Most violence and violent rhetoric is leftist in origin. As the left has a firm grip on the reins of mainstream media, it should come as no surprise that the right is the scapegoat for the sins of the left. The irony is that the left is guilty of what its favorite leftist psychologist, Sigmund Freud, coined “projection.” The left denies its own violent actions and rhetoric and instead ascribes it to its chief political opposition—the right. The left projects its own violent tendencies upon the right through extensive use of media propaganda. “Right-wingers” are immediately blamed for any outburst of random violence perpetrated by isolated and disturbed individuals—as in the Tuscon shootings, yet the entire history of leftist aggression, angry rhetoric, and physical violence is swept into the dustbin of history. Leftist riots, leftist terrorists, leftist serial bombers, leftist calls for genocide—all of these sink down the memory hole, purposefully eclipsed by a barrage of stories about right-wing violence. Reality is quite different.
Worldwide, communism is responsible for more than 100 million civilian deaths in the Twentieth Century. Russia, Romania, Yugoslavia, China, Cambodia, Vietnam, and other communist-controlled nations became killing fields in the name of social progress—a favorite term of the left. America mistakenly believes that Marxism and leftism largely died with the fall of the Soviet Union, but the parasite merely changed hosts.
In the dawn of the new century, the American left and incognito left—i.e., the neoconservatives who infiltrated the Republican Party to subvert it toward leftist ideas—pounded war drums that led to the second invasion of Iraq. The mainstream media conveniently places the blame for this war upon the right, covering up the fact that neoconservative ideology is merely leftism in strategic disguise. The neoconservative infiltrators of the Republican Party were the catalyst for the second invasion of Iraq and these leftists-in-disguise were aided and abetted by most mainstream leftists in government and media. The elite leftist press and Democratic Party politicians were firmly in favor of invading Iraq. Combined with their neoconservative compatriots at the spear’s point, there seemed to be a “consensus” regarding Iraq—but few understood that it was a leftist consensus. Nation-building, foreign intervention, and pre-emptive war are not genuine conservative values. They are the hallmarks of a leftist, a person who wishes to impose ideologies upon the rest of the population by force, all in the name of “progress.”
In the domestic arena, the American left has the bloodstain of White genocide on its hands. In 1965, America was approximately 89 percent White. When the left finally succeeded in passing the treacherous and treasonous 1965 Immigration Act, it upended the racial balance of immigration that had been in place for the entire preceding history of America. Suddenly immigration policy disfavored Europeans and welcomed non-White immigration in overwhelming numbers. Purposeful non-White racial favoritism in legal immigration set the stage for the left to continue its genocidal anti-White campaign by allowing massive illegal immigration. The left constantly clamored for more entitlements, less scrutiny, and laxer immigration enforcement to encourage a constant stream of non-White mestizo invaders from south of the American border. With the demographic disasters of overwhelmingly non-White legal and illegal immigration, White Americans’ share of the population shrunk to under 70 percent in just two generations. In a few more years, White Americans will be a minority group, and the left will be able to claim early credit for the dispossession of the founding stock. The left has loudly, proudly, and publicly proclaimed their burning desire for the end of the White majority.
As far as violent and hateful language and calls for White genocide, there is a long list of belligerent quotations by leftists in the media, politics, and academia. The following is a small sample. Jewish intellectual and leftist activist Susan Sontag snarled, “The White race is the cancer of history.” Leonard Jeffries, chairman of African-American studies at the City College of New York, said he wanted to leave his children in a “world in which there aren’t any White people.” Jewish Harvard professor and editor of Race Traitor magazine Noel Ignatiev trumpeted, “The goal of abolishing the White race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed White supremacists. … Keep bashing the dead White males, and the live ones, and the females, too, until the social construct known as the White race is destroyed. Not deconstructed, but destroyed.” Mario Obledo, founder of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), remarked on radio station KIEV, “California is going to be a Hispanic state and anyone who doesn’t like it should leave. If they don’t like Mexicans, they ought to go back to Europe.”
Professor Jose Gutierrez of the University of Texas gleefully boasted, “We have an aging White America. They are dying. They are [expletive] in their pants with fear! I love it!” Malcolm X described a plane crash in 1962 as follows: “The death of over 120 White people is a very beautiful thing.” Eldridge Cleaver, former Black Panther leader, explained why he raped White women: “Rape was an insurrectionary act. It delighted me that I was defying and trampling upon the White man’s law, upon his system of values, and that I was defiling his women.”
Leftists have conducted an incessant and strident media, political, and educational campaign with the message that White Americans are irredeemably evil. The ideology of unique White evil has motivated many Blacks to murder, rape, rob, and assault Whites, or at the very least has lessened inhibitions toward doing so. The amount of Black-on-White violent crime overshadows White-on-Black violent crime by such an egregious magnitude that it should enrage any reasonable person. Black men rape White women approximately twenty to thirty thousand times every single year in America. The annual count of White men raping Black women rarely breaks into the double digits.
Instead of pointing out the horrendous amount of Black-on-White violent crime, the left purposefully covers it up by not reporting it in the mainstream media. The silence is deafening, especially for victims and their families. Even worse, the left plays up any examples of White-on-Black violence to warp the public’s perception of reality. Instead of taking steps to reduce or call attention to Black-on-White rape, robbery, assault, and murder, the left clamors for “Hate Crime” laws which only apply to White perpetrators. Former head of the US Commission on Civil Rights, Mary Frances Berry, explained that “Civil rights laws were not passed to protect the rights of White men and do not apply to them.”
When Whites are beaten, raped, or killed in a racially-motivated fashion, the motive is always swept under the rug and described as a “random act of violence.” When Whites speak out against the disproportionate amount of non-White crime in America, leftists cry “racism!” and push for “Hate Speech” laws to silence dissent and sidestep the First Amendment by legislative means. Leftists have encouraged, incited, sanctioned, obfuscated, and defended unspeakably vicious acts of violent crime in America, and will continue to do so in the future—unless the perpetrator is White or conservative. In that case, the incident will become front-page news and transform into an endlessly-repeated “talking point.”
The mainstream right in America stands for traditional moral values, property rights, freedom of association, freedom of speech, and individual liberty—all non-violent ideals. Conversely, the left in America stands for coercive redistribution, forced integration, silence of political opposition, and laws restricting individual liberty—all of which require violence and the threat thereof to enforce. The lion’s share of political violence towards the citizenry emanates from leftist political ideals. The rolling avalanche of violent crime in America resonates from leftist propaganda, leftist social policy, and leftist agitation. The left has the blood of millions on its hands yet dares to point a red-stained finger at others.
Christian Miller writes to awaken White consciousness and to advance White interests.
Facing the Future as a Minority
Was the Immigration Act of 1924 Illiberal?
Bravo! Just watch how leftist aggression is getting out of hand in Europe, particularly in Germany. All those politically correct Marxists who nourished it for so long are by now wringing their manicured hands. And they should.
And tremble!
You are not going to advance White interests by defending US Cold War interventions…which were very violent and had conservative and Liberal(that is to say left , in the very vague general way you are using the term) support.
You advance White racial interests by opposing intervention. The race-replacement of the Native Born White Majority goes hand-in-hand with invading other nations.
Word wide US capitalism=world death and destruction.
Pol Pot was largely a creation of the US…..and he was subsidized by the US for years. These are two obvious and indusputable facts.
I must say, you really are clueless and uninformed.
Jupiter 7: “You advance White racial interests by opposing intervention. The race-replacement of the Native Born White Majority goes hand-in-hand with invading other nations.”
Pat Buchanan calls this “Invade the world, invite the world.”
It’s a bloodless, statist-liberal-capitalist fusion of global Marxism and global capitalism. Not surprisingly, it is being implemented mostly by Jewish, Judeo-Christian Zionist, Anglo-American, and White liberal atheist flakes and head-cases, all of whom are driven by an overriding materialism and materialist view of history and the world that trumps any sort of moral imperative they might profess.
The rhetoric and politics of Jonestown – where hundreds of people lined up for a cyanide cocktail – were all of the Left. Before they left (that word again!) the US, the People’s Temple cultists were the darlings of the hippies of the San Francisco city government and functioned as a QuONGO in that city.
At some point, you’re all going to have to stop this nonsense you know, or the failing Libertarian economy and rest of the world including the SCO will stop you. The origin of Neoconservatism lies in Trotskyism, which is pseudo-leftism – that’s the entryism. These were anarchists (Libertarians) purged from the USSR in the 1930s as subversives of the state. They set up shop in the USA. Many who helped the original 1917 revoluton came over from NYC, including Trotsky. They are just deregulators, i.e. anti-statists, ‘wreckers’. and are despised for this by statists. Making out that they are closet-leftists is just a way to vilfy socialism/statism, which is of course what Libertarians do.
I’ve got to admit, up until a few years ago, I used to believe in the old stereotype pushed by the MSM that right wingers are “violent knuckle dragging thugs”, whilst leftists are soft, peace loving intellectuals.
It wasn’t until I sat down, looked at recent violent protests and realized that practically all violent protests were coming from left wingers. The most right wingers ever do is to write an angry letter to a newspaper.
But anyway, the leftists dominate the media and have cultural hegemony, so they can come out with whatever lies they want and people will believe it without question, just like how I used to do.
If the man on TV says rightwingers are violent thugs and that left wingers are peace loving intellectuals, most people will accept it as fact.
Leftists are bullies.
What amazes me is the anti-White comments are made by “respectable” citizens like the Jewish Harvard professor.
“abolishing the White race” – doesn’t he mean exterminating?
When Harvard Professors say things like that then it’s time to worry.
Excellent post, thank you. The Left’s control of the media allows them to be both participants in the political process and arbiters of what is allowable in speech and action. It’s like a football game where one side gets to be both a team and a referee.
That’s right Chris, lets gin up the fear. Why didn’t you mention the lovely Jewess Susan Santage and her ” The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, and Balanchine ballets don’t redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history.”
When Malcolm X realized it wasn’t about race, he was murdered. He was no longer useful. Don’t make yourself useful Chris.
There are not less Whites there are more non Whites. The only thing that will diminish us is our not having children and that decision is on an individual level.
I don’t understand the Malcom X reference… Can you elaborate?
When a white family to survive must have both father and mother working,
When the white family is strapped to pay for safe private schooling,
When the government enacts laws detrimental to the patriarchy family,
When the government takes money from hard working white families and gives it to non-working non-whites to multiply,
When the government directs all its energy to make it difficult to raise white children,
It is not on an individual level.
The obvious lesson from all this is that, VIOLENCE WORKS!
The Left has prevailed precisely because it advocates and uses force and violence against its adversaries (i.e., us).
But for pointing this out, I will once again be insulted and dumped on by clueless rightists and nationalists who somehow think we must play by the rules.
It would be a quaint attitude, if it were not so suicidal.
Yes, this article states the argument about as eloquently and effectively as any I’ve read.
I was 10 years old in 1968, and I remember seeing the violent behavior of the rabble that would call itself the “revolution” broadcast every night on the news. 10,000 blacks destroyed Detroit while another 100,000 cheered them on. Watts was worse. Newark, Philly, D.C., and on and on and on (and that’s not even mentioning the scores of campus riots instigated by liberal whites.)
When today’s documentaries mention the violence of the ’60′s, however, it’s always with film clips of police brutality at the ’68 Democratic convention or attack dogs going after Selma marchers. And, of course, the firehoses…who can forget the firehoses. These films always tell us how “shocked” mainstream America was by the images of these two specific events. In truth, mainstream America was shocked by the billions of dollars of damage done by the emerging criminal class (and seeing civilization starting to unravel right before it’s eyes.)
regard noel ing, he ‘claims’ that he wants to abolish the white race, he means that ‘race is a social construct’ at least that’s his excuse.
as for the harvard comment, harvard has been jewish dominated, anti-white, anti-Christian for years.
btw its steve sailer, not PB that came up w/ that invade the world, invite the world. quote.
Yes the left has been far more violent and far more un-repentent – they still glorify, for example, the Spanish Civil war, despite the fact it’s been long revealed their side was pretty much led by stalinist agents, and 50,000 clergy were executed.
They also have ‘the bullhorn’ and continue to lie with abandon.
“…It is being implemented mostly by Jewish, Judeo-Christian Zionist, Anglo-American…”
I know no “Anglos” who promote the left on the basis of their white sub-ethnic group, no more than Irish or Germans or Italians—although jews, jewish-toned christians from all the various “christian” branches, zionists are another matter, just fyi.
Otherwise, I do remember when Cleaver was introduced, how it affected me as a white female.
The drop in 20% of the white population is not without names, dates, times, places. The myth now is that the new non-white populations merely overwhelmed generational people, that they “chose” to not have children, or be fulfilled with families, or just didn’t “work hard enough to be someone.”
But behind the 20% drop is a saga of rapes, murders, lost friends, lost lives, attacks. A slow, hard-to-define sense of demoralization, of life getting smaller and shutting down, of trying harder and harder, for less and less and less–
—and all against a backdrop in which the ‘right hand never knew what the left was doing, where the people were told it was all their imagination, just try harder–
—and many people did not even understand what was being done. A litany of adults and children given confused sexual messages in schools and marriages, by educators and clergy and counselors– of poverty, foreclosures, divorces, lonely “latch-key” kids without language to explain things happening to them, and parents blaming children who lashed out, then guilting if one mentioned things that were happening, drugged children at school, imperative to mix, holocaust movies—
—and the grisly pseudo science of psychiatry and invasive therapies for those, usually women, such as re-introduced electric shock, rape crisis centers pander pseudo-theories and drugs, slender victim narratives that incited violence offered as the new literature, and on and on…
The 20% didn’t go gently.
Just fyi— many who went through those things were Anglos, not to mention Germans or Lowlanders, the “hicks”—- the most generational populations, the ones most vilified in films, books, etc.— the ones who carried the most experiential memory of a past America newcomers do not like, where one could earn and keep, not have their things redistributed to those who have been taught to hate them.
You’re right, I should have written Anglo-American elites.
As I put it on my blog:
—–
Some of the worst characteristics of the worst elements of Zionist Jewry (haughtiness, an epic sense of entitlement, insatiable greed, racist delusions of grandeur) are also all too common among a certain subset of the corrupted elites of English heritage in America…they have adopted a colonial world view of elitism, racial supremacy and epic entitlement that parallels that of their Israeli and diaspora Jewish Zionist partners — a colonial world view that is increasingly similar to that of occupying British colonialists when they were at their worst — particularly with regard to the contemporary U.S. elite’s insistence on occupying, exploiting, and oppressing Arab and Islamic lands, which implicates all Americans, including those of good will and Christian temperament, in their evil enterprise.
—–
I think where I’m trying to go here is that a lot of English and Anglo-American elites seem to believe they’re God’s gift to humanity, which has made them natural allies with “the Chosen” Zionist-American Jewry out of cynicism and opportunism, particularly once they left their traditional Christianity behind.
Additionally, it seems to me a lot of snobbish English and Anglo-American elites have always had a kind of love-hate relationship with Jewry, with a bias towards philosemitism in modern times.
I’m not trying to blame Whitey here, but point out there is a certain subset of White elites that is as treacherous and destructive as predatory Jewry, (perhaps even more so in that they are “inside the tent”) and must be dealt with as well.
Chris Moore says:
I think where I’m trying to go here is that a lot of English and Anglo-American elites seem to believe they’re God’s gift to humanity, which has made them natural allies with “the Chosen” Zionist-American Jewry out of cynicism and opportunism, particularly once they left their traditional Christianity behind.
The difference is that these so-called Anglo elites, at least in the modern world, have no explicit awareness of themselves as a group that needs to be promoted and protected. That is, there is very little ethnocentrism among them. They may think highly of themselves as individuals, but they do not think of themselves as genetic group to be continued. Jews obviously are very ethnocentric.
Jason: “these so-called Anglo elites, at least in the modern world, have no explicit awareness of themselves as a group that needs to be promoted and protected.”
Indeed, they’ve been swindled by their Jewish partners utterly. I think a few of them started to get an inkling when the found out that with the appointment of the Jewish Kagan, there were going to be 6 Catholics on the Supreme Court, 3 Jews, and 0 Protestants. But it was only a brief flare up, and then they went back to their liberal-capitalist political correctness, careerism and money-grubbing.
It’s getting increasingly difficult to have anything but complete contempt for such creatures.
@ Longly: “These were anarchists (Libertarians) purged from the USSR in the 1930s as subversives of the state. They set up shop in the USA. Many who helped the original 1917 revoluton came over from NYC, including Trotsky….”
Your history is a bit skewed. You should do some more reading. Try some other forums, maybe, or take courses. This is a blog, not a forum, but on a forum you could probably find some more accurate information and links.
Longley’s right in that there was a strong streak of Jewish anarchism-libertarianism in Russia & the Soviet Union. American Jewess Emma Goldman wrote a couple of popular first hand accounts of Jewish anarchism-libertarianism in the Soviet Union.
I don’t buy this left-right, liberal-conservative analysis. There is little or no ideology in most politics, it all comes down to variations of race & religion. Actual physical, and behavioral differences between peoples. Who gets what, and why.
I’ve always thought it interesting that Stalin was a member of a minority nationality in the USSR, and that Lenin had made Stalin the official Communist Party leader in matters of national minority groups.
The Jews interest in neo-conservatism has roots in their being pushed out of leadership in the Soviet Union, and their racial & cult interest in the rise of Israel.
It certainly fits the history doesn’t it?
Alas, most Americans don’t seem to be able to discriminate between Stalinists and Trotskyites, or even read the history. Still, perhaps it’s inevitable given the dysgenic state of American idiocracy today with its faux-choice between Libertarian Republicans and Democrats? Much is the same in the UK with the ‘choice’ between New Labour or a Conservatives/Liberal-Democrat wrapping for Libertarianism. That’s why many don’t vote anymore, and those who do don’t know what they’re voting for!
More than four years after its publication, five disgruntled readers have filed a class-action lawsuit against President Jimmy Carter and his publisher, Simon & Schuster, alleging that his 2006 book “Palestine Peace Not Apartheid” contained “numerous false and knowingly misleading statements intended to promote the author’s agenda of anti-Israel propaganda and to deceive the reading public instead of presenting accurate information as advertised.”
The five plaintiffs named in the lawsuit are seeking at least $5 million in compensation.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/political-bookworm/2011/02/president_carter_named_in_5_mi.html
Jimmy Carter today, Kevin MacDonald tomorrow…?
G’d curse the goyim!
This class action lawsuit is obviously an attempt to intimidate the goyim and criminalize all criticism of Israel. I don’t think the plaintiffs can expect to win their lawsuit. That’s not the point of the suit.
What is its point?
Its point is to intimidate writers like Kevin MacDonald and make him exceptionally nervous about every sentence he writes in future — to make him agonize over every phrase and drive him bananas.
It may well increase his inbuilt mechanism to self-censorship to the point where he feels the need to tone down his prose even further for fear of giving offense to hypersensitive Jews like myself whose capactity for taking offense, I regret to say, is almost infinite.
Imagine discussing Bernie Madoff’s crimes and being told, “Hey, you mustn’t say he’s a Jew — that’s not allowed!”
A time will come, I predict, when it is a criminal offense to mention the fact that six of the seven Russian oligarchs who stole 50 per cent of Russia’s wealth were Jews.
Imagine being told: “You must never use the word ‘Jew’ in future. That’s anti-Semitic. You must say ‘Jewish person’. Better still, shut up about Jews and don’t mention them at all — unless of course they are famous concert pianists or Nobel prize winners!”
You wouldn’t like being told told that, would you? Tough! That’s what you face in the forseeable future.
Listen, goyim, your race is run. Your doom is sealed. Prepare for slavery and chains.
This is to be the brave new world you face: a world in which we Jews will be allowed to run amok and make life impossible for everyone — and no one will be allowed to draw attention to the fact that we Jews are behind it!
Wow. Roll on the day of Jewish world domination! I look forward to the time when I am able to give full rein to my atavistic instincts and trample down Zion’s enemies with the heel of my boot. Ah, sweet revenge!
Let’s face it. You guys are animals. Subhuman scum. Rabbi Kook says so. It’s in the Talmud.
You better believe it.
SHORT PEOPLE
Some weeks ago, in early January when I first posted to this blog, I mentioned some group diversity prevalence statistics which I have long been interested in, and so helpfully gave some links drawing attention to NYC demographics by ethnicity and IQ (something posted back in 2007 elsewhere). I’ve also mentioned NCAH and brain-gender pointing to sex-steroids. This was of interest I said from an epidemiological point of view, and specifically because NCAH is a problem in the HPA-Axis (the fight-flight system). I also mentioned that this is critically involved via the Locus Coeruleus (A6 Noradrenaline for forebrain, an old favourite of mine from the late 70s), as this seems to be critically involved in stress and fear. I even pointed to some work by Jeffrey Gray who was part of our extended group pointing out how Gray rotated Eysenck’s three Personality Factors to give a DA (go), 5-HT (inhibition) and NA (stress) as an alternative. All got the thumbs down here though. Not popular at all. Learning strictly verboten.
If more people had looked into this a little they would have learned that some of this goes back to 1970s work on CAH children and IQ (see Omenn and McGuire), where stress responses were remarked upon (note in passing, C6p21 where CYP21 is autosomally located, is also where the human MHC is – think immune system, self-from non-self). I also referenced and linked to a more recent paper by Charmandari et al in 2004 (which included Phil Gold) on psychological stress in CAH gene carriers (remember its autosomal recessive). Note that I specifically mentioned NCAH and not CAH initially. This is because of the ethnic prevalence rate. I also pointed out short-stature in affected males as one of the phenotypes. I mentioned all this to a friend of mine who I had been doing some work with in the mid noughties (also referenced) and he suggested I published, but as I thought it might seriously upset some people for reasons that you mention, I’ve held off a bit, as you might understand.
In fact, if one goes to Google (in the UK at least) and puts in ‘Jew’, one gets this:
“Offensive Search Results
We’re disturbed about these results as well. Please read our note here.
http://www.google.com/explanation“
I looked up the current Speaker of the House of Commons to check that it is still working, it is. So it appears that someone has sponsored an ad. Was that you Miriam ;-) ?
I wish you luck with the world domination plan (do you like dressing up?). You’re certainly in the right place if looking for mates, as there are lots of Libertarians here. A bit of advice though, they don’t seem to want to share dominating the world with anyone else. They seem to want it all for themselves. In fact, being anarchists, they don’t tend to get on with anyone (it’s an infantile-disorder, undersocialised you see, just want their own way al the time – arrested development probably), they can’t organise – its ideologically verboten. They just like to be dominant. I suspect it’s a narcissistic thing.
See title.
Listen, and give it some thought after looking at the data provided elsewhere. See also earlier links to Michael Young (who drafted the British 1945 Labour manifesto); the policy chapters in Herrnstein & Murray’s TBC 1994; and the summary of communitarianism which I provided. The USA used to be communitarian like Britain (and the USSR).
Where’s the violence? On the other hand, look at the verbal nefarious rhetoric in this blog directed towards those perceived not to be like themselves. It doesn’t bode well with the changing demographics, i.e the low, dysgenic, White TFRs does it?
As Helvena correctly says above:
I’ll just add, this is right-wing, subversive, Libertarian, meritocratic (elitist) narcissism at work, and it’s clearly dysgenic. That’s shown by the data (see ETS, USA PISA scores, and SATs/NAEP over recent decades).
The talk of the evil left is right-wing nefarious rhetoric.
Miriam do you have a sister named Lasha?
I am an only child. No siblings. I would have hated having a sister with a silly name like ‘Lasha’.
okay, every american needs to read this article. on second thought every person on the planet needs to read this article.
@ svend. What I was getting at is that the dynamics of power, (having it, not having it, getting it and losing its), isn’t race based. It’s about manipulation.
@ Jack Ford. There is nothing in your list that isn’t felt by non whites as well. Do you think non whites like seeing the big pay offs to white bankers? We may see the bankers as Anglo/Jewish but what non whites see is White.
I don’t know how we can change this but we have a major problem, perhaps THE major problem, in getting the white side to the general public. Sites like this are certainly useful; at present it’s all we have. But I seriously doubt it will ever be used by any large part of the population.
I think what we require is getting someone interested with the kind of serious money to create what would become a mainstream news organization. OR, some group with the credibility to get people to put their beer and black ball game money into it. I know I’m preaching to the choir; all I’m wondering is if we couldn’t direct more focus to the problem.
How many people here have given much serious, objective thought to the observation that most of the descriptions of leftist regime violence have in fact been told by right-wing Libertarian movements and ‘Think Tanks’? What function might such information/propaganda possibly serve? What have the consequences/blowback been?
After doing a second reading of Christian Miller’s commentary-I tried to give him a second chance-it is even more awfull on the second reading. Who exactly is responsible for the killings in the Balkans? The best you can up with is neocon propaganda-in the case ofthe Balkan war…100 percent Jewish neocon propaganda.
What ever killing took place outside of legitmate self-defense was carried out by the muslims and the Jewish neocon infested Clinton adminstration.
Human beings in other nations have God-given right to resist both Ronnie-Reagan’s and Bill Clnton’s aggression.
The battle against Native Born White American race-relpacement absolutely requires the rejection of the fairy tales of the Cold War propagandists.
Indeed. And then there was this
I bet all those North Vietnamese communitarians were extremely surpised to be relentlessly bombed by their distant ‘leftist’ American comrades?
“There’s none so blind as those who will not see” (and giving what they don’t like the thumbs down is a sure sign of narcissistic rage/arrested cognitive development).
Chris Moore observed: “I’m not trying to blame Whitey here, but point out there is a certain subset of White elites that is as treacherous and destructive as predatory Jewry, (perhaps even more so in that they are “inside the tent”) and must be dealt with as well.”
Well stated, Chris. And, I would urge all white nationalists to remember these words when the time finally arrives for the genocide & race treason trials, convictions, and swift (but hopefully gruesome) punishments to be meted out.
This group goes to the head of the line on the court docket. Assigned Top Priority.
On the Right, I don’t think these are so guilty of intended genocide & “race treason” (far too rigid a term for me) as they are of rank ambition and greed. On the Left, they are mostly guilty of being indoctrinated into Judeophilia and socialism, and being liberal airheads.
I can’t say about White nationalism, but under a return to libertarian nationalism and Christian moral authority, I wouldn’t think “gruesome punishment” need be meted out as collaboration with Judeofascism and political Zionism and their various offshoots like Communism, socialism and neoconservatism would simply become socially and politically anathema.
Of course, their compatriots, the REAL perpetrators of 9/11 and lying us into the Mideast wars, would have to be put on trial for treason.
Ellis Island landed on the blacks, too, but you will never hear the leftists denouncing their grandparents who displaced blacks. They always harp about the Puritans.
Miriam K,
If you would have been my neighbor in Germany, way back when, tell me why should I have risked my life for you with Rabbi Kooks Books/writings in your breast/heart? I read some of it. You are spilling over with fear and hate. I am realy sorry, but you are a real mess. I wonder who and what will save you the next time you outlived your welcome/stay, where ever you are. With your attitude, you might be able to get away with an insanity plea in todays world, due to your history of perpetuating selfinflicted injuries. I will pray for your recovery to some sanity, find a common ground with humanity and other folks, some decency with a renewal of your mind, but I will never stoop so low as to curse you, or invoke God to do so. What a haughty spirit.
@ European
“I will never stoop so low as to curse you, or invoke God to do so.”
Thank you. You show a nobility of spirit, derived from your Christian tradition, which is quite alien to the Jewish soul. I sometimes wish I too could be noble and good like you.
Unfortunately, I am instructed by the Talmud to be as beastly as possible to you and show you no kindness or mercy.
If you were to fall into a well, for example, I am advised by the holy rabbis of my religion to let you rot and die there.
From this it follows that every time one of US falls into a well, you come to our rescue and pull us out — but every time one of YOU falls into a well, we let you rot and die there.
This is why we are winning the race war: because we are ruthless and run on hate.
How long will we allow “Miriam” to pull our leg? This is obvious troll activity.
@ Jason Speaks
Miriam is either a Jewish supremacist or a satirical spoof writer. A troll she is not. A “troll” by definition is either:
(a) A disrupter of proceedings, Jew or non-Jew, whose purpose is to create distractions and therefore sabotage this website.
(Miriam is clearly NOT in this category. She keeps to the point, posts very seldom, and is not trying to interfere with the discussion here.)
(b) Or secondly, a “troll” is a sneaky Jewish infiltrator (or “Zionist troll”), masquerading as a White Nationalist, whose purpose is to defame particular writers for this site by sneering at their contributions and by urging Kevin MacDonald only to publish “safe”, dull, mainstream-friendly, “non-conspiracy theory” articles likely to appease the Jews.
Clearly Miriam does not belong to this category either, since she is an up-front Jew who is not trying to wield any influence on Kevin MacDonald or tell him what articles he ought to publish and what articles he ought to reject, whereas YOU and “Someday” certainly ARE doing this on behalf of the organized Jewish community.
Have you not both been identified as Zionist trolls at least TEN times, not only be me but by numerous other highly respected posters who have grown wise to your sly little games?
For you and Someday to call Miriam K a “troll” is a joke. It’s a bit like Jack the Ripper calling a total innocent a serial killer.
It’s sad to see this site turning into yet another idiotic conservative forum. Reading this article, I feel like I accidentally stumbled on to a Rush Limbaugh fan site.
Left this, liberal that, blah blah blah. What you fail to mention is that conservatives have been 100% behind all of this stuff every step of the way, too. Pretending that conservatives have opposed these changes is flatly absurd. For instance, Ronald Reagan was just as bad as Barack Obama, probably worse. Certainly Reagan was the most pro-immigration and pro-Israel president ever at that time, and he is revered as a conservative icon.
Conservatives have never, ever opposed the Jewish domination of the US or the slow genocide of the White race. And they just keep getting worse over time – look at the popularity of Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin for instance, and the openly pro-diversity and pro-Jewish “Tea Party” movement. These guys are anti-White in both word and deed. Only a very small fringe of the White left is as explicitly anti-White as these bozos.
Meanwhile, anti-Zionism and opposition to Jewish power is coming almost exclusively from the left, with conservative Whites (Christian Zionists and others) typically standing in support of the Jews and against their own people.
So how is the problem “the left” when “the right” is at least as bad, if not worse? Do you think that by framing this situation in this way, you will get conservatives to come over to our side? How has that strategy worked out over the last 65 years?
Well said. Where does the criticism of Israel come from? Certainly not the conservatives in “our” government. It comes from the left. Likewise, anti-immigration sentiment comes only from the right. So, both sides have their strengths and weaknesses. The left is very anti-Zionist, but they are incapable of understanding that all Jews are ultimately Zionists. Likewise the right complains about the loss of our traditional ethics and national identity but they are too stupid to realize that their “allies” the Jews are the ones facilitating their own destruction.
The reason why Jews are such succcessful propagandists is because they get the population to think in terms of politics while they themselves think only in terms of ethnicity. If we did the same, that is, if we only thought in terms of what was good for Europeans, we would start to make some headway.
We need to learn to disregard political and economic ideologies and think only in terms of what is good for ourselves. Until we learn to do that, we will always be chasing our tails, latching onto “conservatism,” then “liberalism,” then “socialism,” then “capitalism,” and any number of fleeting thoeries. The core of every issue is ethnicity. What does it matter if we’re a socialist or capitalist society, so long as it benefits us? The Jews learned this long ago: they rise to the top in any country, whether it’s capitalist or communist, and the reason is because they know political ideologies are all nonsense. The only thing that matters is who is in control.
Agreed. George Wallace was not wrong when he stated: There isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the Republicans and Democrats!
The left has successfully atomized and disunited us. Even our major “White” religions have abandoned us. My own mainstream Anglo-Protestant church is more concerned with sending church monies to supporting African causes than its own members, many of whom are elderly and near destitute. This is the reason I dropped out and will never go back.
Meanwhile, anti-Zionism and opposition to Jewish power is coming almost exclusively from the left
Except in the case of Mr. Duke who is doing a yeoman’s job battling the zionist beast via his short, hard-hitting videos on YouTube. He deserves our support for bravely standing up for us like no one else.
Latest video: Send to everyone you know. Post it everywhere you are able: http://tinyurl.com/4l6bf78
Boudicca says:
My own mainstream Anglo-Protestant church is more concerned with sending church monies to supporting African causes than its own members, many of whom are elderly and near destitute.
This is one of the most infuriating behaviors I see among generally White Christian churches in America. They are constantly sending money to Africa, to Mexico, to Third World nations all over the globe, yet ignore the real needs of the White Christians that helped build those churches. A church not far from me offers services in Spanish. Others act as sanctuaries for illegal aliens. This is true across the spectrum, from Catholic to Protestant.
We need to at least start making parishioners aware of the issue.
I also agree that most conservative forums are quite horrible. I can’t get even the mildest criticism of Israel past the moderators on free republic.
I’m not sure what you mean by “conservative” and “liberal.”
1) If we’re talking pure economics, then yeah, there is not advantage to us in supporting libertarian/free market economies or socialist/managed economies. The truth is that no modern economy can be run purely as market economy or as a managed economy, but must have aspects of both. Both systems can hurt the average person if there is a large accumulation of capital in the wrong hands.
2) If you’re talking “official conservatism,” then yes–as we’ve seen from the Dershowitz-Prager debate posted on tihs site, one can ensure that one’s will is done by controlling both sides of any debate.
I think that many of us have an emotional attachment to certain conservative figures (Reagan was an actor, after all). I kinda of like the America that George Will sells (or used to sell, I haven’t read a column of his since I was in high school)–does he himself really believe it it? I don’t know.
Most of us who say we support conservationism, actually don’t support the ‘conservative’ movement of the past 40 years, but rather support what we wish it was.
fender_strat said
No, the mainstream liberals like Carter who criticize Israel are vastly more effective than the left is ineffective because (apart from Michael Neumann, James Petras and a few others) its arguments put the cart before the horse. The left suggests ( as N. Chomsky does) that the Iraq War, the threats to Syria and Iran ‘are primarily a product of “oil interests” and the “military-industrial complex” and not the role of the pro-Israel lobby or its collaborators in the Pentagon and other government agencies’.
I agree with Christian Miller that the political violence comes from people who call themselves left-wing. Of course we know that it isn’t a case of the left-wing half of the population being violent against the right-wing half. The problem comes from a tiny minority of radicals who work against normal people’s interests. Left-wing institutions have been unable to resist because their leadership has been infiltrated, and many of their supporters have been fooled by the propaganda. On the right, most voters and low-level politicians do not believe the Jewish media propaganda, but the hierarchy wants to compromise and be nice.
Today, left-wing radicals are basically anti-white. Not all of them. Many of them are manipulated. But the overall trend is anti-white. In the end, it isn’t really a left/right thing, it is largely a matter of racial hostility. The problem is that the left/right divide makes it difficult for Whites to protect their interests.
None of the labels matter much. What matters is whether individuals and/or groups work to build a community or to liquidate it. If one works to build a community/state one works to establish and sustain public services. If one works to liquidate/undermine a community/state one works to privatise its public services. To have public services which work, one needs regulation/regulators. Libertarians/anarchists erode regulations appealing to freedom and choice because there’s capital invested in established public services (invested in the past through previous generations’ taxes usually). They then lay people off to extract those investments as ‘efficiency savings’), and they sell off/strip other assets such as plant/land to realise assets for shareholders. It’s like an oil laid down in the past. Most people don’t see this as they’ve just inherited it rather than worked for it themselves.
All white nationalists should re-read this article on a regular basis. The quotes that it contain should be enough to set a fire under the “rear end” of any white person who has even a small amount of character and back bone left in this decaying, race-denying society.
Longley
A lot of us don’t want your socialist services (read “interference”) whether it’s so-called “privatized” or not.
I understand that. Think of it another way. Many adolescents don’t want the intereference of parents or other adults…. until they need bailing out. Similarly, many people don’t see the downside to Libertarianism/anarchism until they have no state left to help them when times get rough (e.g when they are attacked) or get sick, or old. Some people never mature/grow up. It’s genetic. Some people only find this out later in life when they need support.
Jason S,
How long will we allow “Miriam” to pull our leg? This is obvious troll activity.
The sad part is Jason, what she says is actualy advised and prescibed by the Rabbi’s. It is written in the Talmud and Halacha. This is how Jews are supposed to treat Gentiles. It’s no joke. Everyone is just ignorant of it. The dictates of the gentile slaughter is an old one.
Miriam K,
yes I did have a very nice decent christian up-bringing. But I don’t think I would pull you out of the well. And as soon as everyone else becomes educated and not brainwashed with your Holocaust Religion, then neither will anyone else. You cant’t fool everyone for ever. Even Christians are catching on. You’ve been getting by with your nastyness, because some politicians still feel guilty. There are new generations growing up that do not feel indebted to your kind. They will pull the bottom out from under your feet in due time. Your attitude will cost you dearly and no one will care. They will remember your nastyness, because that is what you leave behind after a conversation with you. Nothing nice, period!
@ European
“Miriam K, yes I did have a very nice decent christian up-bringing. But I don’t think I would pull you out of the well… You’ve been getting by with your nastyness…”
Would you pull me out of the well if I offered to do the same for you? I would, too, and be prepared to burn in Sheol forever for my good deed.
What sort of Christian are you if you flout the teachings of your lord and savior Jesus Christ?
Didn’t he say, “Love your enemies, do good to them that despitefully use you and persecute you…He that smiteth thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.”
Obviously you have not been touched by the teachings of your Master if you are wiling to let me, your Enemy, perish at the bottom of the well.
There’s no merit in loving your friends, Christ said. Anyone can do that. It’s loving your enemies that counts.
You are told to turn the other cheek, remember?
The troll Miriam is useful again for illustrating the Saul Alinksky method of using your opponent’s ethics against them. Of course, no culture, including Christian, could ever subscribe to a suicidal program of “loving its enemies” in the sense Miriam puts forward or it would quickly vanish. And obviously, Christians have always felt free to defend themselves throughout history, so those injunctions have traditionally not been interpreted that way,
However, Christians do need to think through this modern reading of Christian altruism that seems so prevalent today. As it is sometimes misunderstood by Christians, it can be used by hateful enemies as a weapon against your children’s civilization.
Which parts of a) Libertarian Liberal-Democracies have chronically below below replacement level (2.1) TFRs (most Liberal-Democratic populations are in the 1.2-1.6 range – a population with a TFR of 1.1 halves in 30 years, and one with a TFR of 1.3 does so in 60), or b) that clerical celibacy in original Christianity (i.e. Catholicism) would have faciliated dysgenic fertility (dumbing down) amongst Christian populations relative to Jewish populations do you still not grasp?
Christianity was of course a Jewish creation for Gentiles, and Jesus, John The Baptist etc were Jewish radicals (rather like Trotsky and teh Bolsheviks perhasps?). Jews of course reject Christianity, because it’s self-destructive, but it is an effective tool of demographic warfare. Jews practice eugenics but deter others from doing so for what should be obvious reasons.
Also see Muslim TFRs which are above 2.1.
In addition, everyone should remember that Anonyma is also a troll. Miriam, David Longely, Anonyma, Der Weenerschnitzel, Adam … quite possibly all one person. Hopefully a way can be found to rid the site of them. What’s so amusing is that it’s painfully obvious to everyone. Is this the best they can come up with?
Pathetic.
Miriam is no troll. (See my post above). The only easily identifiable trolls here are you and “Someday”. And you have have both been outed as trolls repeatedly.
It’s curious that all the people you list as trolls have one thing in common: you dislike them personally because they have attacked you.
Here is your logic:
[1] x has attacked me; therfore x is a troll. (Sorry, false logic).
[2] x, y and z have attacked me; therefore x, y and z are all trolls. (Sorry, false logic).
[3] x, y and z are all trolls because they’ve attacked me, so it follows that x, y and z are the SAME person. (Sorry, this is not only false logic but laughably false — which proves you are a sophistical Talmudic Jew whose only weapon is the ad hominem attack).
I regard you with contempt and I wish Kevin MacDonald would ban you and your felow Zionist troll “Someday” from posting on this site.
You are damaging this website by being allowed to post your abhorrent views here which all have one thing in common: they tend to appease the Jews and promote a Jewish agenda.
Anonyma, why would someone who wanted to damage TOO disagree with the extreme threatening statements made by certain commenters here such as Barbara ? In fact the one proven case of a anti-white activist infiltrating WN sites involved a Canadian man ( who often pretended to be female), under countless pseudonyms. He went to Stormfront and VNN and tried to inveigle other commenters into making threatening statements much like Barbara’s. So you may disagree with Jason Speaks but he doesn’t fit the profile at all. If some randomJews were so worried by TOO that they wanted to destroy it they would be encouraging the nutzis not counteracting them. (Miriam is probably a silly gentile adolescent pretending to be a woman.)
The $LPC would really like swastika toting parades by a mass movement of nutzis but there are no such organisations so they need people making statements like Barbara’s, preferably supported by other commenters.
To the Israel lobby WN’s are a handy way to discredit and counteract the influential voices who express sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians. They use white nationalists who have foolishly associated themselves with the KKK or Nazis to draw parallels between simple liberals who criticize Israel and WN’s, David Duke for example.
Zionists like sites where people are vituperative about Jews.
@ Someday
Someday,
I am impressed not only by your reasoning but by the calmness of your tone. I have had time to read some of your other posts and they are well-written and knowledgeable. The same applies to “Jason Speaks”.
I therefore take this opportunity to apologize to you and “Jason Speaks” for some of the things I have said about you both. I’m afraid I got carried away. Sorry.
I wish to assure you at this point that I am not a “troll” and that I am as concerned as you are that this site remain troll-free.
As for Miriam K, she may well be what you say she is: a gentile adolescent goofing around. She does, however, make some interesting points and writes very well, so she could also be a satirical spoofer.
Cheers.
Cheers,
‘Anonyma’
“Request: Please only down-vote abusive comments, not comments you merely disagree with or dislike.” ~ Matt Parrott
To the posters who gave me down-votes for my previous non-abusive post: please note you are breaching the new house rules recently set by Matt Parrott.
Good stuff Christian Miller. Keep the truth bubbling in pot ,let not the hypocrites forget there transgressions , when they sleep , when they wake , let them remember.
On a more cheery note I had an idea for the first cartoon section for the OccO , It has to be A Greenspan .I envisage a few cartoons with the over caption–”There is nothing to fear but fear itself ! ”
1st Greeny with a swag heading into an Ethic war zone.
2nd Greeny on the steps of the Gallows with the impoverished mob looking on .(Mad comics could do this good)
3rd Greeny getting a organ transplant in India (just for laughs :O)
4th Greeny at 7/ll buying toilet paper.
Hey ” I” , We hEAR you .Palin and the other woodheads are our Trojan horses .First the fascist lefts/right barricades must be breached.They are the kindling on the fire from which the Phoenix rises .The hotdog decoy stand next to Yawaahs bars.
Any fool that reads this sight and watches MSM deserves the gov they get. Thats the gov , the one you’ve got now.
The system can only be brought to heel by grass roots parties . Anyone projected into the political establishment without broad zealous support would be destroyed , by the cunning ,grinding machinating wheels of the controlling fanatics of the current establishment –who ever they are.
http://www.revilo-oliver.com/Writers/Ludovici/The_Jews_in_England_part5.html
Jews as Liberals:
When, however, as an alien, as a man of strange blood, he finds himself confronted by a national population in which any vestige of the conservative spirit remains, and whose national institutions are hedged round by exclusive rights and traditions tending to exclude the foreigner and his influence, his very lust for ascendancy, irrespective of any congenital liberalism in his being, inevitably inclines him to promote all those liberal principles which are best calculated to eliminate the rigid barriers about him and to undermine their philosophic justification. Thus, wherever he may be, he applies his peculiar gifts, both as a sophisticated intellectual and as a formidable exponent of the will to power, to denigrate all the rigorous policies and measures tending to preserve the typically national character or personnel of the institutions and corporations he finds about him, and becomes a liberal out of expediency in addition to being a liberal by hereditary bias. Consequently, he is always found wherever there may happen to be movements engaged in modifying the time-honoured features of a nation’s character, and for opposing as ‘reactionary’ and ‘fossilized’ those barriers to his ascendancy which are rooted in the nation’s self-preservative traditions.
Jews as Conservatives:
On the other hand, when it is a matter of a Jew trying to get himself accepted as a power by the conservatives of his time, nobody could speak in a manner more persuasive and eloquent about the fundamental principles now actuating German National Socialism than Disraeli himself.
Listen to him on the question of the equality of mankind. “They [the Jews] are a living and most striking evidence of the falsity of that pernicious doctrine of modern times, the equality of man . . . the natural equality of man now in vogue, and taking the form of cosmopolitan fraternity, is a principle which, were it possible to act on it, would deteriorate the great races and destroy all the genius of the world. What would be the consequence on the great Anglo-Saxon republic, for example, were its citizens to secede from their sound principle of reserve, and mingle with their negro and coloured populations? In the course of time they would become so deteriorated that their States would probably be re-conquered and regained by the aborigines whom they expelled and who would then be their superiors. But though nature will never ultimately permit this theory of natural equality to be practised, the preaching of this dogma has already caused much mischief, and may occasion more. The native tendency of the Jewish race, who are justly proud of their blood, is against the doctrine of the equality of man.”
The Jews will be Jews. We need to think for ourselves and what will help us do this is to know what really happened in history and not take the mainstreams word for it.
As far as the Moslems, this is what Revio Oliver has to say:
It would be more proper to classify Islam as a Christian sect or group of sects, since the word ‘Christian’ properly designates all of the innumerable sects that attribute divinity to the Jesus who is the protagonist of the “New Testament,” although, of course, there is naturally great hostility between competing sects, each of which claims to represent the “true religion” and even tries to deny the term ‘Christian’ to all of its competitors in the salvation-business. It is true that Mahomet claimed to be the successor of the Jewish Jesus, whom he, like the Christians, regarded as not having been a christ in the strict sense of that word (i.e., a divinely appointed king to lead the Jews to dominion over the whole world), but as a Saviour who, like Zarathustra, could bestow a pleasant immortality on anyone, regardless of race, who believed the right dogmas while keeping his reason in abeyance.
Direct influence of the Talmud on the Koran is excluded because the Talmud throughout shows a hostility to the Jesus of the “New Testament” and to his successors, including Bar-Kokhba, because those christs didn’t get any effective butchering of Aryans under way. Had there been effective influence of the Talmud on Mahomet, he would certainly have refrained from recognizing the divinity of the Jesus in question and presenting himself as his successor. Islam is strictly comparable to the many Christian sects, e.g., the Huggletonians, the Shakers, the Mormons, the Anabaptists of Leyden, the Elect of Shiloh (followers of Joanna Southcott), et al., which gave their Jesus a divinely appointed successor or coadjutor. The story of Mahomet was modelled on the Christian legend: a virgin birth is, of course, de rigeur for all Saviours, but much less common is a claim that the Saviour’s mother remained a virgin after parturition, as is claimed for Mary in the Gospel of James and other Christian gospels and is claimed for Fatimah (Mahomet’s mother) in the Moslem tradition.
This is nonsense. First, Freud was not a psychologist.
Second, Herrnstein was Jewish, and a psychologist – or more accurately, he was a Behaviour Analyst/Behavioural Economist, and what’s written below is what you should have been tying to understand. If it had been understood, the USA may not have had the economic crisis which it’s now in the midst of. Alas, the USA has censored what it doen’t understand/like.
Richard Herrnstein (1990)
Rational Choice Theory: Necessary but Not Sufficient.
That was the end of the article, published four years before The Bell Curve. How many people here understand what he was warning about? Note: Austrian School Libertarians are not empiricists. Anarchists just argue, scientists don’t.
Didn’t you know?_we’ve had our own version of “rational choice theory”. We call it “the glancing goose theory”. If you breathe it affects us all, collectively.
I was unfamiliar with the idiom, but thanks to you, I am now. You’re right to draw attention to the fact that law can be and often is abused, but whilst law is written in Natural Language, good science is not, so it’s probably worth reading the entire 1990 paper, whilst thinking about the policy chapters in The Bell Curve (1994) if you have not done so already. That our Liberal-Democratic laws/constitutions are written in Natural Language, whilst remaining largely uninformed by developments in science goes unrecognised by far too many perhaps? On the other hand, to some, it’s a great advantage. :-(
Someday,
Firstly, nice use of the word “inveigle”. I had to look it up. Secondly, that is very interesting about the Canadian man that went on WN sites to provoke dangerous comments by others. That sounds like what we have seen here by a few commentators (probably all the same person). Is there a news story about this man? I’d be interested in hearing more about it and if there are any links or anything else.
We all need to be reminded that there are people looking to take advantage of us when we get hotheaded. Thanks.
Just as there are anonymous scotomatic ‘useful idiots’ who distract with trivia whilst actively calling for censure and censorhip of all which threatens their Libertarian Permanent Revolution.
As a working hypothesis just try looking at USA/EU ‘leftists’ as Trotskyites, the very people who were (and don’t just take my word for it, take his) expelled/purged from the USSR after 1928 and throughout the 1930s as subversive shills acting on behalf of the West. What they did was undermine state run industry and facilitate both the decline of unionism and the growth of the Private Sector. That is, in terms of the outcome of their actions (i.e. behaviours) they were Libertarians, i.e anarchists, out to change the statist status quo. They were ‘wreckers’.
“Most violence and violent rhetoric is leftist in origin. ”
Argument only works if you define “everything bad” to be equal to “leftist”, which of course is silly. The Neocon movement is not left wing. It is only required to be in order for the argument to work.