Semites, Self-Pity, Aggressiveness, and Censorship, Part 1: Jeremy Corbyn is not a shabbos Goy

The Jewish Chronicle is at it again, promoting a toxic anti-Semitic stereotype. Previously it claimed that Jews were “outsiders” whose “paranoia” and “arrogance” brought about their own downfall. Now it’s claiming that Jews prefer to work “behind the scenes” in British politics. This is the classic stereotype of Jews as conspirators and manipulators, evading public scrutiny as they shape supposedly democratic governments to their own ends.

Shy, tongue-tied Jews

The Chronicle made this claim as it described how, for once, the Jewish community has decided to work in the open. British Jews want the current Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn to be a well-trained shabbos goy like Tony Blair and Theresa May, funded by Jewish money and obedient to Jewish wishes. But Corbyn isn’t a shabbos goy and their best efforts have failed to turn him into one. They couldn’t operate “behind the scenes” in Corbyn’s Labour party, so they’ve had to come out into the open:

Yesterday’s Enough Is Enough rally was the most extraordinary event of my almost ten years as editor of the JC [Jewish Chronicle]. We are not, by nature, an angry community. Nor do we take to the streets. When we have a worry, we — more often than not — talk for ever to ourselves about it and then, perhaps, try to talk behind the scenes to the powers that be.

Guiding a goy: Jeremy Corbyn and the Board of Deputies

So when, on Sunday, the Board of Deputies and the JLC [Jewish Leadership Council] proposed a rally at Parliament Square, and issued a strongly worded open letter to Jeremy Corbyn, there was an intake of breath in some quarters. Not the way we do things. Not enough people will turn up. It will backfire. No one will care.

But the naysayers were wrong. Such is the level of anger — and, one has to say, fear — in our community over the indulgence of antisemitism from the leadership of the Labour Party that over 1500 people came with 24 hours[’] notice just a few days before Pesach [Passover] to make clear their feelings. … (The JC Comment Blog No.8: the antisemites stand together. So should we, The Jewish Chronicle, 27th March 2018 /11th Nisan 5778)

There’s some interesting self-pity and self-delusion in that blog at the Jewish Chronicle. Take the idea that Jews “are not, by nature, an angry community” and that they “talk for ever” to themselves about their worries before “perhaps” trying “to talk behind the scenes to the powers that be.” This picture of Jews as mild-mannered, self-effacing and reluctant to complain does not match the reality of Jewish power and characteristically aggressive Jewish psychology. Would a non-aggressive people attempt to alter the ethnic balance of the country they live in so as to make the natives a minority?

Treating Blair like a child

If you want to see the reality, take a look at a story from the days of New Labour, when the Jewish money-man Lord Levy controlled policy through his shabbos goy Tony Blair. Levy was described as “undoubtedly the notional head of British Jewry” by the Jerusalem Post. Two potential donors to New Labour, John and Courtney Coventry, described what happened when they met Levy and Blair:

“We were greeted by Jane Hogarth [a New Labour official] and taken to meet Lord Levy. He was like an animated cartoon, with large gestures and an overbearing personality. He discussed donations and how appreciative the party would be, especially Mr Blair. He said he would introduce us to ‘Tony’ and Jack Straw [the half-Jewish Home Secretary], Alastair Campbell [Blair’s thuggish spin-doctor] and various others. He said we would have plenty of time with Tony.” Then they [John and Courtney Coventry] witnessed an extraordinary exchange. Lord Levy was taking a call when the Prime Minister walked over to him and started to speak. Courtney said: “Lord Levy held up his hand and said, ‘Not now, Tony,’ and went back to his phone call. The Prime Minister turned to walk away and Lord Levy said, ‘Tony, wait, I need to speak to you.’

“I thought, ‘My God, what a way to talk to a Prime Minister.’ But Mr Blair stood there like a puppet on a string while Levy continued his phone call for at least a couple of minutes. Then he turned to the Prime Minister without apology for keeping him waiting and launched into a conversation about the importance of the evening. Here was the leader of your Government being treated like a child. Jane Hogarth, Lord Levy and Tony Blair all acted like this was normal.” (Lord Cashpoint, the bogus count and his porn star wife, The Daily Mail, 24th March 2007)

But it was normal. Blair knew his place: as gentile frontman for a Judaeocracy, that is, a government funded and controlled by Jews. That’s why, as the Jewish Chronicle has reported, he “was conscious of the need to have very, very good relations” with “the Jewish community.” He knew that if he obeyed orders, he would get to feed first his narcissism in office and then his avarice out of office. Blair is now a very rich man with a “staffed office” in Tel Aviv and a roaming commission from the Israeli arms-industry. Gordon Brown, his replacement as Labour leader and prime minister, was also a dedicated shabbos goy.

Corbyn can’t be controlled with money

When the Conservatives regained power in 2010, they were led first by the shabbos goy David Cameron, who is part-Jewish, and then the shabbos shiksa Theresa May, who may also be part-Jewish. Cameron’s Labour opponent was Ed Miliband, son of the Jewish Marxist Ralph Miliband; May’s Labour opponent is Jeremy Corbyn. And Corbyn is not a shabbos goy. Unlike Blair, he isn’t interested in money and he doesn’t want to become a millionaire by serving Jewish interests. That’s why British Jews and their shabbos goyim have been trying to topple him ever since he became Labour leader. Unfortunately, he’s very popular among ordinary Labour members and he easily defeated a leadership challenge in 2016.

Nor do Mossad and its allies seem to have any useful dirt on Corbyn. Otherwise the dirt would have surely have been used against him by now. Instead, the anti-Corbynites have incessantly wailed about anti-Semitism in the Labour party and tried, so far in vain, to paint Corbyn himself as an anti-Semite. Corbyn’s response to the accusations was very psychologically interesting: “The idea that I’m some kind of racist or anti-semitic person is beyond appalling, disgusting and deeply offensive. I have spent my life opposing racism. Until my dying day I will be opposed to racism in any form.”

He sounded like a religious believer being accused of heresy or blasphemy. That’s not surprising, because the same psychological mechanisms may be at work. Left-wing politics, like religion, is not intended to describe and explain reality, but to satisfy the emotions of its adherents. Corbyn likes to think of himself as a good person, which is why he is so indignant at being accused of the abomination of racism. In essence, he is claiming that his purity of heart shields him from all doctrinal error.

The recalcitrance of reality

But this is an extraordinarily naïve and unsophisticated view both of human nature and of how the world works. Although Sigmund Freud was not the first to identify the importance of the subconscious, Freudianism has been highly influential on the left and should have taught left-wingers to be suspicious of their own motives and behaviour. Why, then, are people like Corbyn and Hillary Clinton so certain of their own purity and goodness? Rationally speaking, they shouldn’t be, because they are imperfect and fallible human beings. But as I pointed out: left-wing politics isn’t rational or realistic. It’s designed to satisfy emotions and many human beings want to feel virtuous and holy.

That’s why left-wingers ignore both their own subconscious and what might be called the recalcitrance of reality. History is full of proof that good intentions do not guarantee good outcomes. We even have a name for it: the law of unintended consequences. Corbyn and millions of other left-wingers don’t recognize it or don’t regard it as important. Their blithe self-assurance is one of the many ways in which Marxism and other left-wing movements are descended from Christianity. I myself reject Christianity because I think, inter alia, that it teaches one to be careless about outcomes. It is purity of heart that wins one a place in Heaven, not perfection of outcome.

“Small, moderate and timorous…”

Blair’s response to the disastrous Iraq war is a good example of how religious beliefs can corrupt behaviour. On the one hand, yes, it’s true that the war cost trillions of dollars and caused huge amounts of death and suffering without turning Iraq into a model democracy. But on the other hand, Tony still feels that it was the right thing to do. He will face God with a clear conscience. In the meantime, he is being very well-rewarded for attacking an enemy of Israel, because the Iraq war was undoubtedly in large part a Jewish project. Lord Levy supported it and Blair did what Levy wanted. Jeremy Corbyn, by contrast, was a strong opponent of the war and correctly predicted that it would be a disaster. After all, Corbyn is not a shabbos shiksa. His political priorities are virtue-signalling and ethnic pandering, not serving Jewish interests.

The Iraq war was one of the two major crimes committed by Blair and New Labour. The central Jewish role in the war contradicts the verbose and self-righteous Jewish novelist Howard Jacobson, who has waxed lyrical about “what a small, moderate, not to say timorous force in British society Jews are.” The Iraq war was not “moderate.” Nor was New Labour’s second major crime, the opening of Britain’s borders to Eastern Europe and the Third World:

Labour let in 2.2million migrants during its 13 years in power — more than twice the population of Birmingham. Lord Glasman, 49, had already told BBC Radio 4 recently [in 2011]: ‘What you have with immigration is the idea that people should travel all over the world in search of higher-paying jobs, often to undercut existing workforces, and somehow in the Labour Party we got into a position that that was a good thing. Now obviously it undermines solidarity, it undermines relationships, and in the scale that it’s been going on in England, it can undermine the possibility of politics entirely.’

The academic, who directs the faith and citizenship programme at London Metropolitan University, criticised Labour for being ‘hostile to the English working class’. He said: ‘In many ways [Labour] viewed working-class voters as an obstacle to progress. Their commitment to various civil rights, anti-racism, meant that often working-class voters… were seen as racist, resistant to change, homophobic and generally reactionary. So in many ways you had a terrible situation where a Labour government was hostile to the English working class.’ (Miliband ally attacks Labour migration ‘lies’ over 2.2m they let in Britain, The Daily Mail, 16th April 2011)

Lord Glasman was a Jewish insider in Blair’s government. He correctly recognized that Labour was “hostile” to the White working class. Alastair Campbell was a gentile insider in Blair’s government. He correctly recognized that Blair “was conscious of the need to have very, very good relations” with “the Jewish community.” In other words, Blair was subservient to the hostile Jewish elite. That’s why New Labour waged the Iraq war and opened the borders. It was serving Jewish interests even as it worked against the interests of the White working-class.

Go  to Part 2.

90 replies
  1. David Ashton
    David Ashton says:

    Problem: May’s “Conservatives” are friendly to Israel and none too enthusiastic friends of multicultural/Islamic colonization, following an austerity policy re teachers, police and defense. Corbyn’s “Marxists” and “Jewdas” are very friendly towards Palestinians and multicultural colonization, opposed to an austerity policy re the health service.

    How to “vote” in the next “election”? Any suggestions?

    • Rick
      Rick says:

      What is the deal with UKIP?

      Another kosher front or bought off like the BNP?

      The failure of you Brits to rally around a nationalist party is your mortal wound.

      • Nick Dean
        Nick Dean says:

        We are not known to be mortally wounded, Rick.

        Our people are naturally nationalist even if the *nationalist* parties offered up by the establishment weirdly are not.

      • Curmudgeon
        Curmudgeon says:

        UKIP was created to destroy the BNP. John Tyndall had predicted that it would be infiltrated by government agents, and at one point questioned whether Nick Griffin was the agent. As problematic as Nick Griffin’s leadership was, the BNP was still generally on its track. My guess is that UKIP is a front, and the infiltrators finally got to the BNP.

    • Dave Bowman
      Dave Bowman says:

      How to “vote” in the next “election”? Any suggestions?

      Since you ask, I discovered this group just two weeks ago, following an unjustified savaging in parts of the mainstream media for its Founder, Gregory Lauder-Frost.

      http://traditionalbritain.org/about/

      They are basically a (tiny) group of disillusioned, extremist (by today’s standards), old-school English Oxford/Cambridge Conservatives, and I frankly doubt whether they have any chance whatever even of putting together a fully paid-up, nationally-organised political party before the next Election – let alone actually finding or fielding candidates for 650 constituencies. What they seem to need right now more than anything else – apart of course from funding – is a fully-working political HQ, professional marketing and publicity advice, and a Manifesto.

      Having said that, I would consider joining them, as

      1) they appear to understand the heart of the Islamic immigration problem

      2) I suspect that in secret they understand the basics of the JQ also

      3) amazingly the annual membership fee is very small

      For now, as an added wall – if a minor one – in the construction of a new populist White consciousness, I wonder whether they could perhaps be useful.

      • Sophie Johnson
        Sophie Johnson says:

        Ah, ‘The Lord Sudeley’! Dave, I have long wanted to know what happened to the nation’s aristocracy, the natural leaders of the land, since the chabbos goy Blair replaced them with the ‘Lord’ Sugars and assorted trash of his ilk. Now, suddenly, a real Lord pops up. (Thanks for him, Dave!) There was already Jacob Rees-Mogg. My desperate hope is that these two are the testers of the water: checking whether we are ready yet to recall them into positions of leadership. Velet Deus, velent dei.

          • Sophie Johnson
            Sophie Johnson says:

            Right, T.J. 🙂 I found something like that (‘velvet’, I think) when I tried to google the phrase to check my rusty Latin. But in case your search has been ultimately less successful than mine: The Latin ‘volāre’ means ‘to have a will’. So ‘velet Deo, velent dei’ means ‘Let God and the gods will it’ (one verb, velet, singular, the other, velent, plural). Alternately, it means ‘Inshalla’. (Sorry: I had to.)

          • Franklin Ryckaert
            Franklin Ryckaert says:

            @Sophie Johnson

            Volāre means “to fly” in Latin. “To wish” or “to will” is velle in Latin.”May God will” is Deus velit, and “may the gods will” is dei velint, but the usual saying is Deo volente, which means “God willing”.

          • Sophie Johnson
            Sophie Johnson says:

            Franklyn, what do you make of this:

            ‘Vellet Deus,
            vellent dii … ‘ (Orf, Carmina Burana, ‘Circa Mea Pectora’)

            Trans:
            ‘May God grant,
            May the gods grant’

            Mine was pretty poorly spelt. And I was right off with the stem: the Present Infinitive is in fact ‘velle’: to wish, to want, to be willing’. See http://latindictionary.wikidot.com/verb:velle

          • Franklin Ryckaert
            Franklin Ryckaert says:

            @ Sophie Johnson

            vellet Deus and vellent dii is from the imperfect subjunctive. Translation : “might God grant”, “might the gods grant”.

            “May God grant” and “may the gods grant” should be in the present subjunctive : velit Deus, velint dei.

      • pterodactyl
        pterodactyl says:

        Dave Bowman – the other option is for ‘right-wing’ people to change UKIP into something that fulfills this role. UKIP could change into being more nationalistic – just as ‘traditionalbritain’ could end up starting nationalistic then going mainstream if it became successful. The Party today (UKIP or Traditional Britain) is not the same as the future version, just as the MSM parties have also changed of over the years.

    • Johnny Rottenborough
      Johnny Rottenborough says:

      David Ashton—Regardless of the level of Conservative enthusiasm for ‘multicultural/Islamic colonization’, Conservatives governments have made no effort in the last 70 years to halt or reverse it. The Conservatives drape themselves in the Union Jack and pretend to be patriotic but their deeds in government belie their words.

      I would only vote for a nationalist party. Given that the British Establishment is adept at bludgeoning nascent nationalist parties to death, I don’t expect to vote at the next election. Or the one after that…

      • David Ashton
        David Ashton says:

        @ Johnny R.
        Agree about “Conservatives” when in Govt. May is a “race, gender, class” egalitarian.

        Note Simon Franks, Richard Reed and other millionaires are planning a new Left-Centre party to challenge “anti-Semitic” Corbyn and replace the Lib Dems.

    • nomor whitey
      nomor whitey says:

      How to vote in the next election? When it comes to pivitol issues like the EU, mass migration, thought control, speech restrictions, white dispossession, cultural marxism etc, Labour and Tories are united. We therefore have a one party state dressed up as a democratic choice. Any vote for these two merely legitimises the fraud. Withholding your vote will delegitimise the system

  2. Karen T
    Karen T says:

    Tobias Langdon, thank you for writing another dead-on analysis of the disease eating away at the West. The Guardian article “God Will Judge Me ” wherein Tony claims to have a clear conscience was a cynical pandering to the peanut gallery, except in this case the aim was not to incite criticism. “Oh mortal man, is there anything you cannot be made to believe.” (Adam Weishaupt)

    • Dave Bowman
      Dave Bowman says:

      “Peanut gallery”.. LOL

      But in answer to Adam Weishaupt, who as a Jew should have known better, Yes, In fact I for one have always believed that the vast majority of (Christian) Whites are largely incapable of understanding or believing that some religions (ie. Judaism, Islam) are inherently, incorrigibly and irredeemably evil.

      • T. J.
        T. J. says:

        They may have a hard time believing, considering a lifetime of indoctrination in the opposite direction. . .supposing that (Christian) Whites had been taught what we know, for an entire life.

        • Sophie Johnson
          Sophie Johnson says:

          Ah, T.J., nostalgia swells: certainly our patents’/grandparents’ generation knew no jew-worship cult. That cult had not gone into mass-production mose until 1945. A few more satiricals like those our singbird Alsion Chabloz puts out, and the cult will die out, rapidly. But we can help: Nowadays, when someone tells me something corny like ‘jews are a brilliant an creative people’, I ask for evidence of at least three. They are at a loss to come up with even one. And that is not surprising, for how many stupid, totally untalented jews do you know? More, I bet, than the mythical brilliant kind.

    • Nick Dean
      Nick Dean says:

      Out of interest – was it in your view a crime against White interests, European interests, or Christian interests?

      It was after all, the most deadly intra-European conflict of the post WWII era. Not enough is written about those wars in our circles.

      • Charles Frey
        Charles Frey says:

        Nick, according to a former Chief of the Federal German Intelligence Service [BND] near Munich, the aggression was primarily driven by the Western Allies in order to shoe-horn the former Communist, but still recalcitrant, newly-fractured Regimes, into the West’s financial, controlling, elite-capturing and profitable octopus framework.

        • Curmudgeon
          Curmudgeon says:

          Is it co-incidental that Camp Bondsteel was created, Afghanistan invaded, and Europe was flooded with heroin? Yugoslavia was dismantled to re-establish the drug smuggling and stop Russia’s influence in the region.

    • Dave Bowman
      Dave Bowman says:

      I’m perfectly certain he has not forgotten any such thing. But in this context it is not of foremost importance.

  3. Salam Fouad
    Salam Fouad says:

    By supporting and encouraging massive islamic immigration to Europe, Jews have dug the grave of their presence in Europe. Crimes agaist Jews have already started in France and Germany. However, as an Iraqi citizen, I do always wonder about the level of knowledge of Left, liberal and right-wingers about Islam and its culture . Do political elites and members of the political parties in the West, have an idea about the savagery, barbarism, violence, racism and backwardness in the Islamic world?.. My answer, and perhaps I’m wrong, is : No.

    • Michael
      Michael says:

      That is your problem if you claim to be from Iraq. As a Western White-Nationalist, I care more about our people and our race, not whether you are liberal, conservative, civilized or barbarian. All non-Whites should go back to were they came from.

    • Dave Bowman
      Dave Bowman says:

      Your answer, whilst logical, is entirely incorrect. Our ruling hostile elite are perfectly well acquainted with the barbarous, blood-soaked, satanic evils of the Islamic world. But it is in their own short-term, wholly corrupt, political self-interest to ignore and deny it completely, and instead to compromise the peoples of their own nations and cultures, by selling their ancestral homelands to aggressive, murderous third-world hordes, whose long-term racist goal is to destroy us all.

      In other words, they are Race Traitors, for which reason, when the final war is over, they will hang from the lampposts. My only wish is that I will be there to see it.

      • Floda
        Floda says:

        Dave, you have put into fine words a murderous thought I have had in my head for a very long time.

      • T. J.
        T. J. says:

        I know what’s going on in the mexican’s backyard, which adjoins my backyard.

        A crowing rooster. . .mexicans are seemingly blase toward noise that would drive humans insane. Anyone here believing that mexes are human, look at this:
        https://tinyurl.com/ydycxntl. . .la vida loca [the crazy life]. . .self-description

        • Karen T
          Karen T says:

          Hilarious, considering that Irene didn’t know that the Russian oligarchs were Jewish, or thought that she could pull one over on us. The greatest errors made in war were/are underestimating the enemy, so their arrogance may work to our advantage.

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      Salam Fouad: “By supporting and encouraging massive islamic immigration to Europe, Jews have dug the grave of their presence in Europe.”
      – true, but if they could rewind the clock they would do exactly the same again.

      It is like saying to a divorcing couple, ‘you can have half each of the house and money’ – and they KNOW this, but choose, freely and without pressure or coercion, instead of this they choose to turn down this option and instead decide to go for the other option of prolonged stress of litigation for two years at the end of which there is zero left for either of them and the lawyers get it all. If you offer them a time machine to rewind the clock, they would do exactly the same again.

      Hatred and spite are far stronger than self-interest.

      There are some (tribes, lefties) who will gladly sink the luxury liner in which they have one of the best cabins. They know they will go down with the ship, but still devote their lives to sinking it.

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      We should never expect humans to behave rationally or in their own best interests. Humans are controlled by animal behaviour instincts that get activated, but there is no deep thought process involved, ie working out if it is in their interest or not is not part of the process. Humans are controlled by very basic instincts that become activated, and never by debating the pros and cons. This aspect (carefully considering best interests) is not part of the process (except for a small minority).

      This is why the Jews do nothing to preserve the stability of the host countries where they live, as they are slaves to their behaviour patterns and not to self interest. Their behaviour patterns were selected when desert tribes fought each other, and this gave them hostility to other tribes, and fierce loyalty to their own. They are no longer fighting other tribes in the desert, but they retain the hostility, and now misdirect it towards the host countries of the Western world who give them their wealth and offer friendship.

      Sadly, one aspect of this lack of thought about things is that the people readily bow to the current culture, without ever thinking about whether it is in their own interest or not. At present the left are setting the culture in collusion with others who hate us, and the people identify the culture of self hatred and seem quite happy to go along with it. This self-hatred is an example of something that is clearly against our self-interest (inviting Africa over to the West is not in our interest, however ‘fair’ it is from the point of view of the left) and yet the people readily follow it, just because it is the current dominant culture.

      Here are some other examples of the way self-interest is not considered when joining in the group behaviour:

      In WWII the Allies’ young men rushed to sign up, but in no queue ever was there a discussion of the rights and wrongs of Germany’s land claims, and whether the War was in our best interests. This did not enter the equation. These discussions of best interest never took place.

      As soon as ‘we’ were at war with ‘them’, at this point everything we did was right and everything they did was wrong. The leaders provided a few reasons for the war, a few key phrases, and everyone readily accepted them without much thought – such questioning would be ‘disloyal’ once their war instincts were activated.

      The point is that this colossal war took place due to instincts being activated, not because the War was in our interest, which it clearly was not.

      Another example is the blacks in S.Africa choosing the path that leads to poverty and anarchy, ie hostility to the whites who provide them with their wealth and food. They can see the consequences of this played out in Zimbabwe, and how the blacks there are worse off, but they still chose the same fate for themselves. So they are behaving tribally and being racist against whites in the full knowledge that it is not in their own interests. Their own interests would be to keeps the whites happy, but this is certainly not the path they are choosing. They are slaves to their behaviour instincts, even when they know this will end badly for them.

  4. Danelaw
    Danelaw says:

    We still lose with Corbyn. This is beyond political partisan loyalties.

    His Momentum nutters are controlled by Jews. Some of his defenders are also Jewish – they are playing both sides.

    He is also fully dedicated to non-whites like his token negro Diane Abbott who is overtly anti-white. His failure to directly address Pakistani men preying on neglected working class girls is another unpardonable sin. In fact he is just a tool of unions – he doesn’t represent the ordinary WHITE working class. He has refused to commit himself to limiting immigration because his non-white voters would object. He has also changed his mind on Brexit despite being on record condemning the EU as far back as 1996.

    This whole “anti-semitism” fanfare like the attack on Putin is just an attempt to divert attention from the latest grooming scandal in Telford. It is a replay of Rotherham – they started talking about Jimmy Saville after he was dead and was allowed to molest girls unfettered for years.

    • Dave Bowman
      Dave Bowman says:

      All of this is completely true, and I have no doubt at all that the brilliant Mr Langdon is very well aware of it. But in this essay he is addressing primarily the subject of Corbyn’s refusals to cooperate overtly with the extended Jewish lobby in London – which is admirable, and very deeply important for White interests.

    • Vehmgericht
      Vehmgericht says:

      Since the defenestration of Enoch Powell no overtly pro-White politician has been allowed near the upper echelons of the mainstream British political parties. The domainant ‘managerialist’ style of Blair, Cameron and (less successfully) May means that it is out of the question to impugn the UK’s ‘state religion’ of Diveristy-NHS-Tolerance even though many realise it it no longer ‘fit for purpose’.

      Corbyn is implacably and viscerally opposed to White Ethnonationalism, but he is an Old School Socialist, for workers’ rights and redistribution but not so keen on the fractious ‘Rainbow Coalition’ of Identity Politics causes and grievances. He’s at least shown himself to be his own man on the EU and he is standing up to the elite media’s effort to character assassinate him on ginned-up charges of ‘antisemitism’.

      We are now at a point where the identikit managerialist politicians such as May, Merkel and Macron are more pernicious to the survival of Europa than some species of socialists. If you want to throw a spanner in the works of those people and the machine they represent, I would suggest considering a tactical value for Corbyn.

    • Curmudgeon
      Curmudgeon says:

      The real trade union movement was destroyed by Margaret Thatcher. The old style trade unionists supported Enoch Powell and were overtly anti-immigration, because they understood it lowered wages and increased housing costs. The much vilified Arthur Scargill’s “crime” was to challenge Thatcher closing “unprofitable” (not enough profit) mines while importing cheap coal from South Africa. He was no “friend” of immigration. Today’s trade union leaders are SJWs and heavily influenced by those whose tribe must not be named.

  5. Rick
    Rick says:

    With all due respect to Mr. Langdon, they don’t like Jeremy Corbyn for the same reason they have tried to tarnish Jimmy Carter – sympathy for Palestinian underdogs.

    Leftwingers defying the Lobby isn’t exactly progress. The Scottish Negro Party also refused to cave in on the early release of Libyan Al Magrahi over Lockerbie, but the party is still committed to race replacement in Scotland.

    Scottish Taxpayer-Funded ‘Art Video’ Calls Whites ‘In-bred Spawn Soon To Die Out’
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOcu-rJs8B0

    Sure he may not fight their wars but Jeremy Corbyn’s BS “shadow cabinet” is full of imported Third World parasites as per the Jewish agenda.

  6. DH
    DH says:

    “It is purity of heart that wins one a place in Heaven, not perfection of outcome.”
    Catholic and Orthodox Christianity are not represented by such reductionism. Some of the Protestant sects might though.

  7. jerry
    jerry says:

    Marxism and left-wing movements are descended from Christianity? So rabbi karl marx/mordecai levy the communist was a Christian? Wow, communism comes from your Babylonian Talmud and so does usury based capitalism. The bolshevik French Revolution and the bolshevik revolution in Russia were Christian endeavors? That is a blatant lie if I ever heard one.

    • Trenchant
      Trenchant says:

      “It is purity of heart that wins one a place in Heaven, not perfection of outcome.”

      One wonders how many unmarked graves around the world are attributable to that very same perfection.

      • Saint Augustine
        Saint Augustine says:

        Source for your quote?

        Wherever the quote is from its definitely not consistent with Christian doctrine. The Bible doesn’t teach that purity of heart wins “one a place in heaven”, only justification through faith in Christ accomplishes that (John 3:16, John 5:24, Romans 3:28, Romans 5:1, 9, etc.)

        “One wonders how many unmarked graves around the world are attributable to that very same perfection.”

        That’s easy, zero. The only one that ever achieved such perfection didn’t stay in the grave very long.

        One wonders how many people around the world live lives invested in platitudes like “purity of heart..” and never grasp the implicit self-idolatry.

      • Saint Augustine
        Saint Augustine says:

        Platitudes. When you boil it down its self-idolatry.

        Makes a nice bumper sticker and may touch the emotions, but good luck bringing clear definition to “purity of heart” and then establishing by what authority your framework/definition is valid. Once that’s done, what about the purity of heart standard(s) others seek to live by and their superiority to your own? How do you establish where the cutoff to qualify for heaven is? What if the standard which you deem to be appropriate actually falls woefully short?

        One wonders if there is any connection b/t “purity of heart” and outcome… 🙂

    • James
      James says:

      Yeah they do marxism and universal egalitarianism is a christian ideal. christianity is not a racially conscious or “pro white” religion it is not. Islam is pro Arab and racially conscious and judaism is racially conscious and pro Jew. Christianity is neither and unlike the other two has no racial realism about blacks or darker races.

      • Sophie Johnson
        Sophie Johnson says:

        ‘Egalitarianism’ is not a Christian ideal, James. That psuedo-concept is the commie perversion of the Christian item of faith, ‘we are all equal before God’ .

        That is, for the Christian who can still think logically, ‘seeing as equal’ is God’s, not man’s, capacity. So man is not obligated by it, for man cannot acquire the capacities of God.

        The counter-intuitive insistence of egalitarianism is that there is no natural hierarchy of people in human societies. But that is nothing other than the strategy that licenses the suppression of the best and most talented among us. And who but a ‘hostile elite’ is interested in doing that? (Sadly, many of our Christian clergy are the hostile elite, and many others are too thick to see throught the hostile elite’s suppression strategies.)

    • Allison
      Allison says:

      When one is a believer in an Abraham religion, it is difficult to remain objective to any form of critique.
      Acts 4:32–35
      “All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.”
      Acts 11:29
      Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judaea:
      Luke 14:33
      So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
      Luke 14:26
      “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters–yes, even their own life–such a person cannot be my disciple.
      Matthew 10:34-36
      “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35″For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; 36and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household.”
      Luke 6:27-36
      “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29 If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. 30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back.
      Luke 6:27-36
      He said to him, “One thing you still lack; sell all that you possess and distribute it to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”
      1 Corinthians 10:24

      “Let no one seek his own good, but that of his neighbor.” – 
      Galatians 3:28
      “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
      1 Peter 2:18
      Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.

      • Irene
        Irene says:

        Thanks for the quotations Allison; now I know where Marx got his subversive, nihilistic ideas from: The semitic “holy” Bible!

      • Trenchant
        Trenchant says:

        Individual charity is quite distinct from socialized charity. Most of today’s “giving” is of others’ money.

      • Karen T
        Karen T says:

        Have you also read Natures Eternal Religion by Ben Klassen? Bobby Fisher said that it was rough, understandable, as it was written by a Canadian ‘bohunk’ but basically true and I agree.

    • PaleoAtlantid
      PaleoAtlantid says:

      What cannot be denied is the Christian churches, with the possible exception of the Orthodox, are eager and willing acolytes of globalism and general leftism. If by some miracle our civilization and race manage to survive the planned murders and gulags, the tribunal of history will indite the Churches, all of them, as accomplices and accessories to the crime of (attempted) genocide.

    • Irene
      Irene says:

      You’ll find that all the Marxist dogmas originate from Christianity, starting with monogenism. Hundreds of years of equalitarian brainwashing by Christianity is the main reason Nationalism is a hard sell to the masses. Christian-marxist universalism means national suicide!

    • Michael Adkins
      Michael Adkins says:

      Jerry,

      “That is a blatant lie if I ever heard one”

      Are you saying there is no European blood on the hands of Abrahamic religions?

    • Franklin Ryckaert
      Franklin Ryckaert says:

      Nothing in her background indicates Jewish origin, but she is a perfect shabbos goy. Here is what she said :

      “Without its Jews, Britain would not be Britain, just as without its Muslims, Britain would not be Britain – without its Sikhs, Hindus, Christians and people of other faiths, Britain would not be Britain.”

    • Charles Frey
      Charles Frey says:

      I know little of Vatican Two: but let me make a suggestion, which would stop anti-Semitism in a long week: saving the world hundreds of billions per annum in general public taxes in its futile, but lucrative and politically profitable attempt to protect a minute minority.

      01 Get the attention of the entire Governmental Israeli Rabbinate, which everywhere else demands the separation of Church and State; including that Official Rabbi who recently added artichokes to the vital list of non-kosher edibles.

      02 Submit to them all documentation of V-2, including all their pleadings, cajoling, transcripts and uncontested protocols, urging Rome to change course in the interest of interfaith understanding and coexistence, including its catechism.

      03 Exchange each reference to Rome with that of Judaism and vice-versa, on each document and within its text.

      04 Keep it brief: so add no more than four-hundred pages of Christians’ complaints about Talmud hatred and boiling excrement disrespect towards us. No more than fifty regarding their RULES on mother-son sex and sexual relations with minors. Include a brief study by a gynecologist, proving Rabbi Grosskotz wrong, who opined, habitually irrefutably, that hymen in three-year old girls simply close back up after defilement.

      05 Oppose their laments, that they cannot change the personal habits of their 50,000 year-old people, with the encouragement, that at least they should attempt it through their otherwise correctly bragged-of internal group discipline. Form a Lobby.

      06 End with a threat of hell-fire and damnation in case of a single breach.

      07 Then demand a reciprocal formal, and particularly multiply- witnessed, videoed signature below a ratified translation.

      Presto !

      • Mari
        Mari says:

        Charles Frey,

        So Jews approve of mother son sex as well as sex between fathers and daughters, blood, not marriage related uncles and nieces as well as babies a year and a day?

        Ayi yiiyiii

        • Charles Frey
          Charles Frey says:

          Thanks for correctly completing my insufficient list of cultural accomplishments. [ Baby girls ” three years and a day “. ]

    • Trenchant
      Trenchant says:

      Come on, those placards are just Charlie Hebdo P.R.. Since “Ich bin ein Berliner!” that style of posturing has become very fashionable. Those holding “Je suis Ahmed” aren’t Muslim, either.

    • William B Travis
      William B Travis says:

      The link (https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/552727/Theresa-May-Jewish-Britain-anti-Semitism-terror-attacks), which is NOT a TOO article, clearly shows Theresa May holding up a sign saying she is Jewish. It doesn’t get any clearer than that.

      Even the caption under the picture plainly says, “Eric Pickles and Theresa May hold up signs saying ‘I am Jewish’ “.

      Having ignored reality, you then appeal to Semitic Controversies which is effete garbage.

      I wonder if anyone proofread that SC article you cited because the article itself is tripe.

      From that article:

      “Neither of these assertions is true and the explanation of this choice of Christian name is rather more prosaic. Since in reality May’s grandmother Violet Welland chose it, because she was highly religious and Zaidee was the name of Abraham’s wife in the Old Testament. (7)”

      Remind me, again, who Jews trace their ancestry back to? Oh wait.. Its Abraham. And, who was Abraham’s wife? Sarah (Sarai, Zaidee, etc). Thus making it a fitting choice for a Jewish woman.

      • Trenchant
        Trenchant says:

        Well, that sign sure wasn’t hers. “Juive” is the feminine form of Jew. “Juif” – the one she bears – is the masculine one. This was just a street performance with mass-produced placards for everyone to join in. Solidarity with the eternal victim.

        Come back with some credible proof and I’ll reconsider.

  8. Franklin Ryckaert
    Franklin Ryckaert says:

    There seems to be a “Hegelian dialectic” at work in politics of western countries, by which the Jews who control the process always attain their goals.
    There are two parties : 1) a right-wing or “conservative” party, 2) a left-wing or “progressive” party. The right-wing party is for aggressive wars (for Israel), but against cultural Marxism. The left-wing party is against foreign wars but for cultural Marxism. Every time one party rules half of the Jewish agenda is fulfilled. So after two alternative administrations the whole of the Jewish agenda is fulfilled, which is wars for Israel and cultural Marxism. Jeremy Corbyn’s fault is that he as a left-wing politician really cares about the Palestinian underdog in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. “Caring about the underdog” is indeed a Jewish tactic to undermine society, but that is meant for gentile society, not Israeli society. Besides, Corbyn cannot be bribed or blackmailed, so the “small, moderate, not to say timorous” Jewish community of Britain has a problem.

  9. Invictus
    Invictus says:

    Jeremy Corbyn, as a “true believer”, is virtually unique among senior politicians in the Western world.

    I see both Tony Blair and Hillary Clinton as more typical, unprincipled opportunists; classic cases of personality disorder.

  10. Tom
    Tom says:

    Nation-saving advocates like Mr. Langdon need to be reminded that mass movements are not effectively created by alienating the masses, as in his outlandish proposition that Marxism emanated from Christianity. To create a mass movement based on traditional western culture requires that one not sloppily attack a feature of western society in part responsible for western society itself. That Christianity has presently been polluted with cultural Marxism is beyond dispute but let’s not throw out the baby with the bath water. Incidentally, the success of Leftist movements is based primarily on the Left’s ability to incorporate contradictory and competing elements into its game plan – as in the Left’s current disingenuous love affair with Islam. Thus, nationalists who remain fixed in a strictly defined ideological purity are destined to remain irrelevant and defeated.

    • David Ashton
      David Ashton says:

      @ Tom

      A multi-pronged resistance is needed at all levels, just like the old CP attack – fronts, fellow-travelers, infiltrators, book-clubs, street demos &c. Don’t worry too much about ideological agreement and “purity”, but DO keep out the agents-provocateurs and keep within the law. Don’t look gift horses in the mouth.

  11. jerry
    jerry says:

    rabbi karl marx idea of socialism in not true socialism at all but communism. In communism the state controls the assets of the state and note marx’s ideology calls for an establishment of a central bank. Hello, who are the world’s bankers? It is they who will own the state, in jewish hands. Same with usury based capitalism, the usurer ends up owning everything. Why do think our European ancestors kicked the jews out of their countries for a thousand years? Of course Langdon throws out the old racist canard toward we whites, who as true Christians and the true Israelites of the bible scattered abroad, are commanded to be a separate people. True Christianity is for white Adamic people only as that is the only man God created. The other so-called races are biblically speaking all bastards. Deuteronomy 23:2. Jews are the eternal enemy of God, they are of Edom.

  12. Charles Frey
    Charles Frey says:

    Seymour Hirsh, in his three-week bestseller THE SAMSON OPTION, describes them as other than ” mild-mannered, self-effacing and reluctant to complain “.

    He quotes an Israeli leader as telling him personally: ” We can still remember the smell of Auschwitz and Treblinka. Next time we’ll take all of you with us ” !

    Around the same time an Israeli SCHOLAR with overt government ties told EU visitors, that Israel has all of the European capitals in its nuclear missile targeting program.

    It remains unclear whether this coincided with yet another request for additional German, gifted and state -subsidized nuclear-missile capabilities U-Boots, to defend ITS eastern-Mediterranean oil-fields in contested waters.

    It is not a matter of record, whether said SCHOLAR was leaning on two adjacent pillars, threatening to bring down the roof: in order to accentuate the credibility of his typically Jewish, demure statement.

  13. Robert
    Robert says:

    Another well researched and written article by Tobias Langdon. I would encourage everyone to share his articles on the internet. There aren’t many writers of this quality covering these subjects.

  14. jerry
    jerry says:

    The Koran was written by jewish scribes and Mohammed was married to a young jewess and was most likely of jewish blood himself. Jews lived among and thrived for centuries among the turks and arabs. That is attested to by Edward Gibbon and many other early historians. The notion that jews are a pure race is laughable since in their international trade they have intermarried with every race on the planet.

  15. pterodactyl
    pterodactyl says:

    Corbyn: “I have spent my life opposing racism.
    Until my dying day I will be opposed to racism in any form.”

    Does that mean he will support the whites in S.Africa as they are attacked by black racist tribes, and discriminated against? For example, there are places in S.Africa today where only blacks are allowed to own land. Will he oppose this? Of course not, therefore the statement quoted below from the article is not the case:

    “It’s designed to satisfy emotions and many human beings want to feel virtuous and holy.”

    If this really was their motive they would have their inner virtue switch switched on by the ways racist blacks treat the white minority in S.Africa. But their inner switch is not activated in this case (and will not be switched however bad it gets there)- because they do not actually posses such a switch, despite claiming to be totally controlled by such a switch.

    So their motive CANNOT be to feel virtuous and holy, otherwise there would not be these double standards the size of a mountain (same applies to their claim to support of women’s rights but then not support the rights of muslim women or white girls in Rotherham raped by muslim gangs, so this reveals their claimed motive was false). So their motive must be NOT virtue, it must be HATE. The true lefty is not wired for virtue, only for a hatred of the better, but they use words like ‘compassion’ and ‘justice’ and ‘fairness’ often, not because they value such concepts, but simply because they are communicating with the rest of us who do. In the same way an autistic person learns to communicate with others when they use language and concepts that he does not understand.

    The left know that all they need to do to make us multiracial is to appeal to our sense of fairness ie say ‘only a Nazi would send this poor child back to Africa, and human compassion demands that we let the child stay here’ (together with extended family, and their religion) – in other words, appeal to the white man’s virtue and lack of racism in order to persuade him to invite over third world racist tribes, the purpose being to make the West into places where real racism (anti-white) occurs, and will occur 10 x as much in the future as it already does. See S.Africa as the blueprint for our destiny, except with no place for whites to flee to.

    It is a big mistake in normal-thinking individuals to to assume that all humans in a race such as a white race are wired the same, eg that they all seek to be virtuous. Just because one person values virtue and fairness, it does not follow that others in his race think the same. Those who are loyal to ‘the white race’ have to accept that 10-20% of their own race are wired to hate anything better, and as this 15% observe that their own race is better in terms of being civilised, therefore they hate it. Assume the hypothetical scenario in which the last group of whites in S.Africa are in a big group being encircled for the final genocide – even within this group of whites about to die, their own 15% lefties would still be cheering on the black racists even knowing that they too (the cheering lefties) were about to die by the tyre necklace method. Some of them would even offer matches if they ran out, or help them get some more old tyres off the cars for their own torture. And they would ask for the great honour of being the last ones killed so they could have the joy of being a spectator of the genocide.

  16. Karen T
    Karen T says:

    Globalism is actually least popular with the masses as they are the ones forced to suffer its consequences such as higher crime, deteriorating neighbourhoods, wage slavery or unemployment, overcrowded schools and degraded education for their children. The middle class resort to white flight and are so wrapped up in keeping a step ahead of encroaching poverty and 3rd world invaders that they have little time or energy left to fight and in their struggle to survive will often go along to get along. The elites benefit through lower wages and keeping the hoi polloi at each others throats rather than theirs. Capitalism and Communism are two sides of the same coin. Chinese and Russian communism has created as many billionaires as capitalism. The richest 1% will own 2/3rd’s of the worlds wealth within 12 years and we the cattle will be branded and corralled as they see fit. The Western elites are playing footsie with the Chinese as they have accepted Chinese communism as the ideal model, but the Occidental unlike the Oriental is a pony not easily tamed, all the more reason to bring in the brown hordes. A handful of spirited white ponys lost in a herd of geldings isn’t much of a threat.

  17. Franklin Ryckaert
    Franklin Ryckaert says:

    Say what you want about Jeremy Corbyn, but he is a principled man :

    Jeremy Corbyn Calls for Review of U.K. Arms Sales to Israel Over Gaza Border Deaths

    Haaretz, Apr. 09, 2018.

  18. J.Towey
    J.Towey says:

    Aren’t Jeremy Corbyns parents called David and Naomi and didn’t they meet as volunteers fighting for the communists against Franco in the Spanish civil war?

Comments are closed.