Posts Tagged ‘everitt foster’

Nationalist Public Radio, Episode 8: Equality

Tuesday, April 4th, 2017

This week the Nationalist Public Radio posse inspect a question which defines modernity and the basis of politics in our era: what is equality, is it a good thing, and is it a substitute for something else? Everitt Foster, James Price and Roderick Kaine look deeply into the philosophy, history and psychology behind equality and discover its roots.

Nationalist Public Radio, Episode 4: Milogate

Friday, March 3rd, 2017

In this episode, the team tackles Milogate and extrapolates from it to homosexuality and “social justice” issues that the Left has primed our society to fascinate itself with while waiting for the End. Instead, we look at some unorthodox solutions and question whether these issues are issues at all.

0:00 – Introduction of the topic

1:30 – Roderick and James discuss Milogate and how the Left would react to a similar situation

8:50 – Peter and Roderick spar on the Gay Question

21:20 – Brett discusses how Leftism and homosexuality co-exist

30:00 – Where do we go from Milo?

41:15 – Does the Alt-Right need a leader?

  • No, the Alt-Right will not die with Milo
  • Roderick notes that the Alt-Right is a diffuse movement that doesn’t need a leader
  • Peter argues that a reading-list, so to speak, is better than a head ideologue for the Alt-Right

46:00 – How should the Alt-Right subvert censorship?

  • Brett notes that censorship of moderates like Nick Land lead to more hardcore people rising up
  • We need to offer something like “thought leaders”

56:00 – Should we withdraw from the mainstream?

  • Brett notes that there is a short term benefit, but we also need a long term strategy
  • James notes that we don’t need the mainstream media anymore
  • 1:01:28 – Alex Jones on Goblins

1:02:00 – Should we punch Right?

  • “Punching Right” by Greg Johnson
  • Brett discusses what “punching Right” means
  • James notes that the shitlords do shift the Overton Window
  • 1:07:30 – “Punch Everywhere” by Andy Nowicki
  • Peter argues that punching everywhere strengthens movements
  • Everitt and Brett discuss the concept of Whiteness
  • Perhaps culture is a better metric than ‘Whiteness’
  • 1:27:00 – Brett confirmed for Zionist

1:29:30 – Closing and Outro

Visit our Nationalist Public Radio Archives to listen to past episodes of the show.

Nationalist Public Radio, Episode 3: Copyright Law

Thursday, February 16th, 2017

Despite our Valentine’s Day being hampered by a lack of Roderick, we went ahead and sat down at the round table to open up a new discussion. In this episode of NPR, Brett, Everitt, and Peter discuss a listener suggested topic: copyright law.

As usual, the highlights can be found below.

0:00 – Introduction of the topic by listener 1349.

1:30 – Everitt’s Intellectual Property Law lecture

  • We are not giving you legal advice – don’t sue us!
  • Origins of copyright law in 1709 and the changes that occurred as production has grown

13:45 – What guides the future of a work? What ought we value?

  • Who owns source material?

18:40 – Peter and Brett discuss cultural appropriation and the world of Sherlock Holmes

  • Peter defends derivative works and critiques the concept of “intellectual theft”
  • Peter also defends plagiarism by critiquing by-lines

24:18 – Everitt and Brett go deeper into cultural appropriation

29:20 – The table discusses the idea of “writing in the same world”

37:00 – Peter expands upon his views on copyright

  • The reader’s interpretation may be just as, if not more important than the author’s intent

41:40 – Government granted ad-hoc monopolies are discussed

44:00 – How ought international scientific cooperation work?

  • Should drugs be patented?

48:00 – Brett discusses who ought to control patents

53:30 – How are we going to enforce copyright laws?

  • We shouldn’t punish individuals with huge fines for pirating a $3 song

57:40 – Peter and Everitt discuss their respective content and paywalls

1:05:40 – What liability ought file sharing sites have?

1:08:35 – Peter confirmed for crypto-Libertarian?!?

1:17:10 – Brett confirmed for open-source nerd

1:18:30 – Any questions can be directed towards podcast@amerika.org

1:18:35 – Closing and Outro

Visit our Nationalist Public Radio Archives to listen to past episodes of the show.

Nationalist Public Radio, Episode 2: Social Conservatism

Saturday, February 11th, 2017

While Roderick is off gallivanting across the third world (either getting a kidney stolen or throwing commies out of a helicopter with Based Duterte), Brett, Everitt, and Peter sat down at NPR’s round table to discuss a meta-topic not often discussed in the Alt-Right: practical social issues. Specifically, the discussion revolved around three major topics: abortion, gay marriage and/or gay rights, and women in combat. We all have different opinions on these topics (even if some of us haven’t given them much thought) and so it was nice to sit down and hash them out.

As usual, below is an outline with the highlights from the show (as well as links to articles and books referenced) and we’ll see you next time!

0:00 – Introduction

0:54 – Peter clarifies his role at NPR and is confirmed for Contrarian Alt-Right (Con-Alt-Right)

3:35 – Everitt lays out the meta-topic for the episode

5:00 – What does abortion mean for the Alt-Right?

  • Brett chimes in arguing that unfettered abortion leads to it being used as birth control
  • The conclusion, as per Brett, is that abortion ought to be between a woman and her doctor
  • What happens when if a woman messes up her birth control? How ought we deal with those cases?
  • 11:00 – Peter pushes back upon Brett’s position and argues for contraceptives and argues that there are more legitimate uses for abortion than Brett claims
  • The conclusion is, according to Peter, that if a teenage parent is unable to take care of the child, then the child should not be birthed
  • How can we give the child the best life?
  • 19:22 – Brett brings us to the real issue: is casual sex permissible?
  • Peter defines casual sex as hookup culture while Brett views that as merely half of it; the other half is dating without purpose
  • Peter argues for a destigmatization of sex
  • Brett concludes that we shouldn’t have casual sex and ought to focus on marriage exclusively while Peter agrees that we also ought to strive for marriage

33:48 – Should abortion be used as a eugenic tool?

  • For Brett, abortion is the wrong tool for the job of eugenics
  • For Peter, we don’t know enough about human nature to eliminate various traits as some traits may have unforeseen positive effects
  • 37:12 – Richard Spencer on racial superiority – 1:10:40

43:44 – How ought homosexuality be treated in the Alt-Right? Should a baker be forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding?

  • Peter argues that forcing bakers to bake anything is absurd and concludes that individuals should be able to do whatever they want behind closed doors
  • 47:33 – “The Rainbow Coalition” by Richard Spencer
  • 47:57 – Richard Spencer’s infamous tweet on implicit white identity
  • Everitt blindsides Peter with a killer question…
  • Brett agrees that the bakery shouldn’t be forced to bake the cake and argues against the state
  • Both Brett and Peter argue for legitimate gay communities
  • 59:40 – Gay Bar story, Savage Hippie Podcast episode 27, 42:20
  • Everitt notes that we ought to treat the gay community as simply an other tribe

1:03:50 – What do we think about women in combat?

  • Peter thinks notes that women should be allowed in combat and, in the current system, required to sign up for selective service
  • 1:06:50 – Kurdish YPG Fighters
  • 1:07:20 – Danish student kills 100 ISIS militants
  • Everitt opposes selective service and Brett opposes women in combat
  • 1:09:50 – Not a Gentleman’s War: An Inside View of Junior Officers in the Vietnam War by Ron Milam (2012)
  • Peter argues for a pragmatic understanding for women in combat and opposes selective service
  • Women in men’s battalions might hinder operational effectiveness, according to Everitt
  • 1:16:10 – The Arab-Israeli Wars: War and Peace in the Middle East by Chaim Herzog (2005)
  • 1:17:20 – Robert A. Heinlein on women in the military:

    “[T]here is very strong reason why female Naval officers are assigned to transports: It is good for trooper morale…Can you think of anything sillier than letting yourself be fired out of a spaceship with nothing but mayhem and sudden death at the other end? However, if someone must do this idiotic stunt, do you know of a surer way to keep a man keyed up to the point where he is willing than by keeping him constantly reminded that the only good reason why men fight is a living breathing reality? In a mixed ship, the last thing a trooper hears before a drop (maybe the last word he ever hears) is a woman’s voice, wishing him luck. If you don’t think this is important, you’ve probably resigned from the human race.” – Robert A. Heinlein, Starship Troopers, (New York: Ace Books, 2006), 260.

  • Brett rejects materialism and wants to preserve the feminine mystique that combat might destroy

1:21:20 – Any questions can be directed towards podcast@amerika.org

1:21:30 – Closing and Outro

Nationalist Public Radio, Episode 1: The Alt Right Rises

Thursday, February 2nd, 2017

During the inaugural episode of Nationalist Public Radio, the round table (Everitt, Brett, Roderick, and Peter) meets to introduce your new source of news and entertainment in The Current Year™, NPR! We discuss what we see NPR as being, who we are, and a myriad of other topics. Specifically, we discuss what the Alt-Right is and how we each view it, we examine questions of history and culture, as well as straying down the path of biological determinism.

Below is an outline with the highlights from the show (as well as links to articles and books referenced) and we’ll see you next time!

0:00 – You are Now Listening to Nationalist Public Radio!

0:40 – What is Nationalist Public Radio (NPR)?

2:00 – Introductions

10:20 – What is the Alt-Right?

19:30 – Is History Cyclical, or is there a ‘Right Side’ or ‘Wrong Side’ to History?

  • Roderick discusses inequality amongst humans, notes that a natural hierarchy arises, and discusses eugenics and genetic engineering
  • Peter on individualism and in-group preference and how that may play a role in success
  • Brett on exceptional people and mixing culture and genetics

31:00 – Does Human Nature Lead to Nationalism?

46:00 – When Does A Tribe Become a Nation? What is the Culture-Genetic Feedback Loop?

1:07:40 – Closing

“An Introduction To Nihilism” And An Interview With Brett Stevens

Friday, October 21st, 2016

brett_stevens

Over at Manticore Press, a short writing entitled “An Introduction To Nihilism” which explains in straightforward terms the philosophy applied in Nihilism: A Philosophy Based In Nothingness And Eternity.

Perhaps its most biting moment:

By facing the darkness of life directly and allowing the cold wind of the abyss to lick our faces, nihilism creates acceptance of the world as it is, and then embarks on a search for meaning that is not “social meaning” because it is interpreted according to the individual based on the capacity of that individual. Nihilism is esoteric in that it rejects the idea of a truth that can be communicated to everyone, but by freeing us from the idea that whatever truths we encounter must include everyone, allows for lone explorers to delve deeper and climb higher, if they have the biological requirements for the mental ability involved.

For this reason, nihilism is transformative. We go into it as equal members of the modern zombie automaton cult, convinced that there is objective truth and we have subjective preferences. We come out realizing that our preferences are entirely a function of our abilities and biology, and that “objective” truth is as much an idol as the Golden Calf of Moses’ time: a fiction and consensual reality created to keep a troupe of slightly smarter than average monkeys working together.

Its most interesting part however may be its clarity on the idea of nihilism as a different method of finding reality than the intermediaries and symbolic realities normally chosen by humans:

Nihilism rejects the ideas of universalism, rationalism and empiricism which have ruled the West for centuries. These ideas arise from our social impulses, or the desire to include others as a group and motivate them with what is perceived as objective truth.

Universalism holds that all people are essentially the same, and therefore that values are a matter of respecting the choices of each person, truth is what can be verified in a way a group can understand, and communication relies on words which have immutable meaning. Rationalism supposes that the workings our minds can tell us what is true in the world without testing, and implies universalism, or that the workings of our minds are all the same. Empiricism, now linked to its cousin logical positivism, states that truth is only found in observable and testable, replicable observations.

In addition, for your reading pleasure, Everritt over at A Natural Reaction has published “An Interview with Author and Philosopher Brett Stevens” in which he asks the big questions and some subtler ones that reinforce them. This was a well-executed interview.

Apparently this section has generated the most reaction:

Do you have hope for the future? If so why?

There is always hope. Humans can change themselves, or at least some can, and they tend to influence others by their natural leadership abilities. Right now, every Leftist policy is failing at once, and so history will force us to make a change. In my view, it will shift toward the vision of futurism and not the old, tired, and failed system of liberal democracy.

You may also notice that we have a new site design. This arose from practical concerns — how to make the text more readable, work around some technical glitches and support mobile devices — but also as an upgrade to our aging three-year-old site design. There will be minor corrections over the next few weeks as there always are, but if you spot something that has gone wrong, please mention it.