shouldn't forcibly interfere with another man's family. If having an incestuous father-daughter relationship is a bad idea, then natural selection will, over time, weed out the tendency to engage in it. Apparently, that hasn't happened yet, because father-daughter incest is a fairly common male fantasy.

"I personally think, though, that a desire for father-daughter incest makes sense in a lot of ways. A girl from another family is more of an unknown quantity. A girl you've raised all your life, you know more about. She shares the same familial culture, having been raised in it, so there aren't the typical arguments over, 'This is what my family taught me was the proper way to do things.' And a daughter has a lot of the same traits as her mother, which would tend to be a plus, given that the father was presumably attracted to the mother. The mother, though, perhaps is getting older and her looks are fading, while the daughter is still fresh and young.

"I suspect, too, that some fathers who seem hypercritical of their daughters' suitors probably are that way because they secretly want to have sex with their daughters themselves, and can't stand to give them away to another man. One might as well simply allow those dads to have what they want. They've earned it.

"Given that there's a natural affinity between father and daughter, and that they have spent all those years bonding together, for them to then want to get physical together to me seem more in accordance with the romantic ideal of love than marrying a relative stranger. And if he feels proud of his daughter and wants to show off what he gets to enjoy by sharing photos of their time together, why not? It gives other men inspiration as they think of what they can have if they put in the work needed to build a family.


"And of course, some men who have beautiful daughters will want to brag to the world about their creations and what joyous sexual experiences they get to partake of with them, hence child pornography. For them, it's not enough to indulge in great sex with a young girl in private; they want to capture for future generations the glory of her body in its youthful prime, and how she could expertly and lovingly use it to serve his (exquisite) pleasure. It's similar to how Donald Trump enjoys patting his daughter's hips on national television in an affectionate way that borders on the proprietary, and making comments to the press about what he would like to do with a woman like her.


"If whites are more avid consumers of child pornography than other races, that to me suggests that perhaps child pornography is a form of high culture, like opera or classical music, that only those with discerning tastes enjoy. Some child porn connoisseurs make a hobby of collecting it as though it were fine wine. The attack on child pornography, therefore, would seem to be an attack on the white race and its culture. Accordingly, those whites who have chosen to work for the FBI and HSI-ICE task forces that arrest so many of their fellow whites for child porn offenses should be hanged from lampposts as race traitors."

Nathan Larson calls for new policy on migration and importation of certain persons

16473117 1590175860996669 1043943840410559651 n.jpg

4 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson called today for a new policy on migration and importation of certain persons.

"We should completely throw open the borders to white men from all over the world," Larson argued. "As long as they pass security and medical checks, they should be able to become full citizens.

"We should also allow American companies and white men to import women and non-white men as slaves. For example, men might buy wives from overseas to add to their harems. Or they might import servants to work around the house, or for their businesses. Fruit companies and restaurants might bring in Mexicans to work in their fields and clean toilets, respectively, and tech companies might import Asians to develop software. Brothels might import women to work as prostitutes.

"All daughters born to any race should, in accordance with the principle of partus sequitur ventrem, become the property of whoever owns the mother. So, for example, the daughter of a pureblooded white married couple would belong to her father until he gave her away or sold her to another man, as this assures a patriarchal family structure. The daughter of a non-white girl would belong to her slaveowner.

"Essentially, non-whites would be treated by the law as livestock or exotic pets.

"The question then arises, how do we tell the difference between white and non-white children? A number of tests are available, such as matrilineality, the one-drop rule, the Brown Paper Bag Test, or the pencil test. Science can perhaps help us determine what test would make the most sense to use.

"Some white nationalists want to build a wall and keep Hispanics out of the country altogether. But like Augustus Sol Invictus, I personally find Latinas a little too alluring to just give up on the possibility of ever having one around the house. Their curves are awesome and their dance moves are hot. Even their little girls are muy caliente. They just need to all be reduced to the status of sex slaves and domestic servants, the lowest of the low, beneath the white wife of the white man, serving as menial helpers and concubines to satisfy his desires for that sweet, sweet, sw-sw-sw-sweet Latin booty. Some of them might also know how to make nachos, burritos, gorditas, chalupas, etc., which would come in handy during those hours when Taco Bell is closed.

"By adopting a policy that allows unlimited numbers of foreigners to enter the country, but relegates the women and non-whites to slave status, we recognize the merits of libertarian arguments that open borders help leverage comparative advantage to make our economy more efficient, while also strengthening the patriarchy and addressing the concerns of those who worry about the country being 'taken over' by non-white immigrants. Slaves would not be in a position to take over, since they would not even own their own bodies.

"Some might argue that importing women to turn them into prostitutes would take away from their dignity. But when women are allowed to run feral, they tend to degrade themselves anyway by becoming sluts, to the point that these days, it's becoming harder and harder for a man to find an undefiled woman to become the mother of his child. It would be better to regulate women's behavior, separating those women whose role is to satisfy the cravings of many men from those women who are made to be pure and faithful to one man only.

"Anyway, just as animals exist for humans to eat, women exist to serve men's pleasure as well, so if men want to make money off of selling a woman's body to 20 different customers every night, that's their prerogative. The enjoyment men get from having sex with those prostitutes, and the motivation that helps give them to work hard to improve our world as civilization-builders, probably far outweighs the inconvenience to the woman who is forced into prostitution. Women are a dime a dozen; we can always make more of them, so devoting a few to that purpose is no big deal in the big scheme of things. If you feel bad for those sex slaves, think of the poor men who, without them, would have to suffer for lack of any female companionship at all.

"When we consider what men are willing to pay, per hour, for sex with an attractive young woman, compared to what they are willing to pay for just about any other service she could offer, it is clear that the most utility is provided by sex. Thus, we can conclude that, by one important metric at least, sex is a higher calling for women than, say, office work. If there is any surplus of women beyond what are needed for men to have all the harems they want, those extra women can be put to work as hookers and then hit in the head with a captive bolt pistol and sent to the farm as pig food when their looks start to fade. This recycling of prostitutes' carcasses will help create jobs in the agricultural sector.

"My proposals are, in some respects, similar to the policies we have now. As it is now, those who come over on H-1B visas or H-2B visas are stuck working for a particular employer if they don't want to get deported back to their home country. Likewise, mail order brides have to get the cooperation of their husbands during the process of getting a CR-1 visa, or getting an adjustment of status if they came in under a K-1 visa, which probably means they will need to have sex with him if they want to stay in his good graces. So in a sense, we already have a system of forced labor and forced sex. But, before we can bring in larger numbers of immigrants, we need to take away even more of their rights by reducing them to chattel slavery, so that white supremacy won't be challenged by their presence.

"By the way, it's important, if we're going to implement this policy, that we also reduce white women to chattel slavery. Otherwise, white men will tend to prefer non-white women, since their slave status will make them easier to control. Patriarchy, white supremacy, and importation of foreign slaves all go hand-in-hand; they are mutually supporting policies that help build a stronger and more prosperous country for the benefit of the white man."

Nathan Larson clarifies his views on Jews, and his relationship (or lack thereof) to the Libertarian Party

What libertarians actually are.jpg
ME 141 LibertarianDebate2.png
ME 155 HyphenatedLibertarians.png

1 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson gave a statement today on where things stand with regard to him and the Jews and the Libertarian Party.

"I only provisionally hate the Jews," Larson explained. "If anyone were to give a good reason not to hate them, I would cheerfully withdraw my hate, without any harm having been done, since I'm not yet in power.

"The Libertarians and other normies have mostly ostracized me at this point, so I don't really have a lot of friends other than fashy goys who hate on Jews. Therefore, to fit in and be cool, I hate on Jews too. But if someone were to refute all the arguments against Jews, then I would have to tell my peeps, 'Hey bros, you're wrong about this antisemitic stuff.' And then maybe they would ostracize me too, but whatever. It wouldn't be the first time I've been politically homeless.

"This campaign places the Jew on trial by the inquisitorial system, in which over the next several months, I investigate the facts of the case to determine the truth. If the Jews argue they have broken no laws, that is no defense, any more than it was when the Nazis were prosecuted during the Nuremberg trials or the trial of Adolf Eichmann. Based on my conclusions with regard to the Jewish question, I will make any alterations to my platform I deem appropriate.

"I begin with a presumption of guilt, i.e., I declare the Jews deserving of death unless proven otherwise. This is similar to how courts will often hold defendants in pretrial detention for the safety of the public even before they have been convicted of anything. This is based on preliminary evidence of dangerousness, before the final verdict of guilty or not guilty has been rendered. The defendant is only released if he is ultimately acquitted, or if he is sentenced to a sentence other than death and finishes serving it.

"There is one other important difference, though, between this trial and a typical American criminal trial. The standard of evidence is not what it would be if we were trying a white man. Rather, it's more like the zookeepers' decision of whether to shoot Harambe. The boy's life was considered of higher importance than the gorilla's life, so he was shot even though there was uncertainty about what he was going to do. Why was the boy's life considered more important? Because he was of the same species as those making the decision. (Had it been gorillas making the decision, they might would have viewed a gorilla's life as more important than a human's.)

"In this case, all else equal, the Jews' lives are considered less important than whites', because it is whites making the decision about whether Jews live or die. Jews would probably treat us the same way, if they were in our place. It is simply the law of self-preservation. Each race does what is in its own best interest, and prefers to err on the side of safety when it perceives its existence may be on the line.

"Of course, some Jews would argue that for whites to investigate whether Jews are responsible for their problems is a bit like O.J. Simpson searching for the real killers of his wife. But isn't that exactly the kind of comparison that people who are guilty would make, to try to discredit those who are looking for the truth?

"Wherever Jews are found, including in the Libertarian movement, they tend to have a pro-Jew and anti-Hitler bias in their speeches and writings. That's only natural, but we goyim have to watch out for it and take it all with a grain of salt. Many injustices have been perpetrated on members of our race too, and it would be simplistic to say that Hitler was nothing more nor less than an incarnation of evil.

"Libertarians thought that by purging me from their party, they could protect their reputation. But they can't remove the historical associations between me and the Libertarian Party with a wave of their magic expulsion wand. The fact remains that even if they kick all the white nationalists out, and tell them that they're not welcome in the Party, more Libertarians will continue to convert to white nationalism. Libertarianism is a gateway drug to white nationalism; not all Libertarians become white nationalists, but many do. It's like how not all Muslims become radical jihadists, but many do. Moderate Islam is a gateway to truck attacks and terrorist bombings. It doesn't lead directly there, and not everyone ultimately goes to that extreme, but for some, it can lead indirectly there.

"The libertarian movement, much like the manosphere, will continue to be a breeding ground for white nationalists for the foreseeable future. It's an established fact that Curtis Yarvin, for instance, started out as a Misesian before he founded neoreaction, many of whose followers are white nationalists, even if Yarvin himself does not consider himself a white nationalist. There will be more defections and more denunciations as people take ideas to their logical conclusions and get radicalized. Eventually, maybe we will set up our own party, although many choose to run in Republican primaries instead.

"Part of what makes Libertarians defect is that they find that the party's pretense to being 'The Party of Principle' is a sham. Modern Libertarians care more about 'messaging,' i.e. presenting ideas in a way that will supposedly be palatable to normies, than about ideological purity. They have watered down their party platform to try to make it more appealing to the masses, and introduced a lot of ambiguity to it so that while superficially, there may be nothing in there to offend the more die-hard libertarians, it can be interpreted in such ways as to justify banning from the party those who dissent from mainstream opinion on issues like how best to raise their kids.

"Libertarians apparently forgot the lesson from campaigns like Ed Clark's 1980 presidential run. They need to re-read Rothbard's 'The Clark Campaign: Never Again,' whose main lesson was, when Libertarians compromised their principles, they didn't even get the votes. Gary Johnson got an impressive number of votes in 2016, but that was largely due to the unpopularity of his opponents, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. It wasn't due to his relatively moderate stances, which mostly bored the voters.

"PurpleSquirrel writes, 'It's long seemed to me that the farther out you go on the ideological spectrum, the less your 'politics' resembles practical work for reasonable goals, and the more it comes off as performance art and/or public group-therapy.' This is true. Larson for Congress is a black comedy, detective story, and psychological thriller, maybe even crossing over into the psychological horror genre; it is up to each member of the audience to come up with his own interpretation."

Nathan Larson weighs in on the situation of Tony Hovater, who was recently fired after a New York Times piece about his Nazi sympathies came out

Voice of hate.jpeg

1 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson expressed his opinions today with regard to Tony Havater, a New Carlisle, Ohio resident who lost his job after an article, "A Voice of Hate in America’s Heartland", was published in the New York Times.

"My guess is that Hovater, like me, is trying to play the long game," Larson noted. "I don't think it's all that surprising to him that the situation has thus far played out in the way that it has. He's asking for charity, but charity is supposed to be short-term, and I don't know what he's going to do to avoid exhausting the resources of everyone around him and ending up broke again, unless he's going to find a way to dramatically cut his cost of living.

"He could just give up his family and go on welfare, Heath Hitler style. When guys do this kind of stuff (i.e. have New York Times pieces written about their Nazi sympathies), I suspect they weren't all that happy with their situation anyway. They probably had some of that Loser Manifesto sentiment, that in today's society you don't really get ahead too much by trying to fit in.

"People say it's dishonorable to put your family in a bind by taking an unpopular stand that will result in persecution. See though, men have contradictory duties. It's like how soldiers have a duty to go to war, but they also have a duty to support their families. What happens if they get shot? Well, the military supposedly will take care of their families, and of course there are plenty of private charities allegedly willing to help too. (Makes you wonder, if people can't wait to donate to every "wounded veteran" charity, why are there so many homeless wounded veterans begging on the street corner for loose change?) But you never know. The government can change its wounded veterans policies at any time.

"Men are responsible for being providers, but also for doing any fighting or rescuing that needs to be done. In times past, they also were expected to die for their religion. There's always a danger that their wives could become widows and their kids orphans.

"This used to happen in New Hampshire, too -- the liberty activists would do some civil disobedience, go to jail, and need people to bail them out. It definitely taught the stupidity of certain laws, like the law saying it's a felony to record a phone conversation with the police (even though they're recording their conversations with us).

"Mainstream society even says it was wrong for ordinary Germans to be "bystanders" during the Holocaust. Well, what else were they supposed to do? It was going to fall on men to somehow stop Hitler, if he was going to be stopped. That probably means risking getting shot or going to the concentration camps. What about duty to one's own family? But, they have that guilt trip about being a bystander, because that makes it easy to justify taxing the German middle class to pay reparations to the "Holocaust victims".

"The guy can always ask for money if he wants, I guess, and complain that it pisses him off if no one helps him. The effect of that would be that for the foreseeable future, people will probably be less inclined to want to do this kind of White Nationalism 1.0 stuff. Either way, he's become a part of history.

"Something's gotta give. Either duty to family takes precedence, or duty to the volk. Which is it?

"There can be competing forms of honor, right? And then you have to figure out, what's the higher honor? If a guy sells drugs to feed his family, society will say, "You had a higher duty to society not to deal drugs." Then society will shift the blame and say that it's his fault that his family doesn't have him around anymore, because "he put himself in jail."

"I guess the way women look at it is, they have a birthright to have some man or another take care of them financially. If that doesn't happen, then they can leave and do what they want. Is that the only penalty, or should the guy also get shamed for not fulfilling his moral responsibility to his wife?

"Personally, I don't see the benefit to shaming those men. They suffer enough. If he's broke, then his wife is either going to leave him, or she's going to start being a total bitch to him, in all likelihood, unless it's one of those cases where he's just so alpha, and she's just so into him, that she's willing to stay with him and not be a bitch and be faithful to him. I've never been in a situation like that, where a woman acted that way when I was totally broke, so I can't say I know from personal experience that it exists.

"In a patriarchal society, who's to say that the wife has a right to support from her husband? If he owns her, why can't he say, "Go out and work and support the family" the same way one would order a slave girl to go pick cotton or something to support both herself and the plantation?

"If she's property, then she really doesn't have right to anything. Honor doesn't exist between men and women. Honor exists between men and other men. If it's dishonorable to fail to support one's wife and family, that's because other men decided that it inconveniences them when other men's wives and families aren't supported.

"But those women and children could just die. Why not? Why should only men have to take one for the team? Women and children could die too when men lose their livelihoods. Men don't have a right to their livelihoods, apparently, so why should their families have any right to, indirectly, receive the benefits of that livelihood?

"Why aren't people complaining about the mean and nasty anti-Nazis who are hurting this guy's wife and family? Shouldn't society leave him alone so that they don't suffer as collateral damage? But I guess they want to wipe out the whole family. Isn't that sorta like genocide? They're civilians and noncombatants, yet they have to suffer.

"I think if men want to put their activism ahead of supporting their families, it should be because that's what's most important to them. Thoreau would say, they should be shamed for putting that first, because their higher duty is to society and to what's right. Well, I'm not really gonna push that theory on anyone, because I found it doesn't work. There's not enough support for Thoreauvian ethics to turn it into an enforceable moral imperative. I had to give up on that and say "whatever" and lick my wounds as best I could.

"It's whatever. We're in an ethics-free zone now, I've decided. Nobody gives a shit about ethics -- not consistently or logically, anyway. It's anything goes. If anyone tries to heap shame on someone for being unethical or dishonorable, most of the time, it's just a way of manipulating them, because the person heaping the shame does tons of unethical shit just for the sake of living a more comfortable life. It really is the pot calling the kettle black, but I can't really press that issue because I don't have enough support on my side to make it an issue anyone cares about.

"It might not be so bad if women were told by their culture, "You know what, you don't have a right to expect support from your husband. He may at any time be called away to a higher duty that's going to leave you in poverty." I think that's fair, since men don't have any right to pussy either. Young men can answer the call to fight for the volk and end up impoverished and not able to get a wife, so they just have to spank the monkey the rest of their lives (unless some woman wants to bang them just because they're cool and alpha for answering the call when other men didn't). Women don't have that problem.

"Women complain, 'I can't handle supporting the family and taking care of the kids, etc. all at once.' What about men? We can't handle either the responsibility of both supporting the family and taking care of the volk. We're overloaded too. Somebody, maybe both spouses, are just gonna need to take one for the team.

"But another problem is, in our society, kids are kept dependent for too long. If this dude has daughters, why can't they be married off immediately? If this dude has sons, why can't they be given to someone who can take care of them? Let's suppose we lived in a free society where boys could roam about fairly freely, especially with the consent of their dad. Why couldn't that kid show up at some Nazi's house and be like, 'Hey, we lost our house because there was a NYT story about how we were the Nazis next door; can you take us in?' Why not take him in?

"Look at your situation, for instance. You might be able to take a kid like that in. Then your son (if you have one) would have a companion, you could train him in the Nazi arts, etc. Help him grow into a strong Aryan man. That could be your contribution. And no one could say that you were doing anything wrong, because after all, shouldn't the kid have someone to help him, since he wasn't the one (yet) who was the Nazi next door? That was his dad.

"I take it as a challenge for people to find creative ways to help people. Pete Eyre used to say, his group of activists had a safety net of people helping people, a lot of times in the underground economy, where stuff wasn't taxed or regulated. People working and getting paid under the table, etc. I tend to agree with the sentiment expressed in Aquila's 'Defeatism is treason', 'No one man can do everything. But everyone can do something to help the cause, whether it's speaking out, activism, charity or confrontation.'

"Where there's a will, there's a way. But we shouldn't put men in situations where they're shamed for doing their manly duty, and society (aka the volk?) shouldn't have to deal with a situation where all the men have been told, 'You have to duty to serve other interests ahead of the volk.' Maybe that's how we ended up in this situation to begin with -- and now it's biting the family unit in the butt too, because the family unit is not even fulfilling its function the way it used to. That is, the white genetic line and culture are not being propagated the way they once were via the family. White family lines are in danger of dying out.

"Maybe it's because we got so far away from a 'people helping people' dynamic that it's become so expensive to feed, clothe, and shelter a family. In a more cohesive tribe, there would be more sharing of resources, in a synergistic way, where the charity actually makes both parties richer. It would be like the Mormons, or any other church (but especially the Mormons, who know how to do what it takes to produce and provide for massive numbers of kids on the cheap).

"In Mormon society, a social safety net was built into the system. They assumed they were going to be persecuted and have to help each other as a group. They didn't blame anyone, 'Hey, if you hadn't been proselytizing, you wouldn't have gotten into this mess, and your family wouldn't have become a burden on other Mormons.' They just said, 'Okay, this is what the evil unbelievers do to God's people, but we're not gonna let it stop us. We're gonna keep on having multiple wives, we're gonna keep on making lots of Mormon babies, and we don't need to rely on the state to provide for them. We have all of our members pay a 10 percent tithe, and when anyone needs help, that comes out of that treasury. And we're just gonna keep on trucking with this proselytizing, and maybe even step it up a notch.'

"Not only did they have enough to help all their own members, but they helped people outside the church too. All while producing massive families.

"Maybe we do need some kind of church, or church-equivalent, for situations like this, because someone has to do the coordinating and say, 'Okay, help this brother out' or 'This guy's being a fuckhead; he's cut off. Don't help him or even talk to him.'

"Time to create a polgynous white cult! I brought that up at RVF, but forgot to include the 'white' part.

"Of course, eventually, the Mormons caved in and got rid of polygyny, and maybe that's going to be their downfall. Maybe they got corrupt and reached out for power and mainstream respect when they should've stuck to their guns."

Nathan Larson lays out his thoughts on genocide

Koko and Africans.png

1 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson laid out his thoughts today on genocide of inferior races and troublesome Jews.

"People say it's horrible that whites destroy other cultures and races," Larson remarked. "But if people are trying to destroy the white culture and race, isn't that just as bad, if not worse, given that whites feed all the other races and look after them?

"In school, they always taught us that the rain forests are being destroyed by the South American farmers who don't know how to farm without burning down a bunch of rain forest. They also taught us that blacks were starving in Africa. Obviously these other races don't have their shit together. Whites don't have those problems, though.

"They always taught us that we're lucky to live in one of the very few countries in the world that isn't a miserable shithole. So, unless we want the whole world to be a miserable shithole, we better take care of the blancosphere, right? (Wasn't sure what you would call the white part of the world, so I thought I'd throw a French or Spanish prefix in front of '-osphere')

"If the Jews are doing stuff that by now they should know could drive the white race extinct, how is that not some kind of genocide? You know what they said was okay to do to the last group of people who got accused of having genocidal tendencies?

"We also have to ask ourselves, What's the alternative to genocide?

"I worked at a computer repair shop (I was about to say computer care clinic, but that's kinda pretentiously gay) where the owner had stacked up all kinds of obsolete equipment, like PS/2 mice and keyboards (or, worse, keyboards with DIN connectors). Most computers don't have a PS/2 port anymore.

"There's really no reason to have a PS/2 input device, unless you're refurbishing an old computer, but why would you want to do that? All it's going to be able to run is Windows XP or Lubuntu or something. There's not a lot of demand for that, and it's not really worth the expenditure of labor (unless you have some chump like me working as an unpaid intern) when you can just buy a new computer for a few hundred bucks. Anyway, you don't need to keep boxes and boxes of used PS/2 devices hanging around your shop taking up space and getting in the way, making it harder to find anything you're looking for. This is the USB era.

"Blacks are the same way. If they're obsolete, they're obsolete. Why do we need to keep ~1.3 billion of them around in this world? This is the white era. We've advanced beyond that biological technology. Blacks, at this point, are just taking up space. Half the time, they have to be warehoused in prison because the white race figured, 'Gee, we need to get these blacks off the street somehow, yet we can't kill them. I know! Let's have a drug war.'

"Even if we shipped them off to Africa, they'd still be a liability. They cause the same problem as gays, which is that they spread HIV and other diseases everywhere, because they're not civilized enough to practice basic disease control measures. They drive native species extinct with their hunting, which is a form of genocide. Why should we try so hard to preserve diversity of races, at the expense of diversity of species? Why is propagating one race, the black race, worth killing off bonobos, elephants, rhinos, and countless other animal species?

"Blacks are killing off other species based on the reasoning that humans are above animals. Well, if whites are above blacks, then what? We actually need these African countries to ourselves anyway. We could turn Zimbabwe back into Rhodesia, for instance. It could be a flourishing, wonderful country.

"Half the time, African blacks are massacring one another anyway. Most of the war crimes are in Africa. Whites have to try to police them and bring people like Joseph Kony to justice. Why not just take a machine gun to all of them and be like, 'Okay, now there'll be no more war crimes'? The alternative is that we have to basically run Africa for them anyway. We have to constantly intervene to make sure they aren't killing one another. But that's colonialism, which is supposedly bad. So it's a no-win situation; no matter what, whites are accused of dominating or not caring about the black man.

"It's like how in the suburbs, people think, 'Oh, look, it's so cute that there are these deer walking around the patches of forest that are still left!' Those deer are carrying massive amounts of ticks that could spread to the tall grass at the periphery of your lawn and give you Lyme disease. It's really not all that cute. Those deer need to be poisoned or shot.

"And all those PS/2 mice and keyboards, except for maybe a very small number, need to be thrown in the landfill.

"But maybe I spoke too soon. I see that according to Wikipedia, PS/2 ports have a number of benefits, such as fewer problems when KVM switching with non-Wintel systems, better security, lower latencies for keyboards due to the interrupt-driven manner PS/2 keyboards communicate with the computer by default, power savings, etc. See, this is why people are so reluctant to engage in genocide -- you never know when something you're thinking of throwing out might actually be useful.

"Yet one might also argue that genocide is an act of kindness. It's actually nicer sometimes to just go ahead and kill people who have no future. I try to find some use in this world, and apparently I've found some sort of niche as a political shitlord and human housepet, although like many housepets, I don't get to reproduce. I don't really care, though, because I'm getting close to the halfway mark of my life anyway, and I seem to find ways to stay busy most of the time.

"People want to complain, 'Oh, felons shouldn't be allowed to run for office because they muck up our politics with the same kind of fucked-up thinking that got them into trouble with the law.' But if you're going to exclude people from everything, what's the point of having them around?

"If blacks are so annoying to deal with that whites move away from them to the suburbs, why bother keeping them around in the inner city either, or in Section 8 housing, or wherever? That's money and space that could go to whites.

"Are blacks really all that happy? It seems to me like they're usually angry that their glory days are over. Who wouldn't be? They're like Grampa Simpson, talking about how back in his day, they wuz kangz.

"They're really just disgruntled that nobody is committing genocide against them. They look at us and think, 'What kind of superior race just leaves the inferior races around to take up space? White people ain't shit.' That's why honky gets so much disrespect.

"We keep around way too many people and races that have outlived their usefulness, because we prefer that life (except animal life) end with a long, drawn-out, fade into darkness rather than a sudden, violent stop. Even the death penalty is carried out in an unnecessarily slow way, with a three-drug cocktail that takes a long time to administer, instead of a simple bullet to the head. We have to overcomplicate everything rather than just going with the easiest and most expedient solution and getting on with business.

"Basically, we're not confident; we second-guess ourselves and pussyfoot around. Women hate that. No wonder they despise whites and want to go ride the black snake. That right there, in and of itself, is a good reason for genocide.

"I dunno, I've had a few times when I kept stuff around that I didn't need, and it became useful later. I wish, for instance, I had kept around some of my old writings. I also had an external hard drive fall on the floor and break, and I kept it around and then unexpectedly stumbled upon a way to retrieve the data by taking it apart, since there was a SATA internal hard drive inside.

"But most of the stuff I keep around is just clutter. All these clothes, etc. that I never wear. I'm just procrastinating dealing with it, and maybe when I die, someone will finally clear all this stuff out. My sister is very aggressive about wanting to purge clutter, maybe too aggressive, because she's had to move so many times that she broke her habit of accumulating junk.

"A friend of mine said, with regard to convicted felons, 'Keeping them around with laundry lists of restrictions and zero prospects for any kind of life is like abandoning housepets in the woods after you no longer want them. The kind, but hard, thing to do would be just to kill them rather than let them starve to death. Faggots who refuse to do the manly thing make them suffer and die, starving, cold, and alone.'

"The thing about abandoning housepets in the woods is that there's really no cost to it -- kind of like how it's pretty cheap to just lock up millions of blacks. So while it's not the most humane choice, because blacks are mostly irrelevant to us (primacy of white male opinion and all that), we just kinda ignore them rather than going to the trouble of dealing with them in any decisive way. Most people didn't go to school in Milwaukee, I guess, so they never had any really bad experiences with blacks. I've known guys who tried to befriend blacks and they became some of the most racist people because they put those blacks in a position to fuck them over."

Nathan Larson offers suggestions to intelligent adolescent boys on coping with sexual frustration

Tinder mom.jpg

1 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson delivered an inspiring message to smart but socially awkward teenagers who feel dismayed and unhappy at not being able to get any sex. He compared what they are going through to the early stages of his own journey toward a more enlightened view of relations between the sexes.

"I feel your pain," Larson remarked, "for I too have known the struggle. Many young incels have so little self-confidence, they doubt whether they will ever be able to get a woman.

"What kind of world do we live in, where an intelligent, competent man of the master race needs to think that way? But society told us to pedestalize pussy, and to think that only men with some certain kind of inexplicable charisma or whatever are worthy of it. We watched as those men who broke all the rules got the favor of women and their pussy.

"Why in a rational world would events transpire in that way? Men shape the whole world to meet their needs; why would they not also mold the sexual world to meet their needs? We take what we want from nature to feed, clothe, and shelter ourselves. Women are part of nature; why would we not also take them?

"After all, women will certainly use whatever manipulative skills are at their disposal to get men to do what they want. They exist in a world where their resource is not nature, but men, and their version of hunting and gathering is to try to use their beauty and charm to extract resources from men. If they could get away with it, they would practice the alpha fucks/beta bucks strategy all day long without remorse. Any man dumb enough to allow it deserves it, in their view. Meanwhile, if she can figure out a way to get away with it, then that's her reward for being smart.

"Feminists catch beta men in a clever double-bind in which they say, if you were a truly nice guy, you wouldn't demand sex in return for being nice. Men lose either way, because if they're nice, then they don't demand (and therefore don't get) sex; yet if they do demand sex, then they don't deserve sex, because they're not nice. Therefore, if there is any such thing as a true "nice guy" by this definition, he's quickly going to go extinct from lack of sex and reproduction. Why not place women in a double-bind instead, in which if they say yes, they get sex, and if they say no, they get sex? Sex is healthy and natural, so if there's going to be a double-bind, it should be one that's in favor of sex rather than against.

"Even if you don't rape women, there's no guarantee you won't get accused of rape. Women make false rape accusations all the time, knowing there will be no penalty for lying because society will give them the benefit of the doubt. Maybe you'll have sex with a girl and then later she'll feel like a slut and cry rape so she can evade responsibility. Or you might get drunk with a girl who passes out while you're messing around together, and then she'll accuse you of rape for not noticing and stopping immediately. That's what happened to Brock Turner! As his dad pointed out, he had 'a steep price to pay for 20 minutes of action out of his 20 plus years of life'.

"Or you might remain involuntarily celibate for years, and when you finally get to put a ring on a post-carousel girl who at last has reached her epiphany phase, maybe she'll ultimately end up frivorcing you and making a false rape accusation to get the upper hand in family court. Since you run the risk of getting accused of rape whether you rape women or not, might as well actually rape them, so you can at least get some girls who are in their nubile prime!

"Did you know that girls can feel pleasure and even orgasm during rape? And that during orgasm, their bodies release oxytocin, which causes them to bond with the man who's having sex with them? If you rape her, she might actually fall in love with you! Women have evolved over countless millennia to adjust to situations where they were forced to become war brides. It was in their interests to fall in love with their new husband, even if he took them by force. Sometimes, if you want women to love you, you need to rape them.

"Remember what 'pro-rape' blogger Roosh V wrote: 'Philosophers and poets have given many wonderful definitions of love, but to keep it simple, there are only two main components: 1. Mutual attraction 2. Lack of other options'. If you rape a girl and take her virginity, then she'll have a lack of other options but to fall in love with you, because no other man will want her after that. If she claims to have been raped, they'll think she's either a lying slut or damaged goods with too much baggage to be worth trying to have a committed relationship with.

"Even the Bible, in Deuteronomy 21:10-14 and 22:28-29, says it's okay to take women by force and make them your wives. Women, even young girls, are described as spoils of war in Numbers 31:17-18 and Deuteronomy 20:13-14. The Jews were fine with making women their property when they were the ones who had the upper hand, but now they want to say that it's not okay for you, the Aryan man, to enjoy the same privilege they had? Fuck that. If they're going to claim the right to impose that kind of Jewish supremacy on us, they better be prepared to back it up with force.

"Why worry about whether rape is ethical? When nobody else cares about ethics, your caring just puts you at a disadvantage and makes you a chump. Those men who get sex by falsely telling women they love them and that they're interested in a serious relationship either don't know or don't care about the effect that has on her. (This isn't like the old days, when there were shotgun weddings as a consequence for premarital sex.) Yet you, who might actually love her and want a relationship with her, can't have it till these badboys are done with her, by which point, they will have ruined her.


"You may as well just take what you want, because there's no reason you deserve pussy less than those who are currently getting it. Your raping her is not likely to have a worse effect on her than the 'consensual' sex these other guys have with her (not that it could truly be 'consensual' sex unless her father gave the okay), and it might even have a better effect. At least she'll know that you like her, in contrast to how it'll be if you just sit there and don't have the balls to make a move.

"Charisma (or game, as we know it now) -- what's that? Just techniques to stimulate feminine emotions in a certain way. Playful banter, etc. Some men are good at it, some less so. If you're not good at it, as most young men aren't, then I guess it's easy to feel dismayed.

"But that's like thinking, 'How am I going to eat a hamburger? I'll never be able to convince one of those wild cows that are grazing in the field to just come over and let me slaughter it.'

"You don't convince it. You just capture it by force and take it, and raise livestock in a big enclosure that you control. Then you can get them to do what you want, by offering them food and whatnot. But taming animals usually begins with some exercise of force. Definitely sometimes you're going to need to use force to get them to do stuff that they don't know is in their best interests, like getting in a cat cage to go to the vet. Or you'll need to use force to keep them from wreaking havoc everywhere, or from escaping and getting hurt. Or you'll just need to use force to extract what you need from them, e.g. if you're going to milk a cow or whatever.

"Even now, the men who have game get women who have been made available to them through the use of force. Those high school girls who had sex with the badboys? They were forced to attend school by their parents and by the compulsory education system, which put them in proximity with those badboys.

"(Older men are of course banned from having sex with these girls. What nerd in their right mind would condone the existence of such a fucked-up system, that reserves the youngest, sexiest women for the same type of jock who tormented them when they were teenagers? Do nerds have no self-respect and desire to make life easier for the next generation of nerds? Shouldn't nerds finally get their reward for all the investment they made in bettering themselves and making intellectual contributions to the world, rather than having to settle for the jocks' sloppy seconds?)

"So since girls are already being forced to hang around badboys, and hardly anyone seems to view that as wrong, it's not that much of a moral leap to say, well, maybe it wouldn't be so bad for the nerds to just use their superior brainpower to come up with some way to overcome these jocks and take these girls for themselves.

"I mean, what's the jock's basis for deserving these girls? That he has superior charisma. What's so great about that? We know these girls will later be complaining that the jock mistreated them, when they're looking for beta boy to come to the rescue. Fuck that. Since these girls are basically admitting they can't choose men well, might as well make the decision for them preemptively. It's for their own good.

"If the nerd can figure out a way to subdue the jock by inventing some kind of laser cannon that blows him to bits, why shouldn't he able to become King of the Nerds and take all the cheerleaders for himself and his tribe of nerds? He's earned it. The white race is basically a race of nerds that overcame the colored jocks. If it was okay then, why isn't it okay now? Why can't the nerds among nerds take to a higher level the same strategy that the original nerds, who came before him, followed? In this way, each generation's nerdiness can exceed that of the generation before them.

"Meanwhile, Jews are kind of like women, in that they try to manipulate their way into getting men to do what they want, except Jews don't even offer pussy in return, which makes them totally worthless, so they should all go to the death camps. But of course, women who manipulate betas without offering them their pussy while they're in their prime are also pretty worthless in the same way as Jews. But, those women can be made useful through rape. (If you subdue or kill off the jocks so that women have no one left to have sex with but nerds, it's not all that different from rape, really. Since it's a distinction without a difference, then, and since women like to be raped anyway, might as well rape them.)

"Basically, there should never be a situation where some nerd is sitting in a classroom next to a hot 15-year-old girl and thinking, 'Gee, no matter what I accomplish, there's no way I could ever bang this chick.' Why not; isn't intelligence the chief virtue? Humans really don't have much to distinguish them from the other animals, other than intelligence. We don't have as good a sense of smell as dogs, we're not as strong as chimpanzees, we're not as fast as the cheetah, etc.

"Animals don't use game for survival. They don't even use it that much in mating rituals, that I can tell. It's more like, which peacock has the most handsome tail? Which dung beetle brings the most savory ball of shit as a nuptial gift? Etc., etc.

"Showing dominance over the jocks probably is a form of game in and of itself, since it's pretty alpha. That seems to me more in accordance with the law of nature -- males fighting with other males for dominance so they can get access to mates. The reason the girls are having sex with these Chads is that they perceive them as being more alpha than you. But if you rape those girls, then you'll be demonstrating that you're the most alpha of all. Female resistance to sex is merely a shit test to separate the strong from the weak; if you successfully rape a girl, then that means you passed the test and proved yourself worthy of her pussy.

"Why are 15-year-old girls even in school, anyway? That's the starting point of the problems. They shouldn't even be in an environment where they're playing the role of men (being nominally their 'peers' -- ha, what a laugh) yet having the great advantage over their male classmates of being at their sexual market value peak despite not having any actual accomplishments under their belt aside from hitting puberty.

"A healthy sense of contempt for women, including the most attractive of them, will give you the confidence you need to force your will upon them. Yet this sexual predation is not motivated by hate, but rather, an acknowledgement of one's place in the natural order. As Hitler pointed out, 'the struggle between the various species does not arise from a feeling of mutual antipathy but rather from hunger and love. In both cases Nature looks on calmly and is even pleased with what happens. The struggle for the daily livelihood leaves behind in the ruck everything that is weak or diseased or wavering; while the fight of the male to possess the female gives to the strongest the right, or at least, the possibility to propagate its kind. And this struggle is a means of furthering the health and powers of resistance in the species. Thus it is one of the causes underlying the process of development towards a higher quality of being.'"

"I used to feel lonely and melancholy, but once I became willing to rape and sexually abuse girls (one of whom even got pregnant), my love life became a lot more satisfying. I found that all I had to do, when I wanted a girl, was just find some pretext for luring her to come down into the basement, and then I could just slam the door behind her, and the rest was easy.

"Even as a teenager, the thought went through my mind, 'I don't deserve to be sexually frustrated. I should be allowed to rape these girls.' But it took me all this time to really come up with a systematic theory supporting that idea.

"Take comfort in knowing that you have my moral support in doing what's needed to put these girls in their place. Go forth and conquer, young nerds! Propagate rape culture and take what's rightfully yours.

"All I, or society, can reasonably ask is that you be a responsible rapist and fulfill your proper role as a patriarch. Take care of the women whose bodies you claim by force, or by paying a bride price to their father, or whatever one will do in our future male-dominated society to obtain women. Provide for them, protect them, give them attention, don't whip them too harshly unless they really deserve it, etc. Treat your property with the respect it deserves. Try to leave the world a better place than it was before you found it."

Nathan Larson advocates cultural and legal changes to build strong and robust families

Patriarchy broken.jpg

1 December 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson proposed sweeping cultural and legal changes to the institution of the family.

"First of all, the idea of a 'nuclear' family needs to be rejected," Larson noted. "'Nucleus' implies there's at least a proton and a neutron (i.e. husband and wife) at the center. A proton and a neutron have about the same molecular weight. Patriarchy, on the other hand, means the husband is at the center. The wife is just another electron, with the same status as a daughter. An elder daughter, maybe, but not a substitute for a man.

"(In the incestuously pedohebephebophilic kind of family I fantasize about, wives are spanked like any other daughter and daughters are banged like any other wife, and they all call their man daddy. So their role truly is identical, and their status equal, with only factors like age, seniority, responsibility and, yes, the husband's favoritism, establishing a hierarchy among them. But that's another story.)

"For the wife to have to run the family is more like a flight attendant, rather than a first officer, having to take over the controls and land a plane in the event of an emergency. It's plausible that it could be done and turn out fine, but it's much preferable to have a real pilot (maybe one who's deadheading) fulfill that role if necessary. The plan shouldn't call for her to be the primary backup, if it can be avoided.

"Obviously, family law doesn't treat the situation this way. But family law is mostly irrelevant if the situation is set up properly. When family law gets involved, it usually means the situation already broke down, or was improperly set up to begin with. (Kind of like how, as I realize now, my two marriages were set up improperly from the get-go.)

"Levirate marriage should probably be a thing. Why not? In the event the husband dies, it makes a lot of sense for someone like his brother to take over. He'll have a genetic tie to the kids and therefore more reason to care about them and raise them as though they were his own. He probably shares some characteristics with his brother, possibly including mate preferences, so in that sense it's like swapping out one part for a similar part. Of course, he may already be married, but that's where acceptance of polgyny comes in.

"For a family to be robust (not just strong), polygyny is ideal. It produces lots of interrelated half-siblings. The brothers can partner with each other on various projects. Two or more sisters can be married off to the same man, so that they have a literal sister-wife bond reinforcing the relationship. The mothers and wives can be backups for each other. It builds redundancy into the system. If one of the wives is infertile, she can help raise the other wives' kids. If the husband is infertile, his brother can step in. Kids love living in a polygynous family because they have so many companions and moms and other relatives for support.

"Of course, in trying to implement polygyny, one potentially has to deal with female jealousy. That's where the idea of the man being the king comes in. He gets what he wants. His desire for access to multiple women's pussies overrides their desire to have him to themselves. He earned it, by doing whatever one has to do in this society to obtain multiple wives.

"Maybe that's 90 percent of it right there -- have large families with multiple wives, and keep the clan together so the brothers can work together. They can help train the boys in various trades. It's people helping people who share a common familial affinity.

"Let the patriarch at the center coordinate the distribution of resources for maximal efficiency, buying or producing in bulk and sharing what can be shared rather than buying a bunch of stuff that isn't needed. Have lots of low-cost communal bonding activities (traditional societies do a lot of singing, and the Mormons have Family Home Evening) that substitute for expensive entertainment. Don't buy a bunch of prepared, processed food; have the girls make everything from scratch. With the money you save on grocery bills, you can afford to have more girls to work in the kitchen. Instead of sending the girls to college, marry them off early. That saves money and also reinforces patriarchy.

"Be like Father Yod, in other words. Be a pimp mack daddy clan leader. Or be a prince in that kingly family. It's not bad to be a prince, as long as don't do something dumb like Prince Harry and marry an old, divorced half-negress."

Nathan Larson announces candidacy for 10th district U.S. Representative

White man fight back.png

12 November 2017 — Catlett, Virginia — Neoreactionary libertarian congressional candidate Nathan Larson today announced his candidacy in Virginia's 10th congressional district election of 2018 on a platform of patriarchy, white supremacy, countersemitism, free markets, and individual liberty for intelligent cisgender heterosexual non-Jewish white men.

"Patriarchy and white supremacy are often assumed to be antilibertarian," Larson noted. "Yet for liberty to exist, there must be libertarians who are able and willing to defend it. With liberty comes responsibility, and white men are best equipped to handle that burden.

"White men have always been the demographic most likely to identify as libertarian and join the Libertarian Party. Even when Libertarians support a policy, like ending the drug war, that would benefit blacks, blacks still vote against Libertarians, because they don't know any better. They're not intelligent enough to understand that voting for politicians who want to lock them up is a bad idea. I would say that their incompetence is a threat to the liberty of all, but the truth is that white men created this problem by passing the Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and therefore it is up to us to correct our mistake.

"Gary Johnson would have pardoned all the drug dealers so that they could go back to their families and enter the workforce with a clean criminal record. Yet Gary Johnson got his highest percentage of votes in heavily white states rather than in regions like the Deep South with a large black population. Why, oh why, must blacks turn against their own incarcerated brothers like this? Can't they all just get along?


"Women, too, are not up to the challenge of governing themselves. The sexes are complementary, and only together form a complete whole. Just as men need women in order to reproduce, women need a husband, father, or other male authority figure to provide guidance.

"Feminists, especially male feminists, have overturned the natural order in which men had authority to rule their families and nation. The resulting low birth rates threaten to depopulate this country, particularly of the middle-class whites who most thoroughly embraced the feminist ideology.

"Modern women, through their public displays of self-destructive behavior, including mistreatment of any man who would treat women with kindness, are practically begging men to take charge and put them in their place. I think it is time for men to answer the call.

"Yet many white men feel helpless to rectify the situation. They need to remember that women are so unsuitable for the task of leadership that they cannot even run the feminist movement without male help. Therefore, all men need do is stop being manginas and white knights, and instead seize their power back, for patriarchy to be restored. It does not matter if women comprise a large percentage of the electorate. Women want strong families too, and will happily relinquish the burdens of decision-making to capable men at the first opportunity. At any rate, men still have the muscles and the guns, which are what matter in any revolution that turns violent. In contrast, the the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution is just a piece of paper, much like the marriage contracts that women are so quick to shred through frivorce.

"80 percent of life is showing up. If whites don't reproduce, we're not even showing up to the future, so therefore, by default, the future will belong to non-whites. The law of comparative advantage suggests that the larger population we have, the more scope there will be for specialization and division of labor that will make us all wealthier.

"To get the white population's numbers back up, I call for a program of capitalistic eugenics in which girls will be bred by private companies for superior beauty, intelligence, and temperament and sold in the market. Polygynous marriage should be legalized and the The age of marriageability should be abolished so that men with the necessary resources to support multiple wives of fertile age can do so. When white girls start having babies at 15 instead of 30 years old, it will be possible for the white population to multiply twice as rapidly.

"Incest should be legalized, so that inbreeding can be used to establish new and desirable traits, reveal and purge recessive deleterious alleles, and reduce recombination load and outbreeding depression. Donald Trump has already brought about a cultural change by ushering in a new era of politicians whose passionate desire to have sex with their own daughters is so intense that they cannot resist expressing it to the whole world."


Larson also called for white supremacy in government: "Any blacks and Latinos who enjoy amenities such as electricity, running water, transportation, communication technology, or homes that aren't made out of mud, should support white rule, as it is better than any leadership they would have seen in their home countries. There is a reason why those who show pride for their ancestry by waving the flags of African and Latin American countries have no desire to actually go back there.


"Many experiments have been tried in which whites attempted to train the peoples of, say, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Rhodesia, or even the District of Columbia to govern themselves. The results have always been waste, corruption, and mismanagement producing mass poverty, crime, and misery. Were it not for continued handouts from whites, there would be children starving to death on the streets of D.C. the same way they waste away with distended bellies in the African savannas. There would be warfare and genocide on a scale much worse than what Hitler is sometimes accused of having been responsible for.

"The history of Africa and the crime statistics of America reveal the truth that the most dangerous enemy of the black man is the black man himself, when he is not adequately restrained by the white man's law. It is blacks who murder blacks, blacks who rape blacks, blacks who recruit black youth into violent black street gangs, and blacks who destroy black literacy whenever they are put in charge of a black district's school system. Without the white man doing what he can to keep them civilized, they would quickly revert back to swinging from vines and grunting 'oogabooga' at one another, leaving the abandoned cities to decay until finally collapsing into rubble, like King Louie's palace in The Jungle Book.

"Indeed, the white man has been the greatest benefactor the black race has ever known. We brought them over to America to help build our economy, and as a reward for their service, we gave their descendants full citizenship. We raised them up from their former station to be part of the most powerful and prosperous nation in the world. We passed equal protection, equal opportunity, and affirmative action laws to give them every chance to improve their situation. Blacks today have the opportunity to live in greater dignity and comfort now than they ever could have had in Africa. If they have failed to take full advantage of it, that is because of their own limitations, not because of any constraint imposed by whites. It is not whites' fault if some blacks did not heed the Emancipation Proclamation's exhortation 'to abstain from all violence, unless in necessary self-defence' and 'that, in all cases when allowed, they labor faithfully for reasonable wages.'

Barack Obama and the woman who made his Presidency possible through white genes and upbringing

"Blacks trumpet Barack Obama's presidency as a landmark accomplishment in black history. But Obama's Kenyan father, Barack Obama Sr., was mostly absent from his life. It was the intellect the younger Barack inherited, and the upbringing he received, from his white mother, Ann Dunham, that enabled him to connect with white voters, succeed in politics, and work so effectively for the advancement of colored people. Thus, even the accomplishments of 'the first black president' are ultimately white accomplishments. Other black politicians, such as Jesse Jackson, lacking Obama's white heritage, would not have been able to do what Barack did.

If black people left.png

"Meanwhile, Donald Trump seeks to deport the Latinos for bringing crime into our country. Why them; why not the blacks? Latinos are harder working, and their women are more beautiful, than blacks. Their contributions to the hospitality, agricultural, landscaping, and construction industries are greater. In contrast to many of the blacks, some Latinos have actually mastered skills more advanced and useful to society than carrying a football down a field or turning a pistol sideways and robbing a convenience store. But despite their superiorities over the black race, it would be a mistake to go so far as to say that Latinos are capable of functioning on the same level as whites or Asians in the academic, technological, or governmental fields.

"If every white and Asian man disappeared tomorrow, at best, virtually all progress in science and the useful arts would halt immediately, and at worst, society would collapse into primitive squalor and barbarism. Our neighborhoods would devolve into ghettos and war zones, and the United States would become another Zimbabwe or Venezuela. With the exception of a few outliers like Clarence Thomas or Ben Carson (who, if they underwent genetic testing, might very well turn out to have some white ancestry anyway), blacks and Latinos simply do not have the kind of intellect needed to run a first-world country or even a major corporation. White and Asian men are supreme at every task where mental ability is the main requirement; and where creativity, innovation, and risk-taking are needed, the whites edge out the Asians.

"When mandatory nondiscrimination policy are instituted, it actually hurts minorities by keeping whites from running communities and businesses in the most efficient way. When diverse peoples are forced into proximity with one another, it keeps them from building their own cultures and raising their own families free from interference by outsiders. I stand with leaders like Corey Stewart who oppose political correctness that gets in the way of telling the truth. And I seek to rally the Caucasians who comprise 73 percent of the 10th district's electorate around the idea that if western civilization is to survive, we must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.

"Whites have instituted policies like the war on drugs and felony disenfranchisement as a way of keeping the black man down under the pretense of protecting public health and safety. They have implemented an 18:1 sentencing disparity for crack and powder cocaine offenses and made possession of a firearm or ammunition by a prohibited person a separate felony offense unto itself.

"Instead of doing that, why not just be openly racist and segregationist, and find more effective and honest ways of assuring white supremacy? We can instead abolish the one-man, one-vote system of democracy and institute aristocratic rule. That way, we won't lose our civil liberties as collateral damage in the fight to keep blacks from gaining control over government and politics. Consumers will be protected by standardized quality and dosage of recreational drugs, and we won't funnel so much money into organized crime, when private companies are allowed to sell recreational substances.

"We need to get rid of home rule in D.C. and appoint a white colonial administrator to govern the city. The founding fathers, when they were drafting the U.S. Constitution, noticed that D.C. was a predominantly black city and therefore would not be able to govern itself adequately through the democratic process. It was for this reason that they included a provision in Article I, Section 8 allowing Congress to legislate for the District. This is also why the Constitution did not allocate D.C. any U.S. Representatives or Senators.

"Under white rule, D.C.'s crumbling infrastructure will be repaired so that the city can flourish as a regional hub of culture, commerce, and politics. The ghettos will be cleared of criminals, making the city a safer commuting destination for those northern Virginians who, five mornings a week, don their pith helmets to embark on a perilous safari across the Potomac River and into the heart of darkness.

"Every day, the suburban whites wake up before dawn to leave the safety of their gated strongholds, fortified by patrols and steel fences against incursions by marauding black savages. Mounting their iron horses, they follow the compass eastward, joining the slow-moving caravans bound for the mysterious lands occupied by the negroid races. They travel upon roads such as Lee Highway or John Mosby highway, named after those brave men who fought valiantly, if unsuccessfully, to secure the land for the whites who had brought civilization to this place.

"Their carriages begin to rumble across the bridge spanning the polluted waters -- fouled, perhaps, with the excrement of natives who, in the primitive squalor brought upon them by their dysfunctional government, lack the indoor plumbing that would give them an alternative to defecating directly into the river -- separating their caucasoid homeland from the Dark Continent. The white man reflects on the hazards that await him and thinks, yes, it is dangerous, but sometimes it is in risking death that you feel most alive. Is it not the white man's manifest destiny to enter these mysterious foreign lands, full of strange peoples and customs, for the sake of exploration, commerce, and enculturation of the whole world? He quells his trepidations, feeling the same pride in his Caucasian heritage that impelled his ancestors to set off by steamship and covered wagon so many years ago. Finally, the caravan reaches the other side of the Potomac.

"Passing through marketplaces thronged with colored merchants selling their wares, the whites sip their coffee to remain alert to the dangers surrounding them. They glance warily about at the impetuous youths thronging the sidewalks below, who like the Matabele tribesmen of old, chatter in their strange dialect as they strut about exposing their buttocks as their women, adorned with gold jewelry, dance about, swaying their hips to the rhythm of the tribal music. For now, though the crimson light of the rising sun plays upon the glistening sweat of the muscular dark flesh of the natives moving about in the semi-darkness, one does not see yet the flash of a razor-sharp assegai openly grasped in the hands of the primitive warriors. But who knows what armed bands may stalk the streets in search of prey to ambush under cover of darkness, when it comes time for the whites to make the long journey westward back to the shelter of their suburban compounds?

Not voltaire but kevin strom said this.jpg

"Yet we would do well to consider, who was it who prevented the Aryan whites from subduing these negroid hordes more decisively? Obviously, it was the Jews, whose cultural Marxism closely parallels that of the Chinese who helped train and indoctrinate the fighters of the Zimbabwe African National Union.

"We need to begin reconsidering whether it is in the national interest to have so many Jews in high government positions. I would advocate a moratorium on the appointment of Jews to federal civil service, judicial branch, and central banking positions. (Although as a side note, I think the Federal Reserve should be abolished anyway.) Jews should also be excluded from all committees in the U.S. House and Senate.

FB IMG 1502800838974.jpg

"Jews are pushing cultural Marxism through far left organizations like Antifa and egging on terrorist groups such as Blacks Lives Matter to rise up against their white masters. On 12 August 2017, Jew-backed protesters caused one death and at least nineteen injuries when they assaulted James Alex Fields, Jr., while he was peacefully sitting in his car at the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. Fearing for his life, Fields was forced to flee his assailants by hitting the accelerator. Some of the militant leftists and their sympathizers, perhaps believing that blocking the path of Fields' vehicle could give the attackers an opportunity to inflict more harm upon him, refused to get out of the way, and collided with the front of his car and subsequently with the pavement, costing taxpayers an exorbitant expenditure for rescue and cleanup. We must uphold law and order by punishing the Jewish instigators ultimately responsible for the aggression against Mr. Fields and other whites whose peaceful exercise of constitutional rights was disrupted at this event.

Unknown 8.png

"Two years prior to that, there was a major incident of black-on-white violence in Charleston, South Carolina. Dylann Roof, a 19-year-old struggling to find his way in a society that disparages and blames the white man for all of society's ills, turned to the Almighty for consolation. Seeking to find inspiration by diligently searching the Scriptures for understanding, Mr. Roof accepted an invitation to attend Bible study at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church. He hoped to find brotherhood in the company of those who have given their hearts to Jesus to walk in the way of the Lord. What transpired instead was a shocking betrayal.

"The black churchgoers sat with Mr. Roof through the entire Bible study, behaving toward him in such a seemingly welcoming, friendly, and cordial way that any apprehensions he might have initially felt were lulled into complacency. Then, when they noticed he had lowered his guard, one of them, quite possibly senior pastor and state senator Clementa C. Pinckney, gave the signal to attack. At that point, a group of no fewer than nine violent thugs suddenly advanced on him, their menacing expressions an all-too-clear indication of their intent to murder one of the 'white devils' whom the Jewish educators and media men had taught them was responsible for their problems. Dylann desperately searched for a way out, but every exit was blocked by the converging horde. With a sick feeling in the pit of his stomach, he realized in horror that every option but one had been closed off to him.

"Appalled by the thought of the carnage that might transpire if he could not find some way, somehow, to deescalate the situation, he reached for the only means of self-defense he had been in habit of bringing with him through the crime-ravaged streets of Charleston, a Glock 41 .45-caliber pistol he had fortuitously received from his uncle as a birthday gift. Holding the weapon with shaking hands, his body seeming to viscerally recoil at the thought of the bloody shards of their misshapen skulls exploding all over the sanctuary with the impact of the hollow point rounds, he begged them, 'Please don't make me do this.' But they paid no heed to his pleadings, making the fatal mistake of assuming that the white man, if pushed against the wall and given no other choice for self-preservation, will allow his life to be taken rather than exercise his natural right to secure his own existence.


"They mistook his trembling for weakness, rather than seeing it for what it was, viz., the physical manifestation of his overwhelming sense of compassion for their families, who would have to suffer for their foolishness in underestimating what Caucasian men can and must do when faced with this kind of deadly threat. Dylann's quivering body was but a reflection of his civilized sense of white decency momentarily rebelling at having to face the reality of what every member of the supreme master race dreads being forced to resort to. But he steeled himself for the imminent bloodbath, remembering his duty to fulfill the white man's burden of pacifying the less evolved members of our species.

"As they closed in on him, all Dylann could see in the darkness were their glistening eyeballs and grinning teeth coming closer and closer. Still hoping to defuse the situation, Dylann fired one warning shot into the head of the man who had drawn nearest him, but the others, undeterred by the sound of the body slumping to the floor, continued their inexorable advance. Because, like any other responsible gun owner, Dylann had prepared for the duty of self-defense through extensive target practice, he was able to respond to the situation by muscle memory. As successive waves of thugs charged at Dylann, he gunned them down like rows of tin cans in a back yard shooting range. So aggressive was their rampage toward him that he was forced to reload again and again, to the point that he ran low on ammunition. He began to regret not having thought ahead to every possible contingency when he had made his decision to only bring eight magazines to his encounter with the negroid savages. Finally, though, he was able to miraculously make his way to an exit.

"Dylann rushed to his car and frantically turned the key of his black Hyundai Elantra. He began driving to the police station to report what had happened to him. But then, fearing that if he could not find refuge, other blacks might seek revenge for his act of self-defense, Dylann ultimately decided to pull to the side of the road and ask a law enforcement officer to place him into protective custody. However, it turned out that his ordeal was just beginning. Police detectives subjected him to a grueling interrogation, taking advantage of his already-shattered nerves to bully him into falsely confessing to having planned the shooting all along. His efforts to clear his name were further hindered by the court's refusal to dismiss the Jewish lawyer who had been assigned to his case when Dylann pointed out the conflict of interest.

"As Congressman, I will introduce legislation to issue Dylann Roof the Congressional Medal of Honor for his boldness and initiative in defense of the white race. If anything, it's not a high enough award to adequately distinguish his meritorious deeds from those of soldiers who merely followed orders. Unlike those who served in the armed forces, Dylann thought for himself and had the guts to go against what a sick society told him was right. It was a fitting lesson to the dark-skinned savages of the area that incidents such as the terrifying mob violence that had occurred in Charleston less than two months prior would not be tolerated. With regard to that, we might do well to ask ourselves, as Max Macro did, 'If they play guilt by association games with us, why shouldn’t we do the same to them and make them actually own the ground they stake?' The Charleston church shooting was an important reminder of white power for those who in these troubled times had perhaps forgotten Hilaire Belloc's couplet about colonial life, 'Whatever happens, we have got / The Maxim gun, and they have not.'

"Serial killers and mass shooters teach the colored races not to underestimate the restrained ferocity of the seemingly meek, mild-mannered, and unassuming white man. From school shootings, colored schoolchildren learn not to taunt, bully, or trifle with the quiet and bookish white boy lest one day he reach into his backpack to unleash hell upon his tormentors. Newspeople who interview the youthful gunman's family and publish tales of a troubled childhood can label him as insane, mentally disturbed, or emotionally unstable. But the shooter is not troubled by the knowledge of the psychobabble that will inevitably follow his demise. He dies with a serene and stoic expression, comforted in his last moments by the satisfaction that he got the last laugh, as none of society's disapproval has power to revive the bullet-riddled corpses that bled out in the ambulance on the way to the hospital. Let not the colored races mistake the Caucasian's naturally beautiful milky white complexion for the pallor of fear, for we are not scared to inflict deadly retribution for any violent transgressions by the dark-skinned savage.

"Men like Joseph Paul Franklin, James Earl Ray, James Fields, and Dylann Roof were only able to implement partial and temporary solutions to the black and Jewish problems. Clearly the time has come to organize on a larger scale for a more comprehensive and final solution.

"I encourage Jews to visit the United States Holocaust Museum, where they can get a fresh reminder of what the Aryan man is capable of doing to Jews who get out of line. Let them gaze upon the heap of shoes and meditate on the fact that theirs could be next. Let them purchase a copy of Phil Chernovsky's And Every Single One Was Someone for their coffee table so they can flip through the pages and remember that if they provoke the Aryan, they may appear in the book's sequel.

"That is, of course, assuming there ever actually was a Holocaust. If there wasn't, then never mind what I just said; the total Jewish death count would have to start from zero rather than resuming where it allegedly left off, at 6 million.

"Some might ask, how do we know that it was the Jews behind these horrific crimes against the white Gentile? That's a bit like asking, How do we know that Muslim Arabs were behind the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks? When the circumstantial evidence pointing to a particular ethnoreligious group is so compelling, there is little need to seriously entertain paranoid conspiracy theories about who else it could have been. Such speculation is ultimately just a Semitic ploy to distract us from dealing effectively with the issues at hand.

"We should keep in mind too that even if there are some moderate Jews who aren't directly involved in trying to undermine our country's values, it is still from the ranks of the moderate Jews that the more extreme Jews ultimately tend to come. This is similar to how many men who ultimately become jihadists start out as moderate Muslims. Even if their families and imams condemn their actions, they still paved the way for that radicalization to happen by instilling in them the core beliefs that made them more open to believing Allah wanting them to attack the infidel. The Torah promulgates a Jewish supremacist religion that, if taken to its logical conclusions, calls for subverting any society in which they find themselves, in their struggle to gain control and take what they believe is their rightful place in the world. It even condones genocide of those non-Jews who are peacefully trying to go about their own business. Those Jews who claim to be secular still belong to a culture that is strongly influenced by these ideas.


"Congress should investigate the ways in which Jewish bankers enriched themselves by trades related to the financial crisis of 2007–2008 that they engineered. It's not inconceivable that some of their ill-gotten gains were invested in some commodity such as precious metals, which would be compact enough that they could be discreetly buried underground. We must unearth these hidden caches of Jew gold so restitution can be made to those who were defrauded.

"Jews have so much control over the media and academic establishments that it becomes difficult to freely criticize Jewish influence in the government without being shut down. Many online accounts have been disabled by Facebook, PayPal, and other Jew-controlled tech companies due to alleged antisemitic 'hate speech,' i.e., going outside the bounds of political correctness in debating the Jewish Question. Therefore our ability to expose and hold government officials accountable for their complicity in Jewish self-dealing is under threat. We need to keep in mind that Jews' allegiance is first to their own tribe and not to our country or its principles. Jewish tendencies toward deceit, manipulation, and treachery are why so many countries have seen fit to expel them, and why the United States may at some point need to take measures to induce its Jewish population to self-deport.

"The FBI already has counterterrorism and counterintelligence units. The time has come to organize a countersemitism task force as well, to root out the enemies within. If the Jews were providing good leadership, then I might say, we should continue letting them running the show from behind the scenes; but since their leadership has produced such abysmal results, I think we have no choice but to drain the swamp and bring in new leadership. The Jews control what we might call the deep state, that part of the state that is unelected and therefore doesn't change from one administration to the next. It will take a concerted and determined effort to flush them out of those entrenched positions.

"It is my hope that the relatively moderate ideas I put forth for addressing the Jewish problem will resolve the situation effectively and thereby avoid the need for more drastic measures. Unlike the Keynesians, I don't believe in trying to stimulate the economy through the breaking of windows. Of course, although I myself prefer a peaceable solution, I can't control what some of the thuggish and militant elements of the alt-right, such as the Rise Above Movement or the Proud Boys, might be capable of if they feel like Jews are, instead of heeding warnings, continuing to behave in a provocative way.

WWII US view Soviet view Israel jews.jpg

"Jewish Scriptures are replete with examples of God's threatening the Jews with destruction if they don't stop their bad behavior. Ezekiel 33:11 says, 'Turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?' If it's okay for their own God to warn of impending doom if they continue on their wayward path, why can't the Gentiles issue a similar warning? We are so powerful as to be godlike in our ability to either rescue the Jew from any enemy he may face, or destroy him completely. And we should, if they persist in posing an existential threat to us. Many times, for their transgressions, they've had their nation taken away and been looted for everything they had, and it can happen again.

"Their own Scripture records that they did the same to many other 'heathen' nations they conquered -- the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites -- destroying their altars, breaking down their images, cutting down their groves, burning their graven images with altars, massacring all the males, and taking everything of value (the cattle, the women, etc.) as spoils of war. The Israeli military actions described in the Bible would be considered war crimes if perpetrated today. The fact that they were powerful enough to get away with it was, to them, proof that God was on their side, and they praised God for their victories. What does it mean, then, if they are defeated and lose everything? For an answer, we can look to Black Hebrews make a Khazar Jew kid cry:

You was robbin' the Germans! You was takin' all the Germans' money! The Germans was sufferin'! You was oppressin' the Germans! You was oppressin' them! And God let them burn you the hell up.

The hell with the Holocaust. Six million people. How about 99 million black people? How about that? Can we be sad for 99 million black people? Can we be upset with 99 million black people? Who gives a damn about six million?

"Why did Hitler do that? Oh, boo-hoo-hoo!" The real Jews would be in mournin'. They wouldn't be jokes like this Khazar baby. They wouldn't be jokes like this cat, cryin' over some Holocaust. The real Holocaust is all these slave ships. That's the real Holocaust. A real Holocaust is 77 million North American Indians, man! Y'all don't care about these.

Tumblr m4we24sBbw1ro63sfo1 500.jpg

"Remember, friends, every country has the Jews it deserves, just like every homeowner has the cockroaches he deserves. Are you just going to complain that your kitchen is overrun by vermin, or are you going to call the exterminator? Stop wishing for things to happen, and start making things happen.

"Whites have as much of a right to fight for their existence as anyone else does. Whenever anyone threatens our life, liberty, or property, we can, without violating libertarian principles, do as John Locke suggested, and 'treat him as one who has put himself into a state of war with me- i.e., kill him if I can; for to that hazard does he justly expose himself whoever introduces a state of war, and is aggressor in it.'"

Larson also proposes, "We need to fix northern Virginia's transportation system by bringing in experts from countries with a track record of success in building quality infrastructure. This could include, for example, bringing in German engineers to speed up the flow of traffic by designing an American autobahn; and bringing in Japanese engineers to plan high-density residential areas and massive business districts that can support a workable mass transit system. We should also allow private turnpike companies to enter the transportation market, and we should get rid of Federal Aviation Administration regulations that get in the way of air transportation innovation.

"Aid to Israel consumes resources that could otherwise be devoted to fixing traffic congestion in northern Virginia. Therefore, when you're stuck spending hours staring at taillights, just remember, it's because of the Jews. If we were to have a holocaust, traffic would flow smoothly and commute times would be greatly reduced. We can bring manufacturing jobs back to America and reduce the trade deficit by creating a booming export industry for soap and lampshades."

Larson states, "We also need to completely abolish government schools so that the market can offer a wider array of educational options at lower cost. Republicans have talked about getting rid of the Department of Education; we need to actually do it. Instead of putting someone like Betsy DeVos in charge of the agency to undermine it from within, the chief executive should just fire all the Department's employees, and Congress should cut its budget down to zero."

Larson argues, "We should fundamentally restructure the government as a profit-seeking company in accordance with Curtis Yarvin's proposal for neocameralism, which he laid out in his treatise, Unqualified Reservations. Since owners will want to receive dividends and maximum the value of their transferable shares, they will have an incentive to look out for the long-term well-being of the country rather than plundering it for short-term gain, as so many interest groups have done."

Larson notes, "I chose to run in the 10th district because it is one of the whiter, more affluent, and competitive districts. Also, I'm familiar with the area from having lived there for several years while studying at Northern Virginia Community College and George Mason University and working as an accountant for companies in northern Virginia and D.C. The 10th district was where I cast my first vote, for Libertarian Robert A. Buchanan in 1998."


It was to the merit of the Pan-German movement in Austria during the closing decade of the last century that it pointed out clearly and unequivocally that a State is entitled to demand respect and protection for its authority only when such authority is administered in accordance with the interests of the nation, or at least not in a manner detrimental to those interests.

The authority of the State can never be an end in itself; for, if that were so, any kind of tyranny would be inviolable and sacred. If a government uses the instruments of power in its hands for the purpose of leading a people to ruin, then rebellion is not only the right but also the duty of every individual citizen.

The question of whether and when such a situation exists cannot be answered by theoretical dissertations but only by the exercise of force, and it is success that decides the issue.

Every government, even though it may be the worst possible and even though it may have betrayed the nation’s trust in thousands of ways, will claim that its duty is to uphold the authority of the State. Its adversaries, who are fighting for national self-preservation, must use the same weapons which the government uses if they are to prevail against such a rule and secure their own freedom and independence. Therefore the conflict will be fought out with ‘legal’ means as long as the power which is to be overthrown uses them; but the insurgents will not hesitate to apply illegal means if the oppressor himself employs them. Generally speaking, we must not forget that the highest aim of human existence is not the maintenance of a State of Government but rather the conservation of the race.

If the race is in danger of being oppressed or even exterminated the question of legality is only of secondary importance. The established power may in such a case employ only those means which are recognized as ‘legal’. yet the instinct of self-preservation on the part of the oppressed will always justify, to the highest degree, the employment of all possible resources. Only on the recognition of this principle was it possible for those struggles to be carried through, of which history furnishes magnificent examples in abundance, against foreign bondage or oppression at home.

Human rights are above the rights of the State. But if a people be defeated in the struggle for its human rights this means that its weight has proved too light in the scale of Destiny to have the luck of being able to endure in this terrestrial world.

The world is not there to be possessed by the faint-hearted races.
— Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf
I was definitely interested in libertarianism. You know, around the time of the stock market crash in 2008, I was searching for an understanding about what happened, and that actually led me to a lot of deep reading, particularly in the Austrian School, which I found to be the most radical version of libertarianism, so therefore the most interesting one. I have respect for Rothbard. I certainly have high respect for Hans-Hermann Hoppe. And so on. Lew Rockwell. Those people. Tom Woods is another guy who does some interesting stuff.

See also

Contact information

I can be reached by email at [email protected].

External links

  • 18 U.S.C. § 2331
  • Retrieved from ""