In Defense of Tucker Carlson

Having a career in the big media is like having a career in big politics. Politics is the art of the possible. Compromises are inevitable. And so it is in the media, where I suppose even many leftists have to suppress their real anti-White hatreds—Joy Reid and Don Lemon come to mind—in order to appeal to their audience and the network higher-ups; for the left, their only sin is to go too far too fast. It would be great if a media figure could talk explicitly about White identity and interests. And it would be terrific if there were honest discussions on the major networks of the ethnic composition of American elites and what their interests and attitudes are. But if you did, you’d be fired.

So Tucker Carlson doesn’t talk about such things, and he is drawing the biggest audience in cable TV history. So is he doing something valuable for our side? I think so. There is a whole lot of implicit Whiteness in his shows, and even though he doesn’t talk about Jewish identity and interests, it’s sometimes there by implication.

For example, he often shows egregious examples of Black-on-White crime, such as the execution-style killing of 5-year-old Cannon Hinnant by a Black man in Georgia, an event that drew yawns from the left; or the gratuitous “knock-out” games where Blacks sucker-punch unsuspecting Whites; or Blacks looting stores during the riots. A frequent guest is Heather MacDonald disposing of the myth that there is an epidemic of White racist cops attacking unarmed, innocent Black people. Recently he noted that in every one of the recent cases, from George Flood to Jacob Blake to Breonna Taylor the police acted reasonably given the circumstances. And he presented a vigorous defense of Kyle Rittenhouse, showing via video that he acted in self-defense.

Segments that illustrate White people being killed by hateful Blacks are exactly the sort of thing that make White people more conscious of being White and more fearful of a future as a White minority. The same goes for his segment on Sarch Jeong’s anti-White rants and how this did not prevent her from having a job at the New York Times.

Recently Tucker featured Christopher Rufo who is an activist against Critical Race Theory which is so common in the educational system and in training sessions for businesses and government workers. Critical Race Theory propaganda, as expounded by the likes of Robin Diangelo, is nothing more than an attempt to make Whites feel guilty for being White and to accept that all Whites are evil racists who must constantly work to overcome their evil. Shortly after the segment, Trump issued an executive order banning such propaganda in government agencies; and now Rufo says it’s been banned from major defense contractors like Raytheon.

He also brought on Heather MacDonald to discuss racial preferences in college admission—another issue that resonates with Whites because it feeds into the idea that anti-White discrimination is rampant in universities and businesses.

And on another segment, Heather M referred to “behavioral differences” that are being ignored by the left when they talk about Black dysfunction and underachievement. They didn’t channel Phil Rushton or Richard Lynn, but the implication was obvious.

Tucker had an exposé of the man he calls “the famously vicious Paul Singer,” who runs a hedge fund responsible for gutting a small town in Nebraska. Singer is Jewish neocon who is a major GOP donor. For people with any knowledge of how our system works—a substantial part of his audience, this is clearly dog whistling. The hedge fund industry is a Jewish industry, and predatory business practices by Jews are a theme of anti-Jewish attitudes for centuries.

And speaking of dog whistles, Tucker has mentioned George Soros by name—an unpardonably anti-Semitic act according to the activists. (Twitter labeled the segment “sensitive content” to discourage viewing.) Newsweek:

[Soros] has become a totemic boogeyman figure for the right, a focus of consternation, anger, and often anti-Semitic hate, accused of buying power and influence, and undermining democracy.

“For many years, leftist billionaire George Soros has used his wealth to remake our society, American society,” Carlson said during his show. “His latest area of focus is criminal justice. From Texas to Philadelphia [and] the state of Virginia, Soros has reportedly spent millions of dollars backing candidates for District Attorney, for prosecutor. Once elected, these candidates…have ended cash bail, treated felonies like misdemeanors, and sometimes ignored some crimes entirely.”

Here Tucker interviews Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) on censorship by Google and other Big Tech companies but also emphasizes the person-who-must-not-be-named’s role in funding the campaigns of leftist prosecutors who let off rioters who destroy property and attack police officers while going to the wall on people, like the McCloskeys, the St. Louis couple who were arrested and charged for trying to defend their property. Tucker: “I can’t think of any rich person who has had a greater effect on how Americans live and how American society works in my lifetime than George Soros, and yet news organizations have been bullied into not mentioning that.”

Tucker concluded the segment by explaining it as “because somehow billionaires get a pass”—a bit disingenuous, since it’s clearly because Soros is Jewish that he is not supposed to be mentioned, and he knows it. Jewish activists were outraged when Victor Orban used Soros as a whipping boy (e.g., “European institutions do not serve the interests of the citizens of Europe, but rather those of prominent billionaire disrupter George Soros”). Again, it’s because they were afraid of an anti-Jewish reaction when people became aware that Soros is trying to fundamentally change their country. And presumably there is similar pressure going on behind the scenes in the U.S., including at Fox, where Newt Gingrich was censored for uttering Soros’s name (“Things got extremely awkward on Fox News panel show Outnumbered on Wednesday after former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich tied billionaire financier George Soros—often the focus of anti-Semitic tropes—to violence in cities”). And, although he doesn’t talk about the very large role of the ADL in promoting censorship, he has often had segments blaming Google, Twitter, and the rest for buckling under this pressure, although they are likely willing accomplices considering the large Jewish ownership of social media (Google, Facebook) and the fact that Silicon Valley in general is decidedly on the left.

But Singer and Soros are just two member of our predatory elite whose actions have devastated the working class by exporting their jobs and destroying the social props for the family that were embedded in traditional Western culture—a recurrent theme for Tucker. Tucker has had a great deal on the decline of the family and the importance of fathers, and on the opioid crisis, all of which are clearly linked to the decline of the culture in general. And he named the Sacklers as the main villain, but perhaps softening the Jewish angle by interviewing a Jewish author on the subject. (Trigger warning: Not all Jews are bad guys.)

Immigration is the most critical issue facing the West. Carlson lost advertisers when he said that immigration results in an America that is “poorer and dirtier and more divided.”

The “Tucker Carlson Tonight” host, in one of his regular rallying cries against immigration, called out “previous leaders” who “demand that you shut up and accept” immigrants.

“We have a moral obligation to admit the world’s poor, they tell us, even if it makes our own country poorer, and dirtier, and more divided,” Carlson said on his show.

“Immigration is a form of atonement,” he added. “Previous leaders of our country committed sins ― we must pay for those sins by welcoming an endless chain of migrant caravans. That’s the argument they make.”

Carlson last week ranted about immigrants replacing Americans, and called out President Donald Trump in a magazine interview for failing to keep promises to voters ― including construction of the U.S.-Mexico border wall. (here)

Notice that, unlike so many conservatives, he did not restrict his comments to illegal immigration. And again, for those able to hear the dog whistles, his comment that “Previous leaders of our country committed sins ― we must pay for those sins by welcoming an endless chain of migrant caravans” clearly refers to Jews who have a massive chip on their shoulder about the 1924 immigration law which they see as directed against Jews and resulted in Jews not being able to immigrate from Europe—essentially blaming the U.S. for the deaths of European Jews in World War II. Every time there is a danger of immigration or refugee restriction getting traction, the mainstream media—and especially the Jewish media—are rife with stories about how Jews suffered because of the 1924 immigration law. As usual, Jews see everything from the standpoint of their lachrymose version of Jewish history and they blame evil White people: If White people stood up once and demanded a country with a solid European-derived majority, it could happen again, and their perception is that that would not be good for the Jews. The legitimate interests of other Americans are irrelevant at best and evil at worst.

Carlson often points out that the American elite is predominantly on the left and that they oppose the interests of the working class and the country as a whole. He has had many shows on the degeneration of California as managed by leftist elites, resulting in the disappearance of the middle class and resulting in a society of the unimaginably rich ruling over poor, illiterate masses—what I suspect is the dystopian future that our post-1960 elite wants. He recently made a comment to the effect that these elites are funding and promoting the rioting to distract the country from the effects of the policies they have promoted. And he repeatedly calls out the hypocrisy of elites because they are able to avoid the effects of the policies they so strenuously advocate—leftist politicians who want to take away guns while insisting on having well-armed body guards. Wealthy liberals getting their not-very-smart kids into good colleges while hating populism. Leftist politicians and donors who live far away from the neighborhoods they have helped to destroy—most recently Michael Novogratz, a billionaire who funds the Bail Project responsible for releasing many of the rioters who are destroying so many cities, as well as violent felons who have gone on to commit more crimes.

[Novogratz] gave a big donation to a DA candidate in Queens called Tiffany Caban. Novogratz doesn’t live in Queens. He has homes in the safest neighborhoods in America, of course. He could afford to support Caban because he doesn’t have to live with the consequences of her ideas.

Caban ran on decriminalizing drug use and prostitution and other, quote, “crimes of poverty,” as if poverty forces people to commit crime. What a patronizing absurdity that is. But all of this is fine with Michael Novogratz. There are never going to be pimps and junkies outside his family’s house. He gets to pose as a progressive activist by doing this.

And critically — this is the point — by funding The Bail Project and groups like it, he and progressives like him, buy immunity from the obvious questions that actual journalists might ask them otherwise. Questions like, how exactly did you make billions of dollars? And how precisely do hedge funds and cryptocurrency trading make this a better country? Those are the real questions. No one ever asked them.

In this video on homelessness, Carlson complains that government should do better to make home ownership available to working-class Americans rather than “selling the country to Chinese investors and prioritizing the returns of real estate speculators.” Definitely a populist message. And, as Media Matters says, he “used a conveniently vulnerable population as a bludgeon against Democrats, urban areas, and the ‘coastal elites.’” “Coastal elites. There’s that dog whistle again, without any mention of the J-word.

And then there’s Russia, the focus of neocon and, since the 2016 election, Democrat hysteria. A writer at Vanity Fair states it this way:

With the fervor he normally reserves for misogynistic for racist screeds, Tucker Carlson has taken up a new cause: defending Russia from the libs. “[Vladimir Putin,] for all his faults, does not hate America as much as many of these people do,” Carlson said on his show Monday night, referring to members of the media who’ve criticized Republicans for cozying up to Moscow. “They really dislike our country. And they call other people traitors?”

This seems to be a new pet line for Carlson, who said last week that he’s cheering for Russia in its conflict with Ukraine—the U.S. ally Trump attempted to extort to gin up an investigation into Joe Biden. “Why do I care what’s going on in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia?” he asked during a panel discussion. “And I’m serious—like, why do I care? And why shouldn’t I root for Russia? Which I am.”

Tucker, like Trump’s rhetoric in the 2016 election (although he hasn’t been able to follow through on it [presidents aren’t all-powerful] because of intense opposition by the deep state national security folks), has been a strong supporter of removing US troops from the Middle East, and of course Russia has made an alliance with Israel’s archenemy, Iran, and has gone to bat for Syria. This is a huge problem for neocons and pretty much the rest of the U.S. foreign policy establishment intent on forever wars (on behalf of you-know-who]. Recently he claimed that Biden-Harris would “plan a new war” in Syria if elected.

Too many thousands of American servicemen are deployed in dozens of countries around the world and have been for generations. In some cases, there may be a good reason they are there. In many other cases though, we just don’t talk about it. You’re not allowed to. In Washington, mindless interventionism is very much a bipartisan project. Both parties support it. … [Trump] has been talking relentlessly about bringing the troops home from countries around the world and maybe more than any other single reason, talk like that makes official Washington hate Donald Trump.

Tucker stays clear of criticizing Israel but he avoids hyping things like the recent peace treaty between Israel and Bahrain or the embassy move to Jerusalem—unmentioned as far as I know—but popular with many mainstream conservatives. Not much doubt in my mind that Tucker understands that these wars are promoted by the Israel Lobby and that they are not in American interests. Since so many conservatives (e.g., Hannity) are slaves of the Israel Lobby, this is important to get across to his listeners.

So yes, I think that overall Tucker Carlson is an asset to our side. I think that he wants an America with a large White majority, but an America that is fair to the historic Black population. And he likely believes that fundamentally America is fair to its Black population and has been for decades, so he is unwilling to excuse so much of Black behavior, often having on intelligent, solidly middle-class conservative Blacks like Larry Elder as spokespeople condemning the behavior of so many Blacks and the BLM activists, and condemning the Democrats for fostering Black pathology (which they have, ever since revamping the welfare system in the 1960s, leading to a catastrophic decline in all the markers of family stability, especially for Blacks). To be sure, he does this without talking about IQ or impulsivity. But he is making the White population more conscious of being White and making it painfully obvious what happens to White people and their property when the left runs things—Portland being Exhibit A. I strongly suspect that he understands that Jews are a dominant elite and are ultimately behind the biggest problems Americans face—any who is as involved in politics as Tucker is as close to the action as he is has got to know. But let’s face it, there are a lot of non-Jews, such as Novogratz, among American elites who are going along with the program. Simply talking about our traitorous hostile elites is a major service.

Tucker paints a dark picture of America’s future if the left regains power—Obama would be nothing compared to what they want. And as a result, even though he has criticized Trump at various times, he, like many (myself included) think this is an Armageddon-like election that would usher in a full-blown anti-White government that would pack the Supreme Court (“Kavanaugh and Barrett were illegitimate”), get rid of the First and Second Amendments, the Electoral College, and two senators per state—and inaugurate a permanent government of the left. And that’s just for starters. The hope is that in the future there will be someone (like Tucker?) who could win the presidency and really start the process of rolling back the last 60 years.

42 replies
  1. Natalie Golovin
    Natalie Golovin says:

    Unfortunately support from this site and V Dare only hurts Tucker Remember Charlottesville All twisted lies and obfuscation

    • John B Walker
      John B Walker says:

      Natalie Golovin….
      Your name sounds youcrainial, dear Natalie.
      It’s a Second Amendment thing.

  2. John
    John says:

    Tucker is brave.

    But he has to work in more things –explicitly– about Jews.

    It must be done tactfully and factually so that it will be acceptable and so that Rupert Murdoch’s sons who run FOX (they’re Jewish) cannot easily censor Tucker.

    For example, Tucker can say that we understand that Holocaust survivors were let into America but that this should not mean that America must let in EVERYONE. In other words, say something nice about Jews while also subtly suggesting that they’re part of the problem.

    The taboo against the mainstream media’s speaking the truth about the ruination of White Christian America by Jewish and allied Democrat/Evangelical/leftist/LGBTQ and even GOP forces must be broken so that others can follow the example and speak freely. They can’t censor everyone.

    Bought-off Christian Evangelicals have to get over their infatuation with Jews and Israel. It makes Christians look stupid and unprincipled.

    I wonder if Tucker has read Kevin Macdonald’s books. He should.

    I am convinced that the taboo against speaking the truth about Jews can be broken if done properly. It MUST be done or America is finished.

  3. Kris
    Kris says:

    Extreme ‘white nationalists’ and their constant demands for ‘purity’ at all costs is the problem here. Under current conditions, Carlson has done plenty of good and has awakened many people who are at least 80% in our direction. But does this satisfy the WN purists in their tiny online ideological ghetto? No. Because he’s not saying ‘Jew’ all the time or praising Hitler.

    • Richard B
      Richard B says:

      “Extreme ‘white nationalists’ and their constant demands for ‘purity’ at all costs is the problem here.”

      Bravo! Couldn’t agree more.

  4. Anthony kenney
    Anthony kenney says:

    Tucker also periodically speaks with the representatives of the 9/11 families sue-ing the Saudi royal family, can’t imagine anyone else in MSM doing so, once he actually asked “what exactly are they hiding?” in reference to DOJ stonewalling, great question.

  5. todd hupp
    todd hupp says:

    At least Tucker is a WASP. Fox has to be careful about sponsors many of whom these days are Jews or Jew controlled/financed. In addition, Tucker may be naïve. We need to send him Dr. Macdonald’s scholarly books so he can understand the situation/problem. The USA is now much like pre WWII Germany re: the Jewish takeover there (universities ,business, finance ,professions).Interestingly Marxism is emerging in the US now, just as in 1920/1930s Germany. In a diluted way( vs the Nazi regime) Trump is attempting to salvage White Christian America. There is now a strong political pushback by Whites in Germany..

    • Jacobite
      Jacobite says:

      To compare today’s US with 1920s Germany is a mistake. First, in Germany, Jews controlled the movies, theater/cabaret, and private banking. They controlled several large-circulation newspapers , but not even most of them. They definitely did not control universities or public education. But they were only 1% of the German population, compared to 3% in the US (comparatively a big difference). And they were widely and openly associated by the public with the KPD (Communist Party) and the Spartakus League, which were known as anti-German and anti-Christian. Like today’s US, there was a large, well-financed, and Jewish-led Leftist military arm, which was staging violent take-over attempts all over Germany from 1918 through 1933. They were generally despised by the German People. Unlike the US today, an equal and opposite reaction soon developed — Rightist political parties, the Freikorps (paramilitary demobbed soldiers from WW I), active-duty military, and the police were all Right-wing. Sad to say, the crucial difference seems to be between the 20s German populace and today’s Americans.

      • Carolyn Yeager
        Carolyn Yeager says:

        Exactly right, as to your last sentence. We need to learn that it’s We the People who are the problem (lazy cowards) and only we who can solve it — and stop blaming politicians, and even Jews. Most love and indulge themselves in everything Jews provide and promote.
        Thanks for your comment, I appreciate it.

    • Aristo Boho
      Aristo Boho says:

      Dear Mister Hupp,

      What does it matter if Mister Tucker Carlson is Anglo-Saxon or not? What if he were of any other White Man lineage: Baltic, Celtic, Germanic, Greek, Latin or Slavic? And in fact he isn’t Anglo-Saxon: he is paternally Germanic and maternally Celtic & Latin. Mister Graham Ledger is English-Italian. I guarantee he has read Doctor Kevin MacDonald’s “The Critique Of Culture”. God Bless, Aristo Boho

      • Lucius Vanini
        Lucius Vanini says:

        According to the Wikipedia bio, Carlson’s mother’s maiden name was LOMBARDI, a Northern Italian surname; so I think you seem right to characterize TC as partly “Latin” on the maternal side. And if her mother’s name was McNEAR, yes, that’d be either Irish or Scottish, i.e., Celtic. So yeah, TC is not quite the WASP that Todd Hupp would like him to be.

        I’m with you. What’s firstly and lastly important here is “Caucasianness.”

        But surely you know that in the WN movement there’s a strong element of “Nordicists,” people of Northern European lineage, who regard Northern or more properly TEUTONIC Europeans as the uppermost caste. For them, to be Nordic or Germanic–and Anglo-Saxon is that–is IT..

        They are beautiful, great, passionate–children. In terms of civilization, a younger branch of the family with lingering adolescent conceits. I like them a lot, and am confident of my relation to them, what with the Nordic traits of my mother and grandparents, likely descendants of Lombards or Goths or Normans, all of which Teutons settled in Italy after the fall of Rome. But I know that they’re in dire need of Anthropology 101 and History 101..

        I never meet any of them who are abreast with the numerous genetic studies unanimously attesting to the tremendous homogeneity across Europe. Coop et al, 2013, says that “….individuals from opposite ends of Europe can be expected to share millions of genealogical ancestors over the past 1000 years.” If Nordics think they’re a tribe apart, they’re dreaming.

        The vast majority of Europeans descend from the early Indo-Europeans who originated on and migrated from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe in what’s now Southern Russia. And millennia of close and overlapping proximity contributed further to the relatedness of the migrants.

        As for the history, our Nordic friends and relatives can think they’re congenitally a cut above us Southerners, and imply it here despite their
        1) using the Roman Script;
        2) using a language 75ish% of whose words are derived from the Romans, with another big tranche coming from the Greeks;
        3) using a device running on electricity, which was harnessed by Alessandro Volta;
        4) benefiting from being heirs of a civilization made great by Greece and Rome;
        5) benefiting from the resurgence of that greatness via the Renaissance, which began and reached its height in the South;
        6) being ensconced, if they’re Americans, in the far Western Hemisphere opened to colonization by Italian and Spanish adventurers–in a country which has two names–AMERICA after my townsman Amerigo Vespucci, and COLUMBIA after Christopher Columbus, an explorer from the region bordering mine.

        The Northerners and Teutons owe so much to the Southerners that I wonder what they’d have been for the past millennium without them. Would they have gone significantly past the Goths, Franks and Vikings toward civilized refinements? We’ll ne’er know.

        Well, their descendants CAN argue that the Southerners’ greatness is past and that now, here and now, Northern Europeans are ablest and most accomplished.

        Well, maybe. But it would seem that they’re already in severe decline, though newer to civilization. As I said under an earlier TOO article, the English, Swedes and Dutch seem to be competing over which of them can most resemble contented lemmings. Afflicted with possibly terminal altruism and apathy. The Deutschlanders ain’t exactly inspiring, either. Now, if they were exhibiting the mettle that the Hungarians or even Poles and Slovaks are showing, then I’d be convinced!

        In any case, whatever edge the Northerners might generally now have doesn’t warrant thinking that a WASP or other Germanic type is necessarily to be preferred over another European individual, as a leader or spokesman of the Whites. So again I agree with you Aristo: TC’s being or not being a WASP or pure Nordic is not of the essence.

        • Aristo Boho
          Aristo Boho says:

          Dear Signor Vanini,

          I thank you for demonstrating correct objective sound logic about what a Caucasian is, namely, European Man, with regard to what I wrote about Mister Tucker Carlson. You compose that I seem right to characterise him as partly Latin because his mother was half Italian. Well, I shouldn’t define this as a characterisation but as a racial fact. And this isn’t just a biological certitude, for it is also of a spiritual value that should be of major importance for all to recognize about themselves, of whatever race or nationality of the given stripe, whether English or Italian and so forth, and this goes for all races. Many, but many, of the pests of counter-cultural counter-current White Nationalism, Nordicists and similar, do not even know for example that Der Führer Chancellor Adolf Hitler in one of his writings reminded one that it was a question of the German Folk and not the German Race. I’ve known those who had been authentic National Socialists and those born after the event who have profoundly admired and studied this ideology and its protagonist, who wanted nothing, and want nothing to do, with these people, going back to, and including, even the likes of Mister Colin Jordan and Commander George Lincoln Rockwell,nor retrospectively do they care for everything that occurred during either regime. What’s more, as to how these Neo-Nazis, Nordicists and the rest of this stagnant uncultured ilk, have like the establishment Conservative Right and the Left, make a mockery of Il Duce Benito Mussolini and Fascism, . The White Nationalist Nordicist is primarily an anti-intellectual, cultural cretin, and can be as destructive of Tradition as any other socio-psychopathic individual. Just look at what occurred in Scandinavia years ago with the Black Heavy Metal Neo-Nazis and the torching, sometimes for them, heroic arson of Medieval churches. Very much like the Islamists and others in France to-day: The Cathedral of Notre Dame and other Churches. There never can be European unity with people like them. They flaunt National Socialist symbols and also those of the American Confederacy without even knowing the spiritual significance of these very same ideograms. “Hey hey White Power” with a Roman salute with the right hand and a can of beer in the left one. They are more akin to those of the Rock’N’Roll culture, sporting emblems and tattoos of their favourite star. Most of them exist in Anglo-Saxon countries; and there and everywhere are also to be found the so-called Pagans and Neo-Pagans whom Baron Julius Evola rightly clarified have nothing to do with the Ancients but with Modernity: They’re just another example of the Liberalism born out of the French Revolution’s French Encyclopedists. I was present years ago when some pathetic bastard in England upon hearing one say respectfully Jesus Christ, spat on the floor and praised the Satanic bible of Mister Anton Szandor LaVey. The Satanists!? Lonelyheart sexual perverts! Yet beware, there’re serious ones about. There most certainly has been an historical theft of just what Fascism and National Socialism were, and the same for Baron Evola. And let me remind one the P in the acronym for White Anglo-Saxon stands for Protestant. Many many Protestants are fine, good, God fearing people but the Reformation destroyed Europe. The monasteries were great centers of some of the most profound learning, and contrary to who controls and writes the history, scientific thought. I once said to a Frenchman from Switzerland, “Oh so you are Latin.” He replied hysterically, “How dare! An insult! I’m Celtic!” So much for the unity of the White Race, including certain Northern Italians who despise the South. They can’t begin to come close to the profound culture of The Kingdom Of The Two Sicilies. And I am not saying the North of Italy is without its valuable cultural depth and story either.
          I differ from you Signor Vanini because as both Hitler and Mussolini knew, there isn’t a pure race, biologically speaking, and this is not to deny Blood and Soil. One point I must stress about the White Nationalist Movement: if there ever was a political organization, albeit autocephalous, to tell the truth. that was infiltrated by law enforcement and the intelligence services it’s the White Nationalist-Supremacist.
          I thank you for your REPLY, and for the ignorant from the four children and their mother, England, America, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, who despite the millions of Italians who reside in these countries, have a look at the dynamics in action in Italy: Look at this and then read my COMMENT below it. God Bless,Aristo Boho

          • Lucius Vanini
            Lucius Vanini says:

            The reason I said you SEEM to be right in characterizing Carlson as partly “Latin” on the maternal side, is that I’m customarily cautious in matters as to which I have no intimate acquaintance. For all I know, the Wikipedia bio MAY be wrong, or Carlson’s mother MAY have been adopted and was or is not ancestrally Italian. Certainly, IF she was half-Italian, Carlson is certainly part, 1/4, Italian.

            As for my being a believer in “pure” races, I don’t see how you concluded that. If you had clicked on my link (to an essay I wrote) in my reply, you would have seen that I don’t believe in monolithically homogeneous “islands of humanity,” but in ethnic/genetic CLUSTERS.

            In any case, you are obviously a man of learning and subtle thought, and it’s an honor to communicate with you.

            Are you Greek (Aristo) and Czech/Bohemian (Boho)?

          • Aristo Boho
            Aristo Boho says:

            Dear Mister Vanini,

            I apologise for stating you believed in a PURE RACE. I can not for the life of me know where that came from, because you do not compose that, Very rare, almost never, that I make such an error. I can only suppose that I was thinking of the many in specifically Anglo-Saxon countries who embrace this belief and got confused. Very strange indeed on my part.

            You too are obviously of learning and the pleasure is likewise mine. No mystery! Nothing occult! Aristo Boho is a European Man! Ti prego di mantenerti bene e forte, e si ricorda, VITA EST MILITIA SUPER TERRAM God Bless, Aristo Boho

  6. TimothyS
    TimothyS says:

    Wow. Christopher Rufus… As per opponents of critical race theory: “…counter-intelligence organizations” have “silenced and shut them down”.
    What do these idiots think they’re doing? They think infiltrating STEM can refurbish nature to their designs? This isn’t skepticism, it’s credulity and popular madness is their crowd..

  7. Lucius Vanini
    Lucius Vanini says:

    Wow. Pretty much a devastation of Dalton’s critique.

    Dalton made some fair points. I applaud his contempt for Christianity, which has poisoned a Civilization made great by Pagan Hellas and Rome; but I regard as slightly childish his bashing Carlson for not being Josef Goebbels (our movement is on crutches and he wants it to run a marathon, expecting it to win too), while his anthropology is embarrassing–full, as it is, of a shrill determination to categorize plainly Caucasoid Jews as of another race, to see their anthropological distance from those other West Eurasians known as Europeans to be racial distance and not, as it clearly is, ethnic distance, quite similar to that between say Swedes and Greeks, both of whom are classed as White by WNs.

    But my impression is that Dalton, like so many WNs or other non-Jewish Whites who dislike Jews, unconsciously assumes that saying the Ashkenazim are White is to say they aren’t doing all those bad things to us. NON SEQUITUR deluxe! Ashkenazi Jews do everything that “anti-Semites” are accusing them of doing AND ALSO meet all the anthropological criteria of “Caucasianness”–such that WNs (Dalton too no doubt) constantly consult Wikipedia to find out whether lol people with certain names are White or Jewish….

    Withholding the acknowledgement of Whiteness, based on dislike, is a familiar phenomenon. Because Catholics were once disliked in a WASPIsh America, the Irish weren’t considered White for a time; ditto Italians. On the other hand, when the dislike isn’t there, Whiteness is attributed to people with such physical attributes as warrant the classification. In the Third Reich, which saw that Jewry is a problematic element, so often inimical to the enveloping majority, Jews had to be classed as another race (how could the good guys include the bad guys?). In the equally White-Nationalist Confederates States of America, on the other hand, where Jews were not the arch-foe, Jews rose to positions of power and respect: Senator David Levy was an eminent advocate of slavery and secession; Abraham Myers was Quartermaster General; Judah Benjamin was at different times Confederate Secretary of War, Attorney General and Secretary of State; and in a society which shuddered at the idea of miscegenation these Jewish Southerners all married White Christian women of high social standing.
    Why was the CSA thus different from the Third Reich? Valuation didn’t get in the way of Confederate eyesight.

    Carlson’s phobia toward racism IS a weak point in his philosophic anatomy. I’m hoping that he just hasn’t thought the subject all the way through–that he’s been content to think like most people that racism is the same as racial bigotry, when in fact it may be inspired by love as surely as by hate. Yes, as another commenter here has suggested, Carlson would do well to read MacDonald. But I’d like him to read this too:

    But even as he is, WOULD I EVER love for TC to be president. I hope that the talk of his running in 2024 isn’t just talk. I’m thinking–perhaps too optimistically?–that since Reagan the movie actor and Trump the TV host made it to the WH, a clearly pro-White pundit of Fox News won’t be considered too incongruous a figure to merit the presidency.

  8. Carolyn Yeager
    Carolyn Yeager says:

    I have noticed that Tucker increasingly talks faster and faster on his show, to the point that he slurs over the words. Sometimes I think I only know what he’s said from the context because t times he’s practically unintelligible. I’m sure he watches himself, and surely his producers do, so I wonder why he’s not advised to slow down. I think his message would be more powerful if he spoke more deliberately – what’s the big rush?
    Perhaps its because he’s conflicted in his message, and how much he wants us to hear it. More importantly, how much he wants to be held responsible for bringing it. If it leads to him being urged to “run for president” – well, he doesn’t appear to want anything like that. He’s not really that strong of a character and he would be eaten alive. It just goes to show, though, how ready the rabble are to proclaim someone a savior who they assign to do the work for them, the work they don’t want to do for themselves. We do need leadership however – all groups do. For this, AH is the best model we have.

    • Barkingmad
      Barkingmad says:

      The faster you talk, the more you can say. He needs to shorten his presentations in terms of number of words spoken and then say those words slowly. It would create more impact. More is not better. Someone, give Tucker a call and let him know.

      • Pierre de Craon
        Pierre de Craon says:

        Yes to all, Barkingmad. And yes, I agree in some part with Carolyn Yeager—which probably surprises her as much as it does me.

        Carlson might profit from two hours’ worth of listening to recordings of Eric Sevareid reading news and giving commentary. Sevareid was a conventional figure from top to toe, of course, but he could read a report of an auto accident in such a way that it sounded like a profound reflection on human frailty.

        Television is at root a performance medium, and so nothing and nobody on television can ever be completely walled off from the few virtues and many vices associated with entertainment. Moreover, persuasiveness and credibility (in the sense of the power to inspire belief) are characteristics that can be native to the honest man and the con man alike; Socrates plainly had them in spades. Carlson ought to work harder at cultivating them.

    • Sally Murdoch
      Sally Murdoch says:

      Tucker is not simply brilliant….he’s funny as hell. Most people are too slow witted to
      catch what he is doing. He is the master of satire and irony. Sometimes he can’t contain himself and he blurts
      out loud guffaws and I am rolling on the floor.
      Not a strong character? Please. He is the epitome of strength and grace. He’d make a great POTUS.
      As to why he doesn’t lambast the jews on every show……if you were making six million dollars a year
      and doing a great service to your country, would you blow it by ranting about the jews?
      He talks about Singer, he talks about Soros, he calls them out as bad guys. He doesn’t need to scream
      BAD JEWS. Most people already know.

      • Carolyn Yeager
        Carolyn Yeager says:

        Sally Murdoch,
        You are an example of why Whites get no traction; it is not because of ‘neo-nazis’ in our midst! It’s because of complacent people like you. I follow everything Tucker says and does, and sometimes he is sophomoric, while at other times he’s serious and mature. His silly outbursts of maniacal laughter are not among his better points, imo. But everyone to their taste.

        You believe that making 6 million a year plus having high ratings should outweigh his satisfaction of being able to point directly to the Jews’ destructive activity in our society. The message we receive from him is that we can’t talk about Jews openly because that would make it about race. Doesn’t that help the Jews continue their destruction?

        Tucker does believe in the Holocaust and that the “Nazis” were the most evil of all people. I think he sincerely believes it. So what does that say about his study of history or of his curiosity & independent thought? Donald Trump has more curiosity than Tucker by far, and I’m sure he has looked into the Hitler question and does not believe fully in the received narrative but no US politician, least of all the president, can express a contrary view. I totally concur in that, and cannot blame any of them for it.

        But someone has to do it.

      • Moakie Jones
        Moakie Jones says:

        Good points Sally. And I don’t understand the criticism that he talks too fast. I think his ideas are delivered with great clarity. I understand everything he says. Yes I think he would make a great populist president.

    • Lucius Vanini
      Lucius Vanini says:

      Nifty how you did a 180-degree turn from “It just goes to show….how ready the rabble are to proclaim someone a savior” to “We do need leadership however” so as to give a plug for A.H.

      Actually, I too would LOVE to have a Hitler to lead our people. Forget Carlson and Trump, if I have me druthers!. A great leader with a true vision, Hitler is the most misrepresented figure in history. Easily! He wasn’t even a real anti-Semite. To the average, mind-conditioned person this sounds counter-intuitive; but a real anti-Semite hates Jews no matter what they do; yet Hitler, as we know now, exhibited much benevolence toward individual Jews (Emil Maurice, Eduard Bloch, Rosa Bernile Nienau); and clearly he was an “anti-Semite” in the way nearly all critics of Jewish behavior are–that is, not a hater of Jews per se but someone LABELED as anti-Jewish for daring to oppose Jewish subversion.

      Be all this as it may, what you commend Jacobite for saying here–“Sad to say, the crucial difference seems to be between the 20s German populace and today’s Americans”–should suggest to you that America isn’t ready to welcome a Hitler. So if we do need leadership–and I don’t know anyone who doesn’t believe that–we presumably must lower our expectations and support whoever can make some headway against the carefully implanted biases of “Middle America.”

      For one thing, I think we have to buy time, to at least avoid becoming mulattos and trannies before Jewish power declines–as it may well do. I believe that Orban’s Hungary might provide an instructive example. While not appearing “fascistic” except to the europhobic far-Left, Hungary is basically doing everything necessary to preserve its White, Western, European heritage and character. While leader of the Hungarian Jewish community, Andras Heisler, says “[Our] relations with the Orban government are incredibly positive,” Hungary has no migrant problem–no black savages committing rapes and assaults, no Islamists perpetrating Jihad terrorism or building mosques.

      P,S. Where Carlson is concerned, I don’t have the same impressions as you have. I’m not convinced he’s as lacking in strength as you seem to think he is. I could be wrong, of course. But the part about his not speaking clearly–I have NEVER had trouble distinguishing each word he speaks; nor have I heard anyone except you say he speaks unintelligibly, howsoever quickly he speaks. Have you had your ears checked?

      His show could not have become the most watched cable show ever if he didn’t enunciate well.

      • Carolyn Yeager
        Carolyn Yeager says:

        You’re quite the long-winded bore. Do you really think the TOO readers want to hear every thought that passes through your head? I sure don’t.
        I looked at your blog and didn’t like it. Who has time for it?

        Of course, I did not do “a 180-degree turn from “It just goes to show….how ready the rabble are to proclaim someone a savior” to “We do need leadership however” so as to give a plug for A.H.”

        The two are not related at all. And after saying that, you admit that Hitler was a great leader and you wish he or someone like him were available to us now. Who is the double-talker now?

        Are you saying we should look to Viktor Orban for leadership? No, you’re not saying that? I suggest you’re saying nothing because you have nothing to say, but want to publish yourself anyway.

        • Lucius Vanini
          Lucius Vanini says:

          Well, if you positively insist that I be more expansive, jawohl!

          It’s not your admiration for A.H. that I thought questionable, Schatz, but your thinking that if people want Carlson as a political leader they are rabble who proclaim a man a savior (your words), but you on the other hand can kneel at the shrine of Der Fuhrer and there’s not a molecule of “rabble” in that!

          So there was no doublethink in my thinking Hitler was a great leader while pointing out the convenient double standard you maintain for yourself..

          I don’t see why there should be more “rabble” and savior-worship in thinking that Carlson might be a good president than there is in believing that, could reality permit it, another Hitler would be a great leader.

          One thing is all but sure, in any case: another Hitler is NOT in the cards now! When I said I’d love to have Hitler as the leader of our people, I said “Forget Trump and Carlson, IF I HAVE ME DRUTHERS.” But I was pleasantly dreaming–I don’t have me druthers. Another Hitler presupposes a nation and historical circumstances consistent with the rise and self-maintenance of such a leader. And these don’t exist now. It would seem–yes, unfortunately–that we will have to try to make do with less.

          And hey–if I really had me druthers, I might not choose Hitler! Maybe I’d prefer Vespasian.

          Funny that you can think Jacobite was being eminently truthful when he said “Sad to say, the crucial difference seems to be between the 20s German populace and today’s Americans” and yet not see that preaching to the latter about the supreme virtues of Hitlerism is a non-starter. Just try to influence anything beyond an eccentric fringe of the American “populace” with your view of Hitler (we are all eccentrics here). Notwithstanding my view of Hitler, I suspect as being hostile agents the “neo-Nazis” who publicly sing his praises, display his images and the Swastika…. I suspect them of working to discredit pro-White politics in the minds of the brainwashed majority.

  9. Judd Rowan
    Judd Rowan says:

    Nice evaluation of Tuck.
    Jews are not white though the Ashkenazi have some white DNA.
    Jews are jews.
    People who say that jews are white clearly do not know who and what the jews are….
    they have set themselves apart from the rest of humanity for thousands of years….
    they are a unique tribe/race….they are hyper-ethnocentric…..and generally anti-white.
    I think Tucker goes as far as he can and sometimes goes over the line. He is the only MSM figure I watch.

  10. Mark
    Mark says:

    Yes to all the above … but ultimately Tucker’s doctrine of “all we want to do is go back to ‘equality for everyone'”, has been tried and failed. Groups will always want to favor their own kind: whites, Jews, blacks, Hispanics and all the rest. And in-group preference will out.

    • Brent Sabo
      Brent Sabo says:

      Specifically, Tucker calls attention to the fact that the left claimed to be for “equality” when in fact they were really just anti-white all along. Same with censorship, they used to be for free speech but now that they are in charge they want us to shut up.
      If you look closely Tucker is always pointing out the hypocrisy of the left. Sadly, it doesn’t matter because people on the left have no integrity or sense of honor and they cannot be shamed.

  11. Danny
    Danny says:

    Tucker Carlson is all we have, one of the few voices from the other side of the media spectrum.
    You could complain he does not say the word ‘White’ enough but if he did, he’d be gone.
    You could complain he does not say the word ‘Jew’ enough but then he would be gone even more.
    Carlson is great at what he does, understanding what is permissible to say in our Canceling Age.
    Sometimes he goes over the line a teensy weensy bit and then…
    he goes fishing.
    He does a great job, don’t tear him down.

    • Rodger
      Rodger says:

      I heartily agree with this sentiment. At present the most important service anyone who has a relatively mainstream platform can perform: call out the o’erweaning dishonesty of the legacy media and the intensifying censorship of the mainstream internet platforms.

      Tucker is always on message.

  12. Joe Webb
    Joe Webb says:

    Moderator, I noticed my two posts were back up this morning, but now they are gone again.

    Which gets me to a query. After one posts, is it normal for the post to disappear for , like , a day, until they are moderated?
    And why are my two posts gone again? thanks Joe Webb


    (Mod Note: Joe, all posts by you which this moderator has been tasked with have been approved. Three today. That said, essays by one author are moderated by the author, not me. In addition, I check at least twice a day. None of your comments has been deleted by this mod. Some may wish for a more “on top of it” moderation, but we all have “other lives” to lead. Be well.)

  13. Mark
    Mark says:

    Tucker lost one of his top writers and his monologue has seem to has have lost some of its impact. His modus operandi (maybe at the behest of his superiors) is to have an implicitly pro-White monologue that is followed by several Jewish and Black guests. Obviously, this is to blunt and mollify the impact of his pro-White monologue by showing how he respects these other ethnic groups as equals, by virtue of including them on his show. Its quite pathetic, and it contributes to the cognitive dissonance that is epidemic in society. Either Tucker is compromised, or he’s a poser.

Comments are closed.