It is no secret that White identity political parties have it difficult in the age of ‘equality’.
If politics is the art of the possible, a culture where Whiteness is anathema makes White identity polities not possible.
Hence, the call to conceive the struggle for the West as a culture war, rather than a political contest: to win the election, we have to first win the culture.
But does this mean that there is no place for party politics in the culture war? Is it pointless to organise politically? Should we forget about contesting elections?
Not at all.
On the contrary, party politics is a key element in the culture war, and identitarian—or counter-cultural—political parties have an important role to pay, even if presently their electoral prospects seem distant.
Establishment Parties vs. Counter-Cultural Parties
Better to understand this role, we need first to understand the essential differences between counter-cultural and establishment political parties. These differences are itemised below:
|
Establishment Parties |
Counter-Cultural Parties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Establishment parties have immediate prospects for real power, so they focus at most on the next election, which sets short time horizons. Campaigning involves taking an intense view on trivial issues, which define the limits of acceptable debate. These parties see politics as a game where they compete mainly against political opponents, and seek a feel-good factor. Their mission is to maintain the existing system and adjust it to suit their preferences when they are in power.
Counter-cultural parties have no immediate prospects for real power, so they focus on at least the next generation, which sets long time horizons. Campaigning involves taking an extensive view on fundamental issues, which are beyond the pale. These parties see politics as an existential struggle where they compete mainly against existential enemies, and seek a feel-bad factor. Their mission is to pull down the existing system and rebuild it in their image once they are in power.
Significance of the Culture War
A culture war means that the battleground is not politics, but culture.
Victory or defeat has obvious political implications, and victory results ultimately in political power for the counter-culture, but the immediate object of the war is to ‘win’ the culture, to transform it in a way that makes political power possible, rather than to win an election and fire the incumbent administration.
Moreover, a culture war is multi-dimensional, because when the enemy is an entire system, every institution, every status system, every source of knowledge is configured to serve the dominant ideology of that system, to enthrone its core values and demonise the ideological enemy.
This opens the way for many different types of activist, in addition to the party political activist, because there are battles to be fought in every area of cultural life.
This also opens the way for methods of engagement that are ostensibly non-political, even if there are political repercussions.
The consequence for those who prefer non-political methods of engagement is that each individual, or group of individuals, may formulate an action plan.
Thus, conceptualising the struggle for Western civilisation is a call for multiple action plans, to be developed according to individual or group areas of competence.
Conceived in this way, party politics is one necessary action plan out of many.
Function of Counter-Cultural Politics
Long time horizons do not mean a lack of political urgency today.
Without a political branch serving as interface between intellectuals and the public, without organisation designed to put ideas into practice, the intellectual counter-culture, however necessary or meritorious, would make itself irrelevant, the realm of a cerebral minority burrowed deep in the catacombs of academia.
Having said this, by their nature, the function of counter-cultural party politics differs from that of their establishment counterparts.
In a democracy (real or nominal), the latter’s function is to renew the legitimacy of the existing system, of which they are the political representation, and any one of which represents a faction with minor differences of opinion.
These parties know that they will be permanently excluded from power if their system is destroyed, so the aim of elections is to prolong the life of that system through periodic changes in administration.
The trick works so long as parties are able to conceal the fact that they are nearly identical and exclude from public discourse anything that questions the system’s fundamental values and therefore legitimacy.
This, incidentally, is where the difficulty lies in democratic system overthrow: in a dictatorship, the sources of power are on display; in a democracy, the sources of power are concealed. In a dictatorship, citizens know their ruler; in a democracy, they do not. (Maybe this is why conspiracy theories have thrived in the democratic West—and particularly in the United States—whereas they have not in the autocratic East.)
From the foregoing, the function of a counter-cultural political party is clear. It is there to:
- Articulate and popularise the counter-cultural position. If no one puts it out there, packed into infectious slogans and stomach-punching soundbites, the abstruse theories of intellectuals, however clever, remain consigned to the libraries.
- Disrupt the consensus opinion. Absent an active political presence, the illusion is perpetuated that the establishment opinion is the only possible opinion, and that the establishment’s different factions represent not simply shades of opinion but entirely different worldviews. By being active in politics, a counter-cultural party shows that the establishment is not the be all and end all of politics. A prominent counter-cultural party, even if commanding a small percentage of the vote, can also have a disproportionate impact, as its prominence and growth inspires fear among establishment parties, and fear compels policy changes among the latter in an effort to drain support from their political enemy. (Granted, often, though not always, establishment parties only make cosmetic policy changes (e.g. Sarkozy or Cameron), but this is still a disruption that slows them down and prevents them from going where they want to go as quickly as they would like to or as openly as they would otherwise do.)
- Erode the consensus opinion. By offering a political alternative, a counter-cultural party erodes the establishment parties’ share of the vote, making them all smaller. A prominent counter-cultural party may still fall well short of winning an election, but the winner wins with a smaller share of the vote, which may put its mandate into question. Sometimes a counter-cultural party becomes so prominent that it can no longer be ignored, as has been the case with the French Front National, which commanded one fifth of the vote in the recent presidential polls—just a few percentage points behind the nearest rival. Sometimes a counter-cultural party will splinter into several others, causing a proliferation of alternatives and increasing the chances of establishment parties being forced to work with its enemies in a coalition when an election results in no overall majority.
- Discredit the consensus opinion. By consistently refuting the arguments, exposing the corruption, mocking the policies, highlighting contradictions, discrediting official data, asking awkward questions, and forcing establishment politicians into defensive or hysterical positions, a counter-cultural party can highlight the flawed, fallible, and fragile nature of the system. A system that looks weak encourages consideration of alternatives. (And often a system is only apparently strong, but is internally weak.)
- Provide an official platform for a strand of dissidence. This is an important element in the process of normalising a dissident opinion, for organisation and the trappings of organisation, by virtue of implying thought and purpose, marks a change in status, from angry mob to righteous movement.
- Organise and mobilise dissidents. (Self explanatory.)
- Normalise dissidence. The more citizens get used to the existence of an alternative, the more prominence it gains, the more they become acquainted with its ideas, the more they meet ‘normal’ citizens who support them, the easier it is for them to consider, or become involved in, solutions not endorsed by the system, particularly as the latter comes to be seen simply as a system serving an ideological clique rather than the only possible reality or the only serious way of doing things.
- Provide professional and economic opportunities outside of the system. A growing party requires more staff, infrastructure, goods, and services. This can provide employment and business to individuals or organisations outside of the system, freeing them from their economic and status dependence on it. A citizen whose sources of money and status come from alternative cultural and economic networks will be freer to speak his mind and act in consequence than one who, dependent on the system, feels he must submit to political correctness less he loses his money and reputation.
- Recruit and develop future political leaders. (Self explanatory.)
Pragmatism or Purity?
The idea that support will go nova if we adjust our message just right is premised on false assumptions: the problem is not one of style, but one of essence.
Obviously, style matters a great deal, and certainly more than truth, but more important for people is being accepted and well-liked by friends, family, or those whose respect they care to enjoy.
A system’s core value defines conventional morality. A message that truly challenges the system will likely be deemed immoral. And if a message is deemed immoral, style may make it less uncomfortable, but discomfort is sure to follow scrutiny.
This is what causes White folk to preface a dissident opinion with stupid phrases like, ‘I’m not racist, but . . .’
This is why White folk repeat the politically correct party line, even if they are inwardly contemptuous of it and do it purely for career or reputational reasons.
This is the motivation behind endless euphemisms, when the real word is ‘Aryanist’.
Morality is important because in Western societies reputation is important.
Thus the way forward is to attack the morality of the system’s core value—to bring about a transvaluation that dethrones establishment morality and replaces it with another.
We know this works because it has been done within living memory, and landed us where we are now—what was once common sense is now reviled, what was once despised is now admired.
In modern Western society the root of evil is the unquestioning belief in equality as an absolute moral good that is worth pursuing for its own sake. Everything flows from that. Destroy that belief and the egalitarian project collapses as malevolent and absurd.
In dissident politics this means that broadening appeal will not come from dilution of the message, but from greater purity—not from passing as egalitarians, or masking that we are inegalitarian, as do pretend ‘conservatives’, but from attacking equality with righteous indignation, openly and ferociously, from every angle, on every level, without hesitation or apology, and upholding a morality of difference with puritanical zeal.
Egalitarians (‘the Left’) campaigned for equality with religious fervour, even terroristically, from day one. They never tried to pass as anything else. Many disagreed, but they feared and eventually respected their conviction.
For us the good is difference (or Quality), not equality.
Everything must flow from that.
If a dissident political party’s mission is to translate the counter-cultural idea into policy, our political parties must formulate policy on the premise that difference, including human difference, is morally good, productive, and desirable, and equality, including human equality, is morally evil, destructive, and repugnant.
Guerrilla Politics
With the above in mind, the focus needs to be on winnable social and cultural issues rather than on (for now) unwinnable elections.
Egalitarians have used a proven method of campaigning that works irrespective of ideology: pick a winnable issue; campaign intensely on it; push for a ‘reasonable’ concession; and, once secured, start all over again. Make them run, and keep them running.
The above is adapted from guerrilla warfare, but it is still used by egalitarians because they still see themselves as fighting a conservative establishment, even though they are the establishment.
When egalitarians campaign successfully their tone is always moral. This works because White folk fear being thought of as bad people (e.g. ‘racists’), which generates internal pressure to yield even if they personally dislike the goals of the campaign.
And since the egalitarian morality is the dominant morality, resistance is inevitably ineffective and the result is victory for egalitarians followed by some form of White flight.
A counter-cultural party is less powerful than its establishment counterparts, so it must resort to guerrilla politics since it cannot fight the establishment on equal terms.
Counter-cultural politicians are guerrilla politicians.
Conclusion
If it is a mistake to think that we can simply vote ourselves out of the present system (if only we get the right Republican or Conservative candidate), it is also a mistake to think that, because of that, party politics is a complete waste of time.
Engaging in party politics on behalf of a counter-cultural cause does, however, imply different rules and different aims to those of establishment politics. Understanding those is key to turning involvement in party politics into a productive exercise.
Facing the Future as a Minority
“I am not racist but,..” You nailed it.
Whites should not play defense, they should be on offense. Instead of “I am not racist, but..” start with a counter accusation, like “No. You are an anti-white supremacist”.
How to attack egalitarianism: Attack the Egalitarian Elite. Loudly tell the masses how Al Gore, Clinton, Jon Stewart and the Jewish Left live in luxury and do not live with blacks, marry blacks, or share their wealth with blacks and poor.
Every one of the functions of a Counter-Cultural party listed above could also be performed by a popular Counter-Cultural media, even costing establishment parties votes (simply by persuading people to unplug from the system). And if that is true, then wouldn’t all the money spent on the particulars of futile political campaigning — yard signs, ballot registration drives, advertisements, etc. — be better spent getting our message out through alternative popular media? If the purpose of an alternative political party is to get the message our there, rather than merely get candidates elected, then why not focus on the message and drop the candidates as superfluous? Are there any specifically political skills that are not also developed by successful media personalities? After all, political campaigning is not the only alternative to ivory tower theorizing.
@Greg Johnson: I believe you’re right on the tactics. The message must first be delivered to the minds of the public and embraced, the politics will follow (from bottom up). Top-down is a recipe for failure; everyone knows who runs the best centralist team in town.
Good thinking the author.
But then…how long is it before we recognize that counter-cultural intellectual movements are an excellent way of eroding/undermining/discreding the consensus?
And then we navel gaze again asking “do we become just like them to beat them?”.
No dummies….we use strategies that work. We aren’t changed by those strategies and it really doesn’t matter if the same strategies were used against us, or who used them.
This is the ancient business of intergroup warfare, just in a modern setting.
Interesting piece. Let me bounce off this line:
It is no secret that White identity political parties have it difficult in the age of ‘equality’.
Notice that in the age of equality, black identity politics has no problem. Latinos, ditto. Muslims speak of their collective identity. And while Asians aren’t politically active, they sure have their own, very cohesive communities with a public identity.
Hmmm. Who, and only whom, is left out of this equation?
If I’m not mistaken it is Whites (once a quite sizable group inside the US and Europe). What does this mean? Clearly we are not living in the age of equality anymore – we have passed that age by (indeed, many conservative Whites cling to the ideal of equality to avoid such things as affirmative action – silly rabbits, they don’t know what the game is about). No, we live in an age that acts and comes close to explicitly stating it is anti-White. Not that all groups are equal but that Whites are specifically not allowed to have the exact same rights as all other groups.
Whites seem to sense this. Politics will be more racialized as we go forward. Think of 2008 – if Obama had been White, there is a strong argument he would have won by a much, much bigger margin. Think about it. Bush had just spent a trillion dollars on a useless war. The stock market had plunged from 14,000 to 9,000 and we had the biggest financial crisis in 100 years.
And yet the Democrats still didn’t win the White vote? Odd. In any previous election it would have been a massive landslide among the Whites for a the other party. What on earth could be different? Well when I look at Obama, a possible solution suggests itself.
He’s black, and most Whites don’t want to support a black, even in the midst of Bush’s epic wreckage. I think this is just another point along the way of America becoming much more openly divided by race, at least when it comes to politics. So, instead of thinking the next 20 years will be like the last 20 years, I think we should consider that things will be quite different. We may not have to spend as much time convincing Whites to vote White as we thought. They are not comfortable saying it publicly and probably won’t for quite some time, but they are already voting in an ahistorical manner.
Something is up.
Our position should be PRO CHILD! (NOT PRO WHITE)
How is a culture destroyed? Are the adults simply killed off? Or is it undermined by the artificial manipulation and neglect/abuse of children from birth onward?
An aggressive pro-child position is the only DEFENSIBLE position that has a chance of gaining the support of a broad base of Americans.
Stop the assault on children and you stop dysgenic memes BY DEFAULT!
@Henry Baxley:
But Whites, blacks and browns are already voting in racial blocks. It’s just that Whites haven’t admitted it yet (the others have). The age where proxies for White Interests were needed will slowly come to an end. We won’t have to hide behind being “tax cutters” or “traditional values people” or “Church goers” or “libertarians”. It will get painfully obvious what motivates the majority of Whites.
Comrade Kurtagic, I agree with everything you wrote. There have been several papers written over the past few years by physcists-statistical mechanics variety-about the “physics” of political consensus. There was a news item about the most recent study on political “Physics”. The basic idea-with evidence to back it up comes down to this:it doesn’t quite take a very large percentage of people with an alternative point of view to shift the majority into a new thought regime. For those of you who know physics, this an application of Ising model to politics. It can be summarized with the simple principle:short range order determines long range order…Steven Jay Gould gave an example of this:the Spandrels of San Marco. Penrose tiles are another example.
Moral of the story:unrelenting agitation. This is precisley how the race-replacement enthusiasts-cultural filth types pulled off their massive transformation of American society. There was nothing magical about.
My fundamental point:What follows from my comments above is that to drive Native Born White Americans into a phase transition that is disruptive to the current political-demographic regime it is absolutely crucial to have the right framework. Events will conspire to disrupt the current arrangement of things…trayvon martin-zimmerman..a possible war with iran..severe draughts in the American South and Americans West..and other social stressors. Having the right framework ready to spring into action without a doubt will drive the Conciousness of millions of Native Born White Americans into a long overdue phase transitions.
I would like to elaborate some more …but I gotta go…gotta attend a First Holy Communion for my niece.
America is entering a state of high social stress..make it work to our advantage.
Alex,
I hope your concept is far more inclusive and wide ranging than the usual publishing and leadership-centric “trickle up” donation model.
This has prevailed in the non-Movement for decades. And the non-results of this are so massive it’s unnecessary to elaborate. If so you are starting to approach the true core of the movement growth problem.
Greg Johnson otoh in his latest comment showed that he thinks the old fashioned publishing & leadership centric donation model is just fine. Of course he’s on the receiving end of the financial transaction.
An extended time-line of struggle definitely implies a sustainable in-group economy, assuming one wants to grow the group or see children born during the interregnum of protracted struggle.
The existing system already provides this economic support for its primary adherents. Full time “Republicans” and “Democrats” are rarely seen outside Washington and the state capitals. These political franchise parties only spring to life and populate during the partisan campaign seasons. The rest of the cycle they are the NEA, the bar association, Goldman Sachs, the synagogue, the “educational complex”, the Chamber of Commerce, etc.
There already is a sizable pro-white constituency-they’re just afraid to speak out publicly.
TOQ contributor Jim Russell was a candidate for Congress in the 2010 election. He was widely was outed by the MSM as an anti-semite/nazi/racist just prior to the 2010 election. The NY State GOP tried to get him removed from the ballot. In a suburban NYC district that’s one-third non-white and with many Jews he wound up getting 36.6% of the vote. He had improved his showing over the 2008 election when he ran for the same office and got 31.5% of the vote.
http://www.rollcall.com/race_detail/district-2010-NY-18.html?cqp=1
So he came within a hair of equaling McCain’s percentage of the district vote despite the fact that almost everyone knew he was a “nazi.”
Yes. And the principle reasons for this fear have little to do with the specific content of far-distant “media”. The sources of the fear are more immediate. The primary ones are: 1) fear of local economic sanctions and 2) fear of Jewish provoked antifa terrorism that selective police-legal enforcement that permits to reign unchecked.
And even if Greg Johnson’s Counter Currents was to start selling 500,000 copies a month of its tomes – that is, if it started to approach the size of the model railroad or R/C hobby presses – it would still do nothing to eliminate the primary causes of the Terror.
@Ex-Pro White Activist:
Yes, far more inclusive and wide-ranging than that. I’ve written about it in a number of earlier pieces. Essentially what needs to develop is a parallel economic and professional network.
I agree that there is a feeling of “we’ve had enough” in the air, and the Trayvon thing set it off for whites. We were/are deliberately targeted by the media, and it’s become painfully obvious to most whites at this point.
Great insights, Alex. Consider helping guide the A3P, as we build a true alternative – which proactively represents our best interests. Merlin
Of course a white political party is possible. The discourse would have to be in a white voice and in a white-centric way, and it could start very easily in local politics around local events, and grow to higher issues. Can’t start with globe-shattering claims, must start locally.
There’s a tendency in these precincts to overstate the dangers of white liberation activity, and a tendency to think that pro-white efforts have to be stated in a voice against others. Keep it in the white voice and in a white-centric context, and you literally cannot be stopped.
Everything seems right. Cultural war is not short term job.
But in some white countries people dont have time left.
White majority stands only on babyboomers shouders. After 10 years most of them are dead and mass immigraton and nonwhite terrible breeding rate means that after 1 or 2 election period whites have no chance anymore to win democratic way. Nonwhites vote everywhere almost 100% their candidate, add some liberal race traitors, jews and there will be no more chance to get majority votes.
@Jason Speaks:
Yes I understand this. I’m just saying that if whites are reluctant to vote in their own long term interests, at least they might be persuaded to vote in their childrens interest.
What kind of parent would ask their kids to run a gauntlet of hostility between National Gaurd troops with bayonets (as in Little Rock) And what kind of parent would subject their kids to being bussed across town only to be assaulted? Multi-culturalism is not healthy for kids because it destroys families, albeit in an indirect way. Sure there are laws against chaining kids in the closet and starving them….after the fact…but where are the laws that prevent psychopaths from HAVING kids?
i have been moderated out in my comments on the counter-productive character of NS , AH, and so on. I have recommended Albert Speer’s Inside the Third Reich as a voice apparently from the other, or, another shore, in our internal debates.
If I continue to be moderated out, I will just leave. Joe Webb
@Alex Kurtagic:
Alex,
I’m completely on board so far. I’d like to see you expand more on your ideas here.
I’ve got my own ideas. These are correlated to reestablishing educational and economic autarchy at the lowest possible local levels.
@joe webb:
Are your comments moderated just temporarily, or permanently trashed? I thought 90% of us thought NS and AH were counter productive. It can be debated, but I thought most of us agreed with that.
I may see this statement differently than others here, but I do not see “difference” as “morally good” – nor even as an issue that relies on a moral judgment. In my view, the fact that whites have different hair colors or eye colors or IQ levels (as opposed to egalitarian thinking that the races are all equal) is not the moral focal point here.
In other words, we do not need to convince unawakened whites that “human difference is morally good” because that’s the same meme the multiculturalists push – i.e. that “human difference” (black skin/white skin, Spanish/English, rap music/Wagner, etc) is what human society needs. Instead, the moral issue here is not “difference is good”, but that “equality is false”.
Distilled even further, the moral issue here is Truth vs Lies. Multiculturalism and all that it stands for is founded on deception. That is its weakness. We need to frame the game in such a way as to convey this idea: that whites are being cheated.
No one likes being cheated.
@joe webb: correction. I checked in again on the Parrott thread. The only thing moderated out was a couple of more personal wise-cracks, telling to be sure, but unacceptable to the moderator.
What happened is that my access to TOO was blocked for some time. I don’t know if this is my computer, or just TOO’s way of telling me or you to shut-up and cool off. So, most of my remarks on Counter-Currents’ fascination with NS and AH was left.
I should also state that Fascism , per se, is something we should discuss, in its generic form. I would even argue that theoretically, fascism is
completely compatible with evolution’s design of our biology. The issue then is governance. The Catholic Church governance is the first item to consider in this connection.
Also, if Christianity is allowed a decent respect on this list, which I assent to, then counter-Christianity in the form of Evolutionary Ethics should also get equal time. I recommended Sir Arthur Keith’s Evolution and Ethics, which can be downloaded from the net, as a great book.
Sentimentality is one thing that is usually easily deplored. However, sadness and loss is not to be ridiculed. Sentimentality is replaced by these psychological states. Rationality then returns one to a more “normal” mental state, and one gets on with life.
When in an earlier post, last thread on Parrott, I talked about “useless people”, that is not to be understood as something I callously tossed off. When I become useless, I have planned for someone to help me Out. And I have kids who will help. Madison Grant’s “sentimental flaw” of Whites is what we need to purge from ourselves. This does not mean the purging of Loss.
Either we toughen up, or we Lose our race. Joe
Caryl,
@Cary1:
I half agree and half disagree. It absolutely must start locally and put the primary focus on the local level. But a “political party” is the worst possible vehicle for white people to use as a primary organization.
1. Elections are extremely infrequent events. They are biennial at best. It is nearly impossible to keep a group cohered in between elections. Even the “Democrats” and “Republicans” make no attempt to do so. Those “parties” are really virtual entities that are used by groups with more a permanent daily existence. Public employee unions, hyper rich Jewish oligarchs, corporations, organized ethnic groups, churches, etc.
2. A “political party” is an entity that ceases to exist at the whim of any state level Secretary of State. Sure, you can ‘fight’ this decision in “court”, and thereby pour still more of your resources into energizing the existing system. This looks to me just like supplying the enemy. And so does the other frequent idea of collecting large amounts of money from white people and giving it to Jewish dominated commercial media to run political ads.
We have got to develop alternative local group structures that are far more organic, self-renewing and even addictive. This doesn’t mean these groups can’t back independent candidates at election time and thus contest keep the political ground contested. They can. But the partisan election certainly can’t be the primary focus.
I think at present partisan political activity will be best used as an excuse to recruit adherents for the more enduring Local Group.
@joe webb:
AH, NS and all that stuff is just self-indulgent crap, if it is meant to be some banner or Awesome Plan we are all to follow. F that. That is a all a waste of time.
Imagine if the Japanese, as a way of getting reparations for their internment in WWII, had gone around dressing up like Kamikaze pilots and shouting their allegiance to the Emperor. It would have been stupid. Good God. I will be glad when the debate about White interests leaves these flakes in the dust.
The fundamental mistake some of you are making is thinking that White people are going to come to any of us looking for a Sacred Creed to believe in or ask us to give meaning to their lives. They won’t. What, may I ask, are you all puffing on? Put the bong down, step away from the pipe.
This is going to be a much more practical affair.
A counter cultural party, or third party, isn’t going anywhere if it “feels bad” about itself, and about White Americans.
A White counter cultural party must feel good about itself, and the accomplishments of White people. It needs to be very positive, and project an air of success.
People don’t want to be associated with losers.
@Tom:
What I mean by the “feel-bad” factor is that a counter-cultural party desires folk to feel dissatisfied with the established system. That’s a prerequisite for change. Other than that, the counter-cultural position has to be positive and constructive, rather than simply critical and destructive.
@MrRennick:
The essay linked to below explains the issue of equality vs. difference:
http://www.alternativeright.com/main/the-magazine/equality-as-an-evil/
The A3P is hiring Activists! http://american3rdposition.com/?p=5178
Right. I just posted a chapter from the book by Merlin Miller and Adrian Krieg which is a position statement for A3P. The link for hiring activists is there as well.
A well written, clear, and concise piece of work. I have been pondering the precise role of counter-cultural parties for some time – marvellous to have the answer so clearly laid before me now.
I read that article when it was first posted but took the time to read it again. I understand the multicultural concepts of “egalitarian” and “difference”, which attempts to reconcile the two of them. And they have largely succeeded, in my opinion. Today, we have institutionalized “equality” between the races (even where none actually exists) and culturally-embedded “difference” (a government-created society of blacks and whites and browns and yellows) to serve the mantra of racial variety.
Because the multiculturalists captured the “difference” meme long ago, I do not see any advantage for white activists to appeal to other whites on the grounds that “the good is difference”. Seeking “difference” in our society is what opened Pandora’s Box to a multiracialized Europe and North America.
Here I must agree with a poster named Hadding Scott, who says Truth is our greatest weapon. I agree with him as I know that you don’t. Even so, it is this dichotomy that has to be resolved, or at least leavened with tactical compromise, before the WN Cause can progress effectively.
@Jason Speaks:
“the age where proxies are needed for white interests will come to an end”
The health of children is not a proxie for white interests. It is the only interest that will insure our survival. I tend to view WNism as a proxie for childrens interests, but it is not very effective. Better to openly defend children directly, and with no explainations, rationalizations, or justifications. There is no SANE defense against being pro-child.
@Jason Speaks:
Of course you are right about this. But you implicitly assume that whatever idea for an intellectual/spiritual movement that someone has, is an idea for *the* movement itself, and not in fact an idea for a component of that movment of which there would be many others.
The individual him/herself will most likley envisage their idea as the the be and all of everthing, but that is to be expected and also welcomed. You need that kind of zeal to make something happen in big reality.
What we need are many different movements that are all intelligently based on start small then grow.
Then at some point in the near future, one can imagine these movements begin to interact with one another, all togethe to change the ambient environment.
In so doing, meeting many of Alex’s (the author above) objectives. As well as many others.
So my point here is, if someone like Matt Parrott who is *known* to be a man who takes real action on the ground, has a personal vision for something. I should say, be interested, be supportive, be helpful, be encouraging.
@Henry Baxley:
You can’t be serious. There is no worldwide concerted effort to destroy brown, Asian or African children – quite the opposite, in fact. Whites and their children and ONLY them are being specifically targeted through a variety of techniques.
Take Tibet. Tibetans can’t defend themselves by saying they are “pro-children”. They have to point out specifically that THEY are under threat and what the treat is.
Or in Darfur, they properly talk about their genocide, not some generic pro-child message.
I have a big problem with the people who say we are doomed when we fall under 50%. As if voting matters.
We can be well below 50% and still take the country back. Democracy is not a law of nature. What matters is that we need to be mentally unified. I think this is coming.
We have been in a period of anti-intellectualism. If you want to reverse our situation, one of the fronts to push on is science/technology/mathematics, and mentor others whites to do these things, and from there you work on group problem-solving.
When we shake off anti-intellectualism we’ll have our mental unity back.
@MrRennick:
What the multiculturalists have pushed is ‘diversity’—as in, having a racially diverse society is good. That is the opposite of what my concept of difference implies.
With regards to truth, what I am saying is that when it comes to persuading people, (1) truth matters less for them than being liked by those they care to be liked by, and (2) style of presentation plays a bigger role in their decision to buy than the fact that something is true. We may not like it, and I certainly don’t, but that’s the reality. So we must keep that in mind if we wish to persuade others to defy convention. Simply telling the truth is not enough, because the truth doesn’t sell itself—it is often difficult to sell because many find it inconvenient; you have to know how to sell it so that people choose to buy it.
@Kievsky:
Even with democratic methods, Whites could be in a strong position with numbers under 50% – if they become racially aligned. Whites will have an advantage over the non-Whites, that being they are all the same race.
All the non-Whites will be separate blocks that squabble. So, we may be in a better position than I have thought because I do believe the trend is for Whites to vote together more and more as a block.
@Jason Speaks:
“you can’t be serious”
Yes I can be serious, Before you can stop white genocide you must address the genesis of that genocide; The social degeneration resulting from generations of child abuse.
@Henry Baxley:
That is not the genesis of White Genocide. Nor does the genesis of it need to be extensively analyzed before anything can be done about it. Do you need to fully understand the generations of “abuse” that led thieves stealing your car, before you inform the world a crime is in progress?
You aren’t even interested in White problems, why are you here?
@Alex Kurtagic:
The folk are already dissatisfied with the system. What is needed is talent, energy, drive, magnetism, good speaking ability and the cunning to galvanize the dissatisfaction.
Share a prominent stage so that you can be on TV or create your own channel.
You can start with Internet TV and Radio like Alex Jones, InfoWars. And a World News blog like Huffington Post. Something that appeals to Middle Class, fills all there news and politics needs on a single site. Comprehensive news aggregator with White twist. Free from kooky words like “National Socialism”, “Aryan this and Aryan that”.
Look at Kris Kobach. He is very telegenic. A3P needs someone like him.
Also, change the name of the party from A3P to “White Republican Party” or something similar. A3P sounds too kooky.
@Jason Speaks:
You got one thing right, I’m not interested in your problems, or your opinion of me. My focus is on the social degeneration (read WHITE SUICIDE) of neglected white children.
The fact that you and many like you can’t connect the dots between the death of marriage and the disenfranchisement of adult white people is not my problem…its yours.
BTW I don’t advocate abandoning everything else EXCEPT the health of children. But I am concerned that many WNs are both unaware and unconcerned with the way their children are being concieved, raised, and cared for. It indicates ignorance and a callous apathy towrd those who represent our only hope for the future.
@Sanjay:
Some of this will occur fairly soon. Look at Takimag – it’s not pro-White at all, but it does talk pretty honestly about race and it continues to carry Derbyshire and Sailer (neither of them WNs, but they do talk very bluntly about race). Why is Takimag important, compared to say, TOO?
Well, TOO is better as a site by far, but writers for Takimag have appeared on Fox – Red Eye to be specific. This means writers from a fairly race-realist friendly internet magazine can go on Fox. I think that is a pretty big first step.
@Jason Speaks:
” Do you need to understand the generations of child abuse that led thieves to stealing your car, before informing the world a crime is in progress?”
Prevent the abuse and your car won’t be stolen.
@Jason Speaks:
“your not even interested in white problems, why are you here?”
My sole purpose in being here is to piss you off. ;-)
David Duke is doing tremendous work as an author, speaker, filmmaker, etc. Would his work be augmented or diminished by running for office again? Diminished, I would say. For the time and money and creative energy that is now going to propagate our message world-wide would be sucked up by futile political campaigning. It is too soon for electoral politics, much too soon. All be alleged benefits of electoral politics can and are already being accomplished by alternative white media. Politics is a costly distraction and self-indulgence when so much more progress can be made with metapolitics, meaning (1) propaganda and (2) community organizing that is not hitched to the electoral cycle.
@Greg Johnson:
It can be a costly distraction if one plays by the enemy’s rules. This would include collecting large sums of money just to give it to hostile Jewish dominated media for ephemeral “political advertising”.
otoh “Politics” can be a source of great strength if used to build and exercise local organizations. The very process of qualifying an independent candidate by collecting petition signatures is an organizational building experience. Local campaigning provides opportunities for contacting people directly on subjects of moment.
This is another point. The electoral cycle can be used for that longer term community organizing. It’s a great time and perfect excuse to go out and plant signs, canvass large numbers of people door to door and even start holding functions. And it’s a time when people’s political interest is heightened above the normal level.
We are in a protracted asymmetrical war and it must be fought asymmetrically. We are weak in terms of Federal Reserve money. And we are presently weaker in terms of organization. But we are far stronger in terms of numbers and local presence. We have to look to maximize on our strengths and minimize our weaknesses.
Cadre recruitment and infrastructure building is where we are at.
@Jason Speaks: “Whites seem to sense this”.
Yes, and what do they do, especially if they are dependent on the status quo?(the system) Well, they kiss ASS, all the more, we’ve all seen it. Whites never take risks. If affirmative action is the policy of their company,(usually stated disingenuoulsy something like, ” We are an equal opportunity employer, etc.”, then the “Human Relations” officer will no what to do, wont’ he/she. Up to now, European-Americans acting as a group, as we have seen all other groups do, is a yet to be realized ideal.
@Jason Speaks:
What we need is “White TV” like FOX which caters to White middle, upper, lower class.
Our approach must be daring, resourceful and uninhibited. That is why the first thing Whites need is move to the top of Human energy pyramid.
Doctors, Lawyers, professors, Movie Producers, Businessmen, Venture Capitalists, who can build and thrive in a White environment.
But first we need complete rejection of Jewish media. Throw out TV, video games, magazines, everything.
@Greg Johnson: To show you how insane and hypocritical things can get when David Duke is the subject, I remember how a University in California,(I won’t give its name) had him slated to do a speech at the Student Union, this was some twenty plus years ago. He got canceled because he was considered too “racist” after the Latino organization MECHA, among others objected. Never mind that MECHA, is practically on every college and community college campus in California, including in some highschools!!!!!!
As White Nationalists, our political stand is theoretical and ideological, but not practical, because the political system is closed to us. Ordinary White people are opposed to us, due to decades of Marxist brainwashing.
They will only come to our way of thinking as a last resort, when things have become unbearable for them. Until such time, we will remain politically impotent. The masses of White asses are indolent, selfish, greedy, ignorant and stupid. Only when their backs are to the wall will they act in their own best interests. Until such time, we may as well hold our breath and go fishing.
@Ex-Pro White Activist:
It is a great weakness of American political parties today that they depend on the media more than local networks to get their message out. So yes, we need real community organizing. But does that need to be tied to a political campaign.
Would Duke be more or less effective in getting out his message even if he campaigned according to your model? I think not.
The Occupy movement and Kony 2012 are examples of community organizing that are not tied to electoral politics. The South Africa Project is an example of our own people doing similar organizing work. I would much rather see local, small scale organizing like that than political campaigns.
@Greg Johnson:
Err. I meant that I think that Duke would still be less effective, even if engaged in grass roots politics.
@Greg Johnson: Distills down to:
Why waste time on CONVENTIONAL “Politics” when the game right now is PRACTICAL politics, the fine art of changing how people think rather than what they do once every two or four years in a little booth.
Glad to see you commenting here, Greg.
@Gregor:
Yes, we need to work on changing what people do and think 365 days a year, not just election day.
Such as endlessly pushing books, speeches, and videos about Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich as a “metapolitical” method to reach the great American public?
Winning With Hitler, Greg?
Moral: an unhealthy obsession with a dead dictator is an even costlier self-indulgence, ladies and gentlemen.
Is the concept of white nationalism an American creation?
I really don’t see how an ethno-nationalist movement would result in anything but conflict and civil strife especially in Europe which most of the immigration anyway is from the new EU countries where I think Poles make up the largest ethnic group.
Yugoslavia proved to be the death nail of the idea of a pan-nationalist movement in Europe.
The impression I get is that WN are modelling themselves on Zionists.
@joe webb: Thanks for qualifying your comment on “useless people”. I abhor the idea of people as units of production. This thinking invites culling of the inefficient, unproductive.
@John Rennick:
Regarding the Hitler question, see these articles:
Greg Johnson, “The Burden of Hitler”: http://www.counter-currents.com/2011/04/the-burden-of-hitler/
Irmin Vinson, “Some Thoughts on Hitler”: http://www.counter-currents.com/2011/04/some-thoughts-on-hitler/
You know, John, we’re not going to stop talking about Hitler just to please bedwetters.
“American Third Position” sounds rather, beta. Calling one’s outfit anything but “first” is a step toward emasculation. The semantics of defeat are insidious specters. Cast them out!
Sanjay was right about the kookiness factor. Baron Evola, Codreanu, Peron, etc. were solid folks. Our racial leaders can utilize them…in private. Furthermore “Third Position” is a broad category lumping together Aryanists, Catholic reactionaries, Orthodox revolutionaries, Pan-Nationalists, and so forth.
Try “National Democratic Party” for example. Something so innocuous that it becomes bold.
a year or so ago I spent a actually a couple hundred dollars on an ad in a local Palo Alto newspaper advertising a meeting for Liberal Recovery. Got not one phone call or email. Maybe the humor was lost on the zombies.
Then I have thought about tabling at Stanford University and then thought about it some more….cops and bruises seemed the logical next event.
I have been thrown out of the local lib book store for rational comments on race at book events.
Of course, one could just table at a public place….maybe a little less dangerous than at a university…and then what?
I have done crime studies and presented them to local gov’t venues…zero apparent effect. Of course, they remember me, espec with burglary rates soaring in Menlo Park and Palo Alto from the nearby mexer hood in Redwood City.
In cities less liberal, I suppose one could have a little effect with this stuff.
Probably white folks need to start getting killed around here by mexers before anything happens. The burglary rates have doubled in the past Year in Palo
Alto, 70% in Menlo Park, 50% in Redwood City…one year.
HOme invasions would help I guess, and so far there have not been many.
Almost every day I chat folks up on my rounds…some are moderately interested and sensible, and others are knee-jerk, espec the technical people who believe they know Everything.
It is truly amazing. Sometimes I deliberately insult a demonstrated fool, usually male, about his failure to have children. Call him a fool and a coward, and sex crazed animal. That shuts them up.
Usually, I have a little success but mostly folks do not want their comfort zone disturbed. LIfe begins when one leaves one’s comfort zone. Ha! Most folks are just cowards , and that is just the way it is.
Worse before better. Joe
@Trenchant: Trenchant, right, agreed. Nothing to do with production/economics, or , almost nothing, keeping in mind the free-riding loafing darkies. Resegregation and sink or swim for them. could care less if they sink. j
my guts squirm when I hear the term “community organizing.” What community? Somebody please tell me about it and where this “community” is.
The young folks around Alternative Right have experience with
“organizing” at colleges. I would like to hear about it. J
@Greg Johnson: ” bedwetters” is what Greg Johnson calls people who oppose NS and the AH cult. Actually, it is a marvelous projection on Greg’s part, with his juvenile delinquent/transgressive reflex.
When we face up to the Reality of our Present with zero comparable conditions to Germany ca. 1920s, then we put the “meta-whas?” out of business and force them to get a real job instead of milking the Dreamers and Fuhrer wannabes. J
@John Rennick: @Greg Johnson:
You know, John, we’re not going to stop talking about Hitler just to please bedwetters.
Oh, so the only reason someone might be against the use of dead dictators or Hitler is because they are weak bedwetters. The pro-Hitler crowd always gets around to juvenile name calling soon enough.
Let me ask the Hitler lovers this: Can we at least be as crafty and politically aware as Hitler was? Hitler wasn’t some autistic child blurting how much he hated Jews on a street corner somewhere. He used imagery and verbiage that resonated with his target audience. He was interested in real political success.
Hitler wouldn’t have hung around 99% of the people who talk about him today, because they would have been such political liabilities.
@Jason Speaks:
Something is up. I cannot endorse the people who made this ad, but there is a lot of appeal to implicit whiteness.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ-4gnNz0vc
Having purchased a copy of Mein Kampf, and reading it, I am amazed just how astute the man was. Since I had been told by Marxist professors that he was the personification of evil I wondered if they were right or not, considering they did not define the word evil. He seems to be into white culture and he did not go around quoting books and academics. He figured it out all by himself.
It was quite interesting also that there was a sermon by a rabbi in the introduction telling me exactly how I was to interpret this book. I think a few more people need to crack this book open and make their own decisions. It is so taboo to actually read what he said.
@Jason Speaks:
I agree that folks are not looking for a creed to believe in, many may be looking to see if we are remotely reasonable or a bunch of angry misfits. Some days it doesn’t look too good for our side.
We should concentrate on offering reasonable arguments that get people thinking. When was the last time anyone even questioned whether or not it is evil to return an illegal immigrant to a country as rich as Mexico? If I break into your house and decide I like it better than mine does that make it evil to throw me out?
@Jason Speaks:
Have you at least read the Irmin Vinson article linked above? It changed my views 180º in 2010 when I first read it (now it’s also available in printed book).
@Alice Teller:
The fact that there are 20 million illegal invaders in this country should be hammered home whenever we get a chance. Even if more aren’t coming due to recession, we still have a those that are here. This does resonate with people. It is obvious that no country can allow tens of millions illegals to simply wander around at will.
And yet we worry over North Korea or Israel’s borders, but not our own. From experience, that argument does resonate with people.
@Jason Speaks:
A much bigger problem is that these parasites are multiplying and breeding from 20 million to 60 million. This is genocide through aggressive breeding.
I learnt a lot from this site and Kevin Macdonald’s books. Thank you to all my interlocutors here.
Soon I will write a strategy book to advance and defend this rich and beautiful western civilization, white women and white peoples.
@Chechar:
Yes, but what does that have to do insisting that we must all embrace Hitler, which is what we often hear. No one spends much time here bashing Hitler, rather his fans go around calling everybody wimps and moral cowards, for not recognizing his greatness. No one cares if Hitler is reexamined or the truth told about him.
But we are always being told that somehow we are running from him out of cowardice, if we don’t virtually wear Hitler buttons everywhere we go.
@Sanjay:
Yes. If if tens of millions of fast breeding non-blacks were dropped in the Congo, everyone would call it genocide.
My, my, my.
Looks like someone wants to play for keeps.
This is outstanding.
Hasn’t anyone seen videos and pictures of the rallies for Ron Paul? His thousands of supporters are young, white males! They are enthusiastic and determined to take over the Republican Party and defeat the Democrats. It is an uprising, a readymade white nationalist movement.
You will wait forever for a third party to bring White Americans together.
@rhondda:
I have found the same to be true in my experience.
Good luck on your journey!
RE the Hitler question:
Jews and their allies and tools have engineered modern politics and culture to set the white race on the path to extinction. It is a genocidal system, pure and simple.
That system includes people’s moral sensibilities, which are trained to regard white racism and all forms of anti-Semitism as evil in themselves.
Another part of the genocidal system is the status system that trains all people to think that past manifestations of white ethnocentrism are all hopelessly stupid, evil, crazy, and hateful, including the Confederacy, the KKK, and the Nazis.
It is the height of naivete to think that we are ever going to save our race in the political realm while leaving that that moral outlook and status system intact and unchallenged.
You can ritually condemn Hitler, the KKK, and the Confederacy all you want, but as soon as you present a credible challenge to the existing system, you will be labelled “just like” Hitler and the rest of them. That’s an unintended compliment. And of course, in terms of all essentials, it is correct.
So you might as well prepare yourself for that eventuality. It strikes me that at that point, you have two options: to deny the truth because you will not challenge the existing status system, or to take the status system on.
Mike Polignano gave a really good answer to that kind of smear in one of his essays in TAKING OUR OWN SIDE. In essence, he said: Our position is the only moral and enlightened one, and if Nazis and the KKK agree with us, that is to their credit.
I don’t think that WNs today should be Nazis or KKK members in white sheets. But the hallmark of political enlightenment and maturity for me is connected with how one treats these sticky subjects. We will never free our people until we first free our minds from the false morality and false status system that have been engineered to annihilate us.
People who wet their beds at the specter of Nazis and the KKK are just too shallow in their understanding of the forces arrayed against us, and too beholden to the enemy’s moral outlook and status system, to be of any use in our struggle.
Or they are mere “concern trolls” trying to keep our people in mind-forged manacles so we will never be able to resist our genocide.
@S Fowler:
The Ron Paul voters are primarily white, but they are ideologically opposed to White Nationalism. They are color-blind individualists, not racial collectivists.
Given that White Nationalism is broken down and up on blocks, I get the desire to be part of a movement that is going somewhere. But the only trouble is: the Ron Paul movement is not going where we want to be.
If Ron Paul’s libertarianism boils down to nothing but “Sound Money for the Brown People”: http://www.counter-currents.com/2011/06/sound-money-for-the-brown-people/
@Greg Johnson:
So – we are also going to reject thousands of white Americans, who are energized, angry, and meeting together to see what can be done because they do not agree with you on every particular. If there is a rulebook that no one told me about please direct me to it.
I am tired of living under Jewish domination. I do not hate black folks, I am simply tired of the ruin they bring. I am dug in, here, where I live, so I guess I am not a white nationalist either. Does white freedom count for anything?
@Alice Teller:
Every particular? No, the libertarians just disagree with White Nationalism on every fundamental.
@Sanjay: Brother Sanjay? You have to be kidding, right? Alex Judas Jones? Alex ‘The Arabs Own Hollywood’ Jones? Alex ‘Nazis who have been dead and decomposed for 60 years are behind the resurrection of the jewish Bolshevik Communist USSR right here in North America’ and the ‘NWO’ Jones?
Holy geography, Batman. Sanjay appears to be clueless.
Alex Jones is working for the enemy and his #1 job is to steer our focus off of the real enemy’s identity and onto long dead and decomposed Nazis.
@Greg Johnson: Not all do! Granted many do, but neutering the Fed also cuts funding for many of the minorities and sundry other hangers-on, leaving the European descendent peoples free to get ahead on their own merits. A natural hierarchy would re-emerge.
Didn’t Ron Paul say during the Republican debates that immigrants are the new Jews? I hate this squeaky voiced weirdo. Ron Paul is a corporate whore and a race-replacement enthusiast. I hate every Libertarian that was ever born. They are evil.
@Greg Johnson:
There is nothing hard to understand about why people flinch away from using Hitler or NS imagery. Is there a riddle somewhere? While Hitler and NS have been demonized, there were real problems with both that most Americans would not sign off on.
Why is this one dictator held before us? I mean, Napoleon was a big leader, but we would all giggle if a party dressed up wearing Napoleon era memorabilia or seemed eager to recreate his empire. And so, Americans and the British – as well as most Germans, have a serious reason to never think of being associated with NS. It’s not on our radar screen. Honestly, if you guys didn’t bring it up all the time, it would be a non-issue.
I do think he should be studied like all historical figures as objectively as possible. And the horrible brand of shame the German people have had to live under should be lifted. But honestly, it might not be so hard to avoid the N*zi tag, if you guys wouldn’t drooling over him all the time.
@Greg Johnson:
Why is Counter Currents publishing book after article on Hitler, when there were never more than a few thousand N*zis in North America? Yet, the KKK had 5 million members. That is a multiplier of 1,000.
We’ve had American Presidents praise the KKK in the past, as well as high ranking senators who were members of the KKK in modern times! There is a deep cultural history of the Clan in America throughout the South, Midwest and parts of the North. Many people had family members who whore the sheets. Yet, not too many books on any of the Grand Wizards that I know of from any of you guys. Why the difference?
It sure seems like a fetishistic fascination that surrounds Hitler more than anything having to do with practical politics. And by the way, I am not recommending bringing up the Klan. It’s actually easy to ignore and so is Hitler. Except you guys keep putting up pictures of German N*zi soldiers on your site, than saying, “Golly, why are always asked about this”.
Jason,
When I look at Counter-Currents, I see a lively variety of topics being discussed. There was recently a collection of Hitler stuff in commemoration of his birthday, but there’s not this obsessive and fetishistic dwelling on Hitler that you’re imagining.
You’re doing the same thing to Greg about Hitler that you did to me about Traditionalism: strawman and hyperbole. Everybody who’s anything other than a strict materialist and pragmatic “mainstreamer” is a sinister and insane buffoon wallowing feverishly in the divine mysteries of Osiris. Everybody you disagree with is a crazed obsessive retard who’s hysterically barking nonsensically and making us look bad.
For goodness sake, if we don’t follow Jason’s perfectly arbitrary template of what should and should not be discussed and to what extent, they might laugh at us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbk2GIp9M9I
Merely refusing to abide by the imposed taboo against discussing Hitler and his legacy (a legacy which still impacts our movement, unlike Napoleon’s) is not the same thing as singularly and monomaniacally parading around in Nazi uniforms and living in an anachronistic fantasy realm.
The only person being all buggy-eyed and wound up about Hitler is you.
The point about hitler from Joe Webb is well taken. But still I regard the man as a genius,loyal to the German people to the end, and a Collosus of a warlord of unforgettable historical relevance. He was both idealist and realized of ideals on Earth by power.
Of course we shouldn’t play dress up nor wave the gammadion. And his methods were for his time. We need to find our own lightening. But we can learn and talk about him and express admiration if we please.
I have known a lot of successful older folks in 70s and 80s who never bat an eye at positive Hitler remarks and a lot of them remember when he had the worlds admiration too before the war. I fund the reflexive Hitler hate is also worse in some places than others. Joe is out wear in Cali; I am near Chicago. To be frank I have met a lot of normal non-WN folks from Chicago who like Hitler. A lot of east Asians admire Hitler, many many Hispanics do, even some blacks.
Hitler is far more popular than “white nationalism” I am sorry to say.
I remember when a teenager I first read MK. In a walden books- they used to stock it. It was always a big seller. he spoke to me. I was moved and yet afraid that such insight was taboo. I knew that must mean the world was somehow distorted in a way that I did not yet understand.
The next book I read along those lines was international Jew by Henry ford. Got it as a gift. From a very successful kinsman. all before the Internet.
People here can do as they like. Some here know each other some don’t. We all don’t need to act and think the same. I love to read Joe’s stuff and Greg’s too.
As for N S what else is there really? Liberal democracy? You can’t keep any republic built on Enlightenment premises permanently racial. The rich will aleays betray their race Libertarian? Please. Nonexistent. Marxist-anarchist? Just as nonexistent and hypothetical
as libertarianism. What is china? Ns. What is japan? Ns masquerading as liberal democracy. What was mexico under the pre- nafta PRI? Ns and pretty frankly so, in favor of the hybrid mexican socalled race. Then plutocracy took over with nafta.now what is Mexico just another plutocracy like the USa. Oh that’s what the USA is anyways, a plutocracy plain and simple. Carto’s been saying that for decades and on thy he’s always been right.
National socialism or racial socialism, if we want to start being honest with ourselves, is our
political philosophy. Like it or not.
national socialism, or racial socialism. Whichever. Let’s quit pretending and shitting ourselves over this. It’s as old as Plato’s Republic.
@Matt Parrott:
Perfect reply. Thanks.
@Anty ep:
He was a politician and in the end a crazed tyrant that lead his people to a path of destruction and gutted Europe like a fish. He turned the Jewish people from a pariah to a protected class via the Holocaust.
The misery and death that madman inflicted on Europe can’t even be comprehended by his American supporters.
His supporters also don’t get that many of his surviving victims and American soldiers who fought them had children and they learned from them what a scourge the Nazis were. You’ll never win them over, you won’t even win over the whites with a smidgen of conscience and humanity.
As it stands this fetish for Hitler and the Nazis plays right into the hands of the Jews and the Libs.
@Jason Speaks:
“There is nothing hard to understand about why people flinch away from using Hitler or NS imagery. Is there a riddle somewhere? While Hitler and NS have been demonized, there were real problems with both that most Americans would not sign off on. ”
If the Nazi/Hitler supporters were the least bit politically savvy they’d keep their beliefs to themselves. They don’t get these beliefs are radioactive to mainstream Whites.
At the very minimum Whites need to be politically organized at the community level(politically and economically), so when events transpire we can take advantage of them. And we don’t Nazis for this, This can be done purely on economic, social and crime related issues that they can relate to. They don’t need to read Mein Kampf or crackpot literature from some American Nazi to get it.
Many of them are already aware of the minority problem but don’t know where to turn. The same with dealing with speech suppressing PC/MC and affirmative action. None of this popular with whites. Find a way to leverage this discontent, other people and political parties do all the time. La Raza does, the Blacks do it, American Indians do it. Heck for these groups just the skin pigmentation is enough.
@Trenchant:
I don’t want a mixed-race society with a meritocracy. I want a white homeland. Libertarians don’t want that. Life is too short, and the demographic threat too real, to be trifling with non-solutions like libertarianism.
@Jason Speaks:
The reason I have published a good deal on National Socialism and other European fascist and New Right movements and nothing on the Klan is that the Klan was pretty much intellectually vacuous. It simply doesn’t have as much to offer us today.
We have published very little on the Confederacy either, but the system they had is not what White Nationalists want anyway. Indeed, for all its aristocratic pretenses, the plantation system is just the prototype of the present system importing non-whites to enrich oligarchs at the expense of the white working and middle classes.
That said, the intellectual work of Southern writers is very useful to us, from John C. Calhoun, America’s greatest political thinker, to the Southern Agrarians, America’s only indigenous anti-liberal intellectual movement (until ours!). Eventually I would like to find a writer who would like to focus on the Southern intellectual tradition for Counter-Currents.
@Matt Parrott:
I’m afraid that the argument regarding Hitler is not as one-sided as you portray. Like Jason, I am all for investigation of Hitler and any corrections made in the search for truth are fine with me.
However, as a white American I insist on the right and duty to honor my ancestors. My father and uncles fought courageously against Germany – not to free the Jews, but because Hitler, allied with the non-white Japanese, declared war on us. I will not cast scorn on their sacrifice by carrying the enemy flag. I resent those who attempt to brand every thread here as well as everyone who supports this site, with a swastika. Obligations of loyalty begin with the family and extend outward. To mock those of us who feel this way as bed wetters and with silly videos is insulting. If you boys want to change the heading on this site from White identity, interests and culture to the National Socialist, Hitler fan club then I will know that I belong elsewhere.
@pessimist: @pessimist:
Really, the next thing you’ll be telling us is that Hitler started the Second World War.
Sobbing in chiches and war propaganda and telling us not to “go there” is not going to prevent people like me from serious, objective, historically-based, non-fetishistic examinations of Adolf Hitler and National Socialism. If that is a deal breaker for you — if you think that your movement will never get anywhere with people like me around — then you need to realize that we are not going to go away. So maybe you are just wasting your time.
There will never be a form of White Nationalism that is “respectable” to the masses as long as the minds of the masses are controlled by Jews who tell us what we may respect and what we may not.
You are obviously attacked to one of these threads of Jewish influence, but given the nature of the internet, there is no way of knowing whether you are pulling it or being pulled.
@Greg Johnson:
That’s “attached to one of these threads of Jewish influence.”
@Alice Teller:
Alice, does honoring your ancestors preclude determining whether or not they were dupes and pawns of evil men? Because that is something that I would like to know.
@Greg Johnson:
Ron Paul supporters are not ideologues; they are enthusiasts. That’s how a race nationalist movement develops – it is necessarily an organic process, not an intellectual exercise. The Germans did not have to wait for everyone to read and understand Alfred Rosenberg’s The Myth of the Twentieth Century before becoming impassioned race nationalists.
Go to RonPaulflix.com and watch and listen to the crowd at UCLA or at Texas A&M during one of Paul’s appearances. If it isn’t an incipient white nationalist movement, I don’t know what it is.
@Greg Johnson:
As I said, I love history and the search for truth. But there is a very big difference between that and brand Hitler. The actions they took were based on the information they had at the time. They did not live outside of history anymore than we do. Keep up the insults – I am sure that will we me and millions of other Americans over to your side.
Originally posted at VNN Forum years ago:
Commenter 1:
If you are asking if Hitler cared whether America remained dominated by Jews, yes he cared. If the Germans had won WWII they would have spread Nazi doctrine by radio, film, and television all over the globe and certain parts of America would have come under it’s influence. As Francis Parker Yockey wrote in Imperium, a political idea needs a state in order to expand across the world. Now if the Third Reich had become a massive Empire from the Atlantic to the Urals, the culture and philosophy of the Empire would have inspired large parts of the Western White world, including South America.
Commenter 2:
Good points, Otto. I can see Uncle Wolf’s problem. Imagine trying to tell 1940’s White America that in 50 years their country would be controlled by jew banking and media, overrun by third world scum, race-mixing with niggers, jew-led foreign wars that never end, Whites-only hate crimes, unheard of taxation, debt, usery, black power, mex power and faggot power!
They never would have believed it!
Commenter 3:
Yes, you are absolutely right and it’s also the reason why the senior citizens who did grow up in that 1950′s All White America still cling so strongly to the idea of Hitler as Demon. They never needed Hitler to be anything else but evil because they were protected and satisfied in their All White World, but for those of us who did grow up in later decades, either 1980’s or 1990’s we see very clearly the minority-oriented Communist Jew chaos that Hitler was trying to prevent long before any of us were even born.
Let the truth be told: America really lost WWII because they fought on the side of those who would one day enslave them.
(Italics added)
@Alice Teller:
My objection was more to Jason’s style of argument than to his position regarding Hitler.
Did somebody ask you to stop honoring your ancestors? Please. This is precisely the hyperbole that stifles rigorous discussion and thought.
Now I’m flapping a big red flag with a swastika in the breeze while spitting on your forefathers’ graves? Seriously?
I didn’t call anybody a bedwetter, though I stand behind my parodying Jason as shrill and silly. He’s trying to frame us as Hitler fanboys, which is preposterous.
…
@S Fowler:
It is becoming increasingly clear that some here are not interested in white freedom unless they get to control it and dictate the acceptable terms. They and only they have all the truth and the ability to wake people up. Anything less than perfection on their terms is to be scorned.
@Matt Parrott: I did not suggest that you personally were guilty of all of the listed offenses. I said that the argument is not as one-sided as you suggest. It is nearly impossible to get through one thread on this site, no matter what the original subject, without someone praising Hitler. This strikes me as a deliberate attempt to brand us all. It is entirely reasonable to object to this without being unbalanced. If I was interested in someone dictating to me who I must admire, I would never have come here in the first place.
@Henry Baxley:
Henry, I wonder sometimes about your posts, if you are one of those abused, neglected and abandoned children coming from broken and divorced homes, of which you so passionately write and voice yourself about. It would almost suggest that you have experienced it all first hand. You make valid points, but disregard the points of others about different ideas. Hear others and be heard, or read and be read, chill.
I would still say there’s a large disconnect going on. Right now, a hostile Octopus has an iron grip over every element of your life and while it functions, every single idea, movement, tactic will be compromised… from Alex Jones to Ron Paul and even David Duke is not above human failings. You actually think any leader can resist the temptations of million$ ? or threats on their family’s lives? honeytraps etc? Because i don’t see any original Knights Templar forming in this society and if they did, most people would want to argue with them.
It strikes me as delusion to think anything else is worth discussing beyond first exposing/removing/pacifying/neutralizing the octopus.
@S Fowler:
Movements follow their leaders, and Ron Paul is a libertarian. I know it is fun being a part of an enthusiastic crowd. But that crowd is not going where we want to go.
@Greg Johnson:
Ron Paul may be a Libertarian, but he is the focus of a huge, grassroots movement that isn’t Libertarian and he is wise enough to know that those thousands of people cheering him, cheering his wife, booing the wars, cheering the Constitution, booing the Patriot Act and the NDAA, cheering homeschooling, raw milk, and hemp, booing the Rothschilds’ Federal Reserve and federal entitlement programs believe that they are part of a revolution.
America is a white nation, founded and built by European Christians. When the Paul campaign uses the slogan “Restore America Now” it is that America his supporters envision.
@European:
I think you will find that those who have experienced something first hand at least know something about that subject. In my case my own personal misfortunes led me into both the study of developmental psychology and a more or less NS world view (they are related you know, for ill or good)
In my zeal, its possible that I may have sumarily disregarded someones opinion without giving it the consideration it deserved. If so that was a mistake on my part. I would also like to note that my very considered opinions are disregarded more often than not, which is dissapointing to me too, but I try to carry on.
Democracy; Government by default
@S Fowler:
Ron Paul is positive proof of the degenerative nature of democracy….The more stupid people vote, the stupider they get.
He is not handsome enough to be elected outside the area he is known in, because all people see on the msm is this ugly little old man saying things they don’t understand.
Democracy is not just a beauty contest, it takes money too!
@S Fowler:
If Paul’s followers are as you say, then their relationship is based on his deceiving them and them deceiving themselves. You certainly seem deep in self-deception. I don’t have any more time to waste on you and Ron Paul.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DVyXPIcd6s
@Chechar:
The above is a must-listen, 4 minute YouTube audio of Greg Johnson on Ron Paul
@European:
Child development is important. Hitlers family was so dysfuntional he decided to do something so that other kids wouldn’t have to endure similar treatment. whether he was conscious of the connection is debatable.
One thing is almost certain. He suffered maternal neglect and paternal violence at a tender age.
Coming to a theater near you; DEMOCRACY! starring Larry, Curly, and Moe
@Greg Johnson:
True enough. A lot of this hand-wringing over Hitler and National Socialism reads like classic concern trolling and discourse policing. The problem is that it is hard to disentangle the concern trolls from people who are simply uninformed. Despite everyone being White, WNists are a very polyglot group. Given that people have different styles, temperaments, interests, educational backgrounds, and awareness of the issues, there are going to be legitimate differences of opinion. In such a polyglot environment, it makes it easy for the concern trolls to integrate themselves into our web site communities, pass themselves off as people of good faith and cause mischief.
@Alice Teller:
It makes perfect sense. Adolf Hitler stood toe-to-toe with the Jews, communists, liberals, degenerates, and petty capitalists of his day. In other words, Hitler opposed the exact people and forces driving Whites to extinction today.
Given this, I suppose my question for you and other Hitler hand-wringers here is why don’t you admire a man who attempted to defeat the parties who have been driving Whites to extinction since the end of WW2?
@Henry Baxley:
I am also interested in developmental psychology, Henry. However, we must be extra careful about this interpretation of Hitler. See my long article “Alice Miller’s nonsense about Hitler”. I say “careful” because in other TOO thread someone has almost accused me that, because (like Hitler) I was abused at home, that raises “the question of psychological stability and health”: a slanderous statement that, alas, I could not respond because that thread was immediately closed after that bizarre statement.
@Jason Speaks: “Something is up.”
You’re right. Something is up.
I started out as your opponent with both of us wasting our energies belittling the other and I have watched you grow into the constructive contributor to TOO you are now, Jason. I don’t always agree with you but why do we have to move in lockstep to share the same general passions and sentiments?
I like how your strategies are evolving. I’m hoping you are only one of many “canary in a coal mine” (s) concerned enough with our collective destruction to raise your voice and offer solutions – another of a growing body of concerned white citizens looking for the ways and means to adopt constructive and practical solutions to our present predicament as marginalized and demonized white people in the countries we created with the sweat of our brows, the strength of our backs, our natural intelligence and our innate creativity and respect for fairness.
You’re doing good and I thank you for your efforts.
PS I mistakenly posted this comment to the wrong thread before discovering my error and reposting it here. I would like to see a way for us to remove our own inappropriate or carelessly posted comments. sigh…
@Matt Parrott:
I’m the only one who is puzzled by the fascination a few White Nationalists have with Hitler? No, I think a lot of us are weirded out by it. And frankly, it is the other side that brings Hitler up, usually to bash everyone else.
@Jason Speaks:
Can I ask who do you perceive to be proposing the use of Hitler and NS imagery? Among the noteworthy NS sympathizers in the American WNists scene, George Lincoln Rockwell used it. He has been gone a long time. William Pierce did not use such imagery when he was alive. Greg Johnson does not support using such imagery. In fact, I know of one and only one active group that does; it is the organization known as the “NSM,” which styles itself the “National Socialist Movement.”
@Matt Parrott:
When I say “the other side brings up Hitler to bash people”, what I meant is Hitler devotees bring him up to bash people who don’t get the love affair.
@Alice Teller:
If you notice, the Hitler devotees unfailingly attack the character of people who are skeptical of Hitler, specifically their lack of “guts”. How is one to respond? Maybe we can all go sky diving to prove we are “mas macho” as well. The premise is that there is reason to be skeptical of Hitler that is based in logic and fact, only pure weakness of soul and fear of public scorn could motivate such lily-livered cowering. Which, rather neatly avoids facing any of the problems Hitler presents.
@pessimist:
“Hitler was a politician”
He was not a politician, he was a statesman. Politicians say what most. people want to hear. He told them what he believed. He didn’t lie. Also, a politician would not have gambled his power on his personal dislike of Jews and Communists…Politicians HAVE NO BELIEFS, save personal greed and glory
“He was,in the end a crazed madman who caused suffering etc.”
True. which proves he was not a politician, but rather a statesman willing to sacrifice everything for his beliefs. As politicians are devoid of beliefs, principles, etc. They would have sued for peace when the going got rough in the hope of saving their skin.
There is no evidence that I am aware of that AH was a liar. on the contrary, all his speeches and the written record reveals a consistant theme throughout. Something you will never find in a politician. Insane yes, cruel yes. genius yes, delusional yes, But he was no lying politician!
Democracy; Government of the passing buck
@Lew:
I guess I will have to take time to demonstrate why I don’t find Hitler a model to follow. You put me in the position of having to point out what are flaws from my view. Which, I suppose will just prove how lily-livered I really am. Or if I do state why I am skeptical of Hitler, I become a “concern troll” …. ewwwwwwww!
Anyway, I will try and summarize why I don’t think Der Furher deserves quite the place of honor you give him in a bit. Again, I think he is interesting, he did some good things for Germany, and had a very difficult crisis in Germany to deal with (communists, etc). But I’m just not sold on Hitler the man or the leader. I’ll try to organize my controversial, “Hitler may not be all that awesome” essay in time.
@arthurdecco: @<a
Well thank you, I appreciate it. It does help to think about things "out loud" and get feedback from others. Of course, there is always the risk of some personal friction, but that goes with people who have strong opinions. Thank you for your contributions as well.
Although I may disappoint you with the next post who knows! Feel free to say so, no hard feelings.
@Alice Teller:
By the way, the irony of all this is that in most political discussions elsewhere, I often find myself defending Hitler against attacks. He has been demonized into some evil carton character. And I do think that while our soldiers were brave in WWII, we may have to face that the whole war itself was tragic. And that we were manipulated into fighting for the sake of the USSR, the most evil regime in history. I think grownups can have that conversation.
@Henry Baxley:
The name “Henry Baxley” had me thinking your were a man.
@Lew:
He declared war on my country and ordered his men to shoot and kill my kinsmen. That is a good enough reason for me. There are dozens more. I am not a scholar or expert on him. I am saying that if a decent white American comes here looking for a new way because he hates being told what to say, what to think, who to admire and who to despise. He will only meet with a new set of masters here.
It is certainly true that it is natural to mention him from time to time, if he has admirers, that’s fine with me. However, the kind of insults thrown at anyone who objects to this site being his fan club is not only tiresome, it is damaging to the larger cause.
He was not the all-evil one or the all-holy one. He had some interesting ideas. He gambled and lost and millions
died, his own people went through hell, and his opponent is stronger than ever. Not my idea of the best role model.
I have a strange preference for men who win.
@Greg Johnson:
The “Ron Paul Revolution” isn’t Libertarian, Greg, it isn’t even about Ron Paul. It’s just that he has become the focal point for an implicitly white, nationalist movement. There is a Libertarian Party and a Libertarian candidate for president; if Libertarianism were the driving force behind the movement wouldn’t you expect Gary Johnson to draw the crowds? A high percentage of Ron Paul supporters are not even Republicans – they have to first fight the establishment Republicans before they can even begin to fight Obama.
White nationalism is biological, that is to say, It is a political response to an existential threat to our race.
@Jason Speaks:
I agree, I am inclined to be persuaded by Pat Buchanan’s book, Churchill, Hitler and the Unnecessary War. That does not mean I am required to cheer for him or risk the wrath of his NS boys. And, yes, they are very quick to leap to personal insults. It is just not clear to me, ( I am after all, only a lowly woman) why I should consider it a big improvement to move from Jews insulting me, my religion, heritage and forebears, to having all of the above insulted by white men?
Excuse men now, I must go back to bed wetting, hand wringing, and cringing in fear that someone may laugh at me.
I have, after all been warned!
@Alice Teller:
First off, I’m glad you acknowledged your lowly status as a woman, it’s about time. I wouldn’t want you to incur the wrath of one of the free roaming beheadment gangs. And while I say that jokingly about beheading, I think this identifies a very weird blind spot on the part of many WN. They accept among their ranks men who literally speak of such things (in carefully delimited situations to be sure!), and they have no problem with it. They truly seem rather perplexed that people would be deeply offended by talk of cutting off a woman’s head, videotaping it, and showing it publicly. Goodness, what prudes some of us are!
Any attempt, for over a year, by me to point out how utterly beyond the pale this is has pretty much fallen on deaf ears among subset of WNs. I don’t hear many of the fellas around here saying, “You will stop saying things like that on our website”. No, instead you rather get a dull silence (which one fears could be taking for approval). And you get people with some stature in WN, who in the midst of my complaint over beheading comments months ago, said that “we must accept everyone, including woman-haters”. This is bizarre. They have no problem with violent woman-haters. But if Hitler makes you recoil, oh boy, that is unacceptable!
There is an odd tone deafness to it, because I don’t think they endorse misogyny and certainly not beheading. But it’s as if they just don’t get what the brouhaha is about. The attitude is almost like, “well yeah, he said something about hating women and wanting to behead them, but what’s that go to do with sitting down to sup with him?” Uh, everything.
And I see the same weird tone deafness about Hitler. They don’t seem to get it.
@Jason Speaks:
It would just be sad and a little funny if it were not for the fact that it works against the larger cause. Our folks desperately need leadership and guidance, not scorn, insults and bullies.
@Chechar:
I understand your concerns about linking Hitlers actions to his adusive childhood. Certainly there were valid existential reasons for his adult behaviour in addition to his PERSONAL misfortunes.
I also agree that Psychohistory is while having some validity, is WAY over the top…One would think that Nations that haven’t had a war in their recent history had no child abuse at all.
As for as people thinking I am crazy because I was abused as a child, they’re correct! If the average American is sane, then I must surely be a raving lunatic. The only difference between them and me is I am honest and they are still in denial.
How can one live in the U.S.A. and believe its Gods special gift to humanity without being crazy as a loon and not even know it. At least I can say I know WHY I am crazy. I can say that I am no longer IGNORANT.
But unlike Hitler, I don’t exclusively blame the jews, Blacks, or anyone. Not even my mother (God rest her soul) for my neglect. I don’t blame PEOPLE. The problem is their sick and dysgenic IDEAS…such as everyone has a right to have (and raise) children. Even two aids-ridden, drug addicted, violent psychopaths with a combined IQ of a watermelon! My own parents, who were ignorant, poor, but decent hard-working farm workers who could barely support themselves let alone six kids, should have been offered a government incentive to be sterilized after the first child. That money could have enabled mother to stay at home with him and helped him to get an education.. Of course I wouldn’t be here, but who would know?
For good or for ill, there is no separating an adults behaviour from his/her childhood.
Likewise, there is no separating a society from the way its children are raised. The reason our society is dying is each generation is, thanks to democracy, sexual freedom, etc. more ignorant than the last. And the more ignorant they become, the more they neglect their kids, and on and on
@Greg Johnson:
Nothing in the libertarian ethos stands in the way of separatism or the desire for dissociation. And de-fanging the opposition in a material sense whilst isolating them socially, as opposed to forcibly shipping them out (whereto?), seems decidedly real-worldly.
In case anybody’s jumping in late. Nobody at any point in this entire thread attempted to censor or even scold anybody for having a negative view of Hitler.
The debate was about whether favorable/taboo discussion of Hitler should be censored, with those in favor of censorship paradoxically interpreting resistance to censorship as a form of censorship of some curious ineffable sort.
The bottom line, of course, is that there are a variety of lines which can be drawn in discourse. Obviously, TOO is across the “discussing Jews” line. And, evidently, it doesn’t concern itself much with the “discussing Hitler” line. There is a very wide range of organizations and outlets and there’s surely one which is a close enough fit for just about anybody. If having Hitler discussed frankly and comprehensively in the comments section is across your line, then perhaps TOO isn’t right for you.
Counter-Currents definitely isn’t right for you.
What’s not going to happen is something as vast and diverse as the pro-White community on the Internet uniting around a single and final decision on where those lines will be drawn. That’s just not how the Internet works. Everybody gets a discursive space. I didn’t make it like this. If you have a problem with it, take it up with Al Gore.
If victory really is as simple as stopping Greg Johnson from posting about Hitler on occasion, then you’ve already lost. Because even if you can thwart Greg Johnson, some other spoil sport somewhere else will step over the line. Bear in mind that you’re already “over the line” for a large subset of White Advocates when you frankly and directly discuss the Jewish Question. Many believe that merely addressing the Jewish role in our plight is tantamount to saluting a Nazi flag and spitting on the graves of our forefathers.
P.S.
In these cases of anti-women trolls bashing or threatening our women (as women), a constructive response is to contact me about it and I will gladly deal out some actual factual censorship.
@S Fowler:
“The name Henry Baxley had me thinking you were a man”
The name S. Fowler has me thinking your a chicken
@Chechar: And yet Johnson believes in the power of “social shunning” of Ron Paul’s supporters. Ironic.
A corrective to Johnson’s anecdotal understanding of libertarianism vis-à-vis open borders:
The Case for Free Trade and Restricted Immigration
http://tinyurl.com/kko7u9
@Trenchant:
Can I ask where are these libertarians other than yourself who see broad compatibility between White nationalism and self-determination and libertarian theory?
No one seems to be arguing or pushing for racial separation based on libertarian theory. CATO isn’t. Reason isn’t. Ron Paul isn’t. Lew Rockwell, Justin Raimondo and the other lib writers sometimes labeled “paleo” libertarians are not.
If these libertarians care so much about the individual’s right to free association and property association, why aren’t they bombarding the Internet, airwaves and mainstream editorial pages every day with arguments for repealing the Civil Rights Act of 1965 based on property rights?
The Civil Rights Act conspicuously tramples White peoples’ property rights by requiring forced integration on private property. Yet the libertarians are strangely silent.
I am familiar with one person who has made serious attempts to justify separation using a libertarian framework: Hans Herman Hoppe. For good or ill, he is not very influential in libertarian circles.
Libertarianism is complete waste of time as a system of thought for many reasons. One of them, from a White racial perspective, is that apart from one serious thinker (Hoppe) the libertarians from top to bottom have exactly no interest in applying the ideas to help White people.
@Matt Parrott:
How about slurring decent honorable white men who faced the real world as they encountered it with decency and honor as dupes? Pretty close to spitting on graves to me.
It is entirely possible to critique WWII or any other part of our reality without resorting to adolescent, cheap shots that insult and demean our own people. If free speech is your highest value – it is your site, not mine. I just regret that you do so in the name of white interests.
@Henry Baxley:
A woman Henry? What is the meaning of discussing the affairs of the world with men….you’ve embarassed us all by this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w
@Matt Parrott:
Certainly TOO and Counter-Currents have the right to publish whatever they want. And no one at TOO is censoring non-praise of Hitler, I haven’t felt censored. I don’t think anyone was accusing TOO of that. We were just trying to respond the accusations that we don’t appreciate Der Furher purely out of cowardice.
Now, as for myself, I am timid as a kitten. Just the thought saying something others might disapprove of makes me blush furiously and I do quite often urinate all over myself at the thought of transgressing social norms. But even though that is true, I don’t think that is what drives my ambivalence about Hitler, or my dismay at those who unreservedly praise him.
@Alice Teller:
Our servicemen fought with courage and honor in WWII. In fact, they did so well that they won. If they were indeed “dupes” on some overarching political level, then that should be determined and discussed frankly with an eye towards guaranteeing that it doesn’t happen, again. Wait…let me re-phrase that: “…guaranteeing that it stops happening.” As we speak, hundreds of thousands of White American soldiers are being duped into an unjust and disastrous war. And thousands of them are dying.
It’s not my site, and I haven’t used my moderation functionality at all in this discussion. I’m speaking with you about this as an equal, on the same level. While it has awkward implications for our forefathers and what they gave their lives for, I think we owe it to the servicemen who are being disabled, emotionally scarred, and killed as we speak and to the lives of future servicemen to have a completely frank conversation about history.
I can say, personally, for myself, that I wouldn’t want my death in combat to be used as the basis of an emotional plea to avoid a conversation about whether or not the combat I was involved in was just or unjust. I would want the sort of rigorous dialogue and scholarship to take place which would have the highest likelihood of arriving at the most complete and accurate understanding of what’s best for my people.
Being a Traditionalist, I see your concern as beside the point. Once an enlisted man swears an oath of service, he’s no longer morally accountable for his actions. He’s to be judged by how well he followed orders, regardless of what those orders were. It doesn’t matter if a warrior is duped or not by his sovereign leaders and generals. That’s outside his sphere of responsibility and accountability and has no reflection on him whatsoever.
@Henry Baxley:
Henry, I am genuinely sorry that your childhood was unhappy. I certainly agree that good parenting is vitally important and that liberalism has made being a good parent much, much harder. I just ask you to consider that damaged people will use whatever they have at hand to justify their behavior. If they did not have Christianity they would use something else.
The other steps you suggest requires us to be willing to play God and declare that we have the right to decide who should live and die. I admit to being tempted at times, but those slippery slopes have earned a bad reputation with me.
@@Alice Teller: Alice Teller:
Both of my grandfathers and four of my great uncles fought in WW2, all in Europe against the Germans except for one of the uncles. All four of my great grandmother’s sons were minding their own business farming and running businesses until they were drafted and sent to Europe to kill their German kin. And for what? To make the the world safe for Bolshevism and post-WW2 American democracy, that is, to make the world safe for the people, forces and ideas driving Whites into extinction. Thanks to Franklin Roosevelt, my grandfather was not around when my mother was born.
Where my grandfathers and their brothers dupes? Of course they were. Saying that is no dishonor to their memory. Calling a person a dupe in the way I think Greg Johnson means it is not an insult. A dupe is simply a person who has been misled, which is exactly what they were.
Not too long after my grandfathers and their brothers returned from the war, the US federal government paid them back by forcibly integrating the South. Literally at gun point, the US government forced Blacks into the public schools just as my Mom and aunts were reaching high school age. The Blacks promptly destroyed the schools and every other nice public space along with them. They turned nice neighborhoods that my grandmothers and great aunts used to visit alone as young women into places where you are now likely to get killed.
Of course they were dupes.
@Matt Parrott:
Why do you keep twisting my remarks. I pointedly said that no subject should be off limits. I simply ask that the discussion remain on a decent level of civility and that resorts to cheap adolescent shots at our people be at least discouraged.
The shot at my father and uncles were not made in an objective, academic discussion about just and unjust war. I raised my relatives to explain why I do not wave Hitler’s battle flag. The responses were personal, deliberately demeaning, and entirely in the spirit of calling people bed wetters if they disagree with the author of the piece.
Please, if you want to allow any and all insults to our folk, by all means do so. Please don’t try to justify it with lofty sounding excuses.
@Lew:
I repeat, the causes of the war are not an issue here. I simply decline to praise Hitler. I object to being insulted for refusing to do so and offered my reasons. The response was a deliberate insult, not a discussion of the causes of WWII. Perhaps we have very different ideas about honoring our parents.
@Mickey Meadows:
LOL I like the part about their (my) brain short circuiting from too much knowledge… when you guys get a clue, maybe your brain will short out too ;-)
@Alice Teller:
If paying drug addicted idiots to get fixed is a slippery slope, what would you call dropping a newborn into a bottomless pit of misery and despair? an elevator?
@Matt Parrott:
You mention the discussion of Hitler over at CC. Now, CC has every right to publish anything it wants, and analyzing positive traits of Hitler the man, or any positive impact of his policies, is very legitimate. However, I wouldn’t call what CC is doing “discussion”.
I see the word discuss defined this way: to consider or examine by argument, comment, etc.; talk over or write about, especially to explore solutions; debate.
I don’t really see much debate or exploration about Hitler there; it mostly comes from one viewpoint. I may have missed it, but it seems like virtually every article and book is pro-Hitler; often very pro-Hitler. We see “discussions” of his statesmanship, his star power, his greatness.
Now that is all within CC rights and some of it may be correct. But there is something slightly dishonest in acing like, “oh yeah, we’re not afraid of talking about Hitler”, when in fact, what is happening is praise and hagiography. It is their right to say what they wish, but they seem to “discuss” Hitler the way Fox News “discussed” the Iraq War (although at least Fox had a few token liberals on).
If they have examined Hitler and honestly find him worthy of such a lofty status, it is their right to say so. But it’s ironic that they don’t more explicitly state it, since they imply those who don’t cotton to Hitler are merely timid bed-wetters living in fear of public opinion.
@Henry Baxley:
Slippery slope???? we are falling off a mountain and your worried about a slippery slope?
@Lew:
Yeah, I think that your comment is fair. CATO is part of the Beltway set (war’s fine, as long as it’s to protect that vulnerable little M-E democracy), Reason is another neo-con outfit when it suits them, and I am sorry to say that Rockwell distanced himself from his paleo views (I, for one, believe it was him penning the newsletters). Now I don’t have any insider information on this, but my supposition is that avoiding all race issues was what Rockwell deemed necessary to get the Ron Paul campaign up and running. I believe his calculus was that turning off the money tap (“End the Fed”, etc.) is more politically saleable and works to the same end as head-butting the MSM/$PLC/ADL.
Raimondo had some interesting articles on the Israeli connection to 9/11, but I think was probably given a stern talking-to.
Dulcis in fundo, Jews are all over the libertarian groups, but then what makes this any different from any of the neo-NS groups or fora? LOL!
@Lew: @Matt Parrott:
Gentleman, be careful with the word “dupe”. We all understand that their was treachery involved in WWII, but the term “dupe” has a specific meaning:
dupe: a person who is easily deceived or fooled; gull. 2.
a person who unquestioningly or unwittingly serves a cause or another person
Dupe is always suggestive of some dimwitted clown that is easily fooled. Someone who is tricked easily in all areas of his life. Given that both of you and myself would have served in WWII quite enthusiastically at the time, that means 99.9% of the human race is a dupe. If we define it that broadly, the term has no meaning.
No, please don’t call them “dupes”.
@Lew: There is a site drawing together those who I’d call traditionalists, anarchists, racial-realists, and nostalgics. Andy Nowicki, whose name is on the TOO authors-list, is a contributor. I recommend their Mission Statement as a thought-provoking introduction. They won’t be bullied into removing links to CODOH, IHR, TOO, which is my litmus-test for intellectual honesty.
http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/whowe.htm
Moderator, why is Parrott’s material in blue? I thought blue was reserved for the author of the article? Joe Webb
He’s in blue because he’s a moderator.
@Alice Teller:
@Alice Teller:
By the way, I think I mislead you into thinking Bob Whitaker had demeaned the bravery of soldiers in WWII. He did not. His complaint is about their after war conduct – specifically that they allowed their sacrifice to be turned into a Holy Sacrifice in favor of Multiculturalism and All Things Anti-German. It was obvious that the whole meaning of the war was being re-framed, from originally fighting the Japanese and German Militarist Aggression (the way they would have thought of it) to a war against “racism” and for open borders. And in time, virtually a holy war against All White Societies.
It would have been helpful if WWII vets had spoken out against that. A few words about the humanity of the Germans they encountered would have been nice. I have heard vets say those things in person, but there was never any official reaction by any public figure (veteran) to set the record straight. And little desire to do so. There is a sense in which, in exchange for endless praise, The Greatest Generation remained silent about how history was rewritten and how we were lied to.
Indeed, the gist of Browkaw’s book and the recent hoopla around The Greatest Generation is to praise them for their collective sacrifice for some Socialist Multicultural Paradise. They should have told them to shut up and get their facts straight. Most just ate it up.
@Jason Speaks:
“Duped into going to war” gets more than 9,000 hits in Google.
@Trenchant: For what it’s worth and speaking as a longtime libertarian freelance adherent/fellow traveler/hanger-on, I fully agree with both you and Lew. I think it’s worth noting, however, that Rockwell publicly dropped the paleo- prefix within three or four years of Rothbard’s death and, rather more to the point, within a year of Thomas Fleming’s magazine’s publication of several articles going after libertarianism (and all who sailed in her) hammer and tongs. He didn’t quite call Rockwell an idiot or a traitor to the West or a dupe (there’s that word again) of the commies, but he came pretty damn close to doing all three.* Besides, any de facto alliance they had was, of course, rooted in affection and admiration for Murray, and only a mug would bet on any alliance like that long surviving the loved one’s demise.
My own moment of despairing for libertarianism as a label I could proudly clip to my breast pocket came when that grossly overweight crypto-commie creep Rod Long was handed the JLS editorship, on grounds that I still cannot discern. He and all the other Randolaters ought to be seen as a major embarrassment to anyone who has gotten over the intellectual equivalent of adolescent acne.
*Besides, I’m sure there was tension over the fact that Fleming is a convert to the church of Vatican II and Rockwell has strong leanings to Traditional Catholicism—even though his failure to see that there is a necessary relationship of high tension between the gospel of Mises and the Gospel of the bearded guy in the sandals is an astonishing blind spot. I’ve put this at the bottom so that the 77 percent of commenters hereabouts who think all Christians are wankers or worse won’t blow their lunch before they finish reading the relevant bits above.
P.S. Whatever you do, Br’er Bear, don’t get me started on Tom Woods!
P.P.S. Do you have any idea how browned off you leave me when you use a Latin expression that I have to look up?!? Do I have to petition the Obama crowd to declare this Show Some Bloody Respect for Old Farts Week?
@Pierre de Craon: Ageism, there should be a law against it.
Yeah, Long is one of those awful left-libertarians (whose real beef is with authority and hierarchy, period).
Hoppe knows all about political correctness, after the witch-hunt he provoked by anodyne comments about gays and time-preference whilst at the University of Nevada. I’m going on memory now, but (Rabbi) Israel Kirzner had Hoppe evicted from The Freeman after some very unexceptionable comments about the relative brutality of pre-war NS vis-à-vis Stalin’s USSR. Got the ex-Messerschmidt pilot Hans Sennholz to mow him down (others fell under the old Luftwaffe’s ace’s aim, too).
Rand’s an embarrassment to both literature and libertarianism. I prefer my comic character to be in visual novels.
About Woods I know next to nothing, re-cap the Mylanta.
@Henry Baxley:
Yeah, those sketches are really funny. I’ve linked to that one before I think. A bit naff linking to the same thing twice but I jus’ couldna help et
@Pierre de Craon:Those newsletters giving Ron Paul grief contained the odd nugget, as per this extract from HHH’s opus magnum, Democracy: The God that Failed (http://tiny.cc/eplkdw):
“Incidentally, the much maligned Jewish Ghettoes, which were characteristic of European cities throughout the Middle Ages, were not indicative of an inferior legal status accorded to Jews or of anti-Jewish discrimination. To the contrary, the Ghetto was a place where Jews enjoyed complete self-government and where rabbinical law applied. See on this Guido Kisch, The Jews in Medieval Germany (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1942); also Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, “Hebrews and Christians,” Rothbard-Rockwell Report 9, no. 4 (April 1998).”
“Incidentally, the much maligned Jewish Ghettoes, which were characteristic of European cities throughout the Middle Ages, were not indicative of an inferior legal status accorded to Jews or of anti-Jewish discrimination. To the contrary, the Ghetto was a place where Jews enjoyed complete self-government and where rabbinical law applied. See on this Guido Kisch, The Jews in Medieval Germany (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1942); also Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, “Hebrews and Christians,” Rothbard-Rockwell Report 9, no. 4 (April 1998).”
It just won’t do, this trimmed-down version of persecution.
@Pierre de Craon:
I have no objection to Libertarianism per se, but in what ways can this philosophy be brought to bear as a part of the solution to the current situation?
That we should be free as individuals to:
- choose to organize and take collective action?
- establish and nurture ethnic business networks?
- institute uber-organized and planned build-ups to legal test-cases with the purpose of securing equal protection from racism and defamation for white groups that wish to collectively pursue white ethnic interests
But then what about the need to restore and revitalize, say, the white working class, which has been thoroughly disrupted and left dysfunctional by mass immigration, typically into their heartlands.
Where does libertarianism fit into things at the current time, as being part of the solution?
I am deeply saddened that my bedwetter comment has so deeply traumatized some of the commenters here. I hope the generous outpouring of solicitude here will prove some small aid in what is sure to be a long hard road to recovery.
@Greg Johnson: I think this speaks to a chronic prostate weakness. Pumpkin seeds are an old folk remedy for this.
@arthurdecco:
Good show Arthur!
@Anty ep:
As people have said, any rule against this sort of talk would be totally unenforcable. So perhaps when making a decision whether to praise Hitler or National Socialism, people might be encouraged to develop a clear sense of the cost/payoff involved with respect to the prospects of new people being willing to join with us intellectually, and also of existing but anonymous people to become more visible.
One consideration is that the White nationalist camp has been intensely demonized in the mindseye of mainstream Whites. It can become hard to remember just how intensely a person is bought into the idea that these people are supremacists, full of hate, racist, violent, but most of all the reason why the N*zis and the Holocaust happened. The N*zi link is the single biggest reason why mainstream Whites detect WN. And they do feel like they detest it…it isn’t fear for a lot of them, because they’ve been so immersed in this since basically birth that they have never even questioned it. Just like you wouldn’t question that you should put some pants on before leaving the house. It’s in deep.
But. The same mainstream Whites increasingly have strong private feelings about the unfairness of the situation facing whites, and are constantly brought into contact with the double standards facing whites, and the abject insincerity of other groups with respect to any real commitment to anti-racism as a real principle rather than just where whites are concerned.
But all the while, these people don’t regard their concerns as aligned to White Supremacist and Hate, which they continue to despise. Just a couple of years back I was proud that I made a point never to read ‘extremist’ websites because they couldn’t be trusted not to push a hatefilled N*zi agenda.
When a mainstream white guy finally gets to the point he is beginning to question whether the WN movement is really as demonic as people say, or is that just more bullshit, the moment will come when he takes a very cautious tentative first step. He’ll quickly browse to a WN location and begin reading a little. He’s still expecting the neo-nazi hate white supremacist image to be confirmed, but he’s lonely enough to want to be proven wrong and find that actually it’s other people like him waking up to the peril and injustice.
If what he finds in that moment is Hitler and NS praise, then 9 out 10 times he will go away and never come back and just try to live out his life as best he can and not think about it.
If when that day came for me I had come here on a bad day, I think I would have left and never come back. Because that was what I wanted to do. I wanted my mainstream principles and sense of optimism back. I was missing it like hell.
That first time for me turned out to be a David Duke video. I had heard of him and believed he was a KKK white supremacist scum. I went to his video expecting, and I think wanting, the worst about Duke to be confirmed, so I could go back to my life without guilt.
This is how it is for people waking up. It’s terrible. Your whole world and value system and assumptions have collapsed.
So that was how thing were for me as I pressed play on Duke’s video. Ten minutes later I knew I couldn’t ever go back to that life. And I was glad too.
@Jason Speaks:
Duped again??? I think the answer is two-fold. My father was a very strict segregationist, believing, as many Southerners did, that it was the only possible way for the races to live together in peace. I have a letter he wrote home while recovering. It relates that they treated black soldiers at the same hospital but that it was so good to see anyone from home that he didn’t have the heart to object. War changes young men in many ways.
In addition, I doubt that they were the first or only group to be slack in monitoring praises heaped upon them.
I heard many men praise the courage and tenacity of both Japanese and German soldiers. They seemed to reserve their contempt for the French.
@Alice Teller:
Funny, the poor French. Well, I, myself, don’t blame the rank-in-file veterans very much, if at all. But those who acted as spokesmen for such groups should have seen what was going on. I was told that people hated the Japanese in WWII, not the Germans, by family members who were alive at the time. But if you notice, the Japanese are never mentioned anymore. The Greatest Generation gets it’s media praise if, and only if, it focuses on attacking Europe. Somehow that has to be stopped.
I get along with some black folks as well. I’m not one who dislikes other races (I doubt many of us are), we just want our own race and way of life to end. And the evidence of history shows that societies need to stay pretty much all White for that to happen.
@Alice Teller:
Just curious, did any of these WWII vets you know discuss their basic training experiences? Whitaker maintains that back in those days the program was to beat each soldier down, physically and emotionally, as a way to gain obedience. Of course, basic training has always had that, but he thinks it was more extreme during that period, which led to vets coming back and believing you could never really challenge the government and win.
I remember one family member talking about how he was kicked repeatedly by a Sargent and told to thank him after each kick. He said it was clear sadism, nothing good came from it, except beating you down.
Now, Whitaker maintains that obedience training in Europe is even more intense, not so much in the military, but in all areas of life. People have always remarked on the lack of joy you see in Europe, as if all the initiative had been drained from them. That’s one thing I don’t like about Great Leaders that wear uniforms and have children pledge person obedience to them (I believe we have examples of that in recent European history). I don’t want people groveling before some all power State or Emperor.
@joe webb:
Joe, speaking of the culture war, I’m curious if you have any insight into how America changed from around 1935 to 1965. I know 1935 is before your time, but maybe you have a feel for it. I read that in 1935, if someone had been caught dealing drugs to a school kid, one of the parents probably would have shot them. And no jury would ever convict. Does that sound true?
By 1965, of course, all that had changed. People rather passively accepted bad behavior and the only action a parent took would be to talk to police (might be different in parts of the South). Seems like after WWII, some big cultural changes came through America. This is before the immigration of non-Whites, so this would only among the Whites. Did you see people stop taking initiative and turning the government in a big way, over that period? Did you see fathers stop taking a decisive command and control position by the early 1960s.
Thanks
Pessimist said there was a politician, a crazed tyrant, who gutted europe with war, and elevated Jews.
That MUST have been referring to Napoleon Bonaparte? Lol
Excellent article. The broad parameters of this discussion has gone on in Australia for some years. Your prescriptions and conclusions ring true.
Some people reject the party model and maintain their ‘purity’ as the perpetual outsiders. Regreatbly, without some party as the hub of a wheel, it’s a fiz. In Germany, would the autonomists and New Right mean much – without the NPD? It seems that the culture war has to creep beyond the soft-boundaries of the sub-cultures and intellectual circles.. A party can achieve that. f the sub-cultures have a certain intellectual power, are they powerless unless their ideas gain some application?
We might also ask whether the groupuscle, which might be activist and favour one line or other from the sub-cultures, can spin with greater effectivess when linked to a party. Like in France the GUD and French Work and others and respective parties from the {New Order to the PFN to the FN.
Contesting elections is a fruitless business (except perhaps local ones) much of the time. But if it legitimizes (in the minds of ordinary folk) a ‘radical’ group, then inroads may be made.
I have found Europeans and Germans ten times more “conditioned” to hate Hitler than Americans.
And white people ten times more reflexively negative about him than Asians or Hispanics with whom I whom I have discussed him on many occasions across decades.
The sad thing about WN is that you find yourself in opposition to the sheep. The shepherd must fight the wolf and can no longer graze ever peacefully. The shepherd must be vigilant and active and aggressive. Yesterday at Mass there was a discussion of this concept.
It can hard for those in a process of awakening to transition.
@Anty ep:
Did anyone challenge the church about promoting sanctuary cities and open borders after mass?
@Jason Speaks:
Can’t help you there. I heard first hand accounts of The Bataan Death March and camps, as well as the Battle of the Bulge among less well known encounters. Next to them, I don’t think boot camp held many horrors. I was taught, that many vets believed that Roosevelt had advance knowledge of Pearl Harbor, but it was not accepted by all.
@Jason Speaks:
If I may intrude, I think that the war experience did have a decisive effect on acceptance or at least lack of resistance to the 1960′s. It manifested in many ways, but the bottom line was that men who had fought WWII did not want their kids to go to Vietnam. Odd, how life works.
@Alice Teller:
Very interesting, well that sounds about right. You know, I hate it, but I think someone is going to have to demythologize Hitler before this is all over. As someone pointed out, most of his views on race would have been acceptable to most American presidents prior to WWII. Hitler and NS were certainly racial, but I wonder if they are given too much credit for thinking unique thoughts on those issues.
What thought on race did Hitler have that would have been alien or offensive to Woodrow Wilson? I’m seriously asking. Hitler did have more insight into Jewish issues, but Germany lived with tons of them, after all.
@Alice Teller:
There was a lot of spoiling of the kids of that generation, that helped give us the Baby Boomer Hippies.
@Alice Teller:
There may be some rewriting of history going on by everyone. WWII was not seen as a race war in any sense by the British or American at the time, nor frankly by most Germans I don’t think. They were fighting for Germany, not for White people everywhere. Hitler had a good opinion of other Whites, especially the English and Nordics, but I go back to what I said long ago – he wound up invading a lot of White countries for such a White Nationalist. Now, the other side will say that in every case, there was a unique reason but that seems to strain credibility.
Part of the motivation was to empower GERMANY, not necessarily all White people. Britain and Germany were having a power struggle, after all, the kind that Europeans had had for centuries.
@Mickey Meadows:
If you want to laugh. Check out “bad women drivers” on youtube. the one with the chipmonk singing for background.
Yes I am aware that statistics show women to be better drivers.
@Jason Speaks:
It was seen as a race war with the Japanese. I never heard anyone in my childhood condemn the use of nukes in Japan. With Germany it was a bit different. Since so many Americans are of German extraction, great efforts were made to distinguish Germans from Hitler and his crowd. Many felt they were freeing the German people, not the Jews, from a tyrant.
Yes, boomers were spoiled. That too is understandable. One half of the boys who graduated with my mother’s class in high school did not return home. This loss inclined many to let the young be free and happy while they can. The price had already been paid. What a pity that we cannot play history in reverse.
@Anty ep:
Perhaps then you think A3P should go onto a 4th Reich style platform and speak/talk/write about Hitler and National Socialism.
It’s potentially a good thing if you conceptualize yourself as shepherd. However in the eyes of other people and also objective reality, it’s a status that needs to be earned.
First base just to be in the running to be a good shepherd has a good strategy for getting himself a herd. If yours is talking about Hitler and National Socialism in the current climate, then I don’t personally think you are ready.
@Greg Johnson:
“I am deeply saddened that my bedwetter comment has so deeply traumatized some of the commenters here. I hope the generous outpouring of solicitude here will prove some small aid in what is sure to be a long hard road to recovery.”
Spoken with all the grace and intellectual honesty we have come to expect from you NS boys.
matt Parrott as a moderator? fox in the hen house. I am about to leave this list. KM has adopted Matt? Incredible. J
@Alice Teller:
Alice, I know that’s just the hurt speaking.
Something that I’ve noticed about many white-centric history and culture forums, is that there is no shortage of commenters who’ll caution against “discussing AH and NS” because it “hurts our cause.” What I find most intriguing is that many times their comments appear before any such discussions about AH or NS have even materialized in the thread. Could reading such comments possibly lead casual or first time readers to incorrectly assume that some latent strain of “evil nazism” lurks beneath the surface of otherwise polite and intellectual white-centric discourse; one which continuously needs to be restrained from within, to prevent it from rearing its ugly head? Does this resemble an all-too-familiar meme?
It leads me to conclude that it’s not the intellectual discourse concerning AH and NS that “hurts our cause,” but rather the incessant cautioning against such discourse. That’s why I’m in favor of moderators tweaking their respective spam filters, so that such “helpful advice” gets redirected into the appropriate trash receptacle.
And judging by the many seemingly erroneous comments by both defenders and detractors of AH and NS, it seems that more education is needed rather than less. Apparently neither of these groups are going away anytime soon, so at least they should be debating issues based on a true understanding of matters. Otherwise casual and first time readers will get confused and absorb factoids, which they’ll in-turn repeat.
I’ve used Counter Currents and TOO articles to educate a number of people (in real life). These aren’t aspiring NS people — far from it — yet I’ve always gotten good feedback. For example, I recently showed a “liberal” type of gal a CC article on the women’s auxiliary of Mosley’s Blackshirts. (I don’t remember exactly what the group was called.) She was genuinely amazed by it. This naturally led to discussions about AH and NS, for which I found even more good material for her to peruse. I think it really changed her perspective. She’s been asking me questions over the past few months and now seems much less confused in her political thinking.
My own politics and personality are more on the libertarian side, so that might enable me to be more effective in convincing non-right-oriented people, as well as so-called “conservatives,” to discover real history. I guess it’s because they sense that I don’t have an agenda to convert them into embracing an ideology that they’ve been programmed to hate. It’s really just about history.
I just wish Ron Paul would embrace history. With all of his talk about non-interventionism, he completely avoids mentioning that WW2 is the best example for why America should’ve practiced non-interventionism against Germany. But considering that he’s attempting to reach a largely public school educated audience, he probably feels it necessary to stay away from such controversy. I guess I shouldn’t blame him. Had sources like Counter Currents and TOO existed 30-years ago, then society’s understanding of history would be such that Ron Paul could speak more openly.
Of course, that would open a huge can of worms, such as what really caused Japan to attack Pearl Harbor. This sort of discussion wouldn’t be very favorable to the liberal status quo.
@Alice Teller
If the public were better informed, then Ron Paul would even be free to reference AH concerning sound money; instead of Rothbard and Mises. After all, AH actually did something to bring it about. That’s the “gamble” that AH took. Obviously the ‘internationalists’ didn’t approve. So they initiated war against him.
Do we see history repeating? Would society’s embracing of this knowledge prevent more disastrous outcomes in the future?
But before that, Roosevelt allied (as a puppet) with non-white international Jewry against Germany. Remember the de facto declaration of war (as per international law) known as Lend Lease?
But it’s correct that no American fought to free the Jews. That’s because they were already free — free to leave Europe. That is, until the Allies closed the seaway and other exit routes, which prevented their departure.
Is it possible to honor the courageousness of WW2 vets but still acknowledge that the politics of their leaders was wrong? And since failure to acknowledge this, has caused more or less every major disastrous conflict since then, at which point to we change how we think about the past? After the next unnecessary war, perhaps?
There’s some nice information about this topic, in the YouTube video: “Were the Germans so Stupid?”
If nationalists continue to be reluctant to debunk the postwar narrative about Hitler and the holocaust, and by this I don’t mean to deny that several genocides were committed against various ethnic groups in the twentieth century (including Jews), the white people won’t see the light. Ever.
Irmin Vinson’s articles on Hitler and the holocaust at Counter-Currents are essential reading for anyone who is remotely willing to see through the lies with which the elites have been brainwashing us for over sixty years.
@Henry Baxley: Funny, I’ve always read that in the case of his Mother, she was extremely loving and devoted to him and he was to her.
@Mickey Meadows: You rudely distort my comments. I did not say what A3p should do. I said I am not a part of A3p however. I said people should not wave that gammadion. That means swastika. I did not say anything about a “reich.” that word is used here by you not me.
I did say something to the effect that WN thinking is more along the lines of socialism than individualism or liberalism, and national or ethic or racial socialism, as opposed to materialist class conflict socialism.
You can keep on demonizing national socialism, or racial or ethnic socialism, but, that does not address the point.
By the way, for anybody here who thinks there may be a Jewish problem in America– do I see any hands? There is a good book to be read, called “Separation and Its discontents” that has more than a few things to say about National Socialism as it related to the Jewish people in Germany in the 1930s– from the perspective of evolutionary psychology– in case anybody is interested in that. I am pretty sure many of you are.
I see that other posters are continuing to demonize some other posters as hitler-worshippers. Jason said something about Hitler buttons. More hyperbole. Not helpful. Hyperbole and demonization are not criticisms.
@Mickey Meadows: The overarching response to your (rhetorical?) questions may be found in paragraph 4 of comment 70635 on the Duping the Christian Zionists thread. The sense I have of the serious limitations of almost every category of sublunary thought when misapplied could hardly be more clearly expressed, if I do say so myself.
As for the specifics, to speak plainly if a bit in teacherly mode, I can’t read the relevant texts for you. Surely you know where to start? (Hint: LRC and mises.org.) You’ll be surprised—whether pleasantly or otherwise is not for me to say—at how much you can learn and how many links you’ll be offered in just a week or three. Speaking of links, Trenchant provides several really good ones on virtually every thread he chooses to comment upon. In addition, while I may not agree with his analyses more than 89.92 percent of the time, he is undoubtedly a more reliable guide to the most important texts of libertarianism than I am. (Remember, as Goethe famously said, “In der Beschränkung zeigt sich der Meister,” and mastery is something I’m still an apprentice at [well, maybe now a journeyman]. Curiously, that notable scholar Dirty Harry Callahan’s catchphrase amounts to a very free but still quite apt translation: “A man’s got to know his limitations.”)
@Rudy:
I think you are incorrect. On this thread, and in general, Hitler is first brought up by fans of Hitler. And if I get you NS boys to just be honest …. you are not interested in “discussing” Hitler. You praise him. You worship him. You don’t like to fully admit it, but that’s the heart of it, and it is obvious to everyone who isn’t in the thrall of Hitler.
Counter Currents has no “discussion” of Hitler anymore than MSNBC has “discussions” of Obama – endless praise. The only criticism of Hitler is of the type Chris Matthews will offer of Obama. Everyone sees that.
And if you note, we all bend over backward to say, it is quite OK to discuss your Dear Leader, we just don’t seem him as the awesome guy you do. We honestly don’t. It would be wonderful to find a real discussion of Hitler, but the NS boys are simply in the tank for him.
@Chechar:
How can I see through lies when I merely read propaganda reports that are one-sidedly pro-Hitler? It’s not helpful to read hagiography. The NS boys will say, “oh yes Hitler wasn’t perfect, there were issues”, but you would never know it to listen to them. What problems did he have? What major mistakes? Does the existence of Hitler Youth not creep you out just a bit? We are White men, and we shouldn’t condone little children being taught to worship a living politician (as in Hitler Youth).
It’s absolutely creepy. As I’m afraid, are the NS boys.
@Chechar:
Now let me say, maybe there are examples of American politicians creating their own youth organizations under their personal name, I am just not aware of it.
Was there a Kennedy Youth or Reagan Youth set up? Of course, it’s not necessarily ominous that college kids would name themselves after a politicians – I mean we do have College kids for Ron Paul. But indoctrinating children as young as 10 into personal allegiance to a living man, strikes me as disturbing. Am I reading it wrong?
I find the following quote that supposedly Hitler Youth took at the age of 10:
“In the presence of this blood banner which represents our Führer, I swear to devote all my energies and my strength to the savior of our country, Adolf Hitler. I am willing and ready to give up my life for him, so help me God.”
Does that sound healthy to you? It just doesn’t to me. It sounds cultish. I would not be happy to find kids at age 10 taking that pledge to Obama or Romney.
@Jason Speaks:
NS is for the German mentality, not for Americans. Yet you can admire Hitler and Goebbels, as Alex Linder does, and at the same time say “I am not a Nazi”.
@Alice Teller
By the way, I wasn’t implying that your comment is incorrect. I just think it would be more helpful if understood in a more complete context. Yes, Germany allied with the non-white Japanese in 1936 Anti-Comintern Pact, but the alliance was against communism. This was a very sensible alliance; one that America could have joined — at least in spirit — had America been blessed with sensible leadership. Of course, joining the alliance would have required restraining the ‘internationalist’ banking establishment’s aims in seeing Japan provoked into war, thus reversing a policy of antagonism initiated by the (iirc) liberalist Wilson administration.
And to clarify something from the previous comment, Anti-Comintern was before Lend Lease. But effectively there was no active cooperation (none that I know of) between Germany and Japan against America until after Lend Lease. For that matter, I think criminal Roosevelt was supplying Britain well before Lend Lease became official.
@Chechar:
Well I understand that different nations have different cultures, but it strikes me as bizarre that a parent would allow their 10 year old child to make such an oath of personal obedience to one human being. It seems like a cult. Now, be that as it may, yes Hitler may have had other good ideas.
But, then I ask myself, what ideas did Hitler have on race that would have been offensive or even shocking to most American presidents prior to WWII? Woodrow Wilson pretty much understood race realism. Why do you we give Hitler so much credit? Ideas of racialism and Jewish Bolshevism/Banking were not original to him. So, I’m left seeing what is unique about Hitler.
He was a masterful politician, in the prophet/visionary mode, who developed a cult of worship around his own person. He may have done good things for Germany, in fact I think he did. But these flaws – including the frightening megalomania and cult of personality – are not minor.
@Alice Teller: The thing I don’t get, Alice, is why Doctor Johnson (that’s GJ, not my hero SJ) spends such an inordinate amount of time bending over backwards to demonstrate something that, at this late date, hardly needs further demonstration. Namely, that possessing a Ph.D. is no insuperable obstacle to becoming or remaining a bigot, a demagogue, or as in his case, just a total jerk.
@Rudy:
Clearly we have very different core values. However, for the record, I am entirely in favor of the free and open study of history as well as intellectual debate. I am certain you will find many fine articles on Hitler and the period right on this site. That is not and never was the issue.
I prefer not to be defined by Jews in any way. I do not want to be told I must hate Hitler nor that I must admire him. In addition, I do find that when this site is turned into all Hitler, all the time, as it frequently is, it is bad for our cause.
I am not here to honor some long lost hero who tried and lost, we Southerners have a more than adequate supply of the homegrown variety. I want decent white men, here and now, to recognize that our people are in desperate need of wise leadership, in a voice that our people can hear and respond to. I came here hoping to find people who were, at least, formulating a plan to do so. Instead, I have, too often, found grown men who appear to have the all emotional maturity and sound judgement of twelve year old girls, complete with clicks, feuds, and petty insults. We need men capable of saying a tad more than hurray for our side and your mother wears army boots.
I have heard smart, wise, sensible men and women here, but they are often drowned out and driven away by these irresponsible, self-indulgent children. Please excuse this rant, I am angry and very disappointed.
@Pierre de Craon:
I am not at my best today, Pierre, and I am perilously close to provoking you just for the pleasure of being insulted with a little wit, grace and style for a change. If this is white leadership today may God have mercy on my children!
Once again, Alex Kurtagic proves himself as the best political writer on this blog. His anaylsis of why conservatives always lose (and why conservatism itself is wholly inadequate for our cause) are brilliant. I wish he’d write a non-fiction book.
@Bobby:
All mothers love their children….well, most of them anyway.
In the natural Law of Supply and Demand the more kids you have the less parental resources is available to each additional kid. You probably read this in Mein Kampf. He seaks in glowing terms toward his mother. But dig deeper and you will find;
1. Due to her up-bringing and hertragic and precarious personal situation she was, largely due to circumstances beyond her control, emotionally and physically UNAVAILABLE in the early, critical years (birth to three)
2. People tend to forget or repress pain and remember the pleasure of their childhood. Anyway it is rare to remember much before age four…it happens, but it is not the rule. Thus, if he suffered acute or chronic maternal deprivation as an infant, he wouldn’t remember anyway
@Alice Teller: If I’ve written something that disturbs you, please tell me what it is. I am not in the habit of barking at my friends, especially as, there being so few, I have none to spare.
You can’t avoid Hitler. the entire postwar order of the West is based on Hitler as the embodiment of evil. Since 1945 virtually all Western Christianity (both secular left-wing Christianity and supernatural Christian Zionism) has been transformed into Holocaustianity with Hitler in the role of anti-Christ. Meanwhile, the 100 million murdered by Communism in the 20th Century is virtually ignored by media and education industries.
NS rose to power in reaction to Communism. The KPD was a serious internal threat and the USSR was only a short distance away. Look at a map of 1933 Europe. As an example of Red atrocities look up “Holodomor”-an event that was taking place right around the time Hitler became Chancellor.
@Jason Speaks:
Despite those defects you mention, the Hitler option was less worse—by far—than Roosevelt’s and Churchill’s Judeo-liberalism. Without Anglo interference the Germans could have defeated the USSR and a vast, racially unified blonde empire would have emerged stretching from the Rhine to the Urals. “And a lot of us, I imagine, would prefer living there than in the colored mess we have to endure today.”
@icr:
Absolutely. Hitler didn’t win an electoral majority. He won most seats and was given the Chancellorship by the German elite in 1933: the year after the Jewish Bolsheviks deliberately starved six million Ukrainians to death. Can there be any real doubt that the threat of the Bolshevik terror influenced both the German voters and the decision to give Hitler the Chancellorship? Why isn’t this taught in the schools, or at least in TOO’s featured articles?
@Alice Teller:
Well, I can think of no situation His mercy wouldn’t better.
On a more mundane level, however, this is a vocabulary issue as much as anything else. Joe Sobran used to say time and again that our political and social masters ought never to be described as what they invariably style themselves; viz., our “leaders.” Candor demands, he said, that they be called what they are: rulers and would-be rulers.
Kevin MacDonald is a white leader—indeed, a not infrequently inspiring one. Many, perhaps most, of the other writers and commenters here and elsewhere may want to be seen as leaders, but the heart of the ruler beats loudly within them, and the ruler’s spirit, the libido dominandi, sometimes is at pains to conceal itself. On occasion a loose glove slips to reveal a clenched fist and lips parted in a smile disclose razor-sharp incisors behind them.
Recall what and who probably lurks behind the curtain the next time one of these characters lectures you or sneers at you.
@Pierre de Craon:
Please forgive me, it seems that I am the one barking at friends. I didn’t mean to suggest that you have insulted me, only that the novelty of being insulted with style would seem like welcome relief at this point. I told you I wasn’t at my best.
Perhaps quite foolishly, I have long hoped that this site might start really considering the best interests of our people. As the mother of sons, ( oh how a wanted just one daughter) I have great tolerance for excess testosterone, status displays, and male pecking orders, both intellectual and physical, but eventually it comes down to whether a man has it or not. Too many of the men who purport to be our leaders here seem not to have it.
Again, forgive me, I am grumpy, ungracious and rude. Leadership, Pierre, leadership, or is there anyone here who will make these boys behave like white men?
@Pierre de Craon:
… may want to be seen as leaders, but the heart of the ruler beats loudly within them …
Wow.
On occasion a loose glove slips to reveal a clenched fist and lips parted in a smile disclose razor-sharp incisors behind them.
Double wow. Brilliantly written and you put your finger right on it. Not leaders … but rulers in waiting. Does anyone feel led by these characters, or do you feel as if a sharp slap is about to strike you down and demand obedience?
@Jason Speaks:
I am willing to praise Hitler in areas where praise is warranted. I have already mentioned a few such areas. But, I don’t agree with Hitler, or the German NS program, or the theory and philosophy of German NS, on every point, nor am I a Hitler fetishist or worshiper who favors using NS symbols and imagery. Admittedly, the Hitler Youth concept is strange to me, bizarre even. At the same time however, I am open to the possibility it might have made some sense in context. Perhaps the reason the Hitler Youth idea seems so alien and bizarre is that we are 60 years removed from its context and living in another country with very different traditions.
In particular, the Führerprinzip idea as an organizing principle for politics has no appeal for me for numerous reasons, and I doubt it will ever appeal to many other White people as well. Among the major NS ideas, the Führerprinzip idea is probably the least relevant to our situation. It is also an idea that the people who admire Hitler rarely cite as a reason for their admiration.
No one who defends NS Germany and Hitler has ever suggested every single NS idea is relevant today, but some of their ideas are clearly very relevant. Whereas the Führerprinzip idea has no relevance in our context, it should be pretty obvious to any TOO reader that understanding their reasons for opposing organized Jewry has a lot of relevance.
You have repeatedly said that people are engaging hagiography, blind Hitler worship, unjustified praise of AH, attempts to suppress debate, and promoting the use of NS symbols and imagery without once backing it with a supporting citation that I have seen. I don’t read here every day, so maybe you have in mind other comments than those here.
@Jason Speaks: I think we would find it easy to agree on half a dozen names, don’t you think, without even the hint of a squabble?
@Pierre de Craon:
As an old fan of the Devil and Daniel Webster I have come to expect even the devil to be susceptible to reason and logic, as well as to maintain minimal levels of intellectual honesty and humor.
@Pierre de Craon: Well, these are all one really needs to read to figure out how the West was lost, and how it may be won back. On sound money, without which there can be no genuine freedom from oppressive elites and their ant-farm fantasies:
http://mises.org/document/3747/The-Ethics-of-Money-Production
On politics, Hoppe’s devastating work on democracy, or mob-rule:
http://depositfiles.com/files/11honxms1
Finally, against franchised monopolies:
http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/against.htm
@Alice Teller: I got what you were trying to communicate after I posted my slightly dim comment but not, alas, soon enough to say “never mind” before you set me straight.
Most of my life I had to constantly upbraid myself for failing to be prepared for disappointment. Almost the most disappointing thing about these, my declining years, is my now near-total inability to be surprised as disappointments fall like rain in the monsoon latitudes.
I think one of the great analyses of present times is that of Ron Neff, Polite Totalitarianism:
http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/neff_pt1.htm
@Trenchant: I am a big fan of this, too.
Thanks, by the way, for being so true to form—i.e., typically and predictably helpful. I sincerely hope that Mickey Meadows follows through and reads the stuff the links go to. This is serious stuff written by serious, three-dimensional people. They stand starkly at odds with a person like the sometime poster here, the lady called Marcy Fleming, and a fortiori Roderick Long and his ilk, who give the impression (to me at least) of wanting diagnostic materials relevant to economics and politics to substitute for religion or a more naturally intuitive, organic understanding of interpersonal relations, even intimate ones.
It’s a shame you haven’t met Neff; you’d get along well. He’s an easy-to-like guy. If I were well enough to get out again, the first thing I’d do is reestablish contact with all the wonderful people I met through the Sobran connection.
This is an excellent article. There is a lot we can hold onto here and develop. I just wish the comment section wasn’t dominated by discussions of Hitler.
http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/dtw_derbyshire.htm
Some great thoughts on Derbyshire.
@Trenchant:
May I add my thanks as well? There is something remarkably reassuring about a reliable man.
@fender: @joe webb:
It’s worse than you think Joe. I took your $500 and used it to buy Matt’s loyalty — lock, stock, and barrel. So he’s working for me now.
@Lew:
@Lew:
Well, every article on Counter-Currents treats Hitler as praiseworthy. I can’t find counter examples. TOO doesn’t do that as much, although I’ve never seen a critical article of Hitler on this site. As far as posters, we’ve had posters put up links to “Adolf the Great” YouTube videos and the like. But perhaps this comment is indicative of a subset of posters to this site. It was on the thread for the forward that MacDonald wrote for the Hitler-friendly book that Vinson wrote:
Ciaran
January 20, 2012 – 6:05 pm | Permalink
Alice- no one “fought gallantly against Hitler”. Thoughtless rubes, so proud of their blind obedience, went to war because Hollywood made movies with the Andrews Sisters
We get that kind of thing quite a bit from people who are obviously pro-Hitler and anti-American. It’s the kind of thing that really seems intended to drive off anybody but a Hitler-Firster. Before long on that thread, Greg Johnson pops in to do his one pony trick, and call those who take a somewhat opposing view, “concern trolls”.
What’s become obvious is that some of these people love Hitler with a religious devotion and they have a deep animus toward Americans and the English. We’ve all walked on eggshells, hoping that we must be misreading the signals, but it is what it is.
The animosity these people have for American troops, as well as the quick offense they take to any shying away from Hitler (“why are you so scared!”), certainly seems like how a religious person reacts when you offend something they consider sacred. It’s as if I walked over to a devout Christian and said, “Hey listen, I think that Jesus guy had some good ideas, but do we really need to show a cross on our charity posters? It’s kinda tedious.” The Christian would be livid. At the very least he would accuse me of moral cowardice. But what if the person really didn’t get the fascination with Jesus? Suppose he wasn’t trying to be offensive, he just didn’t get it. Something similar is at work with this Hitler thing. We just say something like, “oh jeez, Hitler again? Yeah he said some interesting stuff but who wants his image around?” and the other side cringes. What the hell is wrong with us! Oh well, we all have things we consider sacred (I hope), so what can we do?
@Rudy:
Rudy, I think this is valuable advice. As a rule, anyone who works blatantly or subtly to uphold the reigning anti-white consensus about morality, history, or status should be banned from commenting on WN sites, even if they profess to be WNs (which is what any troll would do if he wanted to get in close enough to stick a knife in our backs).
Because of the importance of TOO and Kevin MacDonald in particular, it stands to reason that the site has been targeted by some very sophisticated trolls.
@Pierre de Craon:
Lest it be thought that in recommending the utilitarianism of Boldrin & Levine I’m being inconsistent, here’s the deontological attack on IP:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7511095/Against-Intellectual-Property-by-Stephan-Kinsella-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SaFTm2bcac
Amen!
@White Realist:
The campaign for the extermination of whites is a direct result of the enthronement of Holcaustianity as the official religion of the West. There are Holocaust memorials in every state-where are the memorials to the 100 million murdered by Communism?
The entire postwar order of the West is based on Hitler as the embodiment of evil. Since 1945 virtually all Western Christianity (both secular left-wing Christianity and supernatural Christian Zionism) has been transformed into Holocaustianity with Hitler in the role of anti-Christ. Meanwhile, the 100 million murdered by Communism in the 20th Century is virtually ignored by media and education industries.
NS rose to power in reaction to Communism. The KPD was a serious internal threat and the USSR was only a short distance away. Look at a map of 1933 Europe. The Bolshevik murder campaign that slaughtered six million Ukrainians (the Holodomor) took place in 1932-33 just before Hitler became Chancellor. That extermination program, btw, was largely led by Jewish Communist cadres.
So don’t try using sex as a distraction. That stuff is straight from Tel Aviv:
http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=15;t=000980
@White Realist:
Here, let me make it easy for you. Follow this link: http://www.counter-currents.com/tag/homosexuality/
It yields a list of the 22 posts at Counter-Currents with the tag “homosexuality” out of a total of 1,679 posts. Of these 22 posts, 3 deal with the topic of homosexuality exclusively, 4 if you count a French translation of one of the other three. The other 18 deal with the topic in passing or mention it. This should provide a good start for dealing with your question.
@Greg Johnson:
What a wonderful plan! I presume that you would be the judge of who was sufficiently troll like? Great way to get rid of anyone who disagrees with you.
Sadly, however, I fear that white folks are going to need slightly better intellectual skills and leadership plans than banning folks that you are unable to win a debate with.
@Anty Ep:
I didn’t intend to distort your comments…I’m sorry if that is what I did.
I thought we were talking about whether Hitler/NS is something that can be sold to the increasingly unhappy mainstream Whites, or whether it raises intolerably high barriers to their entry.
I thought you were saying you thought we should be using these ideas.
I am not demonizing Hitler or NS. I have my own private views about this matter. I have never demonized any of it. The subject – that I think is the only important subject – is what package of ideas are best for turning this into a mass movement.
I would suggest that because National Socialism is a philosophy of what we might do given power, that it is a subject for *when* we have that power. Unless…..you and others think it is also as a concept, a good way to grow the movement at the current time, in the current circumstances, with the relative power of mass propaganda between us and the enemy what it is
@Pierre de Craon:
Pierre – I would suggest that a question like mine to you is an invitation for you to make a short statement that might then encourge myself and others to think again.
Judging you (on this occasion) by myself, when I tell someone to go read a book or whatever, it is partly motivated by disinterest in them or what they think.
Which is fair enough…..no harm done….but what about other people that might have been reading our exchange? You were speaking to them as well as myself.
@Alice Teller:
Alice, Don’t you think it’s possible there could be people here with ill will toward Professor MacDonald and his work? Do you even know what concern trolling is? I didn’t myself at one time. I’m not saying you are one, and I’m not asking if you believe any person here is one, just whether you think it’s possible people with ill will toward Professor MacDonald might show up here.
@Mickey Meadows:
Mickey and Anty;
I suggest that since NS and WN are so intertwined both literally and symbolically and;
They both have failed to gain enough support to win in the past. A totally new paradigm is sorly needed.
IMO the DEMONIZATION of people will not work. But the IDEALIZATION of the child will. By changing the stated goal of the “movement” from a negative to a positive you win the hearts and minds of thinking people everywhere. Its easy to be against a “hate” group. But you come off as a Grinch if you oppose a “love” group.
There is abundant SCIENTIFIC evidence that;
The children of “working” mothers don’t fare as well as those raised with a ‘stay at home mom”
People who marry outside their race have a greater chance of divorce….(and children of divoce don’t do as well as children from intact homes)
Forced intercourse is traumatic to the victim, whether it be sexual or social…Traumatised people don’t make good parents.
Democracy has never been sucessful anywhere in the world for long and always results in social degeneration, The brunt of this degeneration is child abuse
Multiculturalism (as social policy) creates friction and confusion as in the “tower of Babel”
Government of personality (one person making the rules) always leads to corruption and who suffers? you guessed it..the children (google Orphans of romania for an extreme example)
I could go on, but if I have not at least tweaked your interest by now I am wasting time
@Lew:
Yes, it certainly is possible. I have been accused of being a troll, as have many people I admire, so I am a little skeptical about calls to ban anyone. If our ideas are sound, we can win on that basis. Frankly, I find this endless fear of trolls and jews hiding under the bed unbecoming. Are white men really such weak reeds that they require protection?
You’re absolutely correct, Jason – there is no such thing as “discussion” of Nazism or Hitler over on Counter-Currents, no questioning permitted by anyone as to whether or not these ideas and personalities are productive to our Cause. No…there is only the snide remarks of Greg Johnson and a ruthless ban for anyone who dares question his love boy Adolf. As case in point, here’s the latest “discussion” of Hitler over on Counter-Currents: Greg Johnson’s Latest Paean to the Hit-ster
You are correct when you say that the WN movement will never get anywhere so long as Hitler lovers like yourself turn white Americans against us. As such, you’re no better than the National Socialist Movement – i.e. – just another crazed believer that the almighty swastika can save us.
And no one is “wetting their beds”, Mr. Johnson. Instead, it’s YOU who’s crapping his diaper that you cannot ban people HERE like you do back at your private Fuehrer Bunker. You hate the fact that too many of us here oppose Hitler and his sickening multi-racial bargain he made with the little yellow men of Japan. WHITE MEN smashed those little yellow bastards with nuclear weapons, Greg. Smashed Hitler’s dreams of a multi-racial empire. And you’re crapping your diaper because sane whites don’t want that shi*t all over again, this time with brown-skinned Arabs instead of yellow-skinned Japs. So grow up or get out of the WN movement.
Mickey said: “I thought we were talking about whether Hitler/NS is something that can be sold to the increasingly unhappy mainstream Whites, or whether it raises intolerably high barriers to their entry.
I thought you were saying you thought we should be using these ideas….I am not demonizing Hitler or NS. I have my own private views about this matter. I have never demonized any of it. The subject – that I think is the only important subject – is what package of ideas are best for turning this into a mass movement.”
Ok then we are not talking about the same thing. Let me clarify.
1– I was talking to an audience of readers here that is not that big. I am assuming that the readers here have adult level understanding of politics and know the difference between classic liberalism & liberterianism, and socialism, for example. I am assuming that people can understand why I use the terms national socialist, ethnic socialist, or racial socialism, interchangeably. I have other assumptions but I think you will be fair to admit that I am not talking to the majority of Americans who are not very well educated enough to know even such ninth or tenth grade concepts as these.
Second thing, I dont believe we are at the juncture of converting anything to a mass movement. Especially if that involves making philosophical compromises that would be fatal to success. If you are not at the juncture where a certain level of social development has been reached for an objective, then you just cant leap forward arbitrarily. Unfortunately, or not, we are in a position of deteriorating social conditions in America that may mean the dissolution of the federal union in our lifetimes out of pure chaos and financial default . May mean– not certainly but perhaps, at a level of signficant possibility. Somewhere along that way, I think that there may be a sufficient crtiical mass of people of our own kind who form into a thinking that the common good of the folk must drive governmental action and policymaking and laws. That idea was not anything special to ancient Greeks but in the intervening 2400 years or so our shared idea of “politics” has deteriorated to where that kind of thing requires a lot of explanation. Any “masses” that can’t agree on those basic premises have no chance of self-government in any meaningful sense. I believe right now we are not self-governed, but rather we are governed by a pro-zionist, jewish-heavy financial elite, a plutocracy, that spouts shibboleths in the place of ideas and conducts gladitorial personality contests waged via mass media in place of elections. The kind of people who think that is government worth imposing on the world by force are credulous miseducated fools. If that is a majority then so be it.
I am not the kind of guy who wants or cares to discuss what will “sell to the masses,” in short.
Thirdly when you use the word mainstream I am not sure what you mean. I am not a fringe lunatic. I graduated from a major university and I have a graduate degree. My neighbors like me fine. I mow my lawn. I pay the significant taxes due of me because its required by law. When I meet them in public I am polite to nonwhites as I am to whites. …I have a garden, I have a vw, a family, credit cards with too high balances… dont know whether I count as “mainstream” or not but I am pretty sure I dont really give a damn about what is “mainstream”– I am secure enough in my own selfconception and social identity that I do not give a damn whether John Q Public is aghast that I can give you a list of 20 things I admire about Hitler. I am polite to John Q Public but I dont loook to him for political and social insight.
I have friends that I have had for decades with whom I may discuss politics or I may not. There is something that I have not really experienced that perhaps you feel Mickey or perhaps you are saying John Q Public feels; that believing something politically incorrect about Hitler or NS is going to get me fired. I am not worried about that at all. I am not indepenedently wealthy but I am not reliant on any kosher seal of approval for my bread. Anybody who is, I recommend you focus your energy on getting past that.
3. I am not concerned with masses and their opinions of poltiics because mass opinions of politics are formed by massive social institutions like universities and media corporations and things that are now totally stifled from allowing independent thinking because of “p.c.”
PC is an issue for people because of money. PC means you have to say the right thing or face some kind of personal economic consequences. Lets get that clear. There will be no independent thinking coming from a nation of economic slaves who are so deluded that they think they are free.
Let me put it like this about political correctness: if you have to worry day in and day about about Jewish approval of your most intimate thoughts about politics and society, then you are a slave of Jews. If the Jews can easily get you fired for saying the kinds of stuff iam saying here, then you are a slave. Far as I know I havent said a thing that was unlawful or even untrue nor dishonorable. So those are my standards: I have to say what is true, lawful, and honorable. i dont give a damn whether Jews “approve” or not. I am not rich, I have a job and debts, but I am independent enough that I mercifully dont have to figure that into every daily schedule.
If anyone reading this feels uncomfortable, like maybe you are a Jewish slave, and you do not like being a Jewish slave, then instead of getting mad at me for calling you a slave, then you need to change your life and get out from under them, first and foremost.
For those reading this who have liberated themselves from dependence on a job that requires bootlicking adherence to political correctness— I applaud you, I celebrate your freedom, and on this May day YOU are the worker that is most laudable.
I would be far more interested in actually freeing the white masses from the yoke of jewish usury-enslavement by far, then sellign them some palatable thin broth that will just keep them breathing for their jewish masters. The first step towards freedom is inside one’s own head, when you decide it is time to be a free man and no longer a slave. And you start to think about the alternatives. Manumission? Escape? Revenge? Whatever, that is for each individual to evaluate based on circumstances. But the first step to economic and social liberation is intellectual liberation and that is what the pursuit of truth and the spread of ideas is all about.
The fake and bogus “freedom” of America is mostly its opposite, one sort or another of indirect enslavement. Our economic “freedom” means less the ability to magically become robber baron railroad magnates than “Freely” take on the foolish burdens of debt-slavery via usurious student loans and mortgages and credit card debt.
Our social “freedom” means generally sexual license where we are “free” to enslave ourselves to bad sexual habits and be mastered by our passions instead of vice versa.
Our “equality” means the collapse of whites, blacks, natives and migrants, straight and gay, all down to the lowest common denominator of nihilistic civil atomization and the same opportunities to become undisciplined debt-slaves with a fake ritual of voting every couple years in rigged elections to mollify us.
@John Rennick:
Above in this very thread I linked to a post with Alex Linder saying, “I am not a Nazi”. Please take a look at it.
I mention this because in Linder’s forum you will indeed find open discussions about the relevancy or irrelevancy of NS from a genuine pro-white viewpoint. What we have here instead—not in TOO articles but in the commentariat section—are a couple of commenters whose mainstreamer attitude has a little kosher smell that has bothered not only Greg Johnson but also Matt Parrott and many others that are not commenting now, like Mark, Severus Snape and Ciaran (search all comments by Johnson, Parrott and Lew on this thread and see what I mean).
@Chechar:
Everything on all sides potentially has a kosher smell.
The best way through this sort of thing is all sides (a) be open to what is being said (b) recognize that even if a POV is wrong on the main point, it may be constructed of some good points as well as bad and some of those good points may need to be heard (c) recognize that not all people defending, advocating or criticizing the cost/benefit payoff of raising the profile of Hitler/NS discussion/revision at the current time, are doing so for the same reasons as the next person who came to that POV.
There’s something to learn from eachother. I can see that in terms of where I am at. But…I am also aware that the criticisms that I have made, which are fairly narrow, have not been properly addressed. Perhaps by the same coin I have not properly focused on what people coming the other way are saying. I will make more effort to do that.
@John Rennick:
Interesting link. I see the book at Counter Currents described this way:
Forever and Ever is a collection of devotional poems—hymns of praise and somber elegies—written in 1952 and 1953 and dedicated to Adolf Hitler.
I guess this is what I mean by hagiography – poems dedicated to Hitler. To say they are not “afraid to discuss Hitler” is the understatement of the decade.
But, it is what it is. I think my personal tension was recognizing that, oh yes, that particular group of pro-Whites is very much pro-Adolf (I guess they are pro-White?). So, it is what it is, might as well stop fighting it. I wish they had been more up front about it, instead of playing it coy , trying to have it both ways, but okay now I get it.
@Jason Speaks:
I think we must remember Dr. Mac Donald’s advice – to frequently ask ourselves ‘Is it good for whites?” Hitler fans remind me of liberals in their reliance on what ought to be true rather than existing reality.
No amount of brow beating from them is going to persuade me that I ought to join them, ( I still fly a Confederate flag, although my husband, who is a Yankee, but otherwise a great guy, insists that when you lose a war you must surrender your battle flag) .
I can justify my position on the grounds that I have a higher duty to kin than to the wider white group. It is not clear to me how they justify loyalty, at the top of their lungs, to Hitler rather than to the best interests of white folks.
I don’t believe most white people have a problem with Hitler as a historical personality, or would even deny the astounding accomplishments his Reich achieved. Nevertheless, it seems the objective of individuals like Greg Johnson and others is to rehabilitate the image of Hitler in the eyes of modern Americans. They want to make of him a grandfatherly, Teddy-bear-huggable saint and by golly to hell with saving the white race UNTIL they convinced these doltish Americans to finally admit that Hitler SHOULD HAVE WON THE FREA#@%&KIN’ WAR!!!
We as a movement need to stop trying to re-fight WWII, as Greg Johnson is currently doing over on Counter-Currents. We need to stop pushing Christianity as a prerequisite to salvaging our Race. We need to stop pushing Neo-Con Republicanism or Ron Paul Libertarianism as key to our success. We need, in short, only one message: let’s join together and work towards ridding America of its non-white hordes without alienating the very people we’re trying to save.
I think if Mr. Johnson takes the time to consult with Dr. MacDonald, Dr. Sunic, or Mr. Kurtagic, they’ll agree that Johnson’s persistence glorification of Adolf Hitler on his website is antithetical to the WN Cause and that he should cease and desist for the betterment of us all.
@Alice Teller:
A few of these posters come from profoundly weird place. They will never be more than .01% of the population, nor deep down inside, do really care to be. Someone mentioned a group that hasn’t posted recently, and ALL of the guys mentioned were explicitly anti-American N*zis – we wouldn’t have to speculate, I remember them. They are a very strange, deeply paranoid little group.
There is usually a call for us to “all get along”, but it is a failed project from the start. The other guys – whether the more explicit violent N*zis, or the more esoteric pseudo-intellectual variety, don’t have any interest in broad based appeal to Whites, certainly not in our lifetimes. For them, this is little boy’s club, something like an online version of Fight Club.
They imagine themselves on deep spiritual journeys that the masses can’t understand. Their tone is a strange mix of bitchiness and hyper-masculinity, which if we really understood their proclivities, would make sense.
So, I suspect they have little time for us Normals. Their desire, as stated time again by many of them, is to shut down debate, ban us, and form a tiny circle of like minded men – always men and only men. It is what it is. I just don’t know why MacDonald has allowed them such access. It disturbs me a bit, but, on a brighter note, I do see signs of a Normal White Revival coming soon.
@Jason Speaks:
That book of poems represents a 0.0001 % of the percentage that the printed media uses against the only head of a white state that dared to defend his people on a racial basis alone. Do you suggest that we go back to the times when 0% of the books in print praised Hitler and NS?
@ Alice Teller:
You still have to respond to the flaws in the Confederacy mindset pointed out by Johnson way above:
@John Rennick:
You cannot put Hitler together with Christianity, Neo-Con Republicanism, Ron Paul or Libertarianism. Hitler and the NS men stood for their people like the slogan “Our Race is Our Nation”. Christianity, Neo-Con Republicanism and Libertarianism on the other hand are egalitarian and universalist doctrines.
@John Rennick:
I agree with much of what to said. I would urge you to rethink banning everyone who has not yet joined our ranks. It is also damaging to alienate large groups of whites, such as Christians or libertarians. We need numbers. That does not preclude critiques of particular church leaders or policies. Let us try winning people over rather than driving them away.
BTW, If you wish to address a response to a particular post allow the cursor to over around the lower right hand corner. It will offer the option to reply.
@Chechar:
Unlike your crowd, I am perfectly willing to admit that my ancestors and even my heroes were imperfect men. No one regrets the importation of blacks to this country more than Southerners. We have also paid for our sins.
@Alice Teller:
@John Rennick:
I think the aim should be not to ban Christians in any way or make them/us feel uncomfortable. But, we shouldn’t make it a litmus test for cooperating on larger goals. In other words, I don’t think the public is much interested in our religious views. Christians should feel very welcome, but we have goals that are different from that of a church.
@Lew: You asked me a series of leading, indeed loaded, questions, didn’t you, on matters about which I have expressed myself at length and, I believe, pretty plainly. Yet you ask that I restate everything in summary form, especially for you.
Rightly or wrongly, I think you already have a good idea of what I think about the matters your leading questions pertain to. If I am wrong, it won’t be for the first or last time, I regret to say. Yet like everyone else not under duress, I reserve the right to choose those with whom I converse, whether briefly or at length, and what I converse about. With regard to the matter at hand, I have said all that I am going to say.
@Lew: The reply I just posted was meant for the comment made by Mr. Meadows, directly above yours. My sincere apologies, Lew, for this error.
@Jason Speaks:
I agree entirely. All I ask is not to be insulted. I am simply tired of hearing “those stupid (name the subset of white folks). As I have said so often, if people are wrong we should try to lead them to the truth not bash them over the head with how wrong they are, at least as our first effort.
“In Germany no one can talk positively about Adolf Hitler” says Carolyn Yeager in her latest interview with her German guest, Kairos. It is… illegal! And you guys want that no one speaks positively about Hitler even at CC? Should CC follow also the German lead?
I would strongly recommend all of you to listen to Yeage’s most recent interview. Kairos may have a heavy German accent but it will give you an idea of how truly Orwellian Germany has actually become:
http://reasonradionetwork.com/20120402/the-heretics-hour-interview-with-kairos
I doubt that. Professor MacDonald wrote himself wrote the forward to Irmin Vinson’s collection of essays on Adolf Hitler published by Greg Johnson’s Counter Currents. Interestingly enough, Alice Tellar, Mickey Meadows and Jason Speaks were quick to pounce and criticize Dr. K for that decision.
@John Rennick:
FYI: John Rennick = Ward Kendall trolling
@Alice Teller: Had you added, Alice, that Dr. Johnson’s presumptive equation of the overall identity of the antebellum South with the “aristocratic pretenses [of] the plantation system” was nothing more nor less than an invitation to you to treat “are you still beating your husband” as an authentic* question, the noise you would have heard in the far distance would have been me laughing and cheering. Actually, I count at least five different presumptions of facts not in evidence** in the dismissive “explanation” he gives for not publishing articles about the “Confederacy,” which I take him to use as a portmanteau word for everything he dislikes about the Old South writ large, not merely its doomed four-year attempt to escape the subverted polity it helped create with its blood and arms.
I would have thought, wouldn’t you, that simply saying “I ain’t much interested” ought to have been quite enough for a man whose right to choose what will or won’t appear on his own website hasn’t even been questioned, let alone disputed.
*How’s that for working in HS’s favorite word?
**E.g., all that tendentious “oligarchs” talk and class warfare stuff, just for starters.
@Lew:
Let me state the obvious – Counter Currents has the right to take whatever positions they like, as does TOO. I have no say in the matter. If they allow me and others to comment on it here, well then, I can comment on it, but that’s it. To be honest, I have no particular reason to care if a site went so far as to totally devote itself to Hitler.
So why do I care? I think some of us come to TOO and have an impression that it is a certain kind of site with a general agenda we agree with. We get all involved, enjoying the debate, clarifying our own thinking, and that is wonderful. But what I, and perhaps a few others want, seems to be incompatible with another group of posters. We are so at odds, that we can’t even relate to each other.
I love American troops and I still love America – at least the essence of what made America great. I hope people in England, Ireland, Scotland, indeed nations far and wide feel the same way. But I am very much in favor of America, at least what it once was. I have zero desire to live under National Socialism. I don’t want to punish modern day Americans for their ancestors winning WWII. Nor do I want to pledge personal obedience to a living dictator. And it doesn’t take but a whiff of that to turn me off.
My desire is for a practical real-world project to get Whites aware for their situation, at least enough of them, to save our White societies. White people already know how to govern themselves; I don’t need to come up with a new plan for them to follow. They aren’t looking to me to provide a new Odin-based religion, any more than they need me to give them a new Constitution or some new social system.
So, we are all here at the same place, but I don’t think we really have the same goals.
@Pierre de Craon:
To be honest I didn’t even notice. We Southerners are quite used to lesser folk attempting to disparage us. Like we give a damn!
I was more struck by Chrechar’s demand that I must answer this charge. I was not aware that there was anything I must do here, must less refute every notion that Dr. Johnson proposes. Presumptuous jackboots!
@Alice Teller: Presumption is today’s growth stock, it seems. A pity.
@Jason Speaks:
Straw man.
Straw man.
Straw man.
How practical is your proposition? How practical is it that a state which was founded as a merchant’s paradise and designed to fail at centralized action going to oppose the multinational corporations in a coherent way? How practical is it to expect a culture which is integrally consumerist and deeply committed to a toxic combination of individualism and globalism to arrive at a bold response to Jewish subversion?
Are you really being all that practical, or are you confusing what’s practical for what’s comfortable?
Attempting to graft what needs to be done to save our people onto the current sociocultural and metapolitical framework…now that’s impractical. The organism can’t help but reject the foreign body. All you’ll end up doing is training men outside the elite social circles how they too can find and lick the boot of control for profit and personal gain.
What happens when you tell a man whose worldview is fundamentally selfish and monetary that there’s a vast conspiracy to subvert a nation he’s not really loyal to? At the best, he’ll learn to defend himself from it. He’ll look up which neighborhoods are the smartest White Flight prospects. At the most, he’ll grumble about it anonymously and within his close inner circle. At worst, he’ll use it as a pro-tip to get ahead in politics and academia.
I know it all seems very simple to you. I know you see your position as “practical”, “common sense”, “sensible”, and not [INSERT STRAW MAN HERE]. I disagree with you about your conclusion, but I also disagree about it being simple. If this were really about delivering sober facts to a mature and rational American public, President Jared Taylor would have signed a bill into law by now which allows Homeowner’s Associations the freedom to define the identity of their members. In doing so, free association would be the law of the land, and all the sober, mature, reasonable, fact-driven Whites would be peacefully moving into explicitly segregated neighborhoods throughout America and everybody would live happily ever after.
That’s a nice thought, but it’s roughly as likely to happen as Odin arriving in a flaming chariot to lead us into RAHOWA. In the final analysis, I believe that simple generic secular White Advocacy is necessary but insufficient. Attempting to accomplish our goals while ignoring the grave spiritual and cultural problems at the root of our crisis is impractical.
@Anty Ep: Notwithstanding socialisms of all shades being anaethema to me, I agreed with much of what you said.
@Jason Speaks:
I share your frustration on this point. Hunter Wallace has made the point that WN share little in common but grievances. I think there is much truth in that statement. Generally, among the people who read these sites, there is broad agreement on the problems and damn near none on the particulars and details of a solution. Hopefully this will change in time.
@Pierre de Craon:
I know I am not a true denizen of cyberspace, but does this strange obsession that grown men have about trolls everywhere seem a little unhealthy to you? It begins to seem like a witch hunt. I will be the first to agree that the Tribe are clever folk, but do they actually have supernatural powers?
@Chechar:
For the record, no one has even hinted that there should be no discussion of Hitler. The primary objection that was raised is perfectly illustrated by this thread. The topic is primarily A3P, a project supported by our host this evening. You boys have effective accomplished the tribe’s goal of branding them as nazis. At the very least they should be permitted to define themselves to their own audience. Among other things, this shows a remarkable lack of gratitude to the man who has done more than any other to bring our cause to respectability and credibility, and the good folks who are running A3P. Did any of you even give them a thought?
@Alice Teller:
Two more asshole comments from Alice Tellar. If you’re not a troll Alice, you sure write like one. You are either a hopelessly ignorant woman or being disingenuous, and my money is on the latter.
@Alice Teller:
On a side issue, I am starting to understand you Alice for what you have just said in the most recent TOO article, “Synagogue of Satan?”
Lew & HW are right: we are living in completely, completely different worlds. I used to be an extremely devout Christian, believe it or not (have a huge autobiography on it) but now I know better.
Obviously, those who have left Christianity behind are freer to adopt a totally new worldview. And why not?: a worldview inspired by NS although not necessarily NS (again, see what Alex Linder says as I mentioned above).
@Lew: @Chechar: Brilliantly reasoned arguments boys. Now need to address any position I hold or refute any logic. Just make nasty accusations. Is that your best shot? Really?
@icr: Great comment.
@Alice Teller:
Let’s better discuss in the other thread I referred to in my previous comment. It’s there where, if I find it suitable, I will post Linder’s views on Christianity and “secular Christianity”: IMHO what makes the real difference between NS sympathizers and NS haters…
@Mickey Meadows:
If the monster hadn’t had a century-long gestation period, and the enabling mechanisms were simpler to understand, then glib answers would suffice.
The three works I listed addressed the main cancers: the money system, ie. paper money issued under monopoly regime, fractional-reserve banking sanctioned by flawed court rulings, central banking and deposit insurance to socialize the costs of the fractional reserve model by blocking bank-collapse and preventing the consequent deflation from restoring the purchasing power of the currency.
The other main malignant nodes are: democracy – mob-rule married to demagoguery, and “intellectual property”. The latter being the primary obstacle to the level-playing-field in the dissemination of ideas. And guess the ethnicity of those in the publishing and media industries, whose rivers of money would dry to a trickle if they didn’t have the odd Sonny Bono onside.
That’s about as much reductionism as I think possible without verging into distortion.
@Lew:
If you insist on referring to me in your comments, please stick to the truth. I doubt very much that I have ever criticized Dr. MacDonald about anything. I have no objection to any scholar writing about Hitler, writing an introduction to any book on the subject or endorsement of same. I did dare to express the opinion that the cover art was unwise.
Look at the headers on this site re topics – many are controversial, none mention Hitler. I presume this is not accidental.
@Jason Speaks:
As if only to confirm your ideas about the Hitler worshippers on Counter Currents, here is a comment on the Savitri Devi article (bold by me) :
Peter Quint, Posted May1,2012 at 3:47 pm.
Need I say more?
@Franklin Ryckaert:
In the past it was not possible to found a religion on Hitler. He was only a man—with all the virtues and defects of a man. Presently however, when PC has turned Holocaustianity into a new religion, I see nothing wrong with Devi’s poems. Or with your quotation above.
Well, Alice, speaking of sticking to the truth, you may have set the record for speed lying in a single paragraph earlier tonight:
Every noun, verb, modifier, phrase, clause and sentence is a lie, or part of a lie.
I do try to consider the host, sometimes successfully, sometimes not. Here at TOO, as far as I can tell, it’s anything goes in the comments. All ideas appear to be fair game in comments if not on the front page.
Regarding comments versus headlines, I don’t see Alex Kurtagic complaining about the comments, and it’s his article. I don’t see Professor MacDonald complaining. There are maybe 2 or 3 A3P board members who contribute here. I don’t see them complaining. None of the top contributors at TOO appear to share your concerns that Hitler/NS discussion in the comments helps the tribe by defining people as nazis. If they don’t care, I don’t see a reason to be concerned. That’s my bottom line. Why do you care so much if they don’t care?
@Alice Teller: No, they certainly don’t have supernatural powers, and you are right to greet any such suggestion with scorn. What they do have, however, I think, is a degree of what might best be called “this-worldliness” that, in group terms at least, surpasses anything we, their opponents, have. Their self-obsession is so perfect, so complete, so inbred, that their omnipresent wariness and hostility, elevated to a princess-and-the-pea level, look so alien and unnatural to us mere whites that they might almost be attributed to a malevolent supernature.
On the other hand, to refer yet again to what Trenchant jocularly wrote a few days ago on the How to Read thread, on any given day and any given thread “the Gentiles [are] a minority, I’d wager.” You and I (and many others, I hope) understand that if awareness of danger is allowed to morph into an obsession with it, one does himself no good but often no little harm. Put otherwise, “be wise as serpents, harmless as doves” makes sense only if it prevents an awareness of the enemies lurking in our midst from crippling us with fear of them. I don’t claim, of course, that this is as easily done as said. Quite the opposite. Looking, listening, reflecting, learning from mistakes: these are good. Whining, cowering, hunting for witches to burn and monsters to slay: these are things the Tribe does—and does better than any of us ever could. Hence, they are bad.
So, yes, there are trolls here, and maybe they do come in the four or five different forms that have been named and described. In addition, they are certainly as dangerous as cars doing eighty-five on an interstate highway are for people trying to run from the gas station on one side of it to the Arbie’s on the other side. The trick is to learn never to cross the damn interstate on foot, not to fret all day about what will happen when you do cross it. Mutatis mutandis, that’s how to deal with the troll problem. It sure as shootin’ isn’t going away.
@Lew: Your earlier comments on this thread alone demonstrate that you are anything but a dope. What in heaven’s name has prompted you to think that crude insults and generally thuggish behavior will win friends or influence people? More to the point, do you really think that screaming “troll” at Alice Teller—in the manner of some inept adolescent dork screaming “lesbian” at a pretty girl who pushes him unceremoniously away when he tries to cop a cheap feel in a crowded high school corridor between classes—will bring discredit on her rather than . . . well, where it truly belongs?
You are better than this. Indeed and to be specific, you are better than Chechar and his “scientific” conclusion that Christianity’s dethronement by Holocaustianity—a word he picked up either from icr or Michael Hoffman, incidentally, both of whom understand its meaning far better than Chechar does, despite an otherwise impressively wide range of reading—has cleared the ground for the elevation of a new Golden Calf with the initials AH inscribed at the base.
Please make better friends. Please clean up your act. Please wash your cybermouth out with virtual soap. Please be the asset to this site, and to the cause that it stands for, that many of your comments suggest you can be. In short, please be a real white man, not the disruptive influence the Tribe wants you and me and all the rest of us to be.
@Pierre de Craon:
In fact I picked the word from Jim Giles’ interview of James Bowery.
@Trenchant: How much better informed your reply is than mine was! I did, however, say all along that you were the master of this material, I the journeyman.
But also, how much more adult your reply is than mine was. Since I’ve had more practice at being one, I ought not to have come in second here too.
@Chechar: Correction accepted, Chechar. I am glad to learn that the term, which has more than an ounce of truth in it, has won wider use.
@Pierre de Craon:
Fair enough. I did not mean to give offense to you or anyone else and would like to apologize to anyone I offended and to you specifically. Alice suggested people who discuss NS in the comments serve the tribe by portraying TOO contributors as NS. It struck me as a trollish comment. I don’t get why Alice cares about cares about such comments when the site operators don’t. I have a comment stuck in moderation on this point.
@Lew: Well said! I knew you were an asset.
Not that you asked, but here’s my two cents on the AH thing. There are basically two sides on this issue hereabouts, but even the most dyspeptic regarding AH among us is, I think, reluctant to go the whole hog of mainstream media/ADL/AIPAC/Republicrat/History Channel “he’s the ultimate villain” baloney. Even so, anyone who thinks of him as being maybe the fifth or sixth or seventh most destructive national ruler in the 1933–1945 period (this is the down and dirty version of my own opinion) is not precisely a fan. Time and experience have shown that AH is one of two topics—the other being the farrago of murder and corruption and destruction that gets subsumed under the numbers 9/11/2001—that get blood boiling, fingers typing, and insults flying whenever they are mentioned. In the latter case, I have no idea why this should be the way the situation invariably plays out, yet play out this way it always does, frequently into the hundreds of comments, which tend to rapidly degenerate from the informative and imaginative to the crass and obscene.
Even though I think that my own view of 9/11 is unassailably sound (c’mon, what else am I gonna say?), I have learned that the aftermath of these frequent fistfights is persistent ill feeling and, inevitably, loss of the sense that, no matter how evil and deadly 9/11 was, it is—in being a symptom of alien misrule and tyranny over this nation and its white people (not to mention Europe and Europeans) rather than one of the causes—ultimately a distraction. And given how many distractions turn up unannounced, we hardly need to go out of our way to revive old ones.
This is how I see the AH and NS nexus, too. Should documents and archives be discovered tomorrow demonstrating beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is one of history’s most maligned individuals, the cause of Kevin MacDonald and this site (and of all but the actual trolls that, indeed, probably do exist in far larger numbers than anyone imagines) will not, I think, be forwarder by sunset than they were at sunrise. Truth is better than falsehood, of course, and I am no fan of burying truth to please the Tribal enemy, but my time is running short, and I am hoping to see, before I check out of Motel Earth, a decline in the blindness and deafness among the Judaically manipulated white masses rather than their continuation in a vector that has invariably risen since my awareness of my surroundings began sixty-plus years ago. (My own pet truth to be unearthed, by the way—not that I’ll see it if I live to be 110—is the proof that Dreyfus was guilty as charged. Ah, dreams . . .)
End of the lesson for today. Now let’s search for something else to smash pottery about, shall we?
@Lew: P.S. Welcome to Moderation Limbo. We’ve all been there. It’s annoying, but it’s provoked a lot of informative speculation—i.e., the good kind.
@Chechar: I also want to apologize for the snotty tone of my remark in the earlier post. Obviously I think you’re dead wrong, but I wish I’d had the sense to confine my remarks to that and that alone. Or better yet, say nothing, rather than be pointlessly provocative.
@Pierre de Craon:
No problem. But talking about friendly discussions about Christianity’s role in modern liberalism, have you listened to the Guessedworker / Linder debate in a YouTube video I just linked in the Andrew Fraser thread? (that interview is just the tip of the iceberg of something much bigger).
@Pierre de Craon:
I do, of course, defer to you on this, as I said, I am not well informed on the issue. I am not even aware of the different forms you mention. Judging only by what I have seem here, it strikes me as a new charge like anti-semite or racist, that is, I disagree with what you said, but am unable to refute it, a way to end the argument because you cannot win it. Do we really want to adopt this as our own opprobrious epithet?
I also have reservations about the utility of the charge. It is thrown around with great abandon, thereby sowing seeds of distrust in a community that has very fragile bonds holding us together.
Perhaps my problem is that I so often agree with those who are so labeled. I look forward to some clarity on this issue.
@Matt Parrott:
IMHO – this discussion would be helped if we could all refer to some sort of a high level visualization of what a successful long term strategy would look like.
Visually….it would look something like a funnel, where the thin end represents our current position and the thick end represents the end result where we are essentially a powerful, broadbased movement with unstoppable momemtum.
Within this context, the question of raising the profile of concepts like NS, becomes not necessarily *if* but *when*.
If it is raised now, do we have sufficient lines of communication with which to rebuke the inevitable lines of attack on us for being national socialists?
The reality is that it could be the case that raising the profile of NS now is bad, whereas raising the profile further down the line becomes good.
I don’t think it helps to talk about these matters in absolute terms. However, I think in the current situation, without a common framework of understanding, it may not be possible to hold discussions like this without all of us, making huge assumptions about what the other person really means and so on.
Because of that…because we are all forcing the other side to ‘fill in the blanks’ about what we actually mean, which just results in all sides regarding the other sides as confirming their worst doubts as to their judgement…or motivation.
The real questions are not “Is it good?”, but “is it good now, at this stage, or would it be better at a later stage?”.
In order to really deal with this, there needs to be more insight as to what our current stage actually is.
The reality – as I see it – is that the current stage is that of weakness, therefore is primarily defined by the strength of the enemy and what their options/choices are, what sort of tactics on our part do they already anticipate and have pre-prepared slap-downs for.
@Chechar:
It seems we are destined not to have a meeting of the mind. You continue to refer me to other folks who do not present an argument, simply agree with and restate your opinion. It is roughly equivalent to referring a non-believer to a bible verse.
I wish I was such a good Christian that identifying me as such told you all you need to know about me. Alas, I fall far short of that standard.
@Alice Teller: I don’t cotton to the use of the term, period. As to its effect—more often than not pointlessly disruptive—I could not agree with you more.
What I was trying to say was that the mouth ought to be the servant of the brain, not the other way round. The brain needs to consider more things, and consider them more deeply and thoroughly, than it is ever wise or prudent to broadcast. I am sorry if a long answer obscured more than it clarified (as has happened before).
@Lew:
The repeated vileness of the accusations you make, without any supporting evidence, does not merit a reply. In case anyone else is interested, most of what I said is my own opinion, the fact that you disagree does not make it a lie anymore than it makes me a troll. If you believe, as you claim, that comments are a free for all, why have you attacked me repeatedly? Interesting double standard there.
I have said several times why I am not interested in being branded with the Hitler label. I often consider others, especially if I am their guest, as we all are here, even when they do not make vehement protests.
The reason I care is because I care about white freedom and I take comments sections seriously. If I visit a new site I often check the comments section. If most people there came across as nuts and idiots or simply vile and rude, I do not linger there. Perhaps I am alone in this. If I am not, then how we present ourselves to the larger white public matters. I have serious hopes of gaining allies, without which we will get no further than Wns have in the last 40 years. Since it is clear that we cannot persuade some people to consider anyone but themselves, the least I can do is to add another opinion that may appeal to more reasonable folks. I can assure you that I am not alone in this, just take a look at the Frazer thread. Yet, somehow, I am singled out for your insults.
Please do not address anything other than a reasoned argument to me. I have, several times replied to you with civil arguments, which you then ignore, change the subject, and raise a new charge. I am really not interested in any more of your name calling or insults.
@Pierre de Craon:
Nothing at all to apologize for, in this new age it seems that the young intuit things that I cannot even learn. Thank you for coming to my defense. It has been so many decades since I was likened to a pretty young girl, in any context, no matter how remote, that I am dizzy with it.
I look forward to your comments on the Frazer thread. To be honest, I know so little theology that it just seemed odd to me. It sure did bring out the misotheists! Simple unbelievers are fine, these folks are scary!
@Alice Teller: Barring a major change of heart, I shan’t be saying a word on the Fraser thread. It would at the very least be wasted breath (make that cyberbreath), don’t you think? My texts, were I so inclined to summon them up, might be the Synoptics’ references to shaking the dust of a place from one’s feet and to precisely the same wording to directly refer to Paul and Barnabas clearing out of Antioch after the local Foxmans got a former-day Mike Bloomberg to bring the police to bear in an attempt to arrest and kill them.
More to the immediate point, when one of the few voices raised in (strictly limited) defense of watered-down reason is “Tom,” with his usual smug string of LOLs, it is folly to be wise or even to urge wisdom as an option. My hat is off, however, to chad and several other folks who are shoveling sand against a tide of hatred, no matter how futile the effort.
This is not to say, however, that this beginning of Fraser’s multipart article is unpromising; far from it. I am very impressed. If he goes on to say in part 2 that the Fathers were uniform in interpreting the destruction of Jerusalem in Christian apocalyptic terms, he will be dead right. My only real quarrel with him so far is in his dating the termination of the Old Covenant to 70 A.D. This is a theological perspective I, as a Traditionalist Catholic, have simply never heard voiced. For those who have thought it important to define a precise moment for the changeover, the most commonly voiced option has long favored the rending of the temple veil as Christ expires on the Cross. Fraser somewhat misstates, too, the matter of the perpetuation of ritual circumcision among baptized Christians of non-Jewish origin. Paul and Barnabas didn’t do it, period, nor did others. And Fraser’s timeline here was way out of whack. The Council of Jerusalem took place in roughly the year 50. It was there where Paul’s respectful but very firm fraternal correction of Peter put a permanent end to the idea that circumcision or the Mosaic Law had any place in Christian life. (Well, more or less permanent. Here in the States, of course, Christophobic Jewish doctors convinced gullible Christians more than a century ago that circumcision was a terrific health measure. My own parents, alas, in common with virtually everyone their age, believed that wicked lie. It is, as you may know, still the default option in the maternity wards of a great many American hospitals.)
@Pierre de Craon:
I am disappointed whenever I hear that you will not add to the conversation. Perhaps it is envy, if I had your gift with words I fear no one could ever hush me up. Assuming that your time, energy and health permit, I urge you to use your talents. I certainly agree that there is very little hope of converting any other commenter, I certainly do not hope to do so. I do have smaller goals, I hope to teach some of the promising young that there are various levels of communication and disagreement between ” you are brilliant” and “you are an idiot”; failing that, one can be insulting without being vulgar and vile (my grandmother’s favorite bit of advice was ‘Only be rude on purpose’ she had some great ones); that there are rules of engagement between civilized folk who claim to represent the best of humanity; most of all I hope to, occasionally, give the message to those who may read the comments but never enter the conversation, that the waters are safe. You are among those whom I admired long before I ever entered the fray. I admit, given recent remarks, I may have to rethink my plan, I seem to bring out the very worst in some.
I am grateful for the little you did say on the Frazer piece, I am such a poor sinner that I always held Easter as the central date, never was good at details.
Heed me and the bard, O, while you live, tell the truth and shame the devil! Don’t bury those talents.
@Alice Teller: Yes, you are right, of course. Easter is the central date of human history: the permanent confirmation of the victory over death and evil. Apropos the veil, all I meant was that since the earliest Christian times, the Church Fathers interpreted the rending of the temple veil as the Gospel authors’ way of indicating “the abrogation of the old Mosaic cult and the way opened up by Christ into the messianic sanctuary” (note on Matt. 27:51, Jerusalem Bible). It’s also an interpretation that survived on both sides after the Reformation—and so few things did, alas.
As for reconsidering commenting on the Fraser thread, I’ll give it some thought. Your comments are so praiseful that I’m not sure whether to consider them a call to duty or a temptation to vanity!
@Pierre de Craon:
I’ll let you in on a little secret. You guys are wonderful in may ways, but until those venomous Jewish feminists persuaded so many poor foolish white girls to join them, white women ruled the world ( and made you guys happy) by using appeals to vanity in order to call you to duty. Ohhh so much is lost!
It is not, however, false vanity so let’s not have any false modesty. Not on this article in particular but in general we need to hear more from sane, sensible men, it does set a standard and makes the fools look …….???
@Trenchant:
OK Trenchant,Pierre, thanks.
One problem I have is that the key emerging hostile intellectual movement of tomorrow also puts Libertarianism at its core.
From their perspective…they envision America (say) moving toward a situation in which they are the dominant elite with the vast majority of the wealth. However, the society itself is a ruin of misery, ethnic strife, starvation maybe….thus a philosophy of extreme libertarianism becomes necessary to (a) prevent blame being put at the door of the elite and (b) justify extreme para-military brutality (in the cause of self-defense against an angry and desperate majority).
In the end – the way I see it – the Third World was always an example of Libertarianism-the-next-day. An elite that justifies itself by saying it would love for everyone to be free but that it has the right to self -defense against a violent and desperate majority.
That was always the third world man.
@Mickey Meadows:
I am inclined to agree with you. Pendulums swing. To a large extent the American experiment has been about attempts to find the proper balance. We have made wild swings in the process. Right now, libertarianism seems to be the proper corrective. Clever elites have used government power not on behalf of the people ( no matter how you define the good of the people) but to seize and hold power on their own behalf. As the government becomes more powerful, they both buy off large groups of people, (with other peoples money), and enrich themselves. We need a clean sweep, then to build again. We used to have some measure of balance, with the government checking big business and the media checking up on government. Never perfect, the system worked pretty well for a while. Now all three are the same
group, inbred and incestuous.
It looks like Jews at it again. Although we are now approaching the year 2013, Jews are embarking on yet another round of Hitler/NS vilification and historical distortion via a new Jew-approved edition of Mein Kampf.
This edition comes complete with Jew-approved annotations “condemning” Hitler’s arguments.
@Lew: The Tribe is famous for taking the long view. They already have their own annotated version of the New Testament; presumably it explains Matthew’s account of the Passion, with its … here it comes … virulently anti-Semitic scene in the courtyard, as the vomitus of a self-hating Jew and former employee (i.e., a publican) of the … virulently anti-Semitic Roman state. The three or four references in John to the Apostles’ “fear of the Jews” are now (and have been for many years) routinely emended to “fear of the people,” even in readings from the “altar” (what’s left of it) at the postconciliar (i.e., Novus Ordo) cartoon version of the Mass. Since Hitler is younger than Christ, as you know, by about 1,900 years, he really isn’t yet cold in the ground to our Hebrew friends.
In the late fifties, as I was approaching the age of fifteen, I asked my old man why he never read the Times (I’m from Hymietown, incidentally). Quoth he, “They don’t differentiate between news stories and editorials. I can make up my own mind.” In that way as in so many others, the Sulzberger rag was a harbinger of things to come. In these [ahem] end times (as our rapturoloony friends might say) no whisky is ever served neat. Requested or not, a Judaeofriendly chaser accompanies everything.
Interesting comments all. Why do I get the sense that despite how intelligent the article was as most of the comments, that it is a matter of consummatum est. Whatever takes the place of the current Jewish Power Structure will have to be an act of God. There is no way you can out-spend or out-organize the dominant system. The primary reason for the death of white culture is that the Catholic Church self destructed based on its interests of joining what it saw as the coming dominant power. By Vatican II it was all over for the whites. It held the J’s back for over a thousand years. Which isn’t a bad run considering what must be considered as a possibility, the length of years we will be under Jewish control. It will be grim. The CC despite its faults, was the only institution in Western history that kept the J’s at bay.
Alice Teller
May 3, 2012 – 10:30 pm | Permalink
@Mickey Meadows:
I am inclined to agree with you. Pendulums swing. To a large extent the American experiment has been about attempts to find the proper balance. We have made wild swings in the process. Right now, libertarianism seems to be the proper corrective.
Uh, the country was founded on liberty, not mixed economy. It was the mixed economy experiment of the last century that wrecked the country.
@TabuLa Raza:
And your point is?
When a White person embraces libertarian politics, he helps the Jew. Jews love it when Whites become libertarians, or see Whites suggesting to other Whites that libertarian ideas offer a solution to Whites’ problems. I’m Jews really cackle at the latter. The word “dupe,” which made an appearance earlier in this thread, applies in this context, too. Whites who promote libertarianism are dupes. They act as cannon fodder for Jewish interests by furthering an anti-White agenda without realizing it.
While Jews and other ethnic groups are working together to further their interests, Whites are running around atomistically in an amorphous, individualistic, ineffectual mass. Libertarianism reinforces this trend. This is a problem for Whites but not for Jews.
It should come as no surprise that Jews have been among the biggest promoters of libertarian theory: von Mises, Rand/Rosenbaum, Rothbard, Friedman, most of the Austrian economists, the list goes on.
Whites need to quit serving Jewish interests and embracing political ideas that further Jewish interests. This stance will require rejecting libertarianism, and encouraging other Whites to do the same.
@Pierre de Craon:
Excellent observations re: Jews, the long view, and the New Testament.
Yes, well, that is sickening news. I was not aware of that. Unfortunately, those kinds of dishonest, Jew-friendly changes to the Bible passages have wormed their way into protestant circles, too. According to a friend of mine, they’re now using a debased version of the Bible called The Message in his church.
Compare:
To:
No one spoke up for fear of the Jew. Sounds familiar.
Except, the modern translator took almost 50 words to say what the King James translator said in 12, and he dishonestly changed fear of the Jew to “Jewish leaders.”
I always push the King James version for this reason because I know it doesn’t have these Jew distortions. Jews hate the King James.
@Lew:
Many here do not seem to grasp the concept that Jews have shown the ability to pervert and twist any political or economic system to which they are permitted entre. Since FDR, government power has been used to favor Jewish interests. The Violence Against Women Act is a fine example. No decent person is for violence against women. Sounds nice, so huge sums of money, which we must borrow, at interest, are given to fight the problem. The sad thing is, however, that very little of the money goes to something that really helps these poor souls, like shelters. Instead, the money is awarded to groups with a track record in the field,
via grant applications.
So Jewish feminists with degrees in Women’s studies form a bureaucracy to read, evaluate and award funding to other women who are trained to be leaders in training for Judges, that the Constitution need not apply to men (and only men, the act does not apply to women) who have been accused of domestic violence, which, as defined, requires neither violence or even physical contact. Men may be required by law to attend shame sessions( in which acknowledgement of their evil ways is mandatory), held and graded by the same crowd in order to see their own children, even if there is no shred of evidence that he ever laid hands on anyone. Not surprisingly, many men hold this as an excellent reason not to marry and/or have children. All this from one tiny government plan. And yet, some think that the libertarian spirit would not be a corrective?