James Edwards’ "Racism Schmacism: How Liberals Use the ‘R’ Word to Push the Obama Agenda"

James Edwards is becoming a very important force in the movement for White advocacy. He hosts the The Political Cesspool, a weekly 3-hour radio show where he interviews a range of personalities on their ideas (including me on more than one occasion). And he has become a director of the American Third Position, a political party that aims makes an explicit appeal to White identity and White interests.

James is exactly the kind of young person who is making a big difference for our cause. He is articulate and well-informed.

Now James has come out with Racism, Schmacism, an important book cataloging the ways that White people are intimidated by the charge of racism. This fear makes people like John McCain rather lose an election than be called a racist for bringing up unpleasant things about Obama:

John McCain lost, and he lost badly, because he decided it was better to lose the election than to be called a racist, no matter how unfounded the charges. So he went around denouncing people associated with his campaign who dared refer to Barack Hussein Obama by his legal name, and he denounced an ad run by a state GOP group that featured Jeremiah Wright screaming “God damn America!” And what good did it do him? Not a bit. All the cowardice he displayed in a desperate attempt to avoid being called the “R-word” was for nothing.

As you can see from this passage, Racism Schmacism is well-written. Very entertaining. But also very fact-based. There are numerous references to news events and articles if readers are interested in further information.

The book recounts a series of incidents that collectively show that White Americans have become cowering fools, terrified of being labeled a racist. There’s Keith Sampson, “one of the most vicious and despicable racists in the United States. In fact, Keith Sampson is so filled with vile racism that he couldn’t keep it to himself, but had to shove his hate down the throats of his black co-workers” by reading a scholarly book on how the University of Notre Dame defeated the Ku Klux Klan during the 1920s.

There are also hilarious accounts of Whites caving in to political correctness — hilarious if they didn’t show the depths to which White people have sunk in their abject, craven cowardliness. The federal “hate crime” investigation into the kid who ate a ham sandwich in school. The mayor who prohibited White police officers from eating bananas on duty.

But this fear of offending aggrieved minorities and other darlings of political correctness has very real consequences. It is the ultimate weapon of the left, and Edwards shows that it is being used to shut down free speech. Organizations like the $PLC and the ADL use the ‘r’ word very liberally to prevent the expression of ideas they don’t like. As he notes, “an ever-increasing number of articles in law reviews and academic journals make the argument that the First Amendment doesn’t protect ‘hate speech.’”

In the end, you are racist just by being White—it really doesn’t matter what you say or do:

Folks, you will never be able to understand politics and culture in today’s America unless you grasp this fundamental truth at the root of more and more political and cultural battles in this country: A racist is a white person.

Racist equals white person, and white person equals racist.

All white people are racist, and they’re always racist, and they will always be racist.

Period.

Write that down in your day planner, make a note of it on your Blackberry or iPhone, put little sticky notes all over your house, or whatever you have to do until this message sinks in. Because until you grasp this, less and less of what’s going on in this country will make any sense at all, and you’ll be at the mercy of the liberal mainstream media, aggressive and hostile racial pressure groups, and white liberals (who are deluding themselves by thinking they’re not racists.)

This book, while entertainingly written, has a deadly point. White people will be utterly defeated unless they can summon the courage to adopt an explicit identity as White people and an explicit concern about White interests.  We have to get over being terrified of being called a racist.

The fact is that everyone has ethnic interests — including people of European descent. A great many other identifiable groups in multicultural America have a strong sense of ethnic identity and interest. Only White people cower in fear of asserting their racial identity and interests.

Jewish groups have been very positive about the recent study showing that Judaism is much more than a religion but that Jews constitute a biological descent group. An article in the Forward crows “We Are One Genetically.” And, as everyone knows, Jews have a strong sense of their interests in maintaining an ethnostate. But Jewish activist organizations have been very effective in repulsing attempts to label Jews as racists. And Jews are completely unperturbed by being called racists. All this while at the same time leading the charge against White America.

We have to be able to do stand up proudly and explicitly assert our White identity and White interests. James Edwards’ book is definitely a step in the right direction. Information on the book can be obtained by clicking on this link, or click here to buy directly.


Bookmark and Share

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

69 Comments to "James Edwards’ "Racism Schmacism: How Liberals Use the ‘R’ Word to Push the Obama Agenda""

  1. Edward's Gravatar Edward
    June 16, 2010 - 1:14 pm | Permalink

    @Blowtorch
    they hate Southern whites the most! Why?

    I don’t think the killing of Jewish Civil Rights activists was that important to Jewish leaders but they have a significant reason for hating the the South. It has nothing to do with bigotry. They hate the South for its insistence that justice should be blind. That is to say, justice should not be just another commodity for sale to the highest bidder.

    Jewish factory owner and Atlanta B’nai B’rith president Leo Frank raped and murdered an twelve-year-old employee of his named Mary Phagan. Frank was convicted of the crime based on eye-witness testimony and extensive circumstantial evidence. The prosperous Jewish community of Atlanta had never before complained of ill treatment but a tumult erupted after the conviction. Powerful Jews from around the world decried what they claimed was a travesty of justice. They said the murder must have been committed by the eye-witness, who was black. They claimed that anti-Semitism was the obvious reason jurors chose to convict the Jewish Leo Frank over the black witness.

    Unable to withstand the intense pressure, the governor of Georgia partially caved in to commute the death sentence to life imprisonment, presumably with the possibility of parole. Atlantans would not go along with the governor’s submission to Money Power. Leading Atlanta citizens took Leo Frank from the jailhouse and carried out the death sentence at the end of a rope hung from a tree. Citizens proudly posed for a photo next to the hanging corpse that was published on the front page of Atlanta newspapers. Atlantans were hailed as heroes across the South and all America. Jews took great offense and responded by founding the ADL which has been taking revenge on the South and the rest of America ever since. If past behavior is any measure, they will still be pursuing revenge two hundred years from now to the extent they are able.

    Government officials, especially in in democracies, are almost always the servants of Money Power. Only the courage of honorable citizens standing behind government can bring about justice. Such courage displayed by the Atlantans is the the only real threat to Jewish power. A people oppressed by Money Power need only rediscover its honor to be set free. May the South rise again.

  2. Blowtorch Mason's Gravatar Blowtorch Mason
    June 16, 2010 - 8:56 am | Permalink

    I add… and Jews are anti white Southern-next to Germans, they hate Southern whites the most! Why? What did southern whites ever do to Jews? A few murders during the Civil Rights Movement in which the murderers didn’t even know their victims were Jews, while they in turn destroyed traditional Southern culture and civilization. Besides that, Southern whites have done nothing to them except try to knock them over with bags of gold-T.V. Preacher and jewish dispensationalist John Hagee brags about giving Israel 58 million dollars for the resettlement program-go figure! Obviously it wasn’t enough!

  3. June 14, 2010 - 11:41 am | Permalink

    “The knee-jerk desire to cast White Nationalist Jews…”

    “White Nationalist Jew” is an oxymoron.

    “…as non-Whites, even when they are clearly White, and feel that way, and contribute to WN movements, is Anti-Semitic.”

    Thanks for proving my point.

  4. June 14, 2010 - 11:32 am | Permalink

    “I see no reason for divulging this personal information in order to buy a book. A valid credit card number should suffice.”

    There’s nothing unusual about having to provide such information when making an purchase online. There’s a lot of credit card fraud.

    How are we going to build a viable movement if half of us are too chicken to order a book online? This is ridiculous.

    Men used to be willing to sacrifice their lives for a cause they believed in; now they won’t even risk compromising their anonymity.

    What are you afraid is going to happen if your name ends up on a list? You think the Mossad is going to plant a bomb in your car?

  5. Edward's Gravatar Edward
    June 12, 2010 - 7:55 pm | Permalink

    AmusedEuro, Wandrin
    Currently, whatever their original good and bad points, all Christian denominations have surrendered to the multicult.

    I suggest you look up traditional Catholicism. A good place to start might be the ADL and SPLC sites.

  6. Blowtorch Mason's Gravatar Blowtorch Mason
    June 12, 2010 - 10:48 am | Permalink

    Dear Anonymous and HA – I have now proven that members of the Southern Caucus in Congress during the 50’s and 60’s were both conservative and pro-white. They were opposed to the 1965 Immigration Act and every other liberal assault on our people and our traditional way of life, and they were virtually the only Senators and Congressmen to do so at the time. Maybe if the rest of the country had been both bright and humble enough to recognize their superiority of wisdom, judgment and discretion back in the 50’s and 60’s, we as a nation would have been spared the misery we’re suffering today! They failed, HA, because people like you and your ancestors were too dumb to follow their lead back in the day- I guess you blame them for being insufficiently charismatic to persuade you or your forebearers to follow them-great mental gymnastics there, my friend-worthy of a liberal! Blame them because you’re too dumb to follow them “. We’ll be sure to send a sedan chair for you next time! HA thinks “So what-they failed! I despise them!-What a punk. They used the best tactics available to them at the time. The Brown decision , a legal case, was the primary weapon that changed everything back then, so they naively thought legal arguments were the best way to fight a legal decision-they didn’t calculate on the totally unprincipled nature of their Jewish and fellow traveler, useful idiot goyim liberal enemies. You’re right in one sense-they didn’t have Jews on their radar screen, at least at first. The guys who killed Schwerner and Goodman, the two jewish “red-diaper babies” in the “Mississippi Burning” murders, didn’t even know they were jews. You see, the last time outlanders came to the South in an effort to force their values, folkways, mindset and temperament on Southerners at the point of a bayonet-the Civil War and Reconstruction-there were hardly any Jews in America. They first arrived in large numbers only during the Second Great Wave of Immigration, from the late 1880s to 1920. The Jews that came then, for the most part, didn’t settle in the South, so Southerners had precious little interface with them. They just thought they were ultra-offensive yankees. After encountering the Freedom Riders, over 50% of whom were jews(who were only 2% of the general U. S. population), Southerners said, “Now I see why our ancestors wanted to secede!” When Schwerner and Goodman were killed, Jews in “Blue State America” went berserk-“How dare they lay rude hands upon the flower of Israel!”- well, if they had minded their own business and stayed in their neck of the woods, nothing would have happened to them. Its not an accident that “buttinski” is a jewish term. I remember when good son of Israel Jerry Lewis(nee’ Jerome Levitch) said on national television that whenever he took a flight over “flyover country ” he always wanted to know when he was flying over Mississippi, so he could use the bathroom. In particular, the ADL, using their small New Orleans branch, began in earnest to infiltrate the KKK(many members of which were petty criminals who were vulnerable to plea bargain style coercion-“do this, and we’ll forget about your breaking into Farmer Jones’s barn) after the Mississippi Burning murders. They worked feverishly to get the KKK to put Jews on their radar screen, so they could ambush them. At first, this was a hard sell-some local jews, like Mayor Henry Loeb of Memphis, were solid anti-integrationists, and their example was hard to overcome. Finally the ADL succeeded, however and the trap was sprung-google Tommy Tarrants and Kathy Ainsworth for the details. Both were ambushed in a jewish concocted FBI agent provacuteur action. In retrospect ,Jews should have been surprised that the violence against Civil Rights workers was as limited as it was. Think of what would happen today if a bunch of Americans traveled to Israel and organized “Palestinian Freedom Rides’, before extensive international press coverage, to reveal the second class status of Palestinians in the State of Israel, and then started organizing Palestinian voter registration drives within Israel. How long do you think the troublemakers would last? Confer the recent Gaza Flotilla story for your answer. Jews have always sought to remain anonymous in their machinations, and the Civil Rights Movement wasn’t the first time, and it won’t be the last. Note that they didn’t advertise their overrepresentation in the Civil Rights Movement to the public generally, but only discretely to a targeted audience. Speaking of “anonymous”, Anonymous points to Glenn Beck and company as examples of how worthless conservatives are. As I said earlier, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannitty and company aren’t real conservatives. As I said earlier, neoconservatism is a jewish stalking horse, meant to keep conservatism confused and helpless. In fact, its true purpose is to make sure that if conservatism actually gains contro somedayl, it can be assured of being just as anti-white as liberalism. The only way to escape this fate is to work so that paleoconservatism prevails. But don’t confuse neoconservatism with authentic conservatism. As for Ronald Reagan, Anonymous, paleoconservatives have never been hoodwinked by him. Check out paleoconservative Sam Francis’s take on him by googling his article, “Ronald Reagan: Principles-And Failings” from his Vdare archives of June 7, 2004. You guys can’t seem to learn-paleoconservatism is the real article-all others are brand X. If brand X is deficient, that doesn’t mean the real article is also. Check out Winston Smith’s(a Cesspool host) blog for a brief article from June 7, 2010 entitled “They Wonder Why Nobody Lkes Them” and check for yourself whether or not they’re the real McCoy. They are the true heirs of the old Southern Caucus which failed, just like their confederate forebearers, because they were outgunned and outnumbered, not because their arguments were deficient. If more of you would get on board with them, maybe they wouldn’t be so outnumbered.

  7. AmusedEuro's Gravatar AmusedEuro
    June 11, 2010 - 10:10 pm | Permalink

    Wandrin

    Currently, whatever their original good and bad points, all Christian denominations have surrendered to the multicult.

    Agreed.

  8. AmusedEuro's Gravatar AmusedEuro
    June 11, 2010 - 9:59 pm | Permalink

    anonymous says:
    June 9, 2010 at 8:26 PM

    Every society in the world has liberals and conservatives. They both serve important and complementary roles. The problem is not liberalism but the Jewish control of it.

    The whole point of the silly “right vs. left” and “conservative vs. liberal” fight on the TV is to divide White people. Ignore the non-white audience. What is the white audience? 75% are watching CNNABCBSMSBC and 25% are watch FOX and Rush Limbaugh.

    That’s the point. Divide and conquer. Good lord, they have a third of White people believing that Obama is a secret Muslim who is going to destroy Israel and we should all sign up for Rahm Emmanuel’s Jew Army to protect “Jerusalem”

    We are f***ed.

  9. Edward's Gravatar Edward
    June 11, 2010 - 9:27 pm | Permalink

    @anonymous
    Funny to watch Protestants and Catholics argue over which branch of the religion of white enslavement to Jews is superior.

    Has secularization of society increased or decreased enslavement to the Jews?

  10. Blowtorch Mason's Gravatar Blowtorch Mason
    June 11, 2010 - 8:56 pm | Permalink

    Anonymous-i just checked the 1965 Immigration Bill. It passed with only 18 dissenting votes with the primary dissenters being the Southern Caucus.

  11. Blowtorch Mason's Gravatar Blowtorch Mason
    June 11, 2010 - 8:38 pm | Permalink

    Anonymous -Don’t confuse populist paleoconservatives,( which is what the Political Cesspool claims to be) with liberals. If you truly think Faubus and George (not Henry) Wallace were liberals, try this experiment. Go to the next Democratic Party fundraiser in your neck of the woods, and loudly proclaim yourself a George Wallace/ Orval Faubus liberal, then stand back and and see what happens. Furhter I would like to see proof that Jim Eastland, John Stennis, Richard Russell and other Southern Senators voted for the 1965 Immigration Act.

  12. anonymous's Gravatar anonymous
    June 11, 2010 - 7:53 pm | Permalink

    Funny to watch Protestants and Catholics argue over which branch of the religion of white enslavement to Jews is superior.

  13. Blowtorch Mason's Gravatar Blowtorch Mason
    June 11, 2010 - 7:53 pm | Permalink

    Anonymous-Faubus and Wallace were considered liberals? By Whom, pray tell? Certainly not by the National media of the day-they were considered arch conservatives!

  14. anonymous's Gravatar anonymous
    June 11, 2010 - 7:41 pm | Permalink

    Jim Eastland, John Stennis, Orval Faubus, George Wallace, Richard Russell and a host of other Southern Congressmen, Senators and Governors were pro-white.

    Faubus was a New Deal Democrat, Wallace was considered a liberal. In any case, I know Southern WNs are *really* proud of themselves for Jim Crow, but they did not oppose the 1965 immigration act and have never been opposed to Jewish power. My statement about “the distant past” was more a reference to the 1920’s, when racialism and eugenics were popular on both the left and right.

    Anyway, whatever the situation was in the past, today’s conservatives are, of course, no different from Teddy Kennedy on immigration. Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to illegal immigrants in 1986, and he is worshipped by conservatives. Conservative pundits like Glenn Beck are openly pro-immigration – basically they want “illegal immigration” to become fully legalized. And of course the evangelical Christians are the most philo-Semitic group of whites in the country. There’s not much good to say about American conservatives.

    Just curious-did you live through the 50’s and 60’s?

    I was born during the Reagan administration.

  15. HA's Gravatar HA
    June 11, 2010 - 4:08 pm | Permalink

    Didn’t most of those Southern Congressmen oppose desegregation on states’ rights grounds? I mean, it was clear enough that many thousands of white girls would be raped by savages and the best they could come up with was an abstract structure of government argument? Pretty weak, that. And needless to say they failed to name the Jew. Anyway, is James Edwards a faileocon or a WN? Does he support a Jew-free white ethnostate?

  16. Blowtorch Mason's Gravatar Blowtorch Mason
    June 11, 2010 - 2:25 pm | Permalink

    Anonymous-by the way, the Southern ers i listed on my immediately prevoius entry wer both pro-white and conservative.

  17. Blowtorch Mason's Gravatar Blowtorch Mason
    June 11, 2010 - 2:22 pm | Permalink

    To Anonymous “Nah, conservatives are no better on race than liberals, and never have been-back in the distant past, when conservatives were pro-white, so were liberals.” Really? My historical memory must be failing me again. I remember back in the 50’s and 60″s when liberals like Ted Kennedy, Bobby Kennedy, Jack Kennedy( students cheered at my school when they announced his assassination) Emmanuel Celler, Hubert Humphrey,Jacob Javits and a host of other liberals were not pro-white, while Jim Eastland, John Stennis, Orval Faubus, George Wallace, Richard Russell and a host of other Southern Congressmen, Senators and Governors were pro-white. Just curious-did you live through the 50’s and 60’s?

    Southerner), while Jim

  18. Jews are not white's Gravatar Jews are not white
    June 11, 2010 - 9:50 am | Permalink

    “Ashkenazic and Sephardic Jews have roughly 30 percent European ancestry”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/science/10jews.html?src=me&ref=general

  19. flippityfloppity's Gravatar flippityfloppity
    June 10, 2010 - 3:46 pm | Permalink

    AngryJew – looks like you missed your anti-racism training, too. You stand with all the other target groups – whiteness has been institutionalized.

    Tom Watson – better check your religious order’s policy on peace and social justice before slinging mud. Still trying to find a religion that hasnt advocated for foreigners.

  20. Edward's Gravatar Edward
    June 10, 2010 - 2:50 pm | Permalink

    @anon

    Napoleon, an Italian Catholic, is regarded as the emancipator of the Jews.

    Napoleon tried to seize the papal states in 1809 and was subsequently excommunicated by Pope Pius VI. The response of Napoleon was to take the Pope hostage until his defeat six years later.

    How could a lowly Corsican corporal be raised the heights of Emperor? Jewish bankers who backed the Masonic French Revolution needed a strongman to consolidate their gains. As is typical, they chose a gifted outsider with no support base of his own. The French army marched through every part of Europe where Jews had not yet been liberated to implement the Masonic policies of Revolution. Napoleon was known for saying “An army travels on its stomach.” The excellent provisions financed by Jewish bankers and the intelligence brought by Jewish spies made the French soldiers invincible.

    Napoleon gradually became so evidently powerful that he forgot about giving proper tribute to his masters. At that point, the Rothschild began funding both sides the in the Napoleonic wars. The loan condition was that the winner would take responsibility for the war debts of the loser.

    After Napoleon’s inevitable defeat, the papal states were restored and Roman Jews returned to the ghetto but the rest of Europe except for Russia was in the hands of the Jews.

  21. June 10, 2010 - 12:50 pm | Permalink

    The Rothschild story: A golden era ends for a secretive dynasty – This Britain, UK – The Independent:

    Many of the distinct characteristics of the family can be traced back to the will of the founder Mayer Rothschild. It stipulated that no public inventory should be made of his estate; that key positions in the House of Rothschild were to be held by family members; that the eldest son should inherit unless the rest agreed otherwise; that the family was to intermarry with first and second cousins to keep the fortune together; that anyone disputing these terms would be struck from the will. And that all this should apply in perpetuity.

    In part this was about preserving not just their Jewish identity but a self-conscious position as role models for their poorer co-religionists. The Rothschilds expended much effort and money pressing for Jewish emancipation and equality across the continent.

  22. anon's Gravatar anon
    June 10, 2010 - 10:52 am | Permalink

    Teddy Kennedy was the Senate sponsor and jewish Congressman Emmanuel Celler was the house sponsor of the 1965 Immigration Act

    Wrong. Philip Hart was the co-sponsor.

    Emanuel Celler – Jew, introduced the bill
    Philip Hart – Irish Catholic, Senate co-sponsor
    Ted Kennedy – Irish Catholic, major supporter of bill
    Jacob Javits – Jew, major supporter of bill

  23. anon's Gravatar anon
    June 10, 2010 - 10:51 am | Permalink

    Tom Watson.
    Protestants are the Jewish frontline. Look at all your Christian Zionists? It is because of the Reformation that Jews were emancipated.

    Napoleon, an Italian Catholic, is regarded as the emancipator of the Jews.

  24. Blowtorch Mason's Gravatar Blowtorch Mason
    June 10, 2010 - 8:08 am | Permalink

    Anonymous-My historical memory tells me that liberals were responsible for every radical egalitarian movement that has changed the world for the worse over the past 80 years. The Civil Rights Movement, Criminal rights, Third world immigration, the sexual revolution, the drug culture, hispanic rights, homosexual rights, radical feminism, enviornmentalism-none of these was the brainchild of the John Birch Society. Hubert Humphrey was the Senate sponsor of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that gave us the EEOC and affirmative action-I always thought he was a liberal. Teddy Kennedy was the Senate sponsor and jewish Congressman Emmanuel Celler was the house sponsor of the 1965 Immigration Act-gee whiz, I thought they were both liberals too! My bad! I understand that you’re disappointed with conservatism’s inability to effectively defend us against liberalism, and are irritated by the tendency of mainstream conservatives to concede the bona fides of certain liberal positions and initiatives in a vain attempt to reach common ground and peace with liberals-they’ve been beaten down, and don’t understand that under critical theory, the Left will never make similar concessions to conservatives, but this doesn’t alter the fact that every social change we both oppose was a liberal initiative. The Political Cesspool proudly proclaims itself as a “Paleoconservative, populist radio show”, and they mean it. Sorry that’s not your cup of tea.

  25. born agin' redneck's Gravatar born agin' redneck
    June 10, 2010 - 7:55 am | Permalink

    Dear Mr. Edwards,

    You is doin’ God’s work.

    All the best to you and yours,

    B.A. Redneck

  26. Wandrin's Gravatar Wandrin
    June 10, 2010 - 6:20 am | Permalink

    Currently, whatever their original good and bad points, all Christian denominations have surrendered to the multicult.

  27. Wandrin's Gravatar Wandrin
    June 10, 2010 - 6:19 am | Permalink

    “But minimizing the nature of the difficulty by ascribing all of our problems to White cowardice isn’t going to help.”

    It’s not cowardice. The multicult is a religion. People feel guilty when called a racist. It’s the exact equivalent of a medieval peasant getting hauled up in church by the priest for being a sinner.

    Historically people have always undermined religions by pointing out double standards, hypocrisy and inconsistency.

    So pointing out the double standards, hypocrisy and inconsistency of the multicult helps to undermine it.

    So the first step is pointing out that the multicult doesn’t care about what it calls racism. It only cares when what it calls racism is done by white people.

    The second step is “why?” Why does the multicult’s anti-racism always seem to be identical to anti-white racism? The answer being that the multicult is a genocidal anti-white death cult wrapped up and presented in such a way as to guilt-trip white people into passively accepting their own extermination.

    The third step is “who?”

    People don’t generally radicalize all at once. You need to do it one step at a time.

  28. Dorothea's Gravatar Dorothea
    June 10, 2010 - 3:42 am | Permalink

    Tom Watson.
    Protestants are the Jewish frontline. Look at all your Christian Zionists? It is because of the Reformation that Jews were emancipated. The Protestants have never be able to present a unified front. The religion always break up into sects. Modern Catholicism has also been infiltrated. I think that the weakest countries in Europe in terms of national identity are the Protestant ones such as Holland and Britain. In Spain and Italy there still seems to exist some healthy racism. Whether they are told old to do anything about it is another matter. The WASP USA has been totally dominated by Jews. Look at the universal condemnation of Helen Thomas. It’s groupthink. Worthy of the old USSR.

  29. AngryJew's Gravatar AngryJew
    June 10, 2010 - 1:20 am | Permalink

    I dont’ see any incompatibility between being a White person, and Jewish.

    do you see a contradiction between being Flemish and White, Irish and White, English and White?

    If you were a Catholic in the American South in 1820, you were White, but you could still suffer discrimination. Would you not then complain. So I see no contradiction.

    All the trouble comes when you start dividing Whites. And then picking us off because of arbitrary criteria.

    Edwards book is great – but we have to remember one thing, Whites are now the targets of real Racial Discrimination. So the term still has some life, when used correctly.

    We are the victims of government legislated Racism.

  30. Der weiße Engel's Gravatar Der weiße Engel
    June 9, 2010 - 10:55 pm | Permalink

    Although cowardice is certainly a prominent part of what is currently ailing the White race, it’s very misleading and simplistic to point to it exclusively. It gives the impression that it’s only a matter of Whites consciously choosing to act differently; as though that is a realistic possibility for them, and that their current condition would be easily remedied if only they’d just come to their senses. But there are lots of other reasons they are on their current self-destructive course, and if we thus oversimply by ascribing the predicament to simple cowardice, we risk missing them.

    For example, ever since the first ziggurat was built, religion has been a seemingly indispensible force for maintaining civilization. The collapse of sincere religious belief among Whites in modern times has left a void in Western culture, a void which has in large part been filled by the pseudo-religion of multiculturalism and multiracialism. The moral goodness of racial and cultural egalitarianism are modern shibboleths; professing belief in them is essential for ingroup membership in mainstream society. We heretics who affirm the inequality of the races, and assert that culture is a racial construct, instead of the reverse, are in the same position as Giordano Bruno or Galileo. We are the last line of defense for the truth. But being burned at the stake or thrown into prison for speaking the truth isn’t for everyone! The vast majority of Whites have a deep-seated, evolutionarily-conditioned need to fit in to a larger group, and in the current environment, rebelling against societal dictates on racial matters isn’t something they could make themselves do, even if they were capable of understanding the scientific reasoning behind our views, which they are not. Expecting the mass of Whites to stand with us in this century would be like having expected the mass of Whites to have stood with Bruno and Galileo in their time. It didn’t happen then and it won’t happen now.

    Beyond this misappropriation of the residue of religious feelings, equally pernicious to our cause has been the growth of knowledge itself, in all areas. A result has been that detailed knowledge is now only the province of specialists, a technocratic elite that has, in large measure, replaced the natural leadership cadres of the White race. This explosion in knowledge has left the average man knowing little in detail about anything. He considers himself, with some justice, incompetent to voice an opinion on any number of everyday matters, a helplessness that would have astonished his ancestors. The White race? The specialists are telling him that it doesn’t even exist, and he believes them. Now, a reliance on expert opinion is the hallmark of modern life. It would be irrational of us to expect him to deviate from his practice of relying on experts in this one thing, when he is more or less forced to rely on them in every other part of his life.

    There are also other reasons for the White race’s present quandary that have nothing to do with cowardice, most of them involving what, put to better use, would even be admirable characteristics. By this I allude to, among other things, the altruism and idealism that is virtually unique to the White race. Many Whites professing belief in radical egalitarianism don’t speak against it, not out of fear, but because they sincerely believe it. We have to realize that after the several centuries of race-mixing that has already taken place, miscegenation is a thing that is constantly building up steam. At this point, it’s like a socio-religious movement that is on the level of a racial death cult, and like most, these cultists can’t easily be reasoned with. A White man who has multi-racial members in his own family, either by marriage or blood, is not usually going to be very enthusiastic about joining a racist cause. This will be true no matter how well the argument for doing so is put to him. White women who have succumbed to the propaganda and who have once given themselves to non-Whites have committed an act of biological treachery that can’t really be undone, even if they later might wish it so. It’s basic psychology that action on race-mixing propaganda makes the propaganda’s effect irreversible. Such people can be persuaded to reverse course with only the greatest difficulty, since to admit that one’s previous actions show one to be a fool deals a terrible blow to self-regard. This is of course true by even stronger reason in the tragic cases where a White woman has acquired mixed-race children from her dalliances. After so many centuries of racial mingling, it may even be true now that more White extended families have non-Whites somewhere in them than do not.

    We must also consider the effect of technology itself. Television and film are reality to most Whites. On a primeval level, if it hasn’t been on TV or wasn’t depicted in a movie, it didn’t really happen; and conversely, if one sees something with one’s own eyes, even if only on a movie or TV screen, it did happen. That’s just the way the mind works, as ad men and clever propagandists know all too well. Whites have now seen negroes depicted as their intellectual equals for decades; and they have seen Jews depicted as their moral superiors, ever-suffering victims. Consequently, the average man will no more believe what we, on the basis of IQ data, know to be true of negroes, or what we, on the basis of evolutionary thinking, know to be true of Jews, than he would believe that things fall up rather than down, or that 2 + 2 is not equal to 4. Negroes are the equal of Whites. The Jews are his moral superiors. He has seen it over and over again with his own eyes! You’ll never convince him otherwise, not in a million years.

    There are solutions to all of this, of course. But minimizing the nature of the difficulty by ascribing all of our problems to White cowardice isn’t going to help. The cancer is systemic and deep, and I believe removing it will require a radical treatment that goes far beyond anything that can be accomplished by mere political argument.

  31. Wandrin's Gravatar Wandrin
    June 9, 2010 - 10:47 pm | Permalink

    “And also, if James Edwards isn’t going to “name the Jew”, then what’s the point? It seems that he himself is guilty of exactly the same thing that he accuses other whites: being cowered by political correctness.”

    Generally speaking **Naming the jew** (dramatic music) has a negative effect on people who are less than half-radicalized.

    However a book on how…
    – racist = white
    – anti-racist = anti-white
    – racism = everything a white person does
    might half-radicalize mainstream rabbits.

    Different strokes for different folks.

  32. anonymous's Gravatar anonymous
    June 9, 2010 - 8:26 pm | Permalink

    Neoconservatism is not conservatism-it is a covert jewish movement borne of the Jewish desire to own both sides of every coin.

    The same is true of liberalism. Every society in the world has liberals and conservatives. They both serve important and complementary roles. The problem is not liberalism but the Jewish control of it.

  33. Daybreaker's Gravatar Daybreaker
    June 9, 2010 - 7:46 pm | Permalink

    If someone persuades you to accept cultural practices and ideas that are harmful to you, and that rejecting them is shameful, that is “racist” you have an indirect problem with that person, but immediate problems with the harmful ideas, the harmful practices and the shaming.

    Imagine someone had gotten you to swallow something very bad for you, like poisoned cool-aid. In the long run, you have a problem with them. But your most urgent problem is to vomit up the poison and take other measures to save your health. If you’re being told you must keep this stuff down because it’s shameful to spit it out, you have to overcome that shaming.

    Focusing on the immediate need is legitimate. First aid books for Whites who are being culturally poisoned are essential.

    Hi, James Edwards. I’ll be buying your book, and I hope others will too.

  34. flippityfloppity's Gravatar flippityfloppity
    June 9, 2010 - 7:40 pm | Permalink

    looks like you guys missed your anti-racist training…

  35. Blowtorch Mason's Gravatar Blowtorch Mason
    June 9, 2010 - 7:39 pm | Permalink

    Anonymous-just because conservatives have not been effective in stemming the tide of liberalism is no reason to assume that they had a hand in promoting leftist change-you can’t be serious. Neoconservatism is not conservatism-it is a covert jewish movement borne of the Jewish desire to own both sides of every coin. Just a little question for you-who do you think came up with the Civil Rights movement, the sexual revolution, the drug culture, the criminal rights revolution, homosexual rights, radical feminism, enviornmentalism, and every other radical egalitarian movement we suffered through ov er the past 50 years. I guess they were the brainchild of the John Birch Society. If the anti-Israel Left is truly your home, you’re welcome to it. If it is populated with nonjews, it’s just a bunch of useful idiot abolitionist, transcedentalist, unitarian New Englanders-the feckless “amen” corner of liberalism, good for running the shuttle service to the next civil rights rally. By the way, liberals have always been pro-black hypocrites, willing to inflict race-mixing on red-state whites so long as there were none in their enviorns to mix with. Liberalism is indeed the enemy, formidable rater than laughable because its run by jews.

  36. Daybreaker's Gravatar Daybreaker
    June 9, 2010 - 7:10 pm | Permalink

    AmusedEuro says: “I think the smear terms “racist” and “anti-semite” are rapidly losing their effectiveness.”

    I bet Helen Thomas doesn’t think that.

  37. anonymous's Gravatar anonymous
    June 9, 2010 - 6:55 pm | Permalink

    Liberalism is the enemy.

    Nah. Conservatives are no better on race than liberals, and never have been – back in the distant past when conservatives were pro-white, so were liberals. Personally, I see a lot more value in the anti-Israel left than I do in anything on the right, which is both pro-immigration and pro-Jewish.

  38. Tom Watson's Gravatar Tom Watson
    June 9, 2010 - 6:45 pm | Permalink

    @AmusedEuro

    Who is defending Jews bright boy? I’m not buying this liberal-conservative rag that everyone including Limbaugh, Beck, & even your Catholic girl Maddow does. LOL.

    Your Pope told you how to think last week on immigration didn’t he bright boy. Yes, and I am a Protestant,and I hold to the principles of the Reformation.

    Once again, we will go nowhere until the Roman Catholic & Jew Alliance in Congress is broken. Although, I do agree with Kevin MacDonald in that some of these non-Catholic universalists like the United Church of Christ/Congregationalists are a problem too. Let’s not forget that the work Catholic means universal.

  39. AmusedEuro's Gravatar AmusedEuro
    June 9, 2010 - 6:22 pm | Permalink

    Tom Watson

    @Bill Thomas

    Right. Just because they are Jews, that makes them liberals. LOL.

    What about the Catholics Tom Watson? When you aren’t defending Jews you are attacking Catholics, remember? You “hold to” the Reformation right? LOL. ;)

  40. Tom Watson's Gravatar Tom Watson
    June 9, 2010 - 5:13 pm | Permalink

    @Bill Thomas

    Right. Just because they are Jews, that makes them liberals. LOL. :)

  41. HA's Gravatar HA
    June 9, 2010 - 4:02 pm | Permalink

    Re: it not being necessary for everyone to discuss Jewish influence, I spose when there’s a rough equilibrium in public discourse between criticism of Jews and praise and defense of Jews, we can afford to diversify our topics. Until then, it seems there’s more of genuine interest in Phil Weiss then in James Edwards.

  42. June 9, 2010 - 3:20 pm | Permalink

    Self-criticism is one thing Hebrews don`t do.

    Oh, they do it all the time. The thing is, “the anti-semites” always get the blame.

  43. Bill Thomas's Gravatar Bill Thomas
    June 9, 2010 - 2:49 pm | Permalink

    Wait, I thought “liberal” was a code word for “Jew” – or did the FOX News watchers actually not figure that out yet?

    The Political Cesspool show is great, so James Edwards has my full support. This book will make a great gift for various conservative/Rush Limbaugh types that need to be weaned off of Ann Coulter.

  44. Blowtorch Mason's Gravatar Blowtorch Mason
    June 9, 2010 - 2:48 pm | Permalink

    Anonymous- “Am I missing something? What is here that cannot be found in mainstream conservatism?”-This book, which I’ve read, by the way, does not admit, as all good mainstream conservatives do, that some whites deserve to be excoriated as racists. According to Edwards, no whites are racists-Coulter, Beck, limbaugh, Hannitty, OReilly, et al would choke before saying that. Whites deserve to promote their own sense of racial solidarity, and ridiculous charges of racism are designed to prevent any budding sense of white racial solidarity from blooming. The term “racist” is a prime example of jewish cultural marxist “critical theory” in action. This book takes mainstream conservatives farther down the path to truth than Hannity, Beck and their brethren would ever take them.

  45. Blowtorch Mason's Gravatar Blowtorch Mason
    June 9, 2010 - 2:09 pm | Permalink

    Anonymous-Liberalism is the enemy. It is a tactic invented by, or at the very least co-opted by Jews of power and influence. They are the driving force-the brains of the outfit. Blacks and other “minorities” are just front men and footsoldiers. In final analysis liberalism’s goal is white gentile genocide. If you can get “mainstream conservatives” to accept the fact that ALL liberalism in ALL of its manifestations( note to Glenn Beck-no exceptions for MLK or the Civil Rights Movement) is evil, it won’t be long until these same “mainstream conservatives” start asking questions about who is behind the stunning success of modern liberalism-that’s where questions of jewish power and inluence eventually and inevitably come up. All the footprints lead back to the jewish camp. Let them walk before they run.

  46. anonymous's Gravatar anonymous
    June 9, 2010 - 1:35 pm | Permalink

    It’s not necessary for everyone to discuss Jewish influence.

    The issue here isn’t so much that he’s not discussing Jewish influence. By saying that the problem is “liberals” and “the Obama agenda”, the clear implication is that the solution is to support conservatives and the Bush/McCain agenda.

    One of the major problems white racialists face is the belief that mainstream conservatism constitutes valid opposition to the problems facing whites, and books like this reinforce that perception.

    Looking at the content of the book on the book’s webpage, there is apparently nothing in the book about immigration, explicit white identity, or other issues of interest to racialists. It’s all about “rolling back big government” and “opposing socialist health care”. Griping about liberals calling conservatives “racist” is already a part of mainstream conservative commentary. Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and Glenn Beck talk about this all the time. None of these people oppose the United States becoming a majority non-white country. This stuff is not even at the Jared Taylor level of racialism. It’s probably not even at the Pat Buchanan level of quasi-racialism. It’s not racialist at all. It’s aracial conservatism, pure and simple.

    Am I missing something? What is here that cannot be found in mainstream conservatism?

  47. Blowtorch Mason's Gravatar Blowtorch Mason
    June 9, 2010 - 1:26 pm | Permalink

    Dear z.o.g. and anonymous-Failing to “name the jew “is obviously a marketing ploy. People must crawl before they walk, and walk before they run. The Political Cesspool radio show certainly deals with jewish power and influence in a candid and forthright manner whenever the topic is raised-check the archives. James is hoping to make converts, and if you feed adult food to infants, they will either throw it up or choke on it! As the show has said many times, 80% of jews vote democrat in national presidential elections-a pretty good self indentification of their liberalism. 0f the 20% that don’t, probably half of those vote for candidates even further to the Left, like Ralph Nader or the American Communist Party candidate. In final analysis, the two great taboos in contemporary American political discourse are Jewish power and influence and Race. Some, like American Rennaissance, will speak about one but not the other. The Political Cesspool addresses both regularly, in a rational, objective way. This, and their quality of speech and thought, is what makes the Political Cesspool unique and separates it from mainstream conservative radio talkshows. Nonetheless, we on the populist, paleoconservative right need to make converts, rather than constantly “talk to ourselves”. This is what James is trying to do. There are, by the way, some authentically conservative jews-Paul Gottfried and former Memphis Mayor Henry Loeb come to mind-but they are admittedly few and far between, and you are right to be suspicious. Liberalism is the modern face of evil, and without jewish intelligence, organizational skills, intensity, wealth and media control, liberallism would have never gotten off the ground. If Jews suddenly were transformed overnight into authentic conservatives, we’d be unstoppable. They are the secret ingredient to the success of the Left. I wish it weren’t so but it is!

  48. HA's Gravatar HA
    June 9, 2010 - 12:44 pm | Permalink

    I agree with anonymous; this reeks of Limbaugh, Coulter and of course Jared Taylor: whatever could those darned white liberals at the $PLC and the ADL be thinking?

  49. Kratos's Gravatar Kratos
    June 9, 2010 - 12:30 pm | Permalink

    The trouble is when one is open with racial interests, it requires partners to validate such interests which the Jews realise but we don’t and even fear.

    Why do we accept Jews to be inclined towards “liberalism” when we are more liberal than them? There is so many self declared “Jewish Liberals”, but turn out to be vile and violent gangsters when Israel is under scrutiny. I have never seen a white person who can match any of these loony Jewish “Liberals”.

    John McCain wanted to go into bed with AIPAC, and he lost in the booty shake competition which Obama scored the highest. Now Obama is the Jewish president celebrating Jewish Week, Jewish Month, Jewish Year and all things Jewish inside the Whitehouse.

  50. TicTac's Gravatar TicTac
    June 9, 2010 - 12:24 pm | Permalink

    AngryJew :

    Kevin MacDonald said… we may find ourselves in an actual “physical sruggle” So, if you are a member of the genius-tribe, then I doubt very-much you`ll be spilling your own blood in defence of European/Americans. But we`ll all be there – Aryan-warriors dying gloriously to preserve their people.

    But if you`ve got the chutzpah to stand with Aryans, then good-on-you.
    But, if you were behind me on the battle-field, then I`d be pretty nervous.

  51. Anonymous's Gravatar Anonymous
    June 9, 2010 - 12:22 pm | Permalink

    AngryJew :

    Kevin MacDonald said… we may find ourselves in an actual “physical sruggle” So, if you are a member of the genius-tribe, then I doubt very-much you`ll be spilling your own blood in defence of European/Americans. But we`ll all be there – Aryan-warriors dying gloriously to preserve their people.

    But if you`ve got the chutzpah to stand with Aryans, then good-on-you.
    But, if you were behind me on the battle-field, then I`d be pretty nervous.

  52. 3D's's Gravatar 3D's
    June 9, 2010 - 11:41 am | Permalink

    Can anyone out there tell me the origin of the word “Semite?” And while you’re at it give “Ashkinazi” a try. The answers might surprise you.

  53. admin's Gravatar admin
    June 9, 2010 - 11:28 am | Permalink

    It’s not necessary for everyone to discuss Jewish influence. Edwards has had people on his radio show discuss Jewish influence, I among them, so he is at least aware of those issues. The book will have a very positive impact for our side. Lots of people who may have been turned off by the Jewish message will be influenced by it. Kevin M

  54. anonymous's Gravatar anonymous
    June 9, 2010 - 10:59 am | Permalink

    And also, if James Edwards isn’t going to “name the Jew”, then what’s the point? It seems that he himself is guilty of exactly the same thing that he accuses other whites: being cowered by political correctness.

    Right. I like what James is doing over at The Political Cesspool, but this book looks weak. If I want to hear criticism of “liberals” and “the Obama agenda”, I’ll listen to Rush Limbaugh or other Jewish-controlled mass media conservatism. The FRAME he is promoting here is totally wrong.

  55. TicTac's Gravatar TicTac
    June 9, 2010 - 10:56 am | Permalink

    Kevin :

    In Chaim Bermant`s book, The Jews, this one quote sums up the cause, and can easily be applied today. But Jews only see the reaction. They`re their own worst enemy.

    Prior to the 1648 Ukranian Uprising, a nervous Rabbi warned… “Jews were sowing a terrible harvest of hatred.” The author goes on to say…
    “but while the revenues rolled in the warnings were ignored. ”

    This made me smile. I can just picture the poor, guilty Ribbi, panicky, nervously tugging on his big scraggy beard, waiting on the sword of justice to fall.

    1648 to 2010 and the good old Jews are still at it.

    Cause and effect.
    For every action there is a reaction.

    Being a psychologist, kevin, I can easily see why you chose the Hebrews to decipher. They`re very interesting, very strange.
    This is a crucial lesson they`ve not yet learned.
    Self-criticism is one thing Hebrews don`t do. Unfotunately.

  56. TicTac's Gravatar TicTac
    June 9, 2010 - 10:43 am | Permalink

    He`s very good.
    I look forward to reading his book.

  57. June 9, 2010 - 10:04 am | Permalink

    The knee-jerk desire to cast White Nationalist Jews as non-Whites, even when they are clearly White, and feel that way, and contribute to WN movements, is Anti-Semitic.

    Barb expertly dismantled this double-talk. “AngryJew” the “White nationalist” whose main concern is “anti-semitism”. What a crock. If your concern is “anti-semitism” you’re a jewish nationalist.

    Whiteness is both biological and political – or biopolitical (James Edwards’ term is ethnopolitcal). Not only are jews genetically distinct from Whites, they distinguish themselves from us culturally and politically as well. Among other things, the shameless jewish propensity for dissembling and dissimulation insults and alienates us. A handful of jews and their sycophants do indeed persist in trying to insinuate themselves into and take charge of pro-White discussions. Most eventually demonstrate that they are more concerned with the well-being of jews than Whites. This is usually evident in their preoccupation with fighting “anti-semitism”. The proper concern for Whites is ourselves, not jews.

    People who pretend to be our friends and work to subvert/hijack pro-White efforts from within are worse than clear, outright enemies.

  58. eurodele's Gravatar eurodele
    June 9, 2010 - 9:34 am | Permalink

    3D’s: “…the more private information I offer in responding to “politically incorrect” web sites, the more my head becomes visible above the parapet.”

    Vendors customarily ask for customers’ phone numbers and email addresses to notify them of product availability, shipping dates, and tracking numbers. That’s the way business is done on the Internet, and getting around it is usually more trouble than it’s worth.

    It’s one thing to use a pseudonym in a forum you know is watched by vengeful Jews. It’s quite another to refuse to deal with White-run online businesses because you’re afraid to purchase “potentially forbidden products” from “potentially unapproved companies”.

    I use a pseudonym here, but I order what I like online and use my credit card to pay for it. That’s because I understand that if somebody wants to get me and has the means to specifically track my online purchases, then he/she also has the will and the means to break through any pseudonyms or other anonymity-preserving devices I might use.

    The point is this: if your online purchasing habits are already this badly constrained by Jewish threats and propaganda, then you’re already too far gone to be of much use in any political conflict.

    If you want to read the book, then man up and buy the book.

  59. June 9, 2010 - 9:12 am | Permalink

    You’re doing fine work James, keep it up.

  60. barb's Gravatar barb
    June 9, 2010 - 8:06 am | Permalink

    “The knee-jerk desire to cast White Nationalist Jews as non-Whites, even when they are clearly White, and feel that way, and contribute to WN movements, is Anti-Semitic.

    Same would be said of taking a Black person, who advocates White Nationalism for whatever reasons, and dismissing him as a mere nigger. In both cases, you have an example of Racism and Anti-Semitism as something irrational, and baseless.”

    There you go again, trying to have it both ways. You’re White, you insist, so that we’ll take you in, but if we don’t want to, it must be because we’re irrationally prejudiced against your race, the Semites.
    So which is it? Are you White or are you Semite?
    If you’re White, it’s not possible to be anti-Semite against you. If it’s possible to be anti-Semitic against you, then you’re not White.

    A pro-White Black nationalist who tried, like you do, to tell us he’s White would be laughed off the stage.
    Only because some Jews are light-skinned enough to fool some of my people, and some of my people are woefully unaware about the masqueraders among us, is why you people often get away with the charade.
    If you’re a White person who converted to the ethno religion of the Semites, Judaism, then you’ve demonstrated that you’re a self-hating White and you’re of no use to us.

  61. Tom Watson's Gravatar Tom Watson
    June 9, 2010 - 7:40 am | Permalink

    @3d

    They have a mailing address. You can send cash, check, or money order. Twenty bucks ain’t a big deal.
    ————-
    I hope that Dr. MacDonald will have a few things to say about how Edward’s has handled the Jews’ involvement with race politics in America in his book.

  62. June 9, 2010 - 7:32 am | Permalink

    While I understand why some might be hesitant to enter personal information, I feel as though I should let you know that our merchant processor asks for that information, not us. But, they’re very reliable and after six years, this is this first time I’ve heard a concern.

    As an alternative, you may send in a check or money order to our P.O. Box, which is also listed at the bottom of the sales page where you can pay via credit card for the book.

    Our mailing address is:

    The Political Cesspool Radio Program
    P.O. Box 34336
    Bartlett, TN 38184

    I’m confident everyone will enjoy this book!

    Many thanks to Kevin and my friends here at TOO for your support. I read this blog daily and am proud to be associated with it.

  63. Daybreaker's Gravatar Daybreaker
    June 9, 2010 - 4:58 am | Permalink

    3D’s, my solution is to buy everything through a friendly local book shop. I get my low profile, the friendly owner gets my custom, everybody’s happy.

  64. AngryJew's Gravatar AngryJew
    June 9, 2010 - 2:23 am | Permalink

    Edwards is on the mark with his description of Racism and cowardice, and I sincerely hope that his book receives due attention and can become a transformative force for American politics.

    In Edwards you have proof that Jews are not all anti-White. Gottfried endorsed the book, even knowing Edward’s opinions about Jews.

    The knee-jerk desire to cast White Nationalist Jews as non-Whites, even when they are clearly White, and feel that way, and contribute to WN movements, is Anti-Semitic.

    Same would be said of taking a Black person, who advocates White Nationalism for whatever reasons, and dismissing him as a mere nigger. In both cases, you have an example of Racism and Anti-Semitism as something irrational, and baseless.

    So its important not to dismiss the “possibility” of Racism (anti-White, anti-Black, anti-you-name it) just because it is now a smear term.

    Edwards is right, but then so are those of us who receive irrational ill-treatment even when we are not libJews and are genetically White.

  65. Z.O.G.'s Gravatar Z.O.G.
    June 9, 2010 - 12:11 am | Permalink

    And also, if James Edwards isn’t going to “name the Jew”, then what’s the point? It seems that he himself is guilty of exactly the same thing that he accuses other whites: being cowered by political correctness.

  66. Z.O.G.'s Gravatar Z.O.G.
    June 9, 2010 - 12:07 am | Permalink

    James Edwards needs to learn about the origin of the term “racism”. Apparently he is unaware.

    The word is a Jewish Communist agitprop term invented by Leon Trotsky in the 1930’s in his book “The History of the Russian Revolution”, and then further popularized by the homosexual Jewish-German doctor Magnus Hirschfeld in his book, “Racisme”.

    So the term “racism” is Jewish Marxist is origin. James Edwards seems to be ignorant of this.

  67. 3D's's Gravatar 3D's
    June 8, 2010 - 5:56 pm | Permalink

    After reading this blog I went through the process of buying the book on line with my credit card. My purchace was refered back to the beginning with a red lettered notification that a phone number and e mail address were required. I see no reason for divulging this personal information in order to buy a book. A valid credit card number should suffice. I backed out. There is little doubt in my mind that Talmudically trained cogitators of the Jewish New World Order crowd are diligently at work in overtime mode to overcome the free flow of information via the internet. I feel the more private information I offer in responding to “politically incorrect” web sites, the more my head becomes visible above the parapet.

  68. AmusedEuro's Gravatar AmusedEuro
    June 8, 2010 - 5:06 pm | Permalink

    I think the smear terms “racist” and “anti-semite” are rapidly losing their effectiveness.

  69. Wandrin's Gravatar Wandrin
    June 8, 2010 - 2:59 pm | Permalink

    Good luck with it. Racist means white and anti-racism is simply a code word for anti-white are simple but critical messages.

1 Trackback to "James Edwards’ "Racism Schmacism: How Liberals Use the ‘R’ Word to Push the Obama Agenda""

  1. on June 8, 2010 at 12:04 pm

Comments are closed.