[Not Safe For Work]
Arktos is a fantastic publishing house, a dedicated team which has made some of the most important work in the New Reaction accessible to American audiences. Arktos is a labor of love by qualified and detail-oriented intellectuals who’ve faced poverty, risked persecution, and imperiled their once-promising careers in academia to expose the Anglosphere to a realm of ideas which had previously remained out of reach.
Please forgive them.
“New Reaction” begins with Mark Dyal’s blistering Nietzschean attack on the bovine masses. I strongly disagree with his thesis, but it’s florid, vivid, and academically informed. If one has made the irrevocable error of purchasing this over-priced patchwork of histrionic blog posts cleverly disguised as something worth reading, one would do well to only read Dyal’s foreword, as his attempt to briefly summarize her position achieves more in a few paragraphs than she manages to achieve for the remainder of the “book.”
Rachel calls them slaves, others call them herd animals, or even homo domesticus fragilis — orthodoxy is considered almost divine. It is the giver of life’s meaning and value, the promise of a future, and the stability of a past. For another human type — I call them nomads, raptors, or homo medio luporum — it is the guarantor of stasis, the break on freedom and revolting action.
This is the hyper-modern solipsistic egotism of Ayn Rand, only with more metaphysical depth. As a Radical Traditionalist, I see nothing that could be appropriately described as “Reaction,” and certainly nothing “New.” Their brand of “New Reaction” is a radical individualism which defies and denies all honor codes and bonds of blood and faith in favor of a maniacal self-worship. What Mark and Rachel are promoting is the polar opposite of the Radical Traditionalist ideals most imagine when they think of “New Reaction.”
The book is more style than substance, but what little substance it contains is one long attack on what New Reaction means to most people: honor codes, hierarchy, ritual, rootedness, and loyalty. Her first chapter is entitled, “How I Left the Left.” This is misleading. She left the left behind. Like an adult Veruca Salt rebelling against the daddy who is spoiling her as much as possible, she wants all of the degenerate self-indulgence now!
Permit me to excerpt some of her revolting poetry. To enjoy it unredacted, you’ll need to buy the book.
Will you let them be fake? There was never any cake to eat. The cake was telling you to join the revolution. Now it’s time to resist the liberal institution.
We’re going counter-revolting. I’m so counter-revolting. You’re so counter-revolting. It’s all counter-revolting!
From the first (prose) sentence, her primary target is tradition.
The response to common slaughter is to revolt against the dethroning of the gods. Mankind, created in the image of psychic tyranny, did not hesitate at the harvest it designed. The only good god is a dead god, and one does not rule based on slaves alone. This is why man evolved from the psychic tyranny it could not survive. It was a suicide of the final harvest, and the beasts across the land screamed in agony.
Within her worldview, politically correct liberal orthodoxy is itself traditional. She’s correct to a degree. Just as Veruca Salt’s father attempted to place some minimal constraints on her behavior for her own protection, the “cathedral” insists on the bare minimum of altruism and traditional morality necessary to keep things from devolving into authentic chaos and mayhem; kinda like how BDSM clubs have condoms, guidelines on acceptable abuse, and “safe words.”
Implausibly, she identifies herself as among those who would come out on top if there weren’t all these pesky morals.
The common gods and their worshippers grew angry at the great dethroning like never before. In more humanistic terms, the strong were killed by the weak before they were allowed onto the battlefield, and the docile maggots labeled this as progress for their historical records.
She indulges here in what I privately refer to as the Neo-Pagan Paradox, nagging about being a hapless victim of weak people with slave moralities. Not all folk religionists are guilty of this, and Rachel’s not the least bit folkish, but it’s common in those circles. It’s typified by the self-contradictory complaint that their proud warrior culture was defeated by sniveling weakling Christians. While pretty much everybody who thinks this way points back at Nietzsche, Nietzsche knew better than this. Bearing ressentiment toward the folk is a sure sign that one remains viscerally submissive even as one fancies the will to power in the abstract.
History’s recent alpha actors–good and evil alike (Joseph Smith, Jr., Adolf Hitler, Jim Jones, L. Ron Hubbard, Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, etc…) –never ask permission from “the herd” or blame it for somehow limiting them. As if anything but her limited trust fund balance actually stands between Haywire and actualizing her vision.
Authentic organic elites don’t preen and posture relative to the masses, they instinctively and lovingly mold them in their own image or simply depart to chart a new course…a microcosm of what Nietzsche expected of his prophesied Übermensch. The most apt analogy can be borrowed from pick-up artist terminology, with the gifted leader as the alpha and his loyal followers as the conquest. Hissing and spitting at “normies” is beta, akin to a maladroit loser kvetching about women.
Mankind burned the gods at the stake for choosing to slaughter their own followers, neglecting the very existence of psychic tyranny. By claiming that this was just hellspeak, every last god was administered a taste of its own blood. Compelled to battle this ruthless cannibalism, the old gods rose from their graves and demanded vengeance. Every last god in the kingdom declared, at once, that man would not serve without consequence.
Haywire is a master of the superficial. She mimics the appearance of a philosopher who’s arrived at a profound metaphorical point without making any point at all. She carries on about hacking without knowing how to close a tag. She wades into politics without doing her homework. She would also have us believe she’s a gritty punk off the streets.
Trendy liberal “social activist” types hate the true punks of the streets. We are rude and unrefined, and refuse to be dominated.
I’m decidedly not “punk,” so I wouldn’t know. Perhaps the upscale Jewish neighborhood Rachel grew up in was exceedingly gangster, the kind of place where angsty teens in pre-ripped and manufacturer-distressed jeans keep it real. The notion that being “rude” and “unrefined” are desirable attributes is prototypical of the contemporary hipster. It kind of reminds me of the pre-teen girls in those “Happy Bunny” shirts which make a point to advertise that the wearer has an inconsiderate and unpleasant disposition.
My conservative friends were shocked to find out that I was “on their side,” whatever that even meant. One of them was a politician who told me that while he was running for office he never would have thought to approach someone who looked like me. “You look like a Leftist,” he told me. My heart wanted to bleed at that point, just to make an ironic statement. “I’m not a fucking Leftist!”
He should have trusted his instincts. She’s a fucking Leftist. She’s a politically incorrect Leftist, to be sure. She’s just angry that the modern Left still retains some vestigial hierarchical and altruistic moral reflexes. Dyal claims in the foreword that she went so far Left that she became Right, but I think a more accurate understanding is that Rachel Haywire is kind of like Ron Paul with a Hot Topic gift card. They both appear to be to the “Right” to the untrained eye but are actually too stridently and consistently liberal for contemporary liberals.
The feminists are all trying to chop off your dicks. Israel is oppressing you. Poor little male existentialist victim. You sound like an oppressed moron and have become the PC culture that you despise. Why are you hating people for abiding by the rules of the jungle which you, dear enlightened male, are so enamored with? You cry because you are being oppressed by the iron fists of feminism and Zionism. This article is for you.
By purchasing this e-book on Amazon, I have paid a Jewish webcam prostitute to sexually tease me and push her Jewish ethnic agenda on me at the same time in some bizarre political fetish ritual. It’s too late for me; I’ve already dishonored and humiliated myself beyond redemption by having paid for this book. Save yourself.
She’s perfectly correct, …within her hyper-egotist philosophical framework. Within her amoral worldview, there’s no legitimate challenge to Jewish power. Might makes right. I seriously doubt she would follow that line of reasoning to openly endorse the dozens of pogroms, including the most recent one, that her people have been subjected to. And I strongly suspect that she would find herself falling back on some herd-oriented normie slave morality excuses for why her life should be spared if the power dynamic were inverted.
She complains, shortly after denying the other side the right to complain, about how she catches considerable heat because she’s Jewish. Their chutzpah knows no bounds.
You can post your ideas to “radical Right” websites, but what if you are Jewish?
What if you are Black and you hate Obama (or even Martin Luther King) due to the integration that was forced upon your people? You must hate yourself for refusing to join the Pride march. You must support rape culture because you didn’t join the knitting circle against gender oppression. You must be a Zionist infiltrator. See the problem here?
Did she not infiltrate our movement? And is she not a Zionist? We “leaders” in the movement defied all those dyspeptic and conspiratorial anti-semites in the comment threads and gave her the benefit of the doubt. Score one for the hardline anti-semites.
She is indeed a Zionist infiltrator, crying out as she strikes us. For a bunch of guys who are supposedly paranoid and hateful, we certainly have established a trend of gullibility and earnestness. A few minutes of googling would have been enough to warn us away from this troubled self-promoting scenester.
What is Right-wing thought? What is the difference between Right-wing and Left-wing thinking? Non-egalitarian thinking is considered Right-wing. Individualism. The notion of humanity not being “all good” is considered a Right-wing thought. Let’s take it as far as fascism. Extreme Right-wing fascism. Right-wing thought.
Well, actually, …fascism is categorically collectivi… Nevermind…
Genocidal regimes have occurred under the rule of democracy, as evidenced by the election of brutal rulers such as Adolf Hitler.
She repeatedly and consistently disparages Hitler and the NS throughout, even though her mainstream assumptions about what Hitler and the NS stood for are pretty much aligned with her dystopian Ragnar Redbeard metapolitics. Curiously, the only time in this book in which she considers cruelty and genocidal bloodlust morally negative things are when those things are visited upon her tribe.
The party is being shut down and the party wants you to go home. The party is no longer inviting you. Sorry, nationalists. You’re just not welcome anymore.
Bloodthirsty ethnic chauvinism for me, individualism and alienation for thee. Sorry, folks. All nationalists except Jewish nationalists have been dismissed.
National Futurism is not about eugenics in the sense that it weeds people out. National Futurism weeds people in. Scientists are starting to realize that Hitler’s idea of an Aryan master race is genetics for the pre-school crowd. It is now time for us to graduate with honors. Why create blue eyes where you can create humans with open eyes? Humans who are not slaves to the herd, who are not cheerleaders of the majority, and who are not servants of equality.
Before she made her flamboyant debut in our scene, Rachel was a gadfly of the less politically-oriented “futurist” scene, which ties with the industrial scene and her BDSM fetish gig into a streamlined total package of nineties emo posturing. As much as I love Trent Reznor’s early work and Mark Romanek’s groundbreaking videography, I emphatically do not wish to sign on for a future which is essentially one big long terrifying Nine Inch Nails music video.
The earlier reference to her BDSM gig was not simply a prudish attack on the chastity she’s proudly discarded. It’s relevant, as the only prominent thinker her ideology truly aligns with is Marquis de Sade, for whom sadism, the S in BDSM (bondage and sado-masochism), is named. According to Wikipedia, “Sade’s works have to this day been kept alive by artists and intellectuals because they espouse a philosophy of extreme individualism that became reality in the economic liberalism of the following centuries.”
There’s a perennial debate over whether the Marquis was actually promoting the lurid behavior in his writings or whether it was an apt challenge to and critique of the philosophes of his day who insisted that men were innately noble creatures who had simply been corrupted and degraded by the clergy and nobility. Haywire has taken the penultimate step into the abyss of Modernity, discarding the reciprocal individualism (non-aggression principle) which restrains national anarchists, Ron Paul, and most other extreme Leftists.
Rachel Haywire’s philosophy is not merely influenced by her BDSM lifestyle. BDSM actually is her philosophy. In her hyper-sexualized imagination, Palestinians and White Nationalists are ball-gagged slaves of the superior Zionist master. Somehow, she’s taken all that pain and torment of decades of being teased and bullied for her mental health issues and has flipped it all on its head. The awkward, vulnerable, and sexually confused Rachel Mandelson created an avatar, Rachel Haywire, who is a sexual fantasy caricature of her goyische tormenters.
I take great pains to avoid bullying the mentally unstable, and to mind my own business regarding personal foibles, but her deviant sexuality is germane to her ideology, she’s not requesting privacy, and the New Right scene continues affording her attention, encouragement, and financing. In the strict sense, she is indeed technically a Zionist infiltrator, albeit a clumsy and unpersuasive one. But the real error and problem in all this lies with each and every one of us who failed to heed the countless warning signs…her Jewishness being but one.
It gets worse.
You are a part of the second human race. The homo futura. The homo superior. You refuse to claim you are the same as the people around you simply because you are part of the same species. The definition of the word “species” does not account for mental or behavioral differences that define you and who you are.
Basically, Rachel just comes out and says what most non-identitarian HBD dorks are thinking but have enough sense to refrain from verbalizing. “I am a god among men because I am so smart. I belong to a transracial, transnational, traditionless cognitive elite of enlightened overlords. This backline job working alongside normies at Burger King is totally beneath me!”
I’m not White or Jewish or Christian or Pagan or American or whatever! I’m…SMART!
As the homo futura, you don’t have to sit back and attempt to win over the homo inferior. Your goal should be to literally create a new nation and leave the old species behind.
Don’t let the door hit you on the way out!
Tonight we stand proud. We kill each other and eat each other because we are cannibals of the soul and mind. Most people are afraid of us, but over here on Dictator Island nobody quivers at our presence.
An island of maniacal cannibals of the soul and mind!? Where do I pre-order?
I met Princess Pixel when she was fisting some guy at some fetish club.
“He doesn’t understand humanity like I do,” I told her.
“Prove it,” she replied, her fist twisting down her slave.
I kicked her slave in the face.
“I love you,” Princess Pixel told me.
I don’t know whether I’m more offended by the frightening pornographic imagery or the incoherence of the point being made. The guy being fisted didn’t even have an opportunity to explain his understanding of humanity! And if you think I’m uncharitably cherry-picking excerpts out of context to make her appear batshit, buy the book and see for yourself. I dare you.
The 99% is the slave class, and the slave class is the homo inferior. Take note, because this 1% nation stuff is multicultural. The 1% is fighting back, and this has nothing to do with economics. The 1% is full of leaders who have had enough of this plastic democracy. A slave is a slave, and we don’t need any more slavery.
I doubt Rachel’s in the top 1% of anything, save perhaps the Narcissistic Personality Inventory. If anybody out there knows the safe word to put a stop to this juvenile and perverted dominatrix’s attempt to be politically relevant, please cry it out.