“Secure Tolerance”: The Jewish Plan to Permanently Silence the West, Part 1

“The promotion of secure tolerance will be permanent and irreversible.”
Moshe Kantor,
Manifesto on Secure Tolerance, 2011.

In 2010, Harvard duo Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simons published The Invisible Gorilla, which detailed their study of the human capacity to overlook even the most obvious things. In one of their experiments, Chabris and Simons created a video in which students wearing white and black t-shirts pass a basketball between themselves. Viewers were asked to count the number of times the players with the white shirts passed the ball, and many were later very satisfied to find that they were accurate in their counting. This satisfaction was tainted, however, when they were asked if they had spotted “the gorilla.” Amidst considerable confusion, the video would then be replayed for the puzzled viewers, who were stunned to see a man in a gorilla suit walk among the students and balls, take up a position in the center of the screen, and wave at the camera. They’d missed him entirely in their initial viewing. The study highlighted the capacity for humans to become fixated on set tasks, events, or other distractions, and miss even the most elaborate and remarkable of occurrences.

When it comes to Jewish activism, and especially Jewish activism in the area of censorship and mass migration, I fear that the same dynamics are at work. Panicked by this or that website or YouTube channel being defunded or banned, we miss the ‘Invisible Gorilla’ — a plan of action far more horrifying and deadly in its implications than any single act of censorship.

There are essentially two forms of censorship. The hard kind we are very familiar with. It consists in the banning or removal of websites, videos, books, podcasts, and social media accounts. It extends to defunding and deplatforming, and it reaches its apogee in the banning of activists from entering certain countries, in the arrest of activists on spurious grounds, and in the development of new laws with harsh criminal penalties for speech. These methods are dangerous and rampant, and I myself have fallen victim to several of them.

I think, however, that softer, more diffuse methods of censorship are even more insidious and perhaps even more catastrophic. We could consider, for example, the manipulation of culture so that even if certain speech is not illegal and carries no legal repercussions, it nevertheless leads to the loss of employment, the destruction of education opportunities, and the dissolving of one’s relationships. This is a form of cultural self-censorship, involving the modification of in-group standards, that has demonstrable Jewish origins. “Soft” censorship can also take the form of socio-cultural prophylaxis. Take, for example, the recent initiative of the U.S. State Department to initiate a drive to engage in the global promotion of philo-Semitic (pro-Jewish) attitudes. I really don’t believe that this will play out in the manner the State Department hopes, and I watch with interest to see precisely what the methodologies of this policy will be. I sincerely doubt its prospects for success. But what other way can this be interpreted than as a preventative measure, obstructing the growth of organic attitudes that, let’s face it, are more likely to skew to the anti-Jewish? Finally, isn’t it in the nature of contemporary culture, with its emphasis on entertainment, consumption, and sex, to be the perfect environment in which to hide many “Invisible Gorillas”? Isn’t it a whirlwind of fixations and distractions, replete with untold numbers of “woke” viewers happy to report that they’ve been enthusiastically counting passes and have the accurate number? Isn’t it rather the axiom of our time that, from the idiotic Left to the idiotic Right, Invisible Gorillas stroll freely and unhindered, laughing and waving as they go, hidden in plain sight? 

Moshe Kantor: Oligarch Activist

If I could single out one point in time at which a process was set in motion that culminated in the heightened censorship that we see today, it wouldn’t be the recent banning of the NPI/Radix YouTube channel, or the removal of the Daily Stormer from the internet after Charlottesville. No answers will be found in the banning of Alex Jones, of Stefan Molyneaux, the European travel ban on Richard Spencer, the eviction of NPI from Hungary, or recent revelations about PayPal’s selective banning process. These are all symptoms that possess no answers in themselves. I do believe, however, that we can locate the immediate intellectual and political beginnings of our present situation in 2011, in the publication of a document titled Manifesto for Secure Tolerance. The document was written by Moshe Kantor, a Russian billionaire, pernicious oligarch, and president of no less than the European Jewish Congress, the European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation (ECTR, which we will return to), the World Holocaust Forum Foundation, the European Jewish Fund, and the Policy Council of the World Jewish Congress. In short, this Jewish billionaire is the quintessential strongly-identified leading Jewish activist, fully committed to the advancement of the interests of his ethnic group.

As leader of so many groups, and mover in so many high circles, Kantor fulfils the qualifications of the early modern stadtlans, Court Jews who boasted of significant wealth and intensive relationships with non-Jewish elites. And he exemplifies many of the same qualities, acting always in un-elected but highly-influential intercessory roles, seeking to improve the tactical and material advantages of his tribe. When not crossing the continent bleating about ‘tolerance,’ Kantor also advances Jewish interests in his capacity as the President of Moscow’s Museum of Avant-Garde Mastery — a dubious establishment dedicated to extolling the disgusting and poisonous art of co-ethnics like Marc Chagall, Chaim Soutine, and Mark Rothko (Rothko is the subject of a 3-part series of TOO articles by Brenton Sanderson).

Although masquerading as a world-renowned “peace activist,” Kantor is in fact a devoted practitioner of international Zionism. A citizen of Russia, the United Kingdom, and Israel, this world parasite wages unconventional warfare by means of backstage diplomacy, policy development, and ceaseless lobbying for repressive legislation to be imposed on Europeans everywhere.

Let’s start with his Manifesto for Secure Tolerance. Its ethos can be summed up in its slogan: “Restrictions are necessary for the freedom to live a secure life.” The instinct is to describe such as phrase as Orwellian, but surely the time has come to describe such concoctions more accurately and plainly as “Judaic.” Surely only the Judaic mind has both the shamelessness, arrogance, and spiteful aggression required to present the removal of freedoms as the key to freedom?

Moshe Kantor: Dedicated Zionist

Kantor argues that “tolerance,” which in his definition basically means acquiescence to globalism (promoted by Kantor as a universal good) and mass migration, is an essential aspect of a successful society. He argues that in order to protect “tolerance,” we should therefore impose “security requirements” (oppressive laws) that focus on “racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism.” Thus, Kantor’s creation of the idea of “Secure Tolerance,” which will see the gradual expansion of cultural and legislative repressions on Whites/nativists, first in the European Union, and then throughout the rest of the West. In Kantor’s own words:

Secure tolerance must be promoted in the public mind and practised in the most democratic way, that is, through law-making. In this way alone will the promotion of secure tolerance be permanent and irreversible. There is no better field in which to implement this project than the European Union because that in itself is a product of tolerance shown by twenty-seven nations for each other and because it is fully exposed to all the challenges of the day. The crucial factors, among others, however, determine the promotion of secure tolerance:

Education, above all primary education (we may be too late forever if we start to teach this difficult new language of communication to children over five years of age).

Secure tolerance is inseparable from the need to develop techniques or practices of Reconciliation in society, which, in turn, are based on the legal recognition of the historical truth of the Holocaust.

And, last but not least, secure tolerance and Reconciliation techniques should be formalized in a code of laws, both national and supra-national, the making of which, once started, is never to stop.

There is a lot to unpack here, but we should start with Kantor’s over-arching expressed goal, the one that opens and closes this section of his Manifesto: the imposition of supranational legislation imposing “tolerance” and outlawing dissent. Kantor’s appeal here to law-making being “the most democratic way,” is pure theater. As we will see, there is nothing democratic about the later course of Kantor’s proposals into becoming law. The Western public has never heard of Kantor’s manifesto or its later incarnations (honestly, have you?), and certainly never had an opportunity to vote on it. Kantor wants repressive laws, “permanent and irreversible,” the “making of which, once started, is never to stop,” in order to deal with, in his words, the “neo-Fascist politicians and organizations, radical nationalists and militarised racists who, in their turn are jeopardising European democratic accomplishments” and therefore represent “destructive manifestations of anti-globalism.”

Further theater is observed in Kantor’s choosing the European Union as a starting point because it “is a product of tolerance.” Of course, I’m sure it had nothing to do with the tactical advantage offered by the opportunity to give his legislative proposals a running head start by ensuring their adoption in twenty-seven countries in one swoop. Jews, of course, have much love for European unity in its current, bureaucratic incarnation. The EU is useful to Jews, who believe that Europe must be compelled to undergo its demographic death as a Continent and sooner rather than later. Supranational government in the form of the EU is seen as the most efficient means to this end. Why go to the effort of separately promoting mass migration in Germany, Britain, France, Spain etc., and navigating speech laws through each of their legal systems and parliaments, when the EU is the purse seine that can reap them all? It’s the same in the U.S. where Jews have always championed a strong central government rather than states’ rights. Jews have always perceived the capabilities of the EU as an engine of mass immigration. When Brexit happened, Ari Paul, writing in The Forward, argued in terror that a reversion to the nation-state government across Europe would be a “return to the state of affairs that gave us two world wars and the Holocaust.” His proposed remedy is the suggestion that the populations of the E.U. should be more tightly controlled through speech and hate laws, and the final solution “is to make the E.U.’s policy more favorable to multiculturalism and migration. … Jews are certainly going to play a role in which direction Europe goes.”

Moshe Kantor is one of those Jews. His insidious education proposals, designed to brainwash our children as early as possible, are mere copies of the tactics of the ADL and countless Jewish activists within psychiatry. And his call for the international legal protection of the Jewish historical narrative of the Holocaust is simply the worldwide criminalization of “Holocaust denial.” He is making speedy progress on all fronts. 

ECTR and the Jewish “Think Tank” Strategy for Increasing Non-White Migration in Britain

Kantor’s 2011 manifesto was the product of an existing diplomatic trajectory to achieve the same goals. In 2008, Kantor had founded the European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation (ECTR), as a:

non-partisan and non-governmental institution. It is envisaged to be an opinion-making and advisory body on international tolerance promotion, reconciliation and education. It fosters understanding and tolerance among peoples of various ethnic origin; educates on techniques of reconciliation; facilitates post-conflict social apprehensions; monitors chauvinistic behaviors, proposes pro-tolerance initiatives and legal solutions.

In other words, it’s something between a think tank and a lobbying group. This “think tank” strategy is absolutely crucial to the Jewish ability to bypass or exploit democratic institutions, and has been devastating in its effectiveness. As I remarked in my study of the use of this tactic in destroying free speech in Britain, Jews had been unable to get speech-restricting legislation through Parliament by relying solely on Jewish M.P.s until the Jew Frank Soskice designed and “piloted the first Race Relations Act, 1965, through Parliament.”[1] The Act approached the problem of White British resistance to mass migration from a different angle and “aimed to outlaw racial discrimination in public places.” Crucially, the 1965 Act created the ‘Race Relations Board’ and equipped it with the power to sponsor research for the purposes of monitoring race relations in Britain and, if necessary, extending legislation on the basis of the ‘findings’ of such research:

It was a clever tactic. The Board soon began sponsoring research from ‘independent’ bodies staffed by, and often explicitly created by, Jews.[2] One of the best examples of such bodies, and certainly the most influential, was ‘Political and Economic Planning’ (PEP) a supposedly “independent research organization whose philosophy and methodology are based on the principles and values of sociology.”[3] Ray Honeyford states that although PEP dabbled in other areas, “its most influential work has been in the field of race. It is no exaggeration to say that its work in this field is far and away the biggest source of information, ideas, and opinions about the state of race relations in Britain and the experience of discrimination by ethnic minorities.”[4] One of its 1977 publications has been called “the bible of the race relations lobby in Britain.”[5]

But PEP was never ‘independent.’ From its inception it was closely linked to the National Committee for Commonwealth Immigrants (NCCI), a body which worked to advance the cause (and demographics) of Blacks and South-East Asians in Britain, but which was run by a group of decidedly pale, not to mention Hebraic, British-born lawyers. In one of those little instances of lack of accountability in our modern ‘democracy,’ in 1965 the NCCI had been inexplicably appointed to “advise the British government on matters relating to the integration of Commonwealth immigrants.”[6] From its early days of operation, the NCCI, which became the Community Relations Commission in 1968, was staffed with Jewish lawyers like Anthony Lester (1936–). Although never elected to any public office his own Wikipedia entry states that Lester was “directly involved with the drafting of race relations legislation in Britain.” In 1968 Lester founded the Runnymede Trust, described on its website as “the UKs leading independent race equality think tank.” Indicative of the ethnic composition of the Trust, and its deeper origins and goals, Lester had founded the organization with his fellow Jew, Jim Rose. Rose is described in the Palgrave Dictionary of Anglo-Jewish History as the “Director of the Survey of Race Relations in Britain. … The Race Relations Act owed much to him.”[7] So basically, if you see a ‘think tank’ described as ‘independent,’ you can be sure its board reads like a Bar Mitzvah invitation list.

One of the ways in which Lester developed and imposed his influence on the drafting of race legislation was in his capacity as ‘special adviser’ to Roy Jenkins, the far-Left successor at the Home Office of the Frank Soskice who, as mentioned above, is Jewish. With Lester behind Jenkins, Britain had essentially gone from having a Jewish Home Office Minister, to having a Jewish-influenced puppet in the same office. In Race Relations in Britain: A Developing Agenda (1998), Lester himself writes about his involvement (though he is often ‘economical’ with the truth) in the drafting and implementation of race laws in Britain. Of course, Lester downplays his role and that of Soskice, writing that “the arrival, in December 1965, of a liberal and receptive Minister, Roy Jenkins, at the Home Office was of decisive importance in making the Race Relations Act. … When Labour came to power in 1974 I abandoned my practice at the Bar to help Roy Jenkins secure the enactment of effective legislation tackling race and sex discrimination.”[8] He further writes that “every democratic society should be concerned with promoting what Roy Jenkins memorably defined thirty years ago as a national goal: equal opportunity, accompanied by cultural diversity, in an atmosphere of mutual tolerance.”[9]

But Lester wasn’t giving anywhere near an accurate portrayal of his own interest and unceasing activism in the field of race and multiculturalism. For a start, we know that it was Lester himself who penned the influential speech he now attributes exclusively to Jenkins.[10] Further, scholar Peter Dorey notes that Lester was “the leading campaigner on race relations” for the Society of Labour Party Lawyers and that Lester had been at the forefront of the Society’s Race Relations Committee when it put pressure on the government for harsher legislation in 1966.[11] Illustrating the true nature of the relationship between Lester and Jenkins, Dorey cites correspondence between the two in which Lester castigated the 1965 law  as a “shoddy job” and in which Lester presents Jenkins with a “shopping-list of discontents: the Government should commit itself to extending the race relations legislation to cover all public places, as well as employment, housing, credit and insurance services, and it should strengthen the Race Relations Board.”[12] Dorey notes that it was in response to pressure from Lester, channeled through Jenkins, that “the Government began to reconsider its race relations policy.”[13]

In truth, Lester was one of the chief architects of modern multicultural Britain and its accompanying repressive bureaucracy. It was Lester who by his own admission, in 1975, set out “coherent principles for new legislation in the White Paper on Racial Discrimination.”[14] The principles were that: “The overwhelming majority of the colored population is here to stay, that a substantial and increasing proportion of that population belongs to this country, and that the time has come for a determined effort by Government, by industry and unions, and by ordinary men and women to ensure fair and equal treatment for all our people, regardless of their race, color, or national origin.”[15]

The point of reiterating this particular process (and Brenton Sanderson has pointed to clear and well-documented parallels in Canada, Australia and elsewhere) is that this is what is meant by Kantor’s “most democratic” way of “law-making.” This process has the appearance of democracy in that legislation is eventually moved through a Parliament or Congress, but beneath this appearance is a sequence of events mired in ethnic activism, obscured methodologies, background lobbying, false representation, and ultimately, the passing of legislation entirely at odds with the wider democratic will. We were never asked, and, in Kantor’s political philosophy, we never will be asked. These laws will continue to be developed and imposed in this manner, and, as Kantor prescribes, they will “never stop.”

The European Council on Tolerance and Reconciliation was Kantor’s first “think tank” vehicle for achieving “Secure Tolerance” legislation. Keen for the ECTR to have a “goy” face, he stayed in the background while initially handing the Presidency of the group to former Communist and President of Poland Aleksander Kwaśniewski. Kwaśniewski had a useful history of neglecting and belittling the Catholic-National character of his people, and made himself known as an ally of Jews by formally apologizing for a 1941 killing of Jews at Jedwabne by Poles, and restoring citizenship to Jews stripped of it by the communist government in 1968. Since 2015, the Presidency of the ECTR has been held by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, a dedicated globalist and arch-traitor of Satanic proportions. Beneath the Gentile faces, however, Kantor has always pulled the strings. This is his project, based on his manifesto, and his history of activism. The group’s board is stacked with honorary roles for non-Jewish politicians, but its legal direction is entirely dictated by Kantor and Prof. Yoram Dinstein, a retired Italian supreme court justice and former President and Dean of Law at Tel Aviv University. Dinstein’s area of expertise is mainly in war legislation, and his co-operation with Kantor is not really a departure from this since it amounts to a declaration of war on Whites everywhere.

Go to Part 2 of 3.

[1] M. Donnelly, Sixties Britain: Culture, Society and Politics (115), & R. Honeyford, The Commission for Racial Equality: British Bureaucracy Confronts the Multicultural Society, 95.

[2] Donnelly, 115.

[3] Honeyford, 93.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid, 94.

[6] I. Solanke, Making Anti-Racial Discrimination Law: A Comparative History of Social Action and Anti-Racial Discrimination Law, 85.

[7] W. Rubinstein (ed), The Palgrave Dictionary of Anglo-Jewish History, 566, 810.

[8] T. Blackstone (ed), Race Relations in Britain: A Developing Agenda, 24.

[9] Ibid, 22.

[10] C Williams (ed), Race and Ethnicity in a Welfare Society, 38.

[11] P. Dorey, The Labour Governments 1964-1970, 322.

[12] Ibid, 323.

[13] Ibid.

[14] T. Blackstone (ed), Race Relations in Britain: A Developing Agenda, 22.

[15] Ibid.

34 replies
  1. Yves Vannes
    Yves Vannes says:

    The Stadtlans and their coethinics are untouchable thanks to decades of conditioning. Their non-coethinic willing white mercenaries are not.

    ” This process has the appearance of democracy in that legislation is eventually moved through a Parliament or Congress, but beneath this appearance is a sequence of events mired in ethnic activism, obscured methodologies, background lobbying, false representation, and ultimately, the passing of legislation entirely at odds with the wider democratic will.”

    Aiming this accusation with 1001 examples of how it has and is destroying traditional English societies and that no one asked for this…with the target painted on obsequious white Brits as the treasonous will get a lot more traction than painting the Jews and their brown bioweapons as the focus of evil. Normal Europeans and North Americans have been so browbeaten for so long about the mortal sin of racism that you lose half the people who should be sympathetic to your cause and point-of-view. They don’t hear anything once a certain radioactive line has been crossed.

    Getting Whites or traditional European ethnic groups to openly see their group as having a group interest is our primary goal…and pursuing it politically and culturally will be easier if they have an enemy whom they can point a finger at and insult without being accused of impiety. Secure Tolerance is Jewish…gets little traction and they get to plead, “See, see! We need even more of it and sooner”…vs…Secure Tolerance is treason and totalitarianism… “For 30 pieces of silver and a filthy halo John will sell off his neighbor Brian’s inheritance to outsiders…The worst of our own tribe turn our children into” ….no need to tiptoe when it’s a traitor.

    I’m not arguing to let the Stadtlans off the hook. I am arguing to chip away at the protective walls they set up between themselves and the peoples of the lands they set out to alter and destroy. Local commissars are a softer target than are national ones. Make a pariah of anyone from our tribe who rejects our tribal interests but who works for the tribal interests of others. A ripe target that can be kept in-house and can’t be neutered with the usual accusations. Do away with this class of people. It is our most difficult challenge. Once out of the way dealing with the Moshes of the world becomes a gas.
    Birds of a Feather.

    The European Council of Tolerance and Reconciliation has the makings of a similar organization on this side of the atlantic except it will be part of the government. The Dept of Treasury is in the process of holding hearings on setting up a Dept of Reconciliation for Slavery and Segregation. It’s origins and functions echo with it’s UK version but with the power to issue and enforce new fiats.

  2. Sophie Johnson
    Sophie Johnson says:

    Thank you for yet another wonderfully informative piece, Dr Joyce. You have floodlit the mechanism that enables our courts to, e.g., impose prison sentences for the ‘crime’ of antisemitism even in jurisdictions (e.g., England and Wales) where there is no law on the statute books that criminalises antisemitism: Courts are simply enabled by statutes that criminalise ‘hate speech’, or ‘grossly offensive communications’, etc. to have jailed activists whom Jews want to silence. Neat indeed!

    I cannot, however, resist honing in on your remarks on ‘the eviction of NPI from Hungary’. I should dearly like to know the real reason for PM Viktor Orban’s eviction of the NPI. After all, he is himself a Nationalist (often called a Fascist and a dictator in EU circles and elsewhere!), and he has done superb things for Hungary, not least by his eviction of the IMF, even as the EU was all but threatening to bomb him into submission if he declines to shore up the Hungarian economy with another IMF loan.

    Then there was Orban’s insistence that Hungary’s international banks bear the brunt of the financial burden of the Swiss mortgage-interest-rates hike. Those banks had pushed the relatively cheap Swiss mortgage at Hungarian home buyers. Without Orban’s intervention, the burden of the steeply risen Swiss interest rates would have had to be borne by the Hungarian mums and dads, among whom even the fully employed would have had serious difficulty in financing. So lots of foreclosed, very cheap real estate would have fallen into the laps of the ever-hungry Israeli investors.

    There was also Orban’s eviction of the viciously seditious George Soros Central European University. Orban did this elegantly by simply having his government make a law that prohibits the continued registering in Hungary of any university that does not have a home-country base.

    And most recently, Orban said a decisive ‘no’ to the cultural-diversity that the EU demanded he let loose upon his country under the pretence that they are refugees in dire need. The remains of the tacky Hungarian ‘Left’, and the world’s MSM and the EU leadership, went berserk about this. The Hungarians, however, said ‘Thank you, Prime Minister’.

    Finally: It is just possible that Orban had good grounds to be suspicious of the international far-right/Nationalist movers and shakers. It is also just possible that he knew all along that the wildly popular among the under-thirties voters, the loudly antisemitic and fiercely nationalist Jobbik Party, was financed by George Soros from its outset. (Certainly, neither Jobbik’s constituency, nor the general public, had so much as an inkling of this.)

    Sorry it is taking me so long to get to the point I want to put to you, Dr Joyce. It is this: Though it is undeniably true that the machinations of Kantor et al. are very clever, and very successful, it is also true that they can be successful only in states that do not have a trusted leader like Viktor Orban, a genuine Nationalist and a very decent man who happens to be a very experienced statesman, and a highly intelligent one..

  3. Tedesco
    Tedesco says:

    Censorship is a Jewish operation. Political censorship, that is. Not censorship of porn – Jews never censor porn – they promote it and profit from it, for its degenerative effects.

    Good for the author to call out Jewish censorship. Andrew Joyce had a great twitter account, until two years ago, when it got banned – the result of pressure from the Jewish ADL.

  4. Charles Frey
    Charles Frey says:

    Every right-minded reader here, indeed in the entire West, is indebted to you for your most relevant contribution to our ” situation room “. A salient compilation of their ” full spectrum assault ” on all of us. The more valuable since it comes straight from their horses’ mouths: unsuited for denial, except by their own logic.

    How in hell does one become a billionaire in a country like Russia, except in the train of that Harvard President swine Larry Sommers and his co-ethnic, protected professor-friend with Russian citizenship and the rest of their mischpuche, who robbed these poor people blind twice in 70 years ??? Incomparably worse than stealing from a defenseless child.

    First they engender anti-Semitism, then they demand tolerance for their in-group’s daily, always euphonious-sounding gangsterisms, under penalty.

    Nekrasov, while working on his ” Magnitsky Act ” documentary, interviewed a German woman of good birth, an administrator in the EU in Brussels, who was either a complete fool or a consummate actress [ Video ]. Birdfeed for timeless operators like Kantor.

  5. Tom
    Tom says:

    The way this is all countered is by advocating for freedom and private property rights. Once anti-discrimination laws are passed in a society, the right to limitless incursions upon freedom become routine and even “logical” (given the premise of course). Some people on the Right try to argue for the ability of all ethnic groups to advocate for their interests but this will never be allowed by the powers that be. The only credible challenge to leftist totalitarianism is basically accomplished by advocating for that absolutely unimpeachable moral value – freedom – of a person or a group of persons to associate or not associate with whomever they wish, and regardless of social outcomes, and to get government’s filthy hands off of one’s property. If you decide to play the “passing games” of the Left, you won’t see the gorilla. But if you opt out by fighting for the freedom to do so, the gorilla becomes obvious to anybody.

    • moneytalks
      moneytalks says:

      “Anti-discrimination” is an oxymoron expression since it is both an empirical and logical impossibility . You cannot be against a particular discrimination without discriminating the difference of being for a particular discrimination . All animals , including single cell ones , and humans absolutely must discriminate their environments both as and for survival necessities . Unfortunately , rationality is less important than emotionally appealing anti-logical political memes for the sheeple majorities . Emotionalism alone cannot save Whites from virtual extinction — rationality and secret organizational strategies are required .

  6. Alex Thomas
    Alex Thomas says:

    Mind blowing. I’ve seen the video clip of Barbara Lerner Spectre: “Europe has not learnt to be multicultural.” Someone should have said; and why should we be? She also said that Europe wouldn’t survive without being multicultural. This was before Israel declared itself ax being a Jewish state. The hypocrisy.

    • Achilles Wannabe
      Achilles Wannabe says:

      Hypocrisy? I wonder. I think there is something about the Jewish mind that enables them to apply certain rules to us from which they are just exempted add yet it all computes for them. They don’t really have a concept of fairness. Privilege for Jews is just baked into their thinking. WE can be hypocritical. THEY are just being Jews, Or something like that.

      Jews really are a somewhat different life form. But they are dwelling in our nest. Or it used to be our nest

  7. Loren R.
    Loren R. says:

    I love reading Andrew Joyce and I am completely impressed by his writing style and in depth research.
    I would love to copy and paste this URL and send it to my long time friends who love America and especially love the First and Second Amendments.
    Yet despite the HUGE GORILLAS in the room day in and day out my friends are totally and completely brainwashed. Even with so many relatively mainstream people picking up the news about BLM’s financiers, my friends are still all about the chosen people, oh the horrible AH and the ovens and lampshades. They bemoan the degeneracy being forced on them and their children yet they refuse to even read one book about who, what and why. They won’t even read one lousy book much less a beautifully written article filled with facts and data. . Then we have all the people that hate America and they fit right in with these communists. And yet with all the propaganda and control of so many levers of power, I still am able to hear many, many people saying that we are in times similar to Weimar Germany. There is hope!! They already have a home they can go to…

    • moneytalks
      moneytalks says:

      Books are essential but topnotch videos will get much more attention if they are short ( 10 mins ? or less ) and “sweet” .

      • Loren R.
        Loren R. says:

        Hey moneytalks,
        Do you have any examples that might help my friends become more aware? Especially about the 800 lb gorilla that is destroying the West.

        • moneytalks
          moneytalks says:

          There are 1000s of relevant videos on the YouTube channel and many are less than 10 minutes . It is doubtful that anyone can simply make a short proWhite video knowing for sure that it would go viral among Whites . Someone or group has to keep making short proWN videos until they get one that goes viral and then another and so on .

          A recent July 20 TOO article

          “The Crisis of the American University…”

          explains why Whites are so ignorant of existential political threats against themselves . Maybe a short expert video rendition of that article could go viral .

  8. Alec Nagle
    Alec Nagle says:

    Their time is up. We know it. They know it. Everybody knows it. Their attempts to completely shutdown the internet after Charlottesville was an abject failure. Every man, sooner or later must be held to account. The day of reckoning for Hebrews is almost here.

  9. Achilles Wannabe
    Achilles Wannabe says:

    The Invisible Gorilla, which detailed their study of the human capacity to overlook even the most obvious things.

    This is a study I intend to look at. I am a first decade boomer, relatively high IQ, educated – even “trained” in history – and yet I missed “the Jews” completely. Since they were swarming over everything, looking back I am wondering how I could not have seen them. Or maybe a better way to put it would be how I could have simultaneously seen them and yet not seen them. They were hiding in plain sight. NOW I see them everywhere because they ARE everywhere – at least everywhere important from a policy or cultural standpoint But they were everywhere back then – in the 60’s and 70’s. And back then I would look right at them and yet somehow manage to see them as individuals who happen to be Jewish; individuals who, like me – blood Irish of Catholic origin – were simply trying to make their way in a WASP world In reality they were making over that WASP world into THEIR world. And in reality I was increasingly trying to assimilate, not to WASP values, but Jewish ones. I just didn’t know it. All this was not an event but a process. I so want to understand that process It was my life for so long And I didn’t even know it. Whole generations of Euro gentiles went through this and still don’t know it. Someone has to explain all this – in detail.

    Am I rambling? I think of this all the time. My Judaization. It was such a great con. But so much of it was a self con, How did this happen?

    • Rod
      Rod says:

      Wrote my life’s story friend (middling iq) these bastards have been gaslighting us, for millennia. Sept.11 was my Ingrid Bergman moment that woke me up from my saxon slumber. ( they showed their hand, when the media flipped the script on its head and concurrently, the birth of the internet opened a whole new world to my disbelieving eyes)

      Ah, but all is well; I now have new meaning in life, an abiding hatred of this vile Levitical filth, that is consuming the goodness of our world. It keeps me fit and alive.

      Just the other day, sitting with my broke down drinking buddies, in a local pub, in a small resort town, in Alberta, a group of upscale young urbanites popped in to see how the local white zoo inhabitants were fairing – One of them loudly declaring to his friends, as they exited the bar, “They are just a bunch of a gentiles”. I then had to explain to my friends, what a gentile was. Unfortunately for them, I started my tale of the gentiles, 500 years before the birth of Christ; it was a long night for my glassy eyed friends and expensive for me, as I had to buy their drinks to keep their beer soaked attention.

      • ChilledBee
        ChilledBee says:

        “Wrote my life’s story friend”
        I believe there are millions and millions of the same stories. One doesn’t have to dig too deeply into the internet to see that a good percentage of people are realizing that the catastrophic damage being done to white Christians did not happen naturally.

        I would have liked to sit and hear your conversation + I would have bought my own drinks.

      • Achilles Wannabe
        Achilles Wannabe says:

        Sept 11? You are quick. I resisted getting it even then. For me, it was when Netanyahu came to the US Congress and I watched the whole place do the goyim two step for him 36 times. That was a gorilla even I couldn’t overlook

        But yeah, I too have a new meaning in my life. Things keep getting worse but at last I begin to understand why. Understanding is everything for me

  10. Transvaal Boer
    Transvaal Boer says:

    “[T]he legal recognition of the historical truth of the Holocaust”. There’s a gorilla right there. Historical truths do not need to be “enforced” by “legal recognition”. Thank you for a well researched and thoroughly written article, Dr. Joyce.

  11. A. Shekelberg
    A. Shekelberg says:

    Uncle A abolished bankers and their fiat currency tricks. Everything fails for whites if working in a Jewish controlled framework. What a mess. Still I’m optimistic that it all collapses before our genetics do. A younger-dryas type cataclysm is required. Nature sorts out the races.

  12. AntiSocialFool
    AntiSocialFool says:

    We must point out their hypocrisy. For example they are always keen to highlight the evils of white controlled slavery but never ever mention the Turkish controlled Ottoman Slave system. This form of slavery was only abolished in 1923- 60 years after Lincoln freed the American Negroes.Could this reticence have something to do with the fact that 95% of the Ottoman slaves were white?

  13. John
    John says:

    Kwasniewski’s fater, Izaak Stolzman, was a colonel in the NKVD. Stolzman is accused of a genocide of civilians and prisoners of war. In the 1940-ties, he changed his name to Zdzislaw Kwasniewski in order to hide his ethnicity.

  14. Carolyn Yeager
    Carolyn Yeager says:

    I’m glad that Andrew Joyce has directed his scathing spotlight on the very dangerous person Moshe Kantor. I don’t think it’s the first time; I seem to remember something earlier.
    I want to draw attention to the fact that I put my own focus on Moshe Kantor beginning in at least 2015. He stands out to anyone looking at Jewish news. Here are some posts I found on my site that directly refer to Kantor. I think you will find them interesting reading and listening.
    2015 – https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-jews-prepare-ensnare-europe-new-tolerance-law-rooted-holocaust
    2015 – https://carolynyeager.net/heretics-hour-how-stop-jewish-takeover
    2017 – https://carolynyeager.net/jews-israel-push-ban-alternative-views-holocaust-internet
    2019 – https://carolynyeager.net/2019-ends-and-2020-begins-wave-antisemitism-hysteria

  15. bruno
    bruno says:

    First of all I would like to emphasize that Dr. Joyce is a magnificent fellow. His writings remind me of a few of my deceased European friends. When Dr. Joyce referred to Poland’s past Prez, Aleksander Kwasniewski (Stolzman), perhaps he didn’t know that that AK’s father was a Ruski Zyd. His dad’s name was Izaak Stolzman. Izaak was a member of the feared NKVD and later Warsaw’s secret police (UB). Numerous sources allege that he was responsible for the deaths/killing of Polish citizens. When Izaak’s son ran for president, the zyd media’s behavior was the same in Central Europe as it is in Amdom; mainly, whatever’s good for the Zs. It was kinda like the MSM support Connecticut’s Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-D) use to obtain.

    A suggestion for Dr. Joyce would be to seek out translations when referring to those in Slavic Europe. Wiki notes, “Ojciec Aleksandra Kwaśniewskiego był Żydem rosyjskim w stopniu pułkownika.” Trans.: The father of A. Kwasniewski was a Russian Jew with the rank of col.” Kwasniewski’s family is fascinating due to it’s Hebrew transnational networking. Malgorzata Sylwia, Alex’s sister, for example, was what else -a director of a bank (in Switzerland). No doubt he knows that Viktor Orban is today perhaps Europe’s greatest son. Thus, a champion of Euroman.

    BTW, Wiki’s English language section was more colorful. It notes A. Kwasniewski’s father was a “doctor.” No time to comment further on Wiki info. Suffice to indicate it’s often more than dubious.

    Should Dr. Joyce have the time, an article by him, that correlates Z behavior in Mother Europe with those within Amdom, would enlighten many. No conclusions would be necessary. I take my hat off to Dr. Joyce.

  16. White State
    White State says:

    Sometimes I wonder if gentiles like Tony Blair, Zapatero, kwasniewski, are really gentiles or crypto-Jews.

    KMac and AJoyce have written enough tracts to think about such possibilities.

  17. omn
    omn says:

    In the interests of disclosure I am a not White.

    I must commend you on writing this article and the rest of the triplet. It is very helpful in clearly articulating what is viscerally felt by many.

    I feel that this struggle against the forces of evil cannot be won without a recourse to eschatology, specifically Orthodox Christian and Islamic eschatology. Now this may be off putting for those of you who are non-religious/anti-religious. But I feel that without eschatology one is fighting with one hand tied behind his back.

  18. Richard B
    Richard B says:

    Always happy to see an article from Andrew Joyce.

    I remain convinced that what we’re really witnessing is, as I’ve said many times before, The Pyrrhic Victory of The Hostile Elite.

    And one of the reasons why, perhaps the main reason, is their own version of The Invisible Gorilla. There’s more than one.

    The mind of Jewish Supremacy is, in spite of its superficial variety and seeming flexibility, of such a profoundly fixed and inflexible orientation that it qualifies as an extreme psychotic type.

    The perspective here is behavioral (not as in academic behaviorism, which was never nearly behavioral enough), not psychological.

    A psychotic is one with an extremely narrow and limited responsive range. No matter what happens it means the same thing to them.

    The Hostile Elite, Zionism, Judeocracy, or Jewish Supremacy Inc. whatever one wants to call it are so focused on acquiring and exercising power that they’ve ignored The Invisible Gorilla of Social Management.

    So, they’re not good at it.

    JSI looks at social institutions as something to own and control.

    They do not look at social institutions for what they are – adaptational mechinisms.

    So, they incapable of seeing what social institutions REALLY are.


    A social institutions isn’t similar to an explanation, it IS an explanation.

    The model of knowing today is science. Which is to say that science has the best explanations. And they’ve done this by exploiting the inherent instability of all theoretical constructs.

    They know that the best explanations are open from both ends, theory and data.

    Even by the 4th edition of his Origin Darwin began to refer to scientific theories as “a mental convenience.”

    Applying this to social institutions makes them more viable and less prone to becoming dysfunctional and maladaptive.

    But that requires leaders with firm and clear principles and values and, above all, the capacity to engage in self-criticism without allowing any anxiety interfere in that self-examination.

    But this is the last thing JSI is interested in or capable of (and not just JSI).

    That’s why their relentless attacks on Whites is so laughable because more Whites are capable of self-criticism in a way that JSI isn’t at all.

    So how could they be capable of tolerance? They’re not even capable of self-criticism.

    They’re famously and tenaciously resistant to exposure, like all psychotics.

    So, the more they attack Whites they more they sound and look like Lady Macbeth. Crackbrained and delusional.

    And dangerous, to everyone. Not just Whites. And I think that’s going to start coming out more and more.

    And now we’re back to their own Invisible Gorilla.

    JSI is like an individual of such fixed orientation to experience that they can’t adapt their orientation to changing situations. which necessarily require a restructuring of their interests.

    And this analogy with social institutions isn’t inapt. Because a social institution is not an entity, it’s persistent patterns of human relations and interactions.

    Constructs, Behavioral Patterns, Human Relations and Interactions are all attributes of The Invisible Gorilla JSI can’t see.


    Because, blinded by a deeply ingrained and internalized psychotic arrogance JSI doesn’t see constructs, or interpretations.

    No. It sees “The Truth.” A “truth” to be blindly obeyed, while the chosen truth-tellers are placed above criticism and loved unconditionally.

    And it doesn’t see patterns, relations and interactions.

    It see “entitiies.”

    But, above all, it does not see the social institutions it now controls as adaptational mechinisms and explanations.

    It simply sees them as things to be owned and controlled, along with the people that help make them work.

    This is why they’re creating a world so extraordinarily dysfunctional and maladaptive.

    This, in short, is why nothing quite fails like their success.

    This is why what we’re really witnessing is The Pyrrhic Victory of Jewish Supremacy Inc.

    Finally, and even more ominously, JSI’s attempt to impose a social order that is free of control and sustained by force will only increase the uncontrolled exercise of naked power.

    And that naked power will disrupt and destablize the social institutions that together make up a civilization more complex and unpredictable than ever before.

    Especially economic institutions.

    And now we arrive to the most important Invisible Gorilla of all.

    The threat of extinction to the human race caused by the criminal psychosis of Jewish Supremacy Inc.

    That’s why Treason Against JSI is Loyalty to Humanity.

    • moneytalks
      moneytalks says:

      ” the inherent instability of all theoretical constructs.”

      Confirmed science , such as { F = ma } for instance , provides us with constructs of reality that are BY FAR more stable than those provided by religious theologies or otherwise . For example , Einstein did not invalidate Newtonian physics application to atomic nuclear physics because it was never meant to describe a reality unknown at the time . Newtonian physics is still applied by modern engineers of non-atomic macro constructs including astrophysical planetary systems , jet/rocket engines , et al .

Comments are closed.