I think it actually explains a lot that the author is British (and is also a blinkered racist who takes the politics of the UK as indicating immutable characteristics of the Saxon and the Gael).
I consider all the intellectualizing and/or pseudoscientific streams of the alt-right (Sailer, MacDonald, Jared Taylor, Unz) to be sneer targets. It's not really on display in this article, but here's the author's take on Priti Patel:
>No, Priti Patel looks like what she is: a nasty piece of work. As I said in “A Shameless Shabbos-Shiksa,” she’s a high-T fem-pol, that is, a female politician with typically elevated levels of testosterone.
[Eigensneers #5 and #10](https://old.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/j1zpdk/nsfw_towards_an_eigenbasis_of_the_sneer_space/)
You know, it’s not too hard to take page-sized screenshots and link
those rather than increase site traffic, even by the small degree of
this small subreddit, to straight up racist websites. Just a
thought.
Or just link to an archive site, which is better proof they'd said it, especially if they delete/edit later too.
(deletion probably not likely in this case, but in general)
I like to read this stuff like a Tom Friedman piece. Not because I’m
so abject and destroyed as people who actually read Tom Friedman for
entertainment but because I feel a certain moral responsibility to keep
up now and again with what the racist arseholes are up to lately.
Again with the Friedman analogy: the bizarre line quoted, though
thankfully published on a website for racist cranks could easily be
fodder for Matt Taibbi’s various
already classic screeds about Friedman
I can’t quite put my finger on why that is but it has that
pretentious ring of making such a sweeping (and racist) statement about
a whole culture the author clearly knows they don’t actually know
anything about. Starting with a twisted anecdote that sounds sensible in
the barest sense for a writer grasping towards a theme, the author goes
way off the deep end with all this guff about what should essentially be
called advocacy of a race war. Lazy pretence to historical analysis
seems to work equally well in the NYT as it does in racist blogs.
To be fair, I'm kinda fine with being perceived as a "useful ally to the hostile Jewish elite".
The main draw I have from this is I'm increasingly interested in Georgia and Latvia.
I can’t tell if you’re expressing a genuine interest in those places or being sardonic: nonetheless both are cool and worthy of attention anyway. I have an American friend - we’ll call him Bill - whose main ambition when we last spoke was to get to Georgia and start up a tech business there. Latvia is a bit different, I remember when I got to Estonia a few years ago my dad’s friend was glad I wasn’t in Latvia, even though things didn’t actually work out in Estonia either.
unironically doing the Irish Question, i can’t even
.
“Make The Irish Non-white Again!”
First as farce then as tragedy… or something?
No True White Person would disagree with my racist views!
White nationalism always cannibalizes itself.
Is this sneer-worthy? Not that it’s not hateful dreck, I just have no idea who this person is or their connection to the sneerosphere.
You know, it’s not too hard to take page-sized screenshots and link those rather than increase site traffic, even by the small degree of this small subreddit, to straight up racist websites. Just a thought.
I like to read this stuff like a Tom Friedman piece. Not because I’m so abject and destroyed as people who actually read Tom Friedman for entertainment but because I feel a certain moral responsibility to keep up now and again with what the racist arseholes are up to lately.
Again with the Friedman analogy: the bizarre line quoted, though thankfully published on a website for racist cranks could easily be fodder for Matt Taibbi’s various already classic screeds about Friedman
I can’t quite put my finger on why that is but it has that pretentious ring of making such a sweeping (and racist) statement about a whole culture the author clearly knows they don’t actually know anything about. Starting with a twisted anecdote that sounds sensible in the barest sense for a writer grasping towards a theme, the author goes way off the deep end with all this guff about what should essentially be called advocacy of a race war. Lazy pretence to historical analysis seems to work equally well in the NYT as it does in racist blogs.