When Jonathan Bowden left the British National Party, he had this to say:
I am sick and tired of the human scum and vermin that proliferate in such shallow waters. … I do not wish to associate with such low grade lycanthropes and psychotic criminals.
One of the dangers about being honest on the internet — or indeed any public medium — is that one exposes oneself to the nastier accretions of whatever community one is engaged with to the fullest extent. As a high-trust Anglo-Saxon I am, by my very nature, a trusting and honest person. I do not tell lies, I do not hold back, I do not shy from giving my views on any topic even if it’s controversial; I’m not out to “preach to the choir,” so to speak, or to partake in an echochamber in order to signal my “knowledge” or “wisdom.” My sharing of views and so forth is an extension of my innermost person without ego or any of the other traps which ensnare the majority of contemporary human interaction.
I base my pride upon my honesty and knowledge of my own flaws and shortcomings as a person. Thus, when my honesty is brought into question — or indeed my dignity is insulted — the wound is that much deeper, because my transparency is the basis of my confidence and ultimately the legitimacy with which I actually interact with strangers and especially people who I see as my superiors (which isn’t a few people, but, rather, the majority of people I regularly communicate with). I have in fact very low self-esteem; I hold my being in rather low regard, ultimately; but via honesty and transparency I wish to overcome that, to overcome my shortcomings and perceived marks of inferiority. For if I am honest and clear with people, if my cards are on the table, my hand is shown and the right people could then pick upon the carcass, rending the fallible flesh from the bones and leaving bare a clean skeleton replete in whiteness and clarity.
Another thing which unsurprisingly relates to this is the fact of fatherless; something which I carry with me and is projected at various moments in various fashions. For if I am to ever be guided and taught, I must be honest and sincere in what exactly needs to be corrected. The trouble, of course, is that not everyone is mannered and respectable, nor the leader-type I’m constantly sensitive for. In a fundamentally nihilistic society where there are no true values, people — and the radical Right is not beyond this as some are want to hope — do not act courteously, patiently, and so on. Plenty of individuals in our little community here on the internet are rude, unintelligent, liberal, crass, vulgar, ill-humoured, ill-mannered, ill-bred, ill-raised, and ill-minded. Much of this can be ironed-out of one’s character over time, of course; much of the filth which comes to encrust our fellows along the way is merely the soot and debris left by a dying, directionless society. Bathing, though, cannot be forgone; we must, once in a while, wash-away the nonsense and silliness and come clean with not only ourselves but with our comrades.
I’ve made it a point not to attack individual persons outside of the strictest circumstances (such as if I have verifiable evidence that someone has acted dishonestly or in appalling taste), and the same goes for various ideological subsets inherent beneath the Alt. Right umbrella. Ultimately, I have no control over most people, as such it is futile and pointless to bang-on about how group “x” is full of idiots or how person “y” should be doxxed or whatever else because I have no control over the situation. My spats with other people are personal, though — and personal relationships do indeed fall under the domain of that which I have some exercise of influence upon. Arguments come if I feel that I’ve been treated poorly or misrepresented.
Take, for example, some rubbish posted about me on the forum of The Right Stuff I’ve no doubt one or two of the people reading this will be aware of. Some person claimed that I’m unequivocally hated by several people he admires and then came the (infuriatingly) usual nonsense about me being a pseudo-intellectual (even though I’ve freely admitted and repeatedly stated that I’m not an intellectual or even intellectually-minded). This whole thing began when I found this person spreading lies about me in the comments section of several of Millennial Woes’ videos. I reacted to this, calling them out, to which they just doubled-down, not apologising for lying about me and spreading nonsense, but, rather, continuing with stupid accusations and the rest. These are the sorts of instances which genuinely make me angry.
They make me genuinely furious because if people are going to spread shit about me, then why bother being honest and so on in the first place? It’s my character, of course; I could easily hold back, but I choose not to because it would be dishonest. But why should I bother to put my faith in the would-be executioner when he’ll just use the real axe anyways and kill me? Other instances include people shit-talking me behind my back or in spaces I know nothing of. Such occurrences are part of the reason I become physically anxious at the thought of being gossiped-about outside of earshot. I know my flaws — be honest about my shortcomings all you like — but when people are inventing rumours out of thin air which are then taken at face-value by other people who’ve never spoken to me we have a serious problem. This is of course is all part of the risk of putting one’s face out there in public; these things are a given to a degree. However, I expect a higher quality of person to be interested in politics, history, philosophy and so on. I expect that people will simply come to me personally to speak about me, as should be ideal. I have no problem with criticism, but I do have a problem with false criticism or things stemming from simple misunderstandings. I want people to engage with me at a personal level as I want a clear and honest exchange with them. I can’t be friends with everyone — I know that — but at least I want people to dislike me based upon truth, not falsehood.
I should add that my aforementioned spat with the person at the TRS forum in particular has been, to some extent, resolved. I’ll admit, however, that I don’t trust this person anymore and I never will again. They don’t have my back. They aren’t on my side. I did nothing to provoke them and yet they saw fit to insult me and worse. I forgive them, ultimately, but my expectations were admittedly too high — and they still are. The only worry, though, is that there will be more occurrences like this which will trigger an irrational action on my part such as a disappearing act. Perhaps one day I’ll just become sick of liars, backstabbers and ignoramuses and remove myself from the internet and do something else with my energy. I don’t want it to come to that, ultimately, but it isn’t an impossibility; and it’s precisely because for me, my interactions with ideas and people are not mere juggling external objects with my hands, so to speak, but the intimate connection with things and persons of hopeful substance and value. I take these matters extremely seriously; I know that. I am aware of how uptight and sensitive I can be, but the first step to changing these things is to be honest about them. “Know thyself,” as Plato qua Socrates noted. And I’m not going to pretend to be someone else simply because some nobody out there thinks I’m “pretentious” for not being more egalitarian in my exchanges with people — a very liberal criticism if there ever was one.
What I’m currently listening to:
I suppose all I can hope to do in future is to not engage with anyone but a relatively closed circle of trusted friends. To leave people who’re untrustworthy or misunderstanding to themselves without intervening and potentially causing yet more of the same. Hm. I don’t know. Perhaps my urge to interfere with how I’m perceived isn’t often because people actually dislike me — indeed in every case thus far it’s been only due to misunderstandings or lies (id est I “hate nationalists and think they’re all ‘plebs'”) hence I feel a duty to correct people instead of let nonsense go unchallenged. People who genuinely dislike me will simply not talk about me or to me; they’ll do their thing and I’ll do mine, and that’s quite alright. Perhaps I should set space aside to correct nonsense directly? It feel, however, as if I’m then giving stupidity respect or legitimacy which it doesn’t deserve — something definitely as such regarding memes about me which originate on Brit/pol/ such as me being a trap/cross-dresser, or a self-proclaimed philosopher/intellectual/leader of anything, and so on. Such nonsense… I suppose anyone stupid enough to believe such things aren’t worth dealing with, full-stop.
This topic clearly relates to a recent video on my YouTube channel titled “About Me.” Honestly, I’m curious as to why this video has dislikes. Aside from its personal nature nothing new or surprising was said about me — and I haven’t lost subscribers over it. There was one stupid comment about being an “emo” — such a person clearly shouldn’t be watching videos like that if they are so intellectually malformed as to see honesty in that context as even marginally niche enough to single-out and sneer at. But, as has been noted, such things are the risk of public openness. If I can help it, I’d just rather not confuse people or miscommunicate anything, but my obsessing over that isn’t doing me any favours, as I’m increasingly aware. I want to be straight with people, I want to be totally and absolutely clear. But if the sanctity, the vulnerability, which such openness facilitates is mistreated, or if it flat-out isn’t understood, then there will not be a one-hundred percent success rate regarding communication. There’s an imperfection there, an impurity; and good grief that’s irritating.