Edward Dutton, Shaman of the Radical Right: The Life and Mind of Jonathan Bowden, Imperium Press, 2025, 355 pp, $25.00 paperback, $9.99 Kindle
I was there.
Edward Dutton calls it a part of “American nationalist folklore.” In 2009, Jonathan Bowden spoke at a nationalist gathering in Atlanta. Jared Taylor introduced him. Professor Dutton quotes Alex Kurtagić:
Jonathan then hit the ground running, fast and hard, and orated for an hour. The intensity was electrifying. Everyone was paralysed. Had anyone not been too transfixed to look, not turned into a salt statue, he would have found jaws all over the floor. It felt like history being made. And who can remember what he said? Few would be able to tell you today. Something about dispelling the cloud. It doesn’t matter. It’s the way he said it that counts. It’s the energy he expelled, and what it did to the audience, that was important.
I was in the audience. There was no microphone, but Bowden had (accurately) said he had a “very loud voice,” so that was no problem. I too do not remember exactly what was said, except Bowden’s declaration that he was “not a Christian” and that life to him was struggle and pain and overcoming and glory. No one took notes, and tragically there was no recording; I cannot help but think others might remember his exact words differently, if not their effect. I have heard many speeches in my life. That speech was by far the best.
Why? With distance should come perspective. It is an unfortunate truth that in politics (dissident or mainstream) you are going to meet strange people whom you would rather avoid. On the surface, Bowden should have been one. He was overweight, wore an Odal rune on wood that clashed with his rather unfortunate fashion sense, and spoke passionately about themes of war, sacrifice, and other charged ideas that are easy to mock or dismiss when you are sitting in a hotel conference room, not a battlefield.
Countless nationalist, self-styled “leaders” have imagined themselves Tribunes of the People and have tried a similar approach, mostly with depressing or unintentionally amusing results. But Bowden succeeded so well that teenagers who were not even alive in 2009 are seeking out his speeches on YouTube, and Bowden’s declarations are common on nationalist videos on TikTok and other social media. How is this possible?
Edward Dutton answers the mystery in his magnificent new biography of Jonathan Bowden. It succeeds for three reasons.
First, Mr. Dutton did the research, tracking down eyewitness accounts, cross-referencing data, and giving us a coherent account of what exactly Bowden was doing and why throughout his life. One might object that this is essentially what every biography should be, but Jonathan Bowden presented a special challenge because of his almost unfathomable capacity for invention or, more uncharitably, deception.
Almost everything about his life, including relationships, family, where he lived, his education, and everything else, was purely invented, leaving Mr. Dutton to untangle numerous contradictory accounts, phony or misleading records, and urban legends. Bowden’s life and lies were so chaotic, they raise the question of whether he himself knew the truth. Occasionally, Mr. Dutton’s truth-telling means discrediting some beloved myths. I was especially sad to learn that Jonathan Bowden’s boast of speaking to Conservative politician Michael Gove, who supposedly told him there was just nothing to be done about mass immigration, probably is not true.
The second reason is that Mr. Dutton brings in his insights from evolutionary psychology to explain not just Jonathan Bowden, but the intellectual, genetic, and evolutionary climate that produced him. Perhaps the most tiresome trope in biographies is the lazy psychoanalysis by writers eager to pathologize or smear their subject. Mr. Dutton does something quite different. He explains why psychological disorders may even have beneficial effects.
Much of the book concerns Bowden’s troubled mental health, his baffling deception about his own life (including claims of marriage and wealth), and delusions of persecution. Yet some of this is inseparable from the creativity, magnetism, and occasional genius that Bowden possessed when he spoke. “[T]he brilliance of Bowden is inextricably linked to his flaws: being a fantasist, being Narcisscisstic, being a depressive and a paranoid schizophrenic,” Mr. Dutton writes. “To put it simply: it is rather difficult to have one without the other.”
One of the most enjoyable parts of this book is Mr. Dutton’s examination of the otherworldly philosophy of Traditionalism and the biological purposes it may serve. Much of Bowden’s genius, he argues, is that he was able to present an often complex and confusing philosophy in an “exciting and original way.” “In effect, the Traditionalist worldview seems to be taking that which is adaptive for the group — which includes conservative religious belief which has been shown to correlate with mental and physical health, fertility, ethnocentrism, and is an instinct which is activated in times of stress — and justifying it philosophically: Force yourself to believe in the eternal and that humans are nature made sentient,” Mr. Dutton summarizes.
When we dismantle our traditions or achieve a “comfortable” life, the result is not happiness, but dysphoria — a feeling that things are “not quite right” and leading to a kind of societal resignation, manifested by behavior like the refusal to have children. Seemingly irrational behavior, like resigning from the modern world, can even be a kind of “adaptive response.” Indeed, Bowden’s Traditionalism, Mr. Dutton argues, can be frightening to postmodernists because “it forces them into the real world, which their reassuring worldview tells them doesn’t even exist.” It is no small thing to take on such weighty themes, analyze their evolutionary purpose and scientific validity, and restrain from airily deconstructing them.
Throughout the book, on subjects as varied as psychopathy, BSDM, or depression, Mr. Dutton shows there is often a more complicated reality behind problematic behavior. Perhaps no other author can provide such insight on so many topics. This leads to the third great strength of the book: Mr. Dutton is clearly sympathetic to his subject and provides a compelling case for why he matters. However, this is not a hagiography. Indeed, at least one reviewer has accused Mr. Dutton of writing a hit piece. Yet the book never crosses that line. Moreover, the author shows why Bowden’s occasionally bizarre or destructive behavior can even be considered part of his appeal.
What is the nature of that appeal? One other thing I remember from the speech in Atlanta is Bowden saying that he was a “mediumistic speaker,” a self-description he repeated on another occasion. Bowden did not prepare his speeches in advance or simply read from a prepared text. Mr. Dutton argues that the near-trance Bowden seemed to enter as he spoke was a kind of disassociation. The title’s invocation of a “shaman” is not flippant, but a description of the archetype and role that Bowden embodied for the English people. “He is able to descend into the underworld, to speak with and even do battle with the spirits of the animals, and then he returns to this world, reassuring the tribe that there will be good hunting,” Mr. Dutton writes. “It has even been suggested that psychosis may well stay in populations precisely because of the way in which it creates shamans who then inspire the group, via a kind of religious fervor, towards victory over its enemies.”
Bowden was, in his way, a religious leader, and religion serves a social function. “The key point, from an evolutionary perspective,” Mr. Dutton writes, “was Bowden’s ability to entrance members of his own ethnic family and to compel them to want to keep that family going — in the face of members of it that would destroy it for their own selfish ends — and make that family great; make it fight, forever, to be one of the gods.” Rare is the man who can make such an outlandish message appeal to ordinary people; perhaps rarer still is the author who can explain why this happens, and how it works.
During Bowden’s life, whatever his undoubted charm on occasion, there were elements many would call pathetic. These include his deplorable living conditions, his failed attempts to serve in various right-wing political organizations, and his failure to have a permanent relationship. Mr. Dutton compiles many unedifying anecdotes about Bowden, notably about his overeating and awkward social behavior. His books were not very good and some were borderline unreadable, his paintings were perverse and often ugly, and his movies were amateurish. He seems to have had no lasting relationships with women. Some who knew him simply do not see his appeal.
However, in some ways, these qualities make him more attractive for the internet age. His vulnerability and awkwardness make him more sympathetic, especially to young whites who find themselves adrift in a hostile culture. Whatever his formal education, professional associations, or artistic interests, Bowden was able to integrate his undoubted erudition into spontaneous, passionate, and exciting speeches that turned complex ideas into inspiring calls for action. His lectures on Julius Evola, Léon Degrelle, and vanguardism are just as compelling as his analysis of pop culture. While probably on the autism spectrum, Bowden occasionally displayed a remarkable insight into human nature, notably about the doublethink that possesses many ordinary white people when it comes to racial issues and their attitudes toward their would-be champions. Those forever “outside” a milieu — in this case the milieu of “normal” conservatives — can often understand it better than those inside. To many, Mr. Dutton observes, Bowden’s flaws simply do not matter.
Nor should they. In the internet age, what matters is content. Jonathan Bowden gave European youth a “credo” at a time when they were being told the only meaning they could seek is through self-destruction and self-mortification. Instead, Bowden preached an amor fati that somehow did not come off as presumptuous, probably because of that strange combination of invincibility and vulnerability he seemed to possess. Mr. Dutton notes that he was especially important to the English-speaking world, serving as an invaluable bridge between the ideas of the European New Right and Anglo conservatism. He must be considered one of the intellectual founders of the original Alternative Right.
He will also be a founder of what comes next, as his influence is only growing after his death. What is perhaps most remarkable about Jonathan Bowden is the near-universal respect and awareness he has within a famously factional movement. Indeed, much of the book details Bowden’s fairly tawdry fights within many British nationalist organizations, alternately clashing and then making up with figures such as Nick Griffin. However, his speeches have transcended those now all-but-forgotten struggles. Mr. Dutton says he has encountered several young, well-educated, and stylish young rightists who look to Bowden as an inspiration, something that few would have predicted during his lifetime. In American right-wing circles, Bowden is one of the few figures who can be cited by both MAGA-supporting Republicans and Dissident Right vanguardists calling for the end of the American Empire. Both his longform speeches and his more meme-worthy declarations (“clear them out!”) are practically made for social media.
Hopefully new and normal individuals will reinvigorate the FGC scene, and any other gaming scene to be honest, once the toxic elements and the cause of it are dealt with.
As Jonathan Bowden said: "You’ve got to clear them out as well. There needs to be a new start." pic.twitter.com/VKPBQpHhsV
— Winged Barnacle (@wingedbarnacle) February 17, 2025
If the book ended with the subject’s life, it would be terribly sad. Bowden’s psychological breakdown, partially linked to his family history, ultimately led to his being heavily medicated. According to most (but not all), this had a dramatic and deleterious impact on both his personality and speaking style. Of course, a descent into madness would have been even worse. Mr. Dutton suggests that the medicine used to treat his disorder might have interacted with an undiagnosed heart disorder leading to Bowden’s death in his sleep at age 49 on March 29, 2012. Though an oft-published author and a widely admired lecturer, Jonathan Bowden received a pauper’s funeral.
Yet Bowden’s story did not end there. The triumph and tragedy is that Bowden died when he did. I agree with the contention in the book that he would have been an internet celebrity had he lived a bit longer. His spontaneous approach might have translated well to streaming, podcasting, or interviews if he had had someone to keep him organized. That might have also gone a long way toward alleviating his financial struggles. Yet had he lived, he would have undoubtedly been sucked into the endless personal disputes and fights that characterize vanguard politics. Mr. Dutton cites several incidents that show that despite his calls for toughness and even ruthlessness, Bowden was rather sensitive to personal criticism and probably lacked the steel for continuous political debate. One would expect no less of someone who was, essentially, of a bohemian and artistic temperament.
Perhaps it is best that he died when he did, leaving a legacy as a unifying and inspirational figure whose work transcended his personal limitations. Even his demons — pitiable eccentricities rather than anything immoral or malicious — may have been a necessary price to fuel his oratory. After all, was that not the whole point of Bowden’s philosophy? Life is struggle, pain, and glory, and the acceptance of suffering must be endured to achieve even a moment of greatness. Those moments of greatness that Jonathan Bowden gave us last forever online and in the awed memories of those of us fortunate enough to have seen and heard him.
We are also fortunate that he has a biographer like Edward Dutton, who had the courage to tell the truth about this flawed and troubled man and the knowledge to explain his meaning. In the end, if Jonathan Bowden did not exactly triumph, he endured and perhaps paved the way for a triumph to come. The message of the shaman, after all, is for the tribe, not for himself. Perhaps he even left the best coda for his own life: “[T]he first thing we have to do is to say, ‘I walk towards the tunnel, and I’m on my own, and I’m not afraid. And I have no regrets.’ ” May we all be able to say the same.
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
English
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
All those words and I have no idea what he said. Who cares about his medications. What did he say?
We are still working our way out of the world view painstakingly and cynically crafted by the jew grifter, confidence man, magalomaniac, and pathological killer. Jesus Christ already worked his way through all of this and came out the other side a vicious antisemite.
So Jesus saves — through antisemitism: the forced extinction of the primitive man-beast, and the confrontation with reality such that its challenges can be met and dealt with objectively, including the survival of the fully human.
Well, there are apparently a bunch of his speeches up on YouTube these days:
https://www.youtube.com/@jonathanbowdenarchive/videos
I remember listening to the audios of a couple of them six or seven years ago and thought they were pretty interesting.
You already covered this topic, right?
Bamboozled, transfixed, spellbound etc
Lobaczewski’s description of Spellbinders from his Political Ponerology.
Am I the only one who has never heard of this guy?
I don’t know why Dutton chose the phrase ‘radical right’ as part of the title — there was nothing particularly ‘radical’ about Bowden — his views were essentially mainstream conservatism as it was for generations, before the advent and takeover of mass media by Jews and their fellow travelers, who started pushing racial egalitarianism and anti-racism to destroy the racial conscience and nationalist instincts of white people, and feminism to destroy the family.
What’s ‘radical’ in view of history is ‘conservative’ parties and politics today, e.g. the CDU/Merkel in Germany, who opened the borders in 2015, and is today getting ready to sell out the German people again on migration so Merz can head a new coalition government that excludes the AfD — but here you could also mention e.g. the Tories, the GOP, or any ‘conservative’ party in pretty much every Western country — it is ‘radical’ to see these parties as being on the political ‘right.’
Typical viewpoint of far too many White Identitarians/White Nationalists/Dissident Rightists, etc:
Well, speak for yourself. I certainly don’t avoid someone just because he or she is fat and wears jewelry that clashes with an unfortunate fashion sense (whatever that is).
No wonder we don’t get anywhere with our “cause”.
The last thing we need is to heed such people.
A very troubling article: a book review about a psychologically very troubled young man who could not get his own life together but is energetic enough to deliver electrifying oratory (but “electrifying” to an already-converted audience). He could not found his own family, but was an “artistic Bohemian” who wore an “Odic rune” carved in wood and considered himself a “shaman”.
The only thing missing is the Bier Hall.
Vox Day https://www.voxday.net/ has an interesting article “We are the Ghost Dancers” comparing the current situation of Whites to that of Amerindians after the Battle of the Little Big Horn. The realization is taking hold that, as Heraclitus said, “Everything passes; nothing remains”. The supposedly glorious “White Civilization” which anxious “rightists” imagine that they can cling to is crumbling beneath their feet and they are not sure about what to do.
The ersatz Blond Messiah, Trump, seems to offer salvation to many. But he also seems to be a crypto-Christian Zionist, on board with Greater Israel and the pet Chihuahua of despised “World Jewry”. Is he our “Neo”, The One who will free Whites from the Matrix which binds them in a web of historical and social delusions?
The Amerindians had nowhere to turn, in the end, but religion. Wovoka, the Paiute Messiah, introduced the Ghost Dance. The Ghost Dance would awaken the Spirits. They would expel the White Man, and the buffalo would return. Jonathan Bowden is deemed a “prophet” who seemed capable of sending some desperate Whites (i.e., impressionable young men) into a quasi-ecstacy of hope.
Behold! The White Shaman hath appeared amongst his People. Let them dance.
As usual, the master comes to the rescue. Thanks!
I’m 64 years old–been conservative all this time–and I’ve NEVER heard of Jonathan Bowden; this is the first time. I’ve heard of Erza Pound, Bella Dodd, been a member of the John Birch Society, read John Stormer’s books, Ralph Epperson, and others, this is the first time. Wow. I’ll certainly listen to his YouTube stuff. Thanks.
Speaking of the shifting notion of what is politically conservative and the AfD, doesn’t anyone find it incongruous that the party is headed by a lesbian?
Great orator, give this a watch if you haven’t already seen it.
Video Link
Nope.
The only impressive political speaker I’ve heard live was the British MP and former Cabinet Minister Enoch Powell. His performance was magnetic – “charismatic” some might say.
Even more impressive was his handling of questions from a bunch of cocky, clever undergraduates. His intellectual honesty and coherence were remarkable.
His political career ended in failure of course, even though – or because? – he was a highly intelligent man. Intelligence is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for political success. Nor is honesty. Nor personal magnetism.
At that age my basis for comparison was slight – a dim former Air Minister, a drunken Foreign Secretary. I’ve attended only a couple of live political events since, neither worth discussion.
Men should be in shape and dress nicely, or stylishly, especially not gaudily. There’s no reason for a man who is mobile to not be in shape. A man who is in good shape and dresses nicely— not like dandy but just non-slovenly, e.g., no sneakers or athletic shoes or sports teams shirts— will be attractive and stand out.
That’s race-mixing lesbian to you, buddy, and smile when you say it!
No, neither had I, but be of good cheer. You’re in for a treat. Use the link in Ron Unz’ comment #3 and click on one of Bowden’s speeches. I watched his speech on the Soviet Gulag. Good sound, steady video. He speaks fluently for an hour, no notes, no sip of water, citing fact after fact, source after source, a mere handful of “uh”s. Most impressive. He is worth binge watching I’d say.
He’s likely another quasi-jew grifter, a product of the ((Cousinhood)) or its whores.
The Amerindians were delusional, the Zionist-cucked Whites are delusional, and the Hebroids of Israel circa year 0 were delusional. We’re living in year 2025 because Jesus Christ wasn’t delusional. In another 100 years, it will be year 2035 and the world will still be living in Jesus Christ’s time, and probably a remnant band of Heborids and their STUPID stooges and whores will by rallying on the sidewalk, railing that its actually year 5884.
I don’t resent the jews and their stooges because they’re insane, I resent them because their insanity spreads to the dumb golem like wildfire. It spread like wildfire under Marxism, and now it has spread like wildfire under Zionism.
My financial advice? Buy gold on earth and store your treasure in heaven until the two are united. (I should have taken my own counsel ages ago).
Obwandiyag needs to be spoon fed.
The same goes for women only double. It is almost unbelievable how many allow themselves to become obese, wear rings and have tattoos. That’s no way to attract a man.
YAWN ! zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Great observations. I would add that regarding:
“Intelligence is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for political success. ”
Neither is intelligence a necessary nor sufficient condition for honesty or moral integrity. In fact even here at TUR high intelligence often represents the opposite.
Things become ever clearer. All threads converge.
Every article published on TUR awakens a din of echos. The same fundamental ideas are present in all of them. The thesis of one article demands comparison with and validation by the theses of every other article.
The shaman, e.g. Bowden, is able to see nature, even when the masses around him have lost sight of it.
The populations of the West lost sight of nature. Tranny mania is an example. Individuals like Jonathan Bowden and William Pierce and Andrew Anglin do not lose sight of nature. They remind us of nature. They remind us of truth.
Is it far-fetched here to cite Romans 2:15?
Is racial law written in Western hearts, despite the decades of brain washing? I think it is. The racial law is, after all, the law of nature. Even the most brain dead must have some inkling of it.
A startling statement. But who can fail to understand it, and agree with it? It is a fearsome responsibility. Only we can speak for nature, for existence, for the universe itself.
Well. Shall I point out the obvious? You do remember that this was tried once before, in living memory, don’t you?
Does that ring a bell?
We’ve just read WHITE NOISE: Shoegaze, Night Rites & REJECTING PUNK.
We’ve also just read The Brutalist: America Turned Upside-Down.
Ninety percent of the commenters on the former article in effect thanked the jews for ‘gifting’ them with rock.
One commenter maintained that the immorality and self-harm of punk ‘artists’ were praiseworthy because they were “holding up a mirror” to the decadent elite.
Upside-down?
The notion of ‘sin’ is anathema here on TUR, as everywhere else. Human beings are incapable of saying, “I did something bad,” or, “I was wrong.” Their innocence, their denial of ‘sin’ is the hill they die on.
This fact of human nature explains everything happening in the EU today. What is the order of the day? The order of the day is, “Save my face!”
At least that’s the way is USED to be. But I’m not so sure today. I see tattooed men with tattooed young women all the time. To me, as a septuagenarian, they look gross, but when so many young women now have visible tattoos, young men must take what they can get or go without, as so many incels addicted to porn and fapping do. I think it’s related to a rejection of modernity, similar to the hippies of the 60’s. I’ve heard that a fast-growing industry today is tattoo removal, which hurts a lot more removing those unsightly ink stains that it did acquiring them.
Andrew Anglin is more destructive than any rock song and on par with Punk Rock. Preaching division amongst White males and females, generational division, banging Oriental prostitutes, etc. A great deal of people think Angie is a (((work))) myself included. Angie has praised retarded white hating nigras like Ye, apparently likes (c)rap, and has flipped flopped on Trumpstein and (((Musk))) a dozen times.
Kikes didn’t gift anyone with rock, they gifted themselves by making money off of SOME talented rock & roll stars, which doesn’t include Punk REJECTS, the overwhelming MAJORITY of Whites rejected Punk.
Bob Dylan, Leonard Cohen and MOST kike singers are horrible, you could name all the talented kike musicians and singers on one hand, ✋, two at the most.
Sometimes a rock song tells a story, even one about kikes.
Cue: Sympathy For The Devil by The Rolling Stoooooones 😝
A charismatic man who holds audiences spellbound by his long, obscure speeches… speeches that all present agree were brilliant, but whose content they somehow can’t remember…
Puts me powerfully in mind of two famous people.
Adolf Hitler
Barack Obama
Specify exactly who is the (((we))) that needs censorship and memory-holing.
I gave up after 3 paragraphs and figured I better hit the comments. I too wanted to know what he said and glad I didn’t waste too much time on this screed.
If he did, it wasn’t covered here. Sad to say, I’d never heard of Bowden half an hour ago.
But I’ll be finding and listening to audios of his speeches for the next few days at least, just as Ron suggests above. Thanks, Greg – and Ron.
De gustibus non disputandum est
One of the more questionable Latin maxims. People argue about it all the time.
Woodstock or Hitler Youth. A stark contrast. Which one a person chooses says much, maybe all, about that person.
TDS, Trump Derangement Syndrome, is a real thing. So is AADS.
de gustibus non disputandum est
Bowden would have made a great university lecturer, if he could have kept to the schedule. Some of his speeches sounded like philosophy lectures, where he promised to make a point, never really reached it, but wandered off into many interesting areas.
Do people still categorize SE Asians (in this case Filipinas) as Orientals? When I was a kid in the 1960’s in a rural all-white part of the country we might call someone who was Filipino, Vietnamese, or Cambodian an “Oriental”. But then again we’d call all soft drinks “Coke”.
Looking back, when I was a kid and saw dirty magazines titled “Orientals”, most of the women were probably SE Asian.
Now it seems silly to call a SE Asian an Oriental, especially someone who’s not Chinese, Korean, or Japanese.
We should hang out… we can have lunch at MacDonalds on our way to the thrift store to check out the t shirt bargain rack, and stop by the Wiccan shop for some Odinic rune jewelry. ✋️😎
I don’t know Bowden much at all, but from what I can tell, Bowden himself used the term for himself. So, maybe that is why Dutton chose it.
Ok. Let me just start by saying that I knew Bowden quite well – I spoke the eulogy at his funeral – and that NONE of this stuff about his private life mattered. It did not matter to me, it did not matter to any of us who supported his efforts and it did not matter to him either. The struggle for our race was everything. Gregory von Rezzori’s excellent ‘Memoirs of an anti-semite’ , (full of excellent insights into Jewish psychology and behaviour),mentions the Jewish habit of asking highly personal questions often of complete strangers. Bowden in a conversation once referenced this, by saying that such questions from whatever the source merited and justified nothing but bare faced lies as answers. Any faults he may have had were actually quite endearing ones. He did have a blind spot as regards deadly Big Pharma and the downhill spiral that anti-depressant medication always leads to, but then prior to the covid plandemic and the killer jabs such blindspots were widespread. While I appreciate Edward Dutton’s efforts in this biography, in the histories of great men the minor petty stuff only really matters to minor petty minds; what matters is the cause they devoted their lives to. Bowden said something to this effect at a speech to The William Cobbett Society and repeated it on a visit to the former home of George Bernard Shaw. I always think of Jonathan Bowden as being something of a cross between a Dr Samuel Johnson (conversationalist and raconteur of an ultra conservative bent), an Isocrates (creator of a long-term vision to free the Anatolian Greeks, finally taken up by Philip of Macedon, and subsequently Alexander the Great) and a Nietzsche (philosopher and yes, shaman). We are not now concerned about any of these men’s petty foibles only with their grand schemes. As Enoch Powell once said “All great lives end in failure”. No matter, the struggle is everything.
Clearly it was all rhetorical smoke and mirrors if you can’t remember anything he actually said.
I will call them Oriental instead of “Asian”which makes no sense at all I understand a Japanese might be offended by being lumped in with a Vietnamese but it is what it is, I don’t particularly like being lumped in with certain White ethnicities but what are you going to do, go call a Colombian a Mexican. 😝
The Jonathan Bowden Archive – https://jonathanbowden.org/
There is another article by Dutton himself which has been on the unz front page since 1 Mar.
https://www.unz.com/article/the-shaman-of-the-radical-right-jonathan-bowden/
Let’s set it up!
Gregory Hood: “Mr. Dutton is clearly sympathetic to his subject and provides a compelling case for why he matters. However, this is not a hagiography. Indeed, at least one reviewer has accused Mr. Dutton of writing a hit piece.”
IIRC, Dutton is the “spiteful mutants” guy, so I can see where he’s a little conflicted on this topic. Perhaps not all “mental disorders” are bad. Perhaps not all mutants are spiteful! If Dutton agrees with them, then they’re A-OK; then he can be “sympathetic”. Sometimes, anyway. So long as they’re not too extreme, like Samantha Rupnow.
https://www.unz.com/article/what-is-the-psychology-of-the-murderess/#comment-6911696
Gosh….someone is writing about someone YOU never heard of…..oh my!
Maybe he didn’t have a tape recorder with him in Atlanta?
Is he supposed to remember every word he heard.
If you READ, and withhold judgment for just a minute, it’s clear that he lucidly explained the gist of what the man said.
I was only introduced to him in Dutton’s article last week, and I’ve been binge watching his talks since then. On first impressions, he reminded me of Jonathan Meades, who used to do TV “essays” sketching out grand themes in European thought and architecture; and also of the football manager Brian Clough, a man of charisma, energy, and counter-consensus opinions who also unfortunately drank himself to death.
Bowden has an old-fashioned English style of speaking that comes from music hall, street preachers, clubs, amateur dramatics. The Beatles and the Kinks and their generation of Englishmen can access that style as parody or archaism, but given the influence of television and immigration, the generations after that (Bowden was born in 1962) usually have no direct experience of that kind of speaking. Look up his talk on Youtube about Punch and Judy – where does he get this stuff from, what’s he plugging into?
Was watching 20 hours of talks a good use of my time? Am I better informed, or better equipped for the rhetorical battle? Not sure – my takeaway points are pretty sparse: (1) don’t be defensive about the bad things whites have done, it just means that we’re no more moral than any other race, and we’re no more required to commit racial suicide than they are; (2) inequality as a fact of reality, as a source of variety and possibility, as a promise of transcendence: (3) bitterness is a self-limiting losing strategy, define yourself by what you’re for rather than what you’re against.
A friend of a friend got rid of their tattoos using razor blades, a steady hand, and lots of bandages. LOL
You’ve heard of Buddha, per chance ?
For some reason the truly honest and outstanding British politicians never ascend to the top. I think it was Shakespeare or maybe Marlowe who said “Methinks, I smell a Jew in the works.”
Growing up in the 60’s tattoos were rare and almost exclusively on sailors, bikers and criminals. They are today a fad and like all fads it will fade, the fad not the tattoos.
“…a book review about a psychologically very troubled young man.” Define “very troubled”. Show me a man who is not psychologically troubled in some respect.
“Everything passes; nothing remains.” What’s important always remains.
“The supposedly glorious ‘White Civilization’ which anxious ‘rightists’ imagine that they can cling to is crumbling beneath their feet and they are not sure about what to do.” They’re just now waking up to the lies and propaganda they’ve been fed by the Jewish Shamans.
History is funny, isn’t it? When you trace it back and follow the clues, you find the same types of individuals (the worst of the worst) manufacturing and engineering massive destruction of civilizations, countries, traditions, tribes, families. They have created coups. They have guillotined, assassinated, ousted kings, all in the name of freedom and democracy, of course, because democracy is easier to buy off (threats, blackmail, bribes). They have created inflation/deflation when they’ve wanted to steer and profit off the herd. And when they want to distract the herd, in comes Trans World, Antifa, Black Lives Matter, Russiagate.
Charles Dickens gave us three different ghosts: the ghosts of Christmas past, present and future. There was no dancing involved. Just seeing.
This is what’s happening now – seeing – and it’s everywhere.
In 2015, YouTube algorithm suggested Bowden videos to me and I binge-watched them. They are terrific. But after Trump won, the left started their soft censorship scheme. Bowden videos are never recommended to me now. I’m surprised they are even allowed and not taken down. But that’s a benefit to us because we can still listen to them. He is good enough that he is a pleasure to listen to ecen if you disagree with him.
I also missed out on all three gents, Tom, but twenty-two or so years ago a close friend of mine from our college days forty years prior was working briefly as a legal consultant with a Democratic talent-spotter who invited him to a speech in a Chicago suburb. When my friend asked what the topic was, his colleague said, “The topic doesn’t matter; you’ll see.”
The speaker was Obama, who was already pretty well known then. He spoke for a bit over an hour from notes he clearly hadn’t written himself. He radiated neither eloquence nor excitement. After the speech, when everyone was drinking expensive scotch and eating fancy canapés, the talent-spotter asked my old buddy what he thought of Obama. “Well, he seems like a decent enough sort of guy, but he made me wish I was watching paint dry instead.” To which the reply was, “That’s the point: this is a nigger we can ram down America’s throat, and no on will complain about it.”
Unlike Obama, Bowden and Hitler don’t seem to have been artifacts produced in somebody’s factory.
This is what he said.
https://counter-currents.com/2025/03/high-culture-patriotic-purpose/
That’s because AFD is controlled opposition.
“Kind fascism” (i.e., the absolute power of the state over the people) against the evil of communism and liberalism? Hitler literally euthanized his own German disabled citizens – not to mention that his own generals tried to assassinate him, and no one warned him until the plot failed. Speaking of Nietzsche, the will to glory, the will to victory – look at today’s war. There are literally armless and legless people with neurochips (okay, maybe I’m a little ahead of reality) taking out elite special forces and marines from many kilometers away. As one writer once said, planet Earth is *Idiocracy* (2006) + *Planet of the Apes* (1968) + *Land of the Dead* (2005) all rolled into one. And heroism will only lead to being devoured by hordes of idiotic zombie-apes.
Would Nick Fuentes be the new Jonathan Bowden?
https://rumble.com/v6q11sc-a-domestic-life-doesnt-interest-me-im-not-normal.html
The article you refer to was actually written by John Carter over at Substack. Carter raises an interesting point for sure, though his view is darker than Vox Day’s commentary on the article, found here.
As the Indians soon found out, the Ghosts failed to make them bulletproof. Carter’s very dark summary of where whites stand now:
Bowden and Wovoka were trying to heal a spiritual disease which has infected their respective peoples. Carter also cites the Boxer’s in collapsing Qing-dynasty China and the Zealots of first-century Judea. Yet at the bottom of his Pandora’s Box of an article, he leaves a small gem:
«“In effect, the Traditionalist worldview seems to be taking that which is adaptive for the group — which includes conservative religious belief which has been shown to correlate with mental and physical health, fertility, ethnocentrism, and is an instinct which is activated in times of stress — and justifying it philosophically:”»
This is what NN Taleb calls “Lindy” effects, that ancient (prudential) traditions most likely were heuristics favorable to survival beyond “black swan” events. One guess is that the food purity customs of hebrew religion women (even if they have no justification in their religion but for the ridiculous interpretation of a passage) are what ensured the survival of unassimilated people following that religion, as they coincidentally also protect from contagion.
«Unlike Obama, Bowden and Hitler don’t seem to have been artifacts produced in somebody’s factory.»
But in the case of Hitler they were like Obama selected by some “talent-spotter” from the oligarchy. Bowden apparently elicited the interest of none of them. The major self-made politician of recent times is Trump, most of the others have achieved prominence after being “sponsored” by someone after the advice of some “talent-spotter”, some as for most athletes.
As to Obama here is a democratic socialist black intellectual describing him in well (“foundation-hatched) before national prominence that matches well the story you have reported:
Adolph Reed “Class Notes” (2001)
“In Chicago, for instance, we’ve gotten a foretaste of the new breed of foundation-hatched black communitarian voices; one of them, a smooth Harvard lawyer with impeccable do-good credentials and vacuous-to-repressive neoliberal politics, has won a state senate seat on a base mainly in the liberal foundation and development worlds. His fundamentally bootstrap line was softened by a patina of the rhetoric of authentic community, talk about meeting in kitchens, small-scale solutions to social problems, and the predictable elevation of process over program — the point where identity politics converges with old-fashioned middle-class reform in favoring form over substance. I suspect that his ilk is the wave of the future in U.S. black politics, as in Haiti and wherever else the International Monetary Fund has sway.”
«I see tattooed men with tattooed young women all the time. […] so many young women now have visible tattoos, young men must take what they can get or go without […] I think it’s related to a rejection of modernity»
I think it has the same cause as anorexia and piercings and cuttings: people who feel trapped and have little control over their life try at least to assert control over their body, and they sometimes do this in a grossly visible way to signal that they have that control. It also helps that “my body is my property” aligns well with neoliberal and even libertarian propaganda.
I find it very sad when people resort to harming their own body to feel a sense of individual autonomy.
Whoever he was, he sure has a great publicist.
And your point is…?
The Austrian painter with whom you obliquely compare Bowden was merely harnessing the widespread frustrations and resentments of his people at the time. Where he differed from many of his contemporaries who shared his sentiments is in 1) acknowledging, via a root cause analysis, who was ultimately responsible for the deplorable state of his nation and its people; and 2) dedicating the rest of his life to actually doing something to fix the problem.
The Austrian painter’s biggest mistake was in underestimating the power of the people who were destroying his nation and its people, as well as failing to understand the extent to which those people held the rest of the world in thralldom that would be used to crush his attempts to free his people and right the wrongs done to them. Only now is the world even beginning to realize, deluded so deeply as it has been by the propaganda and financial shackles of these people, how horribly wrong it was about the Austrian painter and how badly it misunderstood and misjudged him. Whether Jonathan Bowden will be treated better or differently by history remains to be seen, but the parallels are certainly clear. What is at stake for White people today is every bit as great as, if not greater than, what was at stake for the Austrian painter’s White people a century ago.
This should always have been obvious to the non-mentally retarded. Anyone who knows anything at all about modern Germany knows full goddamned well that no genuine grassroots nationalist political organization would EVER be allowed to exist. If the AfD had ever been real, its leadership and key members would have been thrown into prison years ago as soon as the party’s founding was publicly announced.
Quite an insult to Hitler, comparing him to the simian-eared Kenyan Manchurian candidate.
It’s also Truman Show.
Ridiculous. Afd represents over 10 million voters. You obviously are not plugged in to the way things work in Germany, and your generalized comments hints that you have no idea of specific mechanisms that would delegitimize the Afd.
You are obviously very limited in specific and general knowledge of German affairs, which did not impede your shot in the dark toward relevance and actuality.
Unimpressive and comic. See my past comments.
I don’t think tat Mr Unz and I agree on much, but I found this video prescient.
Video Link
My point was that Bowden was reasonably dressed in every photo I’ve seen of him. Suit & tie. Looked good to me. Also, it would be nice if everyone with the correct viewpoints also had a fashion sense, but that is not the way the world works, I don’t think.
All your response tells me is that either 1) you’re in a breathtakingly deep state of denial, or 2) you’ve never set foot inside Germany. I’m leaning heavily towards the latter.
Bingo.
As A. E. Housman said (when wearing his textual critic hat, not his poet hat), everyone wants to find some “system” that makes them seem like an expert but without actually doing the work.
For example, the Christian: this is in the Bible = True, if not, False. Or the Marxist: Who/Whom.
In Dutton’s case, if he disagrees with your idea, Science ™ shows you’re a “spiteful mutant” and should be suppressed.
If he agrees with you, you’re a “magical shaman” and everyone should listen to you.
Dutton at no point argues for any of Bowden’s ideas (which for some reason he calls “Traditionalism”), at least as such. He says the books of the Traditionalists are “obscure” and just hard to read. Really, he says that, just look. I will let readers decide for themselves what Dutton’s reasons are. Modesty, perhaps?
He does however very much want people to believe these ideas because then people will have babies. (*)
Thus, enter the system.
(*) The idea that we should believe Traditionalism because it will make people want to have babies would have made a real Traditionalist like Guenon throw up in their mouth. Evola, btw, specifically rejects such an idea, which was promoted by Mussolini (see “The Problem of Births” in Ride the Tiger)
The question remains, for modern rational people, which — if any — of these might accidentally contain truth or wisdom, and which are just OCD or hysteria that accidentally proved wise. That requires rational inquiry, not “just so” stories.
So, should we obtain forgiveness of our sins by slitting chicken’s throat and waving it around our heads?
Check out how Moses “cures” leprosy in the Torah. (No, not by prayer).
Should we cure blindness by spit?
I first visited Germany in 1973, and have visited several times. I lived in Switzerland – Zurich and Zug – for 5 years.
What about my “denial”? Of what?
>or any ‘conservative’ party in pretty much every Western country
For example the Liberal Party in Australia:
John Howard’s ‘conservative legacy’ is a disarmed populace facing a migrant crime wave
Agree.
God is not mocked!
Video Link
Where do you live?
I’m too shy to say.
Complex opines that the paucity of comments on this article is indicative of the lack of interest in the subject matter.
Of the last fifty or so articles that have been up on Unz for at least a day, there are over 21,000 comments, the low count article having 76 and the high count article 2327.
This piece comes in next to last at 78. Even the imprimatur of a comment by Marshall Unz apparently didn’t help
It’s not a “screed” and, like the book it reviews, it’s written for people familiar with the subject matter. And why would you go to comments when nearly every Bowden speech is online? Your stupidity angers me.
Dutton would have chosen ‘radical right’ as part of the title simply because it is expedient for him to do so. He disassociates himself from the Right because his livelihood depends on that particular branch of politics. Just another opportunistic character in the UK, not dissimilar from Nigel Farage who does exactly the same.
Today is the 13th anniversary of the passing of Jonathan. Unlucky for some.
A pointless book full of gossip and innuendo.
The cover says “Life and Mind of Jonathan Bowden” but the author lacks insight not only into his mind, but his drive and motivation. He makes no attempt to comprehend what it must be like to hit rock bottom; less so his ‘friends’.
There is a certain organization that asserts the author was dismissed from university for plagiarism and that he uses a childish tone. Indeed, the book leans on statements from a ‘best friend’. Who exactly can verify he was such is unclear, whether the self-appointed bestie or the author. Nevertheless, best friend is juvenile playground language and serves to prove them correct.
The thread running through the book is that its subject is a pathological liar. How uncharitable. He is deserving of empathy, not judgment.
What the book neglects to tell you is that its subject was highly intelligent and he determined to create an air of mystery around himself. The bigger the lie the better. So what? The faux friends fell for it, exactly as they were supposed to.
Jonathan, who has departed this mortal coil, is not here to defend himself. Or explain what appears at first glance to be irrational behavior. And why should he, even if he were still here. He endured many trials during his sojourn on this planet. More than most.
He was exposed to the world as a paedophile (false) and was on the receiving end of death threats from very real opponents who wanted to silence him (true). Hence it should be appreciated that he suffered a breakdown but don’t expect any of his friends or the author to commiserate.
Maybe I should write an exposé in the same vein about the rogues’ gallery of friends to even the score. Focusing on their flaws and indiscretions, personal things they wouldn’t want revealed to the world. Which are legion and would portray them in a bad light. They would surely object. But at least they are still here to voice their objections.
I could write more sympathetically as to why Jonathan found himself unable to cope, no shame in that, but he did recover and was able to bounce back. No credit given for that. What didn’t destroy him made him stronger, his mind, sadly not his body and that alone could have been explored further but is not.
To treat others as you would like to be treated has passed by all the individuals involved in this book. It certainly has the author whose poor research does no justice to his subject whatsoever.
You nailed it my friend
Have you ever heard of Max Krah? He’s an East German born lawyer, he was a lawyer for the SSPX, and was involved as a lawyer in the legal process concerning Bishop Williamson. He was a trustee for the Jaidhof bequest from the Gutmann family. You see that character with the red mop right in front the camera? That’s Max Krah. He attended some sort of Columbia University course for which he received a degree.
Now I don’t really follow the AfD, but I know Krah is a major spokesman. If Krah is in any way representative of the AfD leadership, well I’d let you draw your own conclusions, but obviously, you’re incapable of doing so. If anyone else reads this post though, they should be able to.