When White Gentiles start acting selfishly, asking what we have to gain from anything we are asked to do, closing our hearts to others and insisting upon a transactional relationship with others (a mutually beneficial exchange of some sort), we cease to be victims of the abuse of those parasites who feed off of our altruism. There are issues with her philosophy, of course, objectivism is deeply flawed, but the solution is not to reject the ideas entirely, but instead to modify them to something better by identifying and mending out the weaknesses. The error being the complete rejection of any sort collectivism in favor of a weakening and isolating individualism. The poison of normative ethics and objective morality, in which all actors a subjects are indistinguishable, interchangeable, expendable, etc. Where neither the identities of beings matter, nor do the relationships between one them, an inhuman and monstrous kind of moral rule. Morality should never be objective and ethics should never be normative, instead one should embrace a relativistic morality and a subjective ethical system, it is only there that partiality and differences of loyalties could exist. Fortunately, the solution to this is simple, in this case, as it is in many, the ideology needs more influence from of the ideas of Adolf Hitler, you see. Her ideology was focused on individual organisms, which is why it's doomed to failure, but it could be made into something that is very functional when you simply replace the individual organism with their genes, nothing else need be changed from that. Then the principles of evolution takes their place in the core of the objectivist ideology, including a genocentric hierarchy of ethical obligations towards all other living things relative to oneself. For short, hamiltons laws of kinship selection, where your morals are created, shaped, and directed by the interaction of Mendelian inheritance and Natural selection. It all comes down to game theory, where the players are individual genes within the organisms, and not the organisms themselves, who act as vehicles for their genes. The genes come together to create the organism, and could contribute to the traits of that organism, and it is their traits that determine everything about them. These include their behavioral traits, such as the instincts that imbue them with a moral sense, and the behavioral traits that a gene contributes towards constitutes the specific strategies of the gene in the game of evolution. Game theory applies here, and as per Hamilton's rules, genes thst code for the most ideal strategies emerge as the most successful ones at propagating themselves. We feel or beleive as we do because these beliefs and feelings cause us to act in ways that were most conducive to the ability of our ancestors to contribute to the genetic line which leads up to us. Morality must have a goal, one cannot asses the moral value of any action without having some standard by which one action is to be compared to another, this is why morality travels with purpose, without a purpose, there is no basis for making a moral judgement. The purpose of life is the propagation of one's genes, the duration over which copies of one's genes exist within living organisms. Taking this back to objectivism, one must make decisions based upon this purpose, and game theory made it quite clear that a selfish gene sort of strategy is the best one to use for maximizing one's chances of long term success. Objectivism gives us the language abd attitude to make this explicit, that we assert our own interests and demand to be shown what it is that makes anything that we are proposed to do or refrain from doing in our interest, we insist on a transactional relationship with others. Not for ourselves, but for our genes, we could ask, for example, what some proposal has in interest for a specific phenotype we possess, such as hair or eyes of a color other than brown or black. What White people exist in now is a mentality like that of an abuse victim, where our compassion and hope are used to make us submit to intolerable treatment and unbearable conditions. The way to save a victim of abuse is to teach them to discard this idea of an unconditional and self sacrificing altruism, and instead assert one's own interests, demanding thst their relationships be of a transactional nature, ask what one is getting of out the deal, and if it is nothing, have courage to vacate the deal and close out future offers from the same source. Yes, the sobering truth of human interactions, it's not romantic, it's disillusionment, it's quite cynical, in fact, but it is what is needed, especially to one whose illusions about these matters is causing them to be victimized by their abusers. This is ultimately what it means for Whites to act in their interests, and to organize with others in doing so, this is the essence of the White rights movement, and why the events at the Charlottesville trials matter so much. We allowed ourselves to be distracted with the comparatively unimportant Rittenhouse trial, while this one of far more import was going on on the background. We are victims, and we should be asserting ourselves as such, the language of the oppressed rising to meet their oppressors to give a lost of their grievances is exactly what most White people need, especially young White males. We are talking to them from a position of weakness and speaking as if we were in one of strength, this produces a dissonance that pushes away a lot of people who we need to reach, it makes us seem tragically disconnected with the reality of the situation, one that they will have experienced every day. We should change our means of addressing potential recruits, we must tap into that hopelessness and resentment that they are constantly being haunted by. I'm more interested in saving the phenotypes unique to Whites than I am in saving Whites in general, I've got some standards regarding the quality of those we leave behind. I also find that since there is less obfuscation and stigma attached to advocating for phenotypic traits almost exclusively found in Whites than there is in advocating for the White race as a whole, any such advocacy focused on phenotypic traits could gain a great deal more ground than the generic racial advocacy we'd been doing for so long. Lastly, we need to change things up, we've been bogged down in doing the same things over and over to the point that we are utterly transparent and predictable. There's been a playbook written on the other side for exactly how you respond to anything we've been doing, we need more originality and to approach this fight from fresh new angles that they have no prepared responses for.