How to become an Anti-Semite?

Critical or laudatory writings about Jews seem to be an inexhaustible subject although it often turns into a repetitive rant. Over the last two thousand years tons of books and articles have been published either praising Jewish soul-improvers and their apostate apostles to the heavens, or describing their early Judaic brethren as the scum of the earth. Along with each historical surge in Jewish influence, there follows, as can be witnessed anew in the USA today, the inevitable upsurge in antisemitism – whatever this word means, or whomever this generic label with many meanings may apply to. Any objective account about Jews is a coincidentia oppositorum, or simply put, a conceptual tension resulting from the co-existence of two conditions which are opposite to each other, yet dependent on each other and presupposing each other. Objectively speaking every book and every remark in favor or against Jews depend on the self-avowed objectivity of a cited author. Carl Schmitt, a prominent German conservative legal scholar, now a household name for the Alt-Right and New Right in Europe and the US, shortly after the National-Socialist takeover, wrote in a chief German legal journal of that time:

The necessary task of bibliography is very difficult given that it is undoubtedly necessary that we determine as accurately as possible who is a Jew and who is not.[i]

However, the most important thing, coming to light these days, is the clear and definite understanding that Jewish opinions cannot be put on the same level in their intellectual content with the opinions of German or other non-Jewish authors. [ii]

In order to prevent any critical inquiry into the Jewish question, carried out by numerous German anthropologists, biologists, psychiatrists and legal scholars in Weimar Germany and later on in National-Socialist Germany (see here) many Jewish and many left-leaning authors, immediately after the end of WWII, began to inundate the educational and political markets with demonizing treaties not only about “ugly Nazis,” but also about the forever lurking White Gentile threat. One of the harshest critics of antisemitism, quite in line with the re-educational ukases of his coreligionists and coethnics of the newly reestablished Frankfurt School, wrote: “Judeophobia is a psychic aberration. As a psychic aberration it is hereditary, and as a disease transmitted for two thousand years it is incurable.[iii]  The prime purpose of the newly launched academic field of psychoanalysis, which later gave birth to critical race theory, and later on to a bizarre “French Theory” curriculum, was to pathologize Whites into perpetual feelings of guilt. It spread in the 1950’s like a wild fire, particularly in American colleges. Soon, the entire social science curriculum in the West turned into courses of demonology with labels such as “antisemite” and “Nazi” becoming the symbols of Absolute Evil. It follows that is impossible to converse with Absolute Evil. With humans labeled as extraterrestrial monsters or subterranean demons, one cannot negotiate; legal provisions of human rights cannot apply to species declared as non-humans beforehand. They need to be destroyed. Such a Manichean view, based on criminalization of the adversary, soon became the foundation of US foreign policy with its latest offshoot now being observed in the US demonizing attitude toward its former WWII Russian ally. Soviet-Russian soldiers, after their liberation of Auschwitz in January 27, 1945, were crucial in cementing the post-WWII liberal and communist antifascist narrative; today, by contrast, their Russian offspring must be excluded from the protections of international law.

Many Jews are well aware that works critical of their behavior, and especially works published by German scholars prior and during WWII, were not all, and not always, products of aberrant minds. Some of those works contain unsettling truths about Jews.  Hence the reason that the first step initiated by the Allies in ravaged Europe, following WWII, was to destroy or make inaccessible thousands of books deemed to be dangerous to the establishment of the post-WWII world order.[iv] (see also here).

Early French communist and antifascist author Jean Paul Sartre, was among the first to provide the script for demonizing political adversaries, based more on his personal vendetta than on his true concern for French Jewry. As the German troops were preparing their retreat from France in the late summer of 1944, he drafted a short  book in which he commiserated with the French Jewry, comparing their plight to the hero in the Franz Kafka’s novel The Trial,  “who  knows that he is considered guilty; judgment is continually put off — for a week, two weeks[v] .  Very likely Sartre rushed to publish this little Judeophile manifesto of his in order to better adjust himself to the spirt of the vindictive antifascist times in Europe, but also to distract his audience from the fact that in the early 1930’s he benefited from the scholarship in a nascent National-Socialist Germany. The pro-German Vichy government in France, from 1940–44, had never bothered him, leaving the performance of his dramas unscathed. This did not prevent Sartre, however, by the end of 1944, along with a bunch of his communist fellow travelers, and with the little help of American occupying powers, to launch a large-scale operation of intellectual inquisition against thousands of French anticommunist authors, artists and wrong-thinkers — the process to be known decades later in America under the name of cancel culture:

Of all professional categories, journalists and writers were hit the hardest. This underlines the ideological character of the conflict and the ensuing purges. The proportion of writers and journalists who were shot, imprisoned, and barred from their profession surpasses all other professional categories. Do we need to be reminded of the assassination of Albert Clément, Philippe Henriot, Robert Denoël, of the suicide of Drieu La Rochelle, of the death of Paul Allard in prison prior to court hearings and of the executions of Georges Suarez, Robert Brasillach, Jean Luchaire […] [or] the death sentence pronounced in absentia or a commuted prison sentence for Lucien Rebatet, Pierre-Antoine Cousteau, etc.?” [vi]

If one agrees for a minute that antisemitism is indeed a form of mental disorder necessitating the banishment of all antisemitic authors from the public domain, or having them dispatched to psychiatric wards, then one must just as well conclude that hundreds of books critical of Jews, from antiquity  to modernity, also need a similar treatment in retrospect:  from Tacitus to Treitschke, from Dickens to Dostoyevsky from Voltaire to Vacher de Lapouge. The alphabetical list of authors who have made critical remarks about Jews goes off to infinity.

The degree of antisemitism is difficult to gauge, only confirming time and again that this word has an extensive capacity for diverse meanings. There are latent antisemites who limit themselves to mild criticism of Israel in the hopes of avoiding public rebuke, and there are also those who use explicit and often gross words for the portrayal of Jews. There is a huge difference in antisemitic syntax between the well-mannered Catholic writer Hilaire Belloc and the folkish writer Louis Ferdinand Céline, who, other than writing his antisemitic pamphlets (still banned in France), is considered the best French novelist of the twentieth century.  Belloc, by contrast, prefers pussyfooting around the Jewish question, using convoluted sentences devoid of hyperbolic Jew-baiting words, always watching nervously not to cross the line, while putting it diplomatically:

It has unfortunately now become a habit for so many generations, that it has almost passed into an instinct throughout the Jewish body, to rely upon the weapon of secrecy. Secret societies, a language kept as far as possible secret, the use of false names in order to hide secret movements, secret relations between various parts of the Jewish body…[vii]

Céline, by contrast, seems to be focused in his lengthy unhinged antisemitic prose way too often on Jewish anal tracts and Jewish genitals.  In his peculiar lingo, often difficult to translate even into the crassest American slang, he notes:

The fucked up Masonic Republic, supposedly French is at the mercy of secret societies and Jewish Banks (Rothschild, Lazare, Barush etc…) it’s in agony. [viii]

Or even more:

The Kikes that rule the Universe, they understand them, those secrets of public opinion. Hidden in the corners, they have all of the wires in their hands. Propaganda, gold, advertising, radio, press, the cinema. From Hollywood the Jewess, to Moscow the Yid, same boutique, same telephone, same agencies, same Kikes manning the lookout, the cash drawer, the business affairs.[ix]

Rare are contemporary academics who would dare tackle critically, studiously, yet dispassionately,  the most explosive  taboo topic of our times: the Jewish question. For his groundbreaking work on Jews and their role in shaping academic and public discourse in the US Kevin MacDonald was bound to receive a kiss of death from his fellow American academics. The entire political communication after WWII  throughout the West has been based on fake Gentile Judeophile mimicry on the one hand, and hidden Gentile resentment of the Jews on the other. A French author writing under pseudonym notes:

From 1945 onwards, there is no longer any Jewish question, antisemitism  ceasing to be an opinion and becoming  a criminal offence instead; it’s rare to find those daring to defy this taboo. [x]

Modern German politicians are a case in point. Over the last several decades the have not even  pretended  to engage in a make-believe Judeophile mimicry; their veneration of Jews is hyperreal, if not surreal, with the existence of the state of Israeli serving as Germany’s stated raison d’état.  Every new German chancellor, when sworn in, forces himself/herself to embark on multiple pilgrimages to Tel Aviv where he or she states unambiguously, as the former Chancellor Angela Merkel did on several occasions, that  “ Israel’s right to exist is the Germany’s reason of state”.  [xi]

Jews as Gentile Doppelgangers 

Atonement rituals of US and European politicians vis-á-vis Jews can be compared to faked citizenship behavior in the former communist Eastern Europe where critical comments about the communist ruling class could only be made in private and behind bolted  doors. In a similar vein, the Jewish question today is critically discussed in America and Europe only in closely-knit circles of like-minded people. However much the so-called Western democracies like to brag on all frequencies about free speech and free academic inquiry, any critical comment about Jews must stay off limits.  With any tiny critical remark on Jews, if uttered in public, either deadly silence sets in, or all hell breaks loose in the media. Censorship in communist states was surely well described by some sharp American observers; self-censorship, by contrast, which reigns  supreme in academic and governmental  circles in America and the  EU, hasn’t as of today been critically  examined.

Surely, the System, along with its friendly scribes is overjoyed when observing the proliferation of diverse antisemitic sects and multiple “White Power” or “Hollywood Nazi” cults, or internet Jew-baiters. There are two reasons for that:  Firstly, self-declared Jew-haters are always welcome by the System given that they provide the System with necessary legal fodder further bolstering its worn-out mantra that “Western democracies extend free speech to all — even to their enemies.” And secondly, any hostile insult against Jews always comes in handy to the System’s thought police which can easily set up decoys and charge antisemitic suspects with having a master plan for a terrorist act against the Jews.

Another parallel is in order. Former communist apparatchiks in Eastern Europe used Marxist dialectics very adeptly. In the beginning of their bloody reign, dialectics was a tool to justify the physical destruction of their anticommunist critics. After the breakup of communism, they resorted to the same dialectics in order to rebrand themselves as Western liberals and exorcise themselves from accusations of having committed gigantic crimes in their recent communist past. Likewise, many Jewish scholars resort to similar dialectical invocations about “rising tide of anti-Semitism,” which serves them as a tool for further strengthening the national and racial  identity of millions of Jews and lining the coffers of Jewish organizations. One could raise a rhetorical question:  how long would Jewish identity thrive without generating its antithesis in the Absolute Evil incarnated nowadays in the so-called White Supremacist and his fellow traveler, the Antisemite?  If one assumes that all antisemites in America and Europe simply vanished into thin air, the System would likely resuscitate and reconstruct a new brand of antisemites out of the blue. Just like the System in the ex-communist Soviet Union and Eastern Europe drew its negative legitimacy by constantly reinventing the boogeyman of counterrevolutionary Fascism and Nazism, so do many Jewish agencies and pro-Jewish lobbies in the US, along with countless left-leaning social science professors, build their identity, or better yet shield their tenure, by nurturing their evil household darling Hitler and by evoking the danger of his postmodern sidekicks, the proverbial  “White Supremacist” and the “Neo-Nazi.”

In passing it must be stated over and over again that the pejorative word “Nazism”, although not legally banned in private communications, was never used officially in even one document in National-Socialist Germany. The term “Nazi” was first coined by early Spartacists, i.e.,  early German Moscow-steered Bolsheviks in Weimar Germany, later to be used massively in the  Soviet Union, before it comfortably settled during the 1950s in American academic and media vernacular.  Its derogatory equivalent would be “commie” for a communist, although not a single academic paper in the US or EU would accept a paper where a word “commie” is used as a synonym for a communist.  In addition, the compound noun  National-Socialism includes the noun ‘Socialism’, written with a capital S, a word which  had a very good reputation among all nationalists all over German-friendly countries in   Europe, prior and during WWII:  from Germany to Spain, from Croatia to Finland.[xii] Soviets and their  latter-day modern Western offspring, the  antifas, also like to adorn themselves with the word “socialism” yet cannot tolerate that the “Nazis” could also be socialists.  The two-syllable word “Nazi” sounds more demonic, hence more acceptable in the mainstream media.

In a similar vein, mainly due to the willful ignorance of the German language and German cultural history many modern self-proclaimed experts on National-Socialism refer to it as an “ideology.”  Again, not a single National-Socialist government document, not a single academic  paper in in Germany, from 1933-45 used the term Ideologie; the  official name being  Germany’s National-Socialist “Weltanschauung” (worldview). However, neither does the English word “worldview” reflect best the German word “Anschauung”, a word which has a nuanced philosophical meaning, carrying a notion of perception, imagination, figurative thinking, or pictorial apprehension. (see here)

One could also reverse the antisemitic Anschauung and pose another rhetorical question regarding the wishful thinking about the tentative disappearance of Jewish influence in the West. If Jews were suddenly to depart, as many White Christian antisemites secretly yearn – there would still remain countless of millions of US evangelicals, Christian-Zionists, millions of White  traditional Catholics in Europe, all hoping in chorus to become themselves verus Israel, i.e., more Jewish than the Jews and thus await their  turn for chosenness.  Hating or loving Jews and Judaism, yet quoting every Sunday their scripts and bowing down to their jealous god Yahweh, is surely a form if not of the White paranoid mind, then at least a serious form of White Gentile split identity.










Credo quia Absurdum (“I believe because it is absurd”)

Penile and anal analogies that many antisemites often resort to when describing the Jews were also trademarks of the chief Jewish psychoanalyst, Sigmund Freud. His obsession with Oedipus complex projected on his would-be incestuous and parricide gentile clients reflected very likely his own concealed sexual disorders.  Nonetheless Freud deserves big credit when describing Christian antisemitism as a hidden “neurosis” in his best and last book   Moses and Monotheism.[xiii]

The hatred for Judaism is at bottom hatred for Christianity, and it is not surprising that in the German National-Socialist revolution this close connection of the two monotheistic religions finds such clear expression in the hostile treatment of both.

It is no accident that the intellectual and cultural foundations of Fascism and National-Socialism can be traced to central Europe and northern Italy known historically for their strong Catholic traditions yet retaining strong pagan undercurrents which the Vatican willy-nilly had to put up with over centuries, at least until the Second Vatican Council in 1962–65. Many German scholars in the footsteps of Friedrich Nietzsche and sympathetic to early National Socialism wrote hundreds of articles and books linking Judeo-Christianity to the rise of early Bolshevism.  “The Jewry, in its single-minded pursuit of the world domination through the Bolshevik deception of mankind, has had its strongest ally in the disruptive Biblical faith.[xiv]

On the other hand it is also no accident that in WASP America Jews have had a  far better proliferating turf than  in Europe, while continuing to thrive with their overreaching zeal, especially in framing the modern American social-juridical narrative. As I wrote some time ago many Jewish scholars (J. Auerbach, M. Konvitz, J.L. Talmon) rightly acknowledged deep theological links between the American idea and Judaism. Many American traditional conservatives and White Nationalists may be correct in denouncing secular myths, such as Freudianism, Marxism and neo-liberalism, which they see as ideologies doctored up by  Jewish and pro-Jewish writers and politicians. They fail, however, to go a step further and examine the Judaic origins of Christianity and the proximity of these two monotheist religions. Or to put it into a more up to date verbiage: How can one dismiss the self-evident Holocaust story yet at the same time embrace the self-evident story of the Jew Jesus Christ or the immaculate conception of the Jewess Virgin Mary? [xv]

Putting all Jews in one basket is also a serious error given that some of them have shown strong antisemitic feelings themselves, such as the so-called “self-hating” Jews. These Jewish antisemites have simply grouped together Jewish apostates who have critically addressed  the Jewish monotheist mindset in all its religious or secular modalities. Arthur Trebitsch, Otto Weininger, Gilad Atzmon, let alone the modern Holocaust revisionist scholar, Gerard  Menuhin, are just some of the Jewish names that are wisely avoided in social science studies, both  in US and EU colleges today. Long ago a left-leaning French Jew Bernard Lazar, after publishing his classic, came under fire from both the left and the right for his criticism of his coethnicists:

The general causes of antisemitism have always resided in Israel itself, and not in those who antagonized it. This does not mean that justice was always on the side of Israel’s persecutors, or that they did not indulge in all the extremes born of hatred; it is merely asserted that the Jews were themselves, in part, at least, the cause of their own ills.[xvi]

It would be a waste of time trying to debate endlessly about the looks of Jesus Christ. Was his phenotype similar to that of Turco-Khazarian Bob Dylan, or to that of the Sephardic-Maghrebian  Enrico  Macias? Was he the son of God, or a son of a prostitute and her Gentile partner? The discussion about his heavenly or his racial origin will likely continue for another millennium. The true believer, however, always knows the right answer. Jesus certainly didn’t carry the facial features of a blond-haired Nordic superhero that we observe on crucifixes of all churches from Manila, Mexico or Munich, nor did he look like Jim Caviezel.  Moreover, his historicity has been hotly and violently debated for over two  thousand years by Christians and non-Christians alike. During the early Roman Empire his name was never mentioned anywhere in the works of Roman historians, except for the fact  that the Roman high society and the educated Romans, until the beginning of  second century AD considered Jews  (Iudeai)  and Christians (Chrestianos) as the one and the same sect. Therefore, the  expression “Judeo-Christian” is by no means an oxymoron or a deliberate verbal corruption of a single religious denomination.  Early evangelists were not Europeans; all early Christian scribes and missionaries were almost all of north African and Levantine origins, including Tertullian, Cyprian, Augustin, Origen. In his latest and thickest book, containing over one thousand pages and several thousand quotes from various often conflicting sources, Alain de Benoist writes:

In fact, Jesus never polemicized against Judaism, but rather within it. He never wanted to create a new religion, nor to establish a “Church”. At the most, he wanted to reform from within the Judean religion, this being his only objective.[xvii]

Neither has the Church, over the last decades, lagged behind in its Judeophile statements despite its own serious legacy of persecutions of Jews throughout  history. One cannot forever deny one’s own founding myths.

On November 17, 1980, in Mainz, Pope John Paul II spoke of “the people of God of the Old Covenant who have never been revoked by God.” In June 2006, Benedict XVI recalled in his turn the “inseparable relationship which binds Christianity to the Jewish religion as to its eternally living and valid matrix”.[xviii]

De Benoist writes further:

In other words, at its very beginning, Judeo-Christianity was not a form of Christianity, but rather a form of Judaism. This is the reason why, rather than speaking of Judeo-Christianity, it would be far better to speak of Christian Judaism.[xix]

But at some point, twin brothers must seek for a divorce and violent wars — which became much later a mutual trademark of all Christians beliefs during the early and late medieval period in Europe.  But first the Jewish founding father had to be removed.

The break-up between the “Jews” and the “Christians” was therefore part of a much longer process than previously thought, since it was only in the fourth century that the two systems definitively separated from each other. This was a decisive turning point, given that at this time, in 325 AD, the Council of Nicaea was held, and thereafter, in 380 AD, Christianity was declared by Theodosius the state religion. [xx]

However awful this may ring in the ears of many devout modern Christian anticommunists and many White Nationalists, Christ may qualify as an early paleo-Bolshevik of Antiquity  and his apostles dubbed as early crypto-commissars. Christians and communists, after the lengthy process of secularization throughout the period of the Enlightenment did, however, turn into mortal enemies in the first half of the twentieth century. This was to be expected as both the Communist and the Christian preachers had vied differently for the salvation of their sheep. Their underlying, allegedly pacifying dogma, has remained however the same despite the usage of different signifiers respectively: multiracialism, multiculturalism, ecumenism, i.e., communism and globalism. Next to modern-day Antifa rabble rousers and various Jewish agencies, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), along with the German  Bischofskonferenz (DBK)  is today the most vocal spokesman for non-White migrations to the West, known by now under the name of  the Great Replacement.


[i] Carl Schmitt. „Die deutsche Rechtwissenschaft im Kampf gegen den jüdischen Geist“, Deutsche Juristen-Zeitung (München und Berlin: C.H Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlunog; vol.20/41, 1936), p.1194.

[ii] Ibid, p. 1196.

[iii] Rudolph M. Loewenstein, Christians and Jews; A Psychoanalytic Study (NY: International Universities Press, Inc., 1951), p. 15.

[iv] Liste der auszusondernden Literatur (Berlin: Zentralverlag, 1946).

[v]  Jean Paul Sartre,  Antisemite and Jew,  trans. Georg J. Becker (1948 NY: Schocken books, 1976). p.63

[vi] Dominique  Venner, Histoire de la Collaboration (Paris: Pygmalion, 200p),  p. 515-516.

[vii] Hilaire Belloc, The Jews (London: Constable & Company, Ltd, 1922), p. 100.

[viii] Louis Ferdinand Céline, School for Corpses, transl. Szandoer Kuragin (First published in French in 1938).

[ix] L.F. Céline, Trifles for a Massacre, by Translator Anonymous (AAARGH, Publishing House, Internet, 2006), p. 37.  (First  published  in French, 1937).

[x] Henry Boulade, “Petit inventaire de l’antisémitisme”, in Écrits de Paris, n° 656 (July 2003), pp. 29-37.

[xi] Thorsten Schmitz, „Das neue Israel“,  Süddeutsche Zeitung, May 17, 2010.

[xii] Nikica Mihaljević, Ustaški put u socijalizam : U teoriji i praksi NDH : Zbirka rasprava i članaka nikad objavljenih poslije 1945. (Zagreb: Nakladnik: Naklada Pavičić, 2016).

[xiii]  Sigmund Freud,  transl. by K. Jones,  Moses and Monotheism  (London: Published by the Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psychoanalysis, 1939),  p.148.

[xiv]  Hans Hauptmann, Bolschewismus in der Bibel (A. Klein Verlag, Archiv Edition 1937), p.117-118.

[xv] T. Sunic, preface by K.MacDonald, Homo americanus; Child of the Postmodern Age (London; Arktos media, 2018), p. 120 and passim.

[xvi] Bernard Lazare,  Antisemitism, Its History and Causes  (New York; The International Library Publishing Co., 1903) p. 8.

[xvii] Alain de Benoist,  L’Homme qui n’avait pas de père (Paris: Krisis, 2021), p. 44.

[xviii] Ibid., p. 55.

[xix] Ibid., p.  873.

[xx] Ibid., p. 933.


88 replies
  1. John D. Alder
    John D. Alder says:

    Excellent ! I wish every White Nationalist activist would read this ,ponder it and share it in order to liberate the minds of our people.

    • Fourth Horseman
      Fourth Horseman says:

      Agreed, but it’s unclear what his point ultimately is here. Jews need anti-Semites? So what are we supposed to do, roll over? And of course, it’s obvious that Christianity is “Judeo” — given that Jesus, Paul, and the entire NT crew were ethnic Jews. But Sunic misses the main point, namely that the Jew Paul (and his followers) constructed Christianity in their own image, and for their own purposes: to undermine Rome and to confuse and corrupt the detested Gentile masses. Sunic needs to read Skrbina’s “Jesus Hoax” and get a more complete story here.

      • John D. Alder
        John D. Alder says:

        Agreed. I meant that we need to seperate ourselves from christianity and it’s crucial that the leadership of pro White organizations be free of that superstitious judaic nonsense. It’s a big task but one worth taking on.

        • Emicho
          Emicho says:

          Telling people that Jesus Christ was a “Jew”, is about as accurate and truthful as asserting that Hitler was a comic-book Hollywood Nazi.

      • Tom Verso
        Tom Verso says:

        You write: “it’s unclear what his point ultimately is here.”

        That is a good observation.

        This essay is more of a stream of consciousness than a development of a thesis. And, that is characteristic of his writing generally and talks that I’ve listen to.

        If I were teaching a course in social scientific writing, I would juxtapose this essay with the MacDonald essay that preceded it.
        MacDonald is a masterful social scientific writer. He posits a clearly defined thesis and systematically develops his argument with documental facts and valid logical inferences.

      • Josh
        Josh says:

        No they didn’t. The jews of Rome were enthusiastic supporters and participants in the early Roman persecutions of Christians.

  2. Frederick Ford
    Frederick Ford says:

    When someone realizes that Jews, like any other group, have a separate group morality that is only meant to benefit them by providing guidelines for their protection, acquisition of money, and other interests that are derived from outside sources or from the wider Gentile world but because Jews are the chosen people who are destined to be an example and lead the world as one nation with all Gentiles subjected under their rule; this means that fair trade deals with Gentiles aren’t an option hence Jews became the benefactors of money lending with interest with allows Jews to make more money by charging extra payments on a fixed payment or taking the property or other valuable assets as collateral and since the majority of Gentiles are poor or working class peasants these people are the perfect target for exploitation by Jews and this is what incurred the wrath of Non-Jewish Europeans for centuries.

    The Jews themselves were and mostly are of the Black races but their inhabitation of Europe allowed them to “steal”, through careful racial mixing with Europeans, the anatomically different genetic functions of White people, which allows Jews to say they are White while also subverting actual White People in the process and now the Jews seek to completely blacken the West by mixing out said anatomically different biological functions of White People by the predominantly Black genetics functions of Nonwhites, though genetic dilution & high Black birthrates, which are totally different from each other as explained by this article.

    • Birhan Dargey
      Birhan Dargey says:

      EXACTLY my view..regarding WHITE Gentile Christian Western Moral/Judicial/political/CULTURAL Paradigm vrs. Jewish Talmudic Torah Kabala moral/leagl/cultural paradigm that tells them that the JEW is a divine exeptional godlike creature that has the sacred authority to lie/cheat/rape/exploit/fraud/robe/Kill/deceive the Goyim..all this to enlighten the world..what???

  3. Scipio Africanus
    Scipio Africanus says:

    Dr. Sunic
    It is an extremely arduous task just to inform people regarding the deleterious effects of JQ on western civilization without having to throw away 2000 years of Christian tradition. I could argue your points in great detail but in summary authentic orthodox Christianity is the antithesis of Judaism especially Germanic European Christianity which is fused with the warrior erthos. Bottom line. We are losing on every front. Christians excluding Judeophile Zionist Christianity are our natural allies in this fight. Give it up Dr. Sunic.
    You’re not gonna create antisemites and pagans simultaneously.l!

    • Waldemar
      Waldemar says:

      Dr. Sunic, after all, only gets to the bottom of the roots of the mental poison. If Christianity (“by their fruits thou shalt know them”) were in its core an entity preserving the white race, the missionary activities of the European colonizers overseas would probably be inexplicable. Most Christians today are non-whites. Do you want to explain to all of them, “You are not real Christians at all, Original Christianity is Aryan!” That is absurd, you would be at a loss.

      The only real “difference” between Christianity and communism, however, is that Christians – just like their monotheistic brothers Judaism and Islam – promise “paradise” only after death in the hereafter, while communists want to establish the kingdom of heaven already on earth. The cognitive division of Christians can even be seen in their schizophrenic funeral culture: They regularly visit a grave of their ancestors with the Christian cross, although they supposedly believe that their souls are now “with the Good Lord in heaven.

      “Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin”. Jared Taylor emphasizes again and again that it is still a mystery to him where exactly the fatal ethnomasochism of the whites comes from or where it has its origin. But this man, who spent his childhood in Japan, is clever enough to recognize this and to put it into words.

      Erwin Wickert, a German diplomat in Asia for many years, gave the following answer to the question how he explained the different way of dealing with common “war guilt” of the Japanese and Germans: “Asians do not know any collective guilt, they only know individual shame or loss of face. The moral blackmailability of Europeans undoubtedly stems from the biblical legend of the original sin of mankind.”

      There is a remarkable cartoon for children from the 50s, which is to explain to them at an early age the bipolarity of the world of good and evil, called “The Creation of the World”. It is certainly no coincidence that its French cartoonist was awarded the “Lenin Prize” and made an “Honorary Member of the Academy of Arts of the USSR.” Allegedly, so we hear again and again, are Christianity and communism an “irreconcilable contradiction”? Not at all.

  4. John
    John says:

    Several days ago I arrived in Montreal driving all the way from Victoria, B.C. Stops along the way were at Hope, Kamloops, Gold, Medicine Hat, Brandon, Kenora, Dryden, Terrace Bay, & Sudbury. Demographically, approximately 50% are non-Europeans aka non-Whites. Miscegenation was not uncommmon. Here in Montreal the Europeans are under 50%; additionally, the distinct Québécois People are definitely a minority & again miscegenation is not uncommon (so much for the Québécois People vehemently wanting to be recognized as a distinct ethnic nation. In fact, such was the desire that they conducted two referendums to separate. Both referendums failed because everybody was allowed to vote. The Québécois People still fail to understand that any decision, vote, or referendum must be SOLELY reserved for the Québécois People; they & they alone must decide their future).
    The Québécois People were the only ones in North America who voiced in no uncertain terms that they are a distinct people. Well, what happened? I mean, they fought so hard & for so long to be viewed & treated as a distinct people, yet, they are throwing that all away. At current rates, unless there is an awakening, within one or two decades the Québécois People will even become a minority in their own homeland of Quebec.
    Ditto to all the other Ethnic European Peoples from Europe to Australia – why are we allowing our replacement; enroute to extermination?

    • Curmudgeon
      Curmudgeon says:

      I don’t know where you’ve been hiding, John, but I was in all of those places back in the 1960s. With the exception of Kenora, which has a couple of Indian Reserves close by, if you saw a non-white, it would be a shock. The flood was started by our globalist shill Trudeau v1.0 in the early 1970s then multiculturalism quickly became government policy. The first referendum in Quebec was unsuccessful, because there were no real issues between “English” and “French” Canada other than the manufactured (by Trudeau v1.0) “official bi-lingualism” policy, which ran contrary to the purpose of, but not explicitly stated in, our Constitution. To create more conflict, and to “help preserve” the French language, the Feds flooded Quebec with Haitians, which created more resentment and led to the second Referendum which was properly blamed by Jacques Parizeau when he said “It’s true we have been defeated, but basically by what? By money and the ethnic vote.” He wasn’t including the “Anglos” as being the ethnic vote, because many Quebec “Anglos” are thoroughly assimilated and in favour, and much of the “money” in Quebec is held by the old Quebec elite who understood the purpose of the founders. I won’t go into what “Quebec” really is, the 1982 coup d’etat by Trudeau v1.0, or all of the other globalist shills that have followed him as Prime Minister, who also led Zionist Occupied Governments. We aren’t “allowing it”, it’s being forced on us. It doesn’t matter how you vote, the result is the same or worse. Of the previous 60 years, it is only within the last few years that surveys have shown that the majority of Canadians are in favour of immigration. During that time, our population has almost doubled, and is virtually all due to the mass 3rd world immigration and their offspring. Of course they are now “we” and will always want more of their own to emigrate.

  5. Arthur
    Arthur says:

    I find it interesting that the majority American population of White Christians has been beaten into submission by Jews, Jewish organizations, and Israel.

    This belies the image of the brave American.

    • Tim Folke
      Tim Folke says:

      Largely (almost totally) due to misguided support by these mainstream Christians who believe in a book that mistranslates ‘Judean’ as ‘Jew’, among other gross mistranslations.

      I have studied languages (and Christianity) over the years and know what I am talking about.

      I say this as a Christian, though I view much of the English Bible translations with cautious detachment.

  6. Chris Moore
    Chris Moore says:

    The Judeofascists had a narrow window following WW2 to impose their will on the Anglosphere and the world, and they succeeded, with the help of cynics, atheists, opportunists, Satanists, Freemasons, etc… all manner of cults and misfits. But now this nest of vipers has finally reached its essence, which is a state of perpetual back-biting and backstabbing. So not only is it fighting the authentic Christians, but also the schizo elements of its own fraying coalition, and it’s beginning to fail bigtime.

    This Judeofascist cult can’t run a civilization, by definition. It’s built to serve itself and it’s cult interests, and to penalize any out-group. When it could hoodwink a plurality of rubes, and buy off enough corrupt Judas sociopaths, and smear all opposition as “anti-Semites,” it was fine. But those days are over, and soon it will be over.

    The world simply can’t function absent viable civilization.

  7. K M Landis
    K M Landis says:

    Tom Sunic has written a brilliant, illuminating article. Jews and their tools love to censor the truth, which they call “hate speech.” They also love pornography, which they call “free speech” and which they actively promote.

    We see it in America today – the entire decadent “culture” forbids any discussion of Jewish influence, including AIPAC and US subservience to Israel. The US Congress really is a kind of “Israeli occupied territory”, as Pat Buchanan described it. The USA is a colony of Israel, just as India was a colony of Great Britain before 1947.

  8. Bernard Fisk Wellington IV
    Bernard Fisk Wellington IV says:

    The author is wrong regarding the coupling of judaism and Christianity.
    The NT is a complete BREAK from the OT…..a new deal…..a new covenant.
    Only a tiny remnant of jews accepted Christ, so the rest are in rebellion against God.
    The jews are no longer the chosen people. Christians are the chosen people.
    Abraham’s seed is Christ and the body of Christ.
    For 18 centuries, Christians understood these things, until the Scofield Bible (financed by jews)
    brought subversion and confusion.

    • Crush Limbraw
      Crush Limbraw says:

      Exactly, Bernard – finally someone who has an understanding of the entire Bible, not just the common perception of what we believe.
      Jesus came as prophesied in the OT – proclaiming the Kingdom of God, was vehemently opposed by an apostate nation Israel which was violently destroyed permanently in 70 AD by Rome.
      If anyone wants to dig into this at length, you can start here – – just for the introduction. The main library collected over 7 years has a whole section on the the KoG for those interested, but it comes with a warning – prepare to lose your presumptuous presuppositions – I had to!

  9. Birhan Dargey
    Birhan Dargey says:

    Did you he just say “SELF/evident Holocaust” ??? what makes it selfevident Historically and in the context of believing in Jesus mircales.??? NO Historical event can be self/evident that’s just ridicolous. IF Human events were all self/evident there would be NO need to study History. The Holocaust can NOT be exempted from serious scholarly research..never. And here where ANTIsemistism runs into a wall.. Questioning anything alleged Historical event seems to be ok with the jews sepcially if it the study is highly marinated with anti/Christian references as irrational/illogical. etc. I must confess that I do not beleive in teh most esoteric Christian claims such as ; the virgin/birth of Jesus, the resurrection etc. BUT I can NOT beleive the chooseness argument of the Jews, Moses speaking to “burning” bush, the parting of the red Sea,,and other fantastical Jewish accounts contain in the Torah. Besides jews denounce the Resurrection of Christ and according to Maominides the true jewish messiah must resurrect from the death. So jews believe in resurrection yes/no?? only when they claim it. The problem for me is when referencing HISTORICAL FACTS with Undisputable EVIDENCE that counter jewish narrative..then it becomes ANTI/semitism..why? Ever since I have memory I remember Christianity being attacked constantly by Hollywood, and left political movements usually under jewish leadership. Does the Catholic church has a monopoly on JesusChrist and his alleged deeds?? How about Mormons? Lutheran? Anglicans? Muslims? It seem to me the opposite Jewish hold a profound bitter hatred for Christianity…and they put it mistankenly at the root of all antisemistism without questioning their Jewish evil behavior.

  10. Liosnagcat
    Liosnagcat says:

    “How can one dismiss the self-evident Holocaust story yet at the same time embrace the self-evident story of the Jew Jesus Christ or the immaculate conception of the Jewess Virgin Mary?”

    Jesus and Mary were not Jews.

    From “The Controversy of Zion” by Douglas Reed (pp. 60-61):

    This public assertion, “Jesus was a Jew,” is always used in our century for political purposes. It is often employed to quell objections to the Zionist influence in international politics or to the Zionist invasion of Palestine, the suggestion being that, as Jesus was a Jew, none ought to object to anything purporting to be done in the name of Jews. The irrelevance is obvious, but mobs are moved by such phrases, and the paradoxical result, once again, is that a statement, most offensive to literal Jews, is most frequently made by non-Jewish politicians and ecclesiastics who seek Jewish favour.

    The English abbreviation, “Jew,” is recent and does not correspond to anything denoted by the Aramaic, Greek or Roman terms for “Judahite” or “Judean,” which were in use during the lifetime of Jesus. In fact, the English noun “Jew” cannot be defined (so that dictionaries, which are scrupulously careful about all other words, are reduced to such obvious absurdities as “A person of Hebrew race”); and the Zionist state has no legal definition of the term (which is natural, because the Torah, which is the Law, exacts pure Judahite descent, and a person of this lineage is hardly to be found in the entire world).

    If the statement, “Jesus was a Jew,” has meaning therefore, it must apply to the conditions prevailing in his time. In that case it would mean one of three things, or all of them: that Jesus was of the tribe of Judah (therefore Judahite); that he was of Judean domicile (and therefore Judean); that he was religiously “a Jew,” if any religion denoted by that term existed in his time.

    Race, residence, religion, then.

    This book is not the place to argue the question of Jesus’s racial descent, and the surprising thing is that Christian divines allow themselves some of the statements which they make. The reader should form his own opinion, if he desires to have one in this question.

    The genealogy of Mary is not given in the New Testament, but three passages might imply that she was of Davidic descent; St. Matthew and St. Luke trace the descent of Joseph from David and Judah, but Joseph was not the blood father of Jesus. The Judaist authorities discredit all these references to descent, holding that they were inserted to bring the narrative into line with prophecy.

    As to residence, St. John states that Jesus was born at Bethlehem in Judea through the chance that his mother had to go there from Galilee to register; the Judaist authorities, again, hold that this was inserted to make the account agree with Micah’s prophecy that “a ruler” would “come out of Bethlehem.”

    The Jewish Encyclopaedia insists that Nazareth was Jesus’s native town, and indeed, general agreement exists that he was a Galilean, whatever the chance of his actual birthplace. Galilee, where nearly all his life was spent, was politically entirely separate from Judea, under its own Roman tetrarch, and stood to Judea in the relationship of “a foreign country” (Graetz). Marriage between a Judean and a Galilean was forbidden, and, even before Jesus’s birth, all Judeans living in Galilee had been forced by Simon Tharsi, one of the Maccabean princes, to migrate to Judah.

    Thus, the Galileans were racially and politically distinct from the Judeans.

    Was this Galilean, religiously, what might today be called “a Jew”? The Judaist authorities, of course, deny that most strenuously of all; the statement, often heard from the platform and pulpit, might cause a riot in the synagogue.

    It is difficult to see what responsible public men can mean when they use the phrase. There was in the time of Jesus no “Jewish” (or even Judahite or Judaist or Judean) religion. There was Jehovahism, and there were the various sects, Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes, which disputed violently between themselves and contended, around the temple, for power over the people. They were not only sects, but also political parties, and the most powerful of them were the Pharisees with their “oral traditions” of what God had said to Moses.

    If today the Zionists are “the Jews” (and this is the claim accepted by all great Western nations), then the party which in Judea in the time of Jesus corresponded to the Zionists was that of the Pharisees. Jesus brought the whole weight of his attack to bear on these Pharisees. He also rebuked the Sadducees and the scribes, but the Gospels show that he held the Pharisees to be the foe of God and man and that he used an especial scarifying scorn towards them. The things which he singled out for attack, in them and in their creed, are the very things which today’s Zionists claim to be the identifying features of Jews, Jewishness and Judaism.

    Religiously, Jesus seems beyond doubt to have been the opposite and adversary of all that which would make a literal Jew today or would have made a literal Pharisee then.

    None can say with certainty who or what he was, and these suggestive statements by non-Jewish politicians ring as false as the derisive and mocking lampoons about “the bastard” which circulated in the Jewish ghettoes.

  11. Andrea Ostrov Letania
    Andrea Ostrov Letania says:

    The thing is to become a Anti-Supremite.

    Supremite: Supremacist Semite.

    Anti-Supremitism: Against Supremacist Semites.

    We need to stop calling them ‘neocons’. Call them ‘supremites’.

    And instead of ‘Great Replacement’, better to say ‘White Nakba’.

    • Poupon Marx
      Poupon Marx says:

      Hello Russia, here I come…..

      I haven’t found the Time Machine to take me back to the Fifties, but the next best thing is Russia, Land of The Much More Free, and truly Home of The Brave, Better, and Wiser than the West. Like Solar Cycles, Weather Cycles over millennia, Earth’s Poles shifting, the East will continue to rise, the West will inevitably sink and evermore stink.

      • John D. Alder
        John D. Alder says:

        Correct ! Just as Armstrong Economics says we will decline. Prepare for tough and lean times ahead while we can.

    • Waldemar
      Waldemar says:


      Hello, the has in principle the same content as the comment above it, and can therefore be deleted (like this hint). Thx & Greetings

  12. Terry Dumpling
    Terry Dumpling says:

    You mentioned that White Nationalists, ‘Hollywood Nazi’s’, garden variety anti-Semites & actual National Socialists (like myself), are falling into our enemies trap when we jew bait etc… because it only justifies & strengthens the jew & their shabbos goyim position. This is correct as far as it goes but its not like they need any real assistance in any case.
    What you haven’t realized is that this works both ways because the jew is pathological & motivated by fear & greed. When the average juden encounters any real antisemitism it goes into a flat spin, foams at the mouth & demands blood. So far so good for the system right? The hysterical jew then proceeds to complain loudly & apply pressure to anyone who will listen & everyone else who wont about how oppressed they are & how something must be done. They cant help it, its instinct.
    The Streisand effect is instinct & its our best ally, especially when the jew is comfortable because their greed becomes greater than their fear.
    So everyone is forced to watch ‘schindlers list’ again & worship a picture of Anne Frank during ‘sensitivity training’ or they get a shabbos boot on their neck & told they have a phobia.
    This is excellent because it forces each of us to make a choice in the face of blatant jew entitlement & over-lordship.
    a) Worship the jew like the filthy goyim they would like us to be.
    b) Hitler was right.
    Its a selection process & the jew by its very nature cant help providing it.
    And there are millions of jews all over the world, all with their little soap box on social media, the board room or at the water cooler, all hysterical, all so easily triggered, all shouting & foaming at the mouth, all calling for blood. They do our work for us.
    Why do you think they keep getting caught & punished?
    The jew hornets nest must be upset because only then will their stings wake some of our people up to the true nature of the jew & to our predicament.
    Action – Stress – Polarization – Reaction – Repeat

  13. Waldemar
    Waldemar says:

    The “white” millionaire Marta Kauffman admits her “guilt” for having once tolerated systemic racism. This, she has come to realize in the meantime, should not be.

    The fact that she pretends to be “white” can only mean that “systemic racism” does not mean Jewish acts against whites, but (pretended) white acts against blacks.

    “I before E except after C” or “I’m not white, I’m
    jewish. But I’m white” is the name of the game.

  14. Barbara
    Barbara says:

    If not for Christianity all of Europe would be Muslim today and America would probably not even exist. Historically Christianity has not benefited the Jews and it never prevented Europeans from attempting to drive the Jews out. In the early 1900s Americans turned Jews away when they attempted to come here and we turned away a ship of Jewish children. We never consented for Jews to immigrate here.

    Jews hate Jesus and Christians. Christians are not the cause of what is going on in the world today. Christians are victims of every thing that Jews are doing. The church is not in control of anything. There are no longer any WASPs running our government but America was great when they did govern. WASPs didn’t voluntarily give our government over to the Jews.

    According to Chuck Baldwin a recent poll says that 60% of Christians today do not believe in the virgin birth.

    The most recent Gallup Poll

    “While biblical literalism has long been held as the most dominant method of interpreting Scripture among Evangelicals, results of a new poll released by Gallup show that fewer than half of Evangelicals and born-again Christians believe the Bible should be taken literally. The poll . . . found that just 40% of respondents who identify as Evangelical or born-again view the Bible as the “actual word of God.”

    Language is very important and I think we should talk in terms of Semites and Gentiles and make the point that Semites should be prevented from living in Gentile homelands because they are very different and historically cause many problems for Gentiles. We should make it plain just as Jews made it clear to Whoopi Goldberg that we’re different. Semites don’t have rights to Gentile homelands so why are they allowed to continue to live here?

    • Raeto West
      Raeto West says:

      Barbara, BOTH Christianity and Islam were Jewish inventions. The supposed holy books were all written by Jews. In fact, Christianity has benefited Jews, and so has Islam, because both Christians and Muslims wanted Jewish money and secretly allied with them. And still do. America was never ‘ruled by WASPS’: it was always controlled by Jews acting through Europe, though of course they didn’t do so visibly, preferring to pretend the strutters were in control. It’s complicated – deliberately.

      • Nancy Sparks
        Nancy Sparks says:

        Question that nobody can answer…..if Christianity is such a great thing for Jews, then why have Jews opposed Christianity for 2000 years?
        Can’t answer the question?
        Then you should stop spewing your Adam Green nonsense.

        • Raeto West
          Raeto West says:

          Nancy S
          Sparks appears to be trying to reply to me. “if Christianity is such a great thing for Jews, then why have Jews opposed Christianity for 2000 years?”
          Jews supported Christianity from the start; all the early Popes were Jews, and Christians pretended to oppose Jews – they were given money in exchange for claiming to oppose interest. You seem to have no understanding of Jewish secrecy.
          Unless, as is likely, you’re just another Jewish liar.
          I’m not, luckily, in much contact with US junk journalism, which I assume may include Adam Green.

        • Kevin MacDonald
          Kevin MacDonald says:

          It’s a good question because things have changed over the centuries. In Chapter 3 of Separation and Its Discontents I describe the 4th-century church as an anti-Jewish movement, with many of the Church fathers vehement anti-Semites (e.g., St. John Chrysostom who still has a statue on the colonnade at the entrance to St. Peter’s and a chapel inside). Even in the 1890s the Church reiterated its stance on traditional stance on Jewry (Pope Pius X). It wasn’t really until the 1960s when all that changed with Vatican II and there was a very large Jewish role in what happened, as documented on TOO.

          • Autisticus Spasticus
            Autisticus Spasticus says:

            While belief in Christianity has waned considerably during the last century, largely due to Darwin, Christ’s teachings survive in the egalitarian value system. In this secular incarnation of Christian ethics, the supposed virtues of pity and compassion for the weak are still upheld. This pity is what preserves those wretched mutations which should, by all rights, perish. This in turn perverts the natural process of elimination which forms the bedrock of evolution, and the liberal progressives that facilitate this malfunction are the traitors in our midst who betray all our futures in exchange for the moral high of signalling their own self-righteousness. We all suffer because the Left elevates the most worthless people at the expense of our best and brightest. Christianity’s maladaptive system of ethics endured the death of God and found fertile ground in the creed of secular humanism which had formed to assuage the wounds inflicted by the world’s most devastating war. Christ on the cross became a proxy for non-whites, non-heterosexuals and women, in whom has been cultivated a status of perpetual victimhood. These groups are repeatedly told that they’re oppressed and marginalised, and the copious evidence to the contrary won’t convince them otherwise. It has become imprinted in their brains, and so they play the “discrimination” card whenever they encounter any difficulty in their lives. They lay all the blame for their shortcomings upon those who succeed where they fail, which absolves them of responsibility for their behaviour and deflects the shame they would otherwise feel at being evolutionary losers. The essence of evolution is eternal struggle, that of finite quality against infinite quantity. With the abrupt reversal of the eugenic revolution, the world stage was set for the revolt of the underman. The excess glut of humanity now numbers some six billion, and among the refuse has emerged an ever-growing contingent of spiteful defectives, all marching in unison under the banner of equality.

            Tracing the genealogy of this “wokeness” reveals it to be a product of Christ’s egalitarian sentiments about the brotherhood of man. You, Andrew Joyce and Thomas Dalton have done some phenomenal scholarship on the Jews, but you seem to be largely blind to the role Christianity has played, as the progenitor of both liberalism and communism. You subscribe to a monocausalist explanation for white decline, pinning the blame almost exclusively on the activities of Jews, with whites themselves assuming little to no culpability. I recognise that the Jewish Question and the Christian Question are synonymous, however, and that whites have been complicit in their own downfall by prostrating themselves before an alien religion. In his multi-volume Christianity’s Criminal History, Karlheinz Deschner painstakingly uncovers how the new religion plunged classical philosophy into centuries of near-oblivion, clashing with the established and ancient European wisdom regarding the inequality of men. Spreading first among the slaves and lowest classes of the Roman Empire, the Christian faith came to teach that all men were equal in the eyes of a universal creator, an idea that was totally alien to traditional European thought, which had recognized a hierarchy of competence among men and even among the gods. Opposing the traditions of classical philosophy and scientific enquiry, Christianity introduced the concept of a single, omnipotent “God of History” who controlled all phenomena in the universe, with mankind being the pinnacle of his creation. Since all human beings were “the children of god”, all were equal before their Divine Maker. Faith in the church’s interpretation of supposedly prophetic revelations became more important than scientific or philosophical enquiry, and to question the church’s view of reality was a grave sin, one that could spell death for the blasphemer. In addition to Deschner’s work, I recommend The Darkening Age by Catherine Nixey and On the Historicity of Jesus by Richard Carrier.

            Nietzsche saw that the successful promotion of Christianity relied on a pretence of reciprocal hostility between Christians and Jews. It required making the Jewish cult, when peddled to gentiles, seem non-Jewish and even anti-Jewish. “Was it not a necessary feature of a truly brilliant politics of vengeance, a far-sighted, subterranean, slowly and carefully planned vengeance, that Israel had to deny its true instrument publicly and nail him to the cross like a mortal enemy, so that the whole world (meaning all the enemies of the Jews) might naively swallow the bait?” It would, and did in Deschner’s case, take many tomes to chronicle the nefarious history of Christianity, from its known beginnings around the middle of the second century to the triumph of a particularly shrewd and aggressive sect in the fifth century. There were hundreds of sects, each with its own bundle of gospels, peculiar doctrines, and adroit theologians, all of whom took seriously the purported antagonism of the Jews to the new religion.

            Nietzsche observed that Christianity is anti-Darwinian, its value system having dysgenic consequences. Time and again, computer algorithms identify sub-Saharan faces as non-human, as simian. This is because computer programs are objective. They have no concept of soul equality, since they have not been tainted by Christian axiology. If our people had never been infected with this Levantine poison, it is doubtful that blacks would be classed as human. It is more likely that they would be viewed as an infestation, a hostile species of archaic hominid in competition with us for our beautiful white women. Darwin believed that, if not for Christianity, we would have exterminated them with pitiless indifference. César Tort, arguably the most extreme figure on the Far-Right, proclaims that “Christianity, in essence, means not the number of priests ordained, but the number of negroes loved.” It is for this reason that Christians are unlikely to be motivated by ethno-nationalism, their focus being on God’s eternal kingdom in the hereafter, not on any earthbound nation. Their priority is the salvation of immortal souls, and the importance of genetics will not resonate with them.

            As if fulfilling Nietzsche’s prophecy in Der Antichrist, the Third Reich was a culture that, for the first time in over a thousand years, rejected the “spiritual syphilis” of Judeo-Christian ethics and adopted a more organic, evolutionarily informed moral code. It was essentially a return to pagan values, and Germans were soon reaping the rewards, becoming the most scientifically advanced nation in the world. In terms of politics and philosophy, they had a very intimate understanding of certain realities which are to this day verboten to acknowledge. Viewed within the context of society as a living organism, a revolutionary concept at the time and one which is consistent with many contemporary findings in evolutionary psychology/biology, the Nazi movement was a healthy immune response to the latest manifestation of subversive exploitation which the Jews had wrought upon their host nations since time immemorial. Nazism identified disease vectors in the body politic and neutralised them, with the SS functioning much like antibodies, developed in response to a deadly bacillus. Mercilessly exterminating this parasite without remorse would previously have been unthinkable, due to Christian moralism. Hitler knew that the sheer power of antisemitism as a coherent worldview is terrifying for those in power, not to mention a gullible public who have been conditioned their entire lives to equate Jews with saintly innocence. His regime’s days were numbered, however, as the existential threat posed by Jewry had bifurcated, with bolshevism looming in the east and the forces of international finance preparing to attack from the west. In due course they would form a pincer movement to encircle and destroy the one nation that stood in their way. Although this new culture was obliterated while still in an embryonic stage of development, one cannot help but be awed by its unrivalled success in such a short space of time. In the ensuing decades, the narrative of the Second World War as a herculean effort to defeat the ultimate manifestation of evil became set in stone. To be the antithesis of Hitler in every conceivable way became the paragon of virtue for all white people, and the memory of the Nazis was used to browbeat any whites who still dared express ethnocentrism into submission. This has cultivated ethno-masochism and pathological altruism in the European peoples on a mass scale, leading to their destruction at the psychological and demographic level.

            You have noted the seemingly paradoxical fact that Jews are invariably found promoting ideas, political movements and business practices that cause social decay, in turn fomenting antagonism towards them, yet they insist it is never their fault. Jewish influence in the pornography industry and Hollywood, which disseminates a massive amount of increasingly obvious woke propaganda, is something they admit to quite candidly and with pride. Despite this, many people still have trouble accepting the facticity of Jewish hegemony, not only because they’ve been conditioned since the day they were born to perceive Jews as victims, but because it seems so statistically implausible. Jews are such a minuscule percentage of the global population, so how is it possible for them to be so staggeringly overrepresented in positions of power and influence? To the uninitiated, our vague references to “the Jews” being responsible for such a vast array of social ills, as if they were some omnipresent and omnipotent force, seem like the ramblings of a paranoid schizophrenic. But the answer, of course, in addition to their cognitive dexterity, is the unparalleled knack for ethnic networking and nepotism among Jews, which has allowed them to climb to the summit of our society in spite of their numerical inferiority. Few people understand that a Jew being the head of a large corporation, for instance, is enough to make said corporation and its activities de facto Jewish, no matter how many gentiles may toil on the factory floor and in office cubicles.

            Jews in positions of power and influence work tirelessly and ingeniously to advance Jewish interests and peddle their victimology, which is always given centre stage, while their history of subversion and parasitism is never acknowledged. This is the martyrdom aspect, arguably the most quintessential component of the Jewish character, at least according to one uncharacteristically honest Jewish scholar. Meanwhile, the sixty million victims of communism are never identified as such. Since 1945, the objective knowledge about Jews, their behaviour, and the intense hatred they harbour for their gentile hosts has been all but expunged from Western discourse. The Jewish Question has long been supplanted by the Anti-Semitic Question, as the world’s most cunning and tenacious race shifted the focus away from their own provocative behaviour and redirected the suspicion onto the hostile reactions of their hosts. Jewish scholars and activists maintain a strict monopoly on Jewish historiography, guarding the discipline fiercely against any intrusion from outsiders. It should come as no surprise, then, that the prevailing narrative is a philo-Semitic one. The fact that the same complaints have been made about Jews in many different cultures over great expanses of historical time, and that they have been banished from more than a hundred different nations, is deemed to be the result of an ancient and irrational prejudice which inexplicably follows God’s chosen people around like a black cloud wherever they go. Jews attribute these accusations to various neuroses within the host population, which the Jews, in typical mercenary fashion, have become adept at “diagnosing” and “curing.” The behaviour patterns and subversive activities which gentiles have consistently noticed among Jews “are not real, but hallucinatory.” Talk about chutzpah.

            Jewish historiography is replete with stories of persecution, which are habitually invoked in nauseating and self-indulgent displays of moral exhibitionism. These stories are frequently severed from any historical context, with the incriminating activities of the Jews prior to their “mistreatment” being omitted entirely. Joyce has described this as the “cropped timeline” phenomenon within Jewish historiography. While some of the more blatantly preposterous Holocaust atrocity claims have dissipated from the collective consciousness thanks to the passage of time, many of them endure in spite of their self-evident absurdity and refutation. This is achieved by artful diversion and confusion tactics that have been perfected over many decades. Following the fall of the Iron Curtain, the four million death toll at Auschwitz was reduced to one-and-a-half million, but this significant revision garnered no attention from the media. This is a modus operandi which we have seen demonstrated repeatedly, most notably during the ongoing coronavirus scamdemic. Whenever the lügenpresse are forced to come clean about something, they give the matter only minimal coverage and hastily move on to something else, giving no time for sustained contemplation. This is a very calculated sleight of hand, one that ensures their admission goes largely unnoticed, and those who do notice are quickly distracted from what has just been disclosed, disrupting the brain’s ability to fully process and retain the information. This cunning misdirection ensures that the lies remain in circulation despite having been formally (albeit briefly) exposed. It will be put down in the official record that a correction was issued, and they are then free to use what I call “the smallprint defence” if they are ever interrogated in the future. “Well technically we did admit that we lied, but it isn’t our fault if nobody was paying attention at the time.” As a naturally occurring defect of human cognition, the memory hole makes for an incredibly effective tool, one which the powers that be never miss an opportunity to exploit. When they are obliged to make a concession, they will always do so in a covert manner, with as much subtlety and discretion as the circumstances will allow.

            The Germans had an intimate understanding of the Jewish character, forged over many centuries of bitter experience, which was completely unfamiliar to Americans. In letters to his wife, General Patton states how it had gradually become apparent to him that many of the Jewish prisoners in the camps had been locked up for good reason, particularly the communists. Patton commented, not long before his suspicious death, that many of the former inmates now under his jurisdiction were very unpleasant individuals. The more time he spent in their company, the more he loathed them. Many of them began telling clearly fabricated atrocity stories almost immediately, with farcical claims about shrunken heads, lampshades made from human skin, and flaming pits where hundreds of babies were burned alive. It has since been established that such claims were fraudulent, but the most fantastical of these stories have been memory-holed as far as the general public is concerned. Still, the remarkable alacrity with which they concocted these morbid fantasies can leave one in no doubt that the Jew is an instinctive opportunist and a born manipulator. One of the most ludicrous assertions was that ten thousand prisoners were being electrocuted simultaneously every day. Such lurid tales of torture and sadism were met with scepticism by Patton, who came to regard many of the DPs (displaced persons) as habitual liars. Shortly before his death, Patton expressed deep regret for having fought on the side that killed millions of German men, women and children in exchange for “the liberation of vermin.”

            When we examine the history and underlying psychology of the Jewish victimhood complex, a shameless tradition of exaggeration and even outright fabrication of persecution begins to emerge, which in turn paints an unmistakably devious picture of the Jewish mind. Considering this, the question “why would anyone be an anti-Semite?” soon becomes “why would anyone be a pro-Semite?” Given their remarkably consistent history of nepotism, political subversion, financial exploitation, white-collar crime, war mongering, compulsive lying, incorrigible arrogance and vicious contempt for gentiles, one would have to be mad to believe their tales of woe. In the Jewish people can be observed the purist distillation of psychopathy, narcissism, and the cult of martyrology. Why, then, are they believed so unquestioningly? Because they have used their unsurpassed wealth, their monopoly of mass media, their unrivalled political influence, and their absolute censorship of any and all dissent to make sure we got the message. The saturation of the gentile mind has been relentless, and Christianity has played a pivotal role in that brainwashing.

            We have failed to instigate a revolt against these criminals among our people because their minds have been stewing in a culture shaped by two thousand years of Christian delusion. To hope that a people imbued with the conviction that a Jew is God will revolt against Jewry is a fool’s errand. As more time passes, it will become clear that the evil in the West not only emanates from the Jewish mass media and our treacherous elites, but also our own people, whose operating systems contain malware implanted since the time of Constantine. The only salvation lies in a Nietzschean transvaluation of values, a complete and total elimination of malware from the psyche of our people until it is restored to that healthy and virile condition before the Christian infection. This is what the Nazis were attempting to do in Germany, a renaissance that was promptly nipped in the bud by those traitorous nations that should have been her allies. The German defeat at Stalingrad was a portent of things to come, that Europe’s metamorphosis into a racially conscious empire was to be slowly and agonisingly aborted. With the destruction of the Third Reich, the flame of white civilisation that had burned so brightly for millennia was finally extinguished. The combined effort of whites in America, Britain and France had destroyed tens of millions of their racial comrades in the heart of their ancestral homeland, and for what purpose? To free the dregs of humanity from imprisonment so they could exact their revenge upon those who had recognised them for what they were. 1945 was the year of the total inversion of “Aryan” values into Christian values.

            It is important to notice that the degradation and humiliation inflicted upon Germany by the Allies in both wars is reminiscent of what Union forces did to the Confederate States in the 1860’s. Keep in mind, though, that the events of the American Civil War played out in the complete absence of Jewish manipulation. What, then, was the primary motivating factor for America’s fratricidal conflict? It was the Christian love for the negro. Thanks to these tremendous betrayals, we live today under the inescapable tyranny of usury, fiat currency, and the international system of interest-based debt slavery. Government abuse of taxpayer funds has been an accepted part of life for so long that nobody alive today can remember a time when this was not the norm. Since the founding of the Federal Reserve in 1913, a staggering $48 trillion has been spent on actively undermining the political sovereignty, economic stability and demographic homogeneity of the United States. It isn’t restricted to America, though. In every white country, the fruits of our own labour are used to finance our destruction. This constitutes nothing less than the most bare-faced betrayal in the history of human civilization, on a scale so unprecedented, utilising methods of subversion and deceit so vile and revolting, that it beggars comprehension. Few dare complain, and many are happy to turn a blind eye and make bank by exploiting the unparalleled opportunities that late-stage capitalism affords them. Technocracy, plutocracy, and the elevation of talentless “social media influencers” to celebrity status are symptoms of a terminally ill civilisation.

            Satoshi Kanazawa made an extremely prescient point in the wake of the 9/11 disaster. Whether one believes that Muslim terrorists, the United States government or the Israeli Mossad were responsible for what took place on that day, Kanazawa saw that Western man has been castrated. He said that we could have dropped multiple neutron bombs and annihilated the nexus of Islamic radicalism in the middle east in a matter of weeks, but we didn’t, because “Western man does not hate his true enemies enough. He can scarcely even recognise them.” How has this come to be?

            Returning again to the role of Christianity in our decline, while few of our people profess to be Christian in the traditional sense of the word, it still plays a major part in secular life. Even the most atheistic nations are fully committed to Christianity’s doctrine of unconditional love for “The Other”, as can be seen in the Nordic countries. It thus becomes apparent that a literal belief in the saviour-on-a-stick is irrelevant, as the value system no longer requires that belief in order to proliferate. Its influence can be seen within a number of franchises that have become pillars of popular culture, which have in turn contributed to the woke agenda. In the Harry Potter series, the villain Lord Voldemort is a shameless caricature of Hitler, obsessed with blood purity (eugenics) and fanatically opposed to the mixing of muggle (untermensch) and magical (white) bloodlines. He refers to the results of this mixing as mudbloods and half-breeds (mischling), terms which are extremely offensive to those who oppose him. In a scene from the seventh film, Voldemort murders a pureblood Hogwarts teacher for her ideological impurity. “She believes that muggles are not so different from us. In her view, the mixing of purebloods with muggles is not an abomination. She would, given her way, have us mate with them.” He expresses incredulity that anyone could permit such an act of defilement, and his followers are visibly disgusted by her mere presence. In contrast, the boy hero is analogous to the Christ child. He never uses the killing curse, for he harbours no hatred in his heart, instead using The Power of Love™ to defeat Voldemort. Most blatantly of all, in the last book/film, he sacrifices himself and is resurrected, whereupon he deflects Voldemort’s killing curse and forces it back onto him, effectively vanquishing him with his own hatred. Considering that J.K. Rowling is a self-professed Christian and a woke grifter, this is hardly surprising.

            Neo, the protagonist in The Matrix, is an even more obvious example of the “saviour” trope, in a series which is littered with biblical references. His coming is prophesied by mystics, his body is laid out in a cruciform pose during his selfless act of sacrifice, hovercrafts are christened with ancient Levantine names, and perhaps most explicitly of all, the last human city is a Babylonian mix of all races and cultures named Zion. The primary antagonist, Agent Smith, makes evolutionary analogies and thinks of himself as an instrument of sanitation, using terminology that evokes the Nazis. In a monologue dripping with hatred, he refers to the protagonists as a plague, a disease, one that he intends to wipe out. The license plate seen on his black sedan is a reference to a Bible passage (Isaiah 54:16), which reads “behold, I have created the smith that bloweth the coals in the fire, and bringeth forth an instrument for his work; and I have the waster to destroy.”

            In Star Wars, the forces of the Dark Side are blatantly fascistic. The Emperor’s infantry units are called stormtroopers (a term Hitler bestowed on his Sturmabteilung), who are clad in white suits of armour and helmets not dissimilar to a gas mask, eerily reminiscent of a biohazard team, one that has been tasked with eradicating the “pathogen of rebellion” that is spreading against the “order and purity” of the empire. The Emperor’s elite commanding officers are all smug aristocrats, dressed in black and wearing jackboots, much like the SS. Finally, the emblem of the Galactic Empire is faintly reminiscent of the swastika in its design. In contrast to the homogeny of the Dark Side, the protagonists are diverse, being from multiple races and cultures, a veritable tapestry of intergalactic harmony. The Jedi undergo intensive training to eradicate hatred from their hearts and renounce all worldly attachments. They are expected to lead an ascetic life as an apprentice of the Force, an ambassador for peace, and a defender of freedom (liberal democracy).

            Considering the ubiquity of this sermonizing on the evil of hate, is it any wonder that the white man has, in Kanazawa’s words, forgotten how to hate? Not completely forgotten, however, since he does hate his own kind with a passion. For common humanity, the Nazis are the barometer of evil. Many people have referred to our disproportionately Jewish elites as Nazis, especially amid the insane coronavirus hysteria, despite the fact that the Nazis were opposed to international finance, usury, fiat currency, egalitarianism, multiculturalism, multiracialism, miscegenation, immigration, sexual deviancy, Marxism, consumerism, technocracy, plutocracy, and cultural degeneration. The powers that be are in favour of literally all these things, yet still the proles continue to make the asinine accusation that our overlords are fascists.

          • Barbara
            Barbara says:

            Autisticus Spasticus

            “The division of the United States into federations of equal force was decided long before the Civil War by the high financial powers of Europe. These bankers were afraid that the United States, if they remained in one block and as one nation, would attain economic and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination over the world. The voice of the Rothschilds prevailed… Therefore they sent their emissaries into the field to exploit the question of slavery and to open an abyss between the two sections of the Union.”

            Otto Von Bismarck

          • Junghans
            Junghans says:

            An absolutely brilliant analysis Autisticus !
            Please ask Kevin if you can present formal articles at this site.

      • Larry
        Larry says:

        Every singe letter of the New Testament was written by a Christian Catholic to other Christian Catholics in an already existing Catholic Church (the church pre-existed the New Testament) and one of the criteria for inclusion in the Canon of Scripture is whether of not the text had been read at Holy Mass.

        The New Testament clearly records how it was Jews were expelled from the Synagogue if it was learned they were following Jesus.

        Jesus told the Jews their father was Satan if they did not follow Him.

        All of the first Christian Catholics were Jews.

      • Gerry
        Gerry says:

        Never ruled by WASPS. One of the things that has always bothered me about America is why is it that anyone who tries to do the right thing politically winds up dead and often in very strange and unusual circumstances? It’s hard to fight evil and those that were on the front lines knew it all to well:

        Dr. Willard Cantelon as one example of a great Christian, Oxford educated and an advisor to the President some sage words from an old book of his The Day the Dollar Dies Logos 1973:

        In 1934, when legislation was passed prohibiting the American public from owning gold currency, the door was left wide open to the foreign holders of American dollars to claim gold in exchange for their paper. But even before this international stage was set, Representative Louis T. McFadden (R-Pa.), Chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency, made statements on June 10 of 1932 which indicated America’s gold was already moving back to Europe. His statements were recorded in the Congres’sional Record and pages 140-174 in H. S. Kenan’s book entitled The Federal Reserve Bank. Representative
        McFadden speaks of those on the other side of the water with a strong banking “fence getting the currency of the Federal Reserve Banks-exchanging that currency for gold and transmitting the gold to the foreign confederates.”

        McFadden named the dates on which America’s gold was shipped to Germany:

        On April 27, 1932, $750 thousand in gold was sent to Germany. One week later another $300 thousand in
        gold was shipped to Germany the same way. In the middle of May of that year, $12 million in gold was
        shipped to Germany… . Almost every week there was a shipment of gold to Germany-these shipments
        are not made for profit.

        Representative McFadden referred also to the comments of Senator Elihu Root:

        Long before we wake up from our dreams of prosperity through an inflated currency, our gold which could
        have kept us from catastrophe will have vanished, and no rate of interest will tempt it to return.
        In his report to Congress, Louis McFadden asked the question,

        Why should our depositors and our government be forced to flnance the munition factories of Germanv
        and Soviet Russia?

        Representative McFadden continued, Gold was taken from the entrusting American people and was sent to Europe. In the last several months $1,300,000,000 in gold has been sent to Europe every dollar of that gold once belonged to the people of United States and was unlawfully taken from them.

        As I weighed the words of Louis McFadden and other Iawmakers, I also witnessed the fairtastic scene of America’s vanishing gold. The record was unbelievable:

        1949 – $24,500,000,000
        1958 – $21 ,593,000,000
        1959 – $20,478,483,000
        1960- $19,420,997,000
        196l – $ 17,667,587,000
        1962-$15,997 ,647,000
        1965 – $ 13,733,000,000

        On and on the gold drain went, unabated. Then came the crisis in the spring of 1968. We were living in Europe at that particular time. On March 14, hysterical crowds of people crowded, screamed, and scrambled their ways to the windows of the banks of England, and to the bank windows of the sub-basements of Paris to exchange their paper for gold. On one single day, the crude and the cultured, the
        peer and the peasant, carried off 200 tons of the precious metal. They stored it in secret places of their homes and deposited it in various banks in strongboxes labeled with fictitious names.

        On that day Senator Everett Dirksen in conversation with Secretary of the Treasury Fowler, William McChesney Martin, and a dozen other senators said,

        We have reached the bottom of the barrel.

        It seemed like only yesterday when I spoke on monetary matters when America had $26 billion in gold in her treasuries. By June 30 of 1971, it had been reduced to $10.5 billion.
        I would also suggest going here:

        • Raeto West
          Raeto West says:

          Gerry, on US gold shipped overseas (to Germany?) since 1932.
          You seem to have no theory as to why this was done. To force depression on the USA? To fund world-wide Jewry in the USSR, UK, Germany, France, Japan, China….. ? Maybe even for bona fide payments?
          My own best guess is to support the Jewish victory in the Second World War. But what’s your view?

  15. Larry
    Larry says:

    Jesus did establish His universal
    ( Catholic) Church

    Matt 16:18 “ And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this Rock I will build my church…

  16. Waldemar
    Waldemar says:

    We have only one realization which, in spite of everything, gives rise to great hope, and which even arises from the Jewish world domination of the few over the many. It is so amazingly simple that nobody comes to it, I read it in a forbidden “Nazi” reading:

    If so few Jews rule over so many non-Jews, then the answer is already in the question how all this is possible at all. It is that even only a few representatives of our race, who are determined to do everything, can turn the principle of the corrupters into the opposite at any time. If they are too strong, we are too weak, so simple is the equation.

    Genetically, we are already completely degenerated anyway. Nature does not tolerate such negligence without consequences. The Jews “know” that most of us already consist of – pardon – “genetic, non-survivable junk”. The procreative capacity of the white man has not decreased rapidly without reason.

    There is, for example, the history of the East Prussian Trakehner horses, which owe their origin to a very few (the really strongest and most robust) ancestors who managed to escape from their homeland during the war, and distilled a noble resistant breed.

    “Class instead of mass” has been the motto also of the “Nazis”. Today is “World Tiger Day”, who would have thought it. But we are not talking about rusty tanks with the same name that were once supposed to save the white race, but an endangered species.

    • Waldemar
      Waldemar says:

      Jews will always remain Jews, it is absolutely ridiculous to “reproach” them for this. It is just as idiotic as the alienated Anglin who, in his unworldly delusion, is “outraged” by the fact that women keep small dogs, for example. Women are not men, you moron! And Jews are just not Aryans.

      Jews can only “live” through us, because they are parasites. They even create now and then something (apparently) important from our substance, but just apparently. Because they are not a substance but a mask. Jews are a game of hide and seek. Here no idiotic eternal lamento helps, but only a decided energetic action of the fencing.

    • Socraticist
      Socraticist says:

      “If they are too strong, we are too weak, so simple is the equation.”

      The question then becomes: why are ‘we’ too weak, of which the answer is that mass democracies are the most weakest and easy to subvert systems. Another issue is, in the case of the US, the US is a young still immature nation, eager to assume a guiding role in the world, which is somewhat above its head, even more in the worst of all systems of governing. Thus, a three millennia old clan, having a lot of experience, a strong and fixed identity, being masters of propaganda already from the beginning, having no scruples at all, can easily take control of such a nation which has more power than wisdom and experience. Those who have no scruples are also inherently at an advantage, since no methods are left unused. The lack of scruples, the enormous skills in the area of propaganda, plus the very unusual fantacism (see Voltaire), how should people’s rule mediocracies defend themselves?

      What you are saying about genetic degeneration is sheer foolish babble. With people throwing around such despicable nonsense, we aren’t going to win the war.

  17. Carolyn Yeager
    Carolyn Yeager says:

    From Tom’s article:
    “In passing it must be stated over and over again that the pejorative word “Nazism”, although not legally banned in private communications, was never used officially in even one document in National-Socialist Germany. The term “Nazi” was first coined by early Spartacists, i.e.,  early German Moscow-steered Bolsheviks in Weimar Germany, later to be used massively in the  Soviet Union, before it comfortably settled during the 1950s in American academic and media vernacular.  Its derogatory equivalent would be “commie” for a communist, although not a single academic paper in the US or EU would accept a paper where a word “commie” is used as a synonym for a communist.
    The two-syllable word “Nazi” sounds more demonic [than National-Socialist], hence more acceptable in the mainstream media.”

    I was moved to comment on this yesterday, but like so much these days, sufficient motivation to follow through and ‘put myself out there’ wavers and fades. But thank you, Tom Sunic, for remembering to mention this once again (yes, to “put yourself out there”). I have made the point, and still stand by it, that “Hitlerism” is an acceptable, and correct, shorter term to use for Germany’s National-Socialist Weltanschaaung, but “Nazism” is not.

    How I would like to see you engage in a debate with Ron Unz, the “celebrated good Jew”, on this subject of the propriety of “Nazi” and “Nazism.” Do you think Ron will publish (copy) this article to his Unz Review, as he has so very many of the articles at TOO in the past year? I hope so. I’d hope you would engage with the commenters. I note you have your own list of “good Jews.” One I think should not be there is Gilad Atzmon, since he upholds the Holohoax.

    • Socraticist
      Socraticist says:

      Interesting, I take it that if the official name National-Socialist would be used, the latter part would reflect on all currently accepted and implemented socialism? I agree that the word Nazism has a special connotation, more or less isolated in itself. Nazism, due to ubiquitous propaganda by the clan seems today almost equal with ‘beast’, while the Nazi’s were actually quite disciplined. In fact, if the National-Socialists would not have been defeated, we would today be living in an extremely disciplined society, we’d all be highly controlled state-socialism puppets rather than beasts (i’m sure you disagree with this). I’m sure that modern democracies are more ‘beastly’ in the sense of people being out of control than the projected National-Socialist societies would have been.
      If it would not have been up to the clan’s ubiquitous propaganda and their obscene lies, National-Socialism would have been looked at another way. The obscene portrayals by the way are a proof of the characteristics of the clan themselves.
      Nevertheless, as a classical liberal, statism, socialism, mass-democracy and communism are all pejoratives to me.

      • Carolyn Yeager
        Carolyn Yeager says:

        “Interesting, I take it that if the official name National-Socialist would be used, the latter part would reflect on all currently accepted and implemented socialism?”

        No. Why would you since the hyphen make it one thing, not two things stuck together. The Socialism is Nationalist and the Nationalism is Socialist. Then again, the basis for this question is unclear, as is the rest of your comment. What the heck are your talking about?

        “… if the National-Socialists would not have been defeated, we would today be living in an extremely disciplined society, we’d all be highly controlled state-socialism puppets rather than beasts (i’m sure you disagree with this).”

        Yes, of course I do. Again, no basis (evidence) for it. The Germans living under N-S at that time were not “highly controlled state-socialism puppets.” They lived normal lives with all the freedom they could want except for two exceptions: (1)not Jews and (2) the vicious war being waged against Germany/Germans. It must be remembered that for many years the Jews were given all assistance to move elsewhere (the problem was no one wanted them). Once war heated up, Jews were prevented from leaving as they were needed for labor to replace the German male workforce that were now serving as soldiers. It was their mistake not to have left when they could. (Or was it a mistake??)

        Finally, what is the “clan.” I should not have to guess what you mean. Is there a valid reason you think you should speak in code here? You’re completely anonymous already. Well, I guess that’s a “classical liberal” for you.

    • Socraticist
      Socraticist says:


      ‘sufficient motivation to follow through and ‘put myself out there’ wavers and fades’

      I understand, in a democracy a shipload of fools and mediocrity constantly over-shout everything. To be defeated by mass stupidity and ignorance, who would have thought of that strategy.., to conquer by means of equality. It is the people’s trick, though they are themselves always fooled and ruled by others.

      • Carolyn Yeager
        Carolyn Yeager says:

        No, it’s not democracy or defeat, but I turned 81 in June and very naturally don’t find it a worthwhile to use my energies to “teach” or reach today’s Libertarian youth. The commenters here may not be young, but they are overwhelmingly libertarian, and such believers already have all the answers (to their satisfaction). They also want to speak in code language, probably in large part because they don’t really know much about what they speak, ie. superficial knowledge from the Internet. Even though all knowledge is available on the Internet, it doesn’t encourage deep thinking. Maybe because one can answer people without giving much thought to what they’ve said. It’s too much about ‘repartee.’

        Well, anyway, I’m pretty much a Socraticist too.

  18. todd hupp
    todd hupp says:

    The virgin birth was an attempt to insert pagan myths into Christianity.The breeding of god -like entitles with humans.
    It also has roots in Egyptian mythology.

    Modern Israel is largely inhabited by only the descendants of the Tribe of Judah vs the Northern tribes that inhabited ancient Israel and were the “chosen people.” Modern Israel should be called Judea.

    • Larry
      Larry says:

      Writing about 800 years before The Incarnation, Isaias 7 prophesied;

      Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign. Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel.

  19. Waldemar
    Waldemar says:

    I normally have nothing against brown eyes, but the dark eyes of the Jews are a maelstrom that swallows up everything. They radiate something sick, strange, remote, psychopathic, abnormal. They stare at you, full of reproach, hatred and penetrance. They give nothing, but want to take. The eyes are the mirror of the soul, and these eyes are abyss of gloom. Jews are psycho vampires and energy robbers, eternal sleepless hate generators.

    They are the eyes of perverts and criminals, of thugs, thieves and swindlers. And we are all supposed to constantly “sympathize” with them! Insolence! Don’t we deserve anything else in this world in our one and only short existence than to pay constant attention to them? What do the miserable creatures want from us? They should finally leave us in peace and stop to bother us permanently with their “intellectualistic” psycho-complexes and identity insecurities!

  20. Waldemar
    Waldemar says:

    “To laugh at a donkey, you have to know a horse.” “Hubris” in Greek means “stampeding donkey.” We should move on to laugh heartily at these long-eared donkeys who want to “rule” us, because that is what they are in truth uniquely entitled to.

  21. Bilejones
    Bilejones says:

    Most “antisemitism” is in fact counter-semitism: fighting back against their anti-White actions.

  22. Nickola Antic
    Nickola Antic says:

    Excellent points Mr Sunic.
    A superstitious mentality which accepts the story of Jesus doesn’t lend itself to someone who is capable of breaking through the holocaust myth.
    I quite like the concept of the divine posited by William Pierce.
    Za dom spremni!

  23. todd hupp
    todd hupp says:

    I wanted to add:

    The pagan concepts in Christianly in no way detract from the message. Much of the message is ancient occult wisdom.

    Paul found it necessary to give the new religion some pagan aspects when seeking converts.

    The ten tribes of the separate country of ancient Israel(vs Judea) ultimately migrated into Europe. Thus the true “chosen” are European Christians.

  24. Waldemar
    Waldemar says:

    Swivel-eyed ventriloquist doll (“philosopher”) Sartre was officially involved with lesbian feminist herald of the “second sex,” de Beauvoir. The latter raved in bobbysoxer-like love letters to Jew author Nelson Algren that she had “no more ardent desire than to be his slave.”

    The “modern marriage” between Sartre and de Beauvoir took shape in such a way that de Beauvoir regularly gave her many playmates to Sartre for food. When she was buried near her “longtime partner” Sartre, she still wore Algren’s engagement ring on her finger…

  25. Waldemar
    Waldemar says:

    The judgment of the Jews is clear: “Whites (Europeans) are potential murderers”.#

    They’re coming close to us everywehre and everytime with their “kind” (and and their millionfold imported invaders), as if they wanted to fulfill their prophecy that we all are murderers by all means. Why don’t they just go away and leave us and our way of life?

    Where is in this illogic the alleged “Jewish intelligence”?

    The only permissible conclusion is that “Jewish intelligence” consists of destroying others. How do they want to keep this irresolvable contradiction (and the constantly awakening knowledge about their true intentions) permanently under control?

    • Waldemar
      Waldemar says:

      According to Jewish way of thinking there can and must never be any justified reason for “anti-Semitism”. Although they themselves create it constantly, even provoke it with intention! Exactly in it their pathological hubris shows up. Nothing would be worse for the Jews than if they were no longer “world topic number one”! We all are supposed to take care of our own destroyers lovingly, we are supposed to sacrifice our lives for them. In truth this is already the fulfillment of the Talmudic slavery rule!

        • Waldemar
          Waldemar says:

          Thank you, dear Carolyn, and your website, in which a lot of effort, time and work has gone into, is extremely informative, enlightening and detailed. You truly deserve the utmost respect. You must be a downright “germanophile”. (But I know, it’s not just about the Germans, it’s about all of us.) Greetings & Best Wishes

  26. Emmerich
    Emmerich says:

    I found the first part of this article enjoyable, but then it turned into “Mary was a prostitute” level slander more consistent with the Talmud than Western Civilization. This idea that Jews created Christianity as some sort of secret Gentile mind control project is Bill Cooper level illuminati conspiracy. As far as I can tell from my reading, modern Jews have little continuity with the Jews of Judea at the time. Many of their texts and beliefs originate from Babylon (i.e. Babylonian Talmud), for instance, and many of their racial characteristics were evolved during their contact with Europeans, not at some time prior to their co-existence with Europeans, though perhaps these traits began to be selected for during the Babylonian Exile.

    • Frank
      Frank says:

      “This idea that Jews created Christianity as some sort of secret Gentile mind control project is Bill Cooper level illuminati conspiracy.”

      The jews are a war cult. Read their documents and look at their holidays. They are a collective group, and have achieved their sloppy power over us precisely because of christianity, which has atomized western populations, hidden the endless warfare that controls this planet, engineered absurd superstitions, with defacing, self-denying beliefs such as the love for violent psychopaths, etc. The concept that goys are born in sin, yet jews a gods chosen, is a particularly hard pill to swallow, not to mention the symbol of a human being tortured to death, dying for the alleged sins this system burdens us with. I’ve found that most christians use this bizarre belief, not for some spiritual reason, but rather as a method of judging and controling others, turning goys into foot soldiers against themselves. No, this isn’t a conspiracy theory, it’s escape from the metaphysical cage the jews have had the west in for centuries.

      • Socraticist
        Socraticist says:

        The conspiracy theories, as in the proper definition of it, in a democracy, are the product of the characteristics of the minds of the people (das volk), obscene, grotesque, absurd and overly serious. It is the equivalent of the many historical superstitions produced by the people, but since democratic people have a maniacal obsession with politics and power, though making a mess of everything, the superstitions are now produced in the area of political theories, the area of power, who governs. The clan’s superiority is based upon the inferiority of democratic rule, or should we say demagogic rule.
        If the democratic people would not have a maniacal obsession with governing everything, politicizing everything, the whole of life, creating monstrously large governments and a ridiculous amount of institutions, the chances of the clan (which is equally maniacally obsessed with politics) to rule by means of infiltration and manipulation of these governments and institutions would be far less. And if the democracy would not allow the incompetent and corrupt to float to the top, the clan would have no chance. Additionally, the democracy is also obsessed with political activism, progress, change and turning over everything all the time, of which the clan is eager to lend a helping hand.

        People should ask themselves: has the clan ever before in history attained such ubiquitous power in so many areas as during the modern mass democracies?

      • Emmerich
        Emmerich says:

        This still sounds like illuminati level thinking to me. Although you could provide evidence that Jews have manipulated Christianity to their own ends, most markedly after the rise of mass media, such as through zionist TV preachers, it seems a bit much to call Christianity some Jewish plot against the goys since the very beginning since there really is no evidence of that other than retconning based on the current (and not historical) state of Christianity. To the extent you believe there is continuity between the Jews of Christ’s time and today, it does not seem all that preposterous to believe that the Jews would kill God himself when it became clear that the plan was elimination of usury, submission to Roman (i.e. gentile) authority, threat to their own power, etc. In any event, people often assume that being a people chosen by God means they are somehow better, when it is more miraculous if they are actually worse, like Gollum chosen to safeguard the ring of power. And this complaint of “judging and controlling others” is something an atomized individualist would make.

  27. Socraticist
    Socraticist says:

    I cannot possible become an anti-Semite, as I happen to invest and reserve all my hate and contempt for democracy, first cause of troubles and cultural decline, before the take over of the mentioned clan. I tend to call it either Dumbocracy or Corruptocracy (or Mediocracy or The Great Braindump). Now, who am I, against millions of believers, about the whole Western world, but what is strange is that we find on alternative media the writings of educated men, and at times even the comments of educated men, but it appears that the Church of Democracy has erased a whole history of philosophy of critique on democracy by very eminent historical writers, some of them even having laid the foundations of Western cultural, political and ethical philosophy… Could it be that it is true that the conquerors write history, and delegate what does not fit into their views to dusty archives?

    Blaming the clan for everything also appears rather childish to me.

    Going through the media, mainstream of alternative, it appears to me that quoting Oscar Wilde (paraphrasing Abraham Lincoln) is appropriate:

    “Democracy is the bludgeoning of the people, by the people, for the people”.

    I should add that the clan probably has an idea of this perpetual citizens war, as they appear to be masters in stoking the war of the people, which altogether does not require much IQ. Those who are attributing the success of the clan to take over the dumbocorruptocracy to a clan based IQ advantage, in my view, are putting a feather in their own asses, as it is merely a matter of quantitative effort and perseverance, rather than of any qualitative effort.

    Oh yeah, these clan philosophers of ant-thropology have imposed the view that people are not so different, thus multiculti is oke, right? Isn’t it egalitarian democracy which has leveled society first, cutting of the head of historical elites, overflowing everything with pop culture, declaring it’s own people’s geniuses, so that no geniuses and great statesmen will volunteer to raise and lead, declining the honour to lead the people, as they will be covered with mud from all sides. The best which a democracy will produce seems to be a tyrant, perhaps that is why they are so obsessed with seeing Hitlers everywhere, a matter of a collective bad conscience. But for now, the democracy is not even capable of producing a competent tyrant or enlightened despot, and we are stuck with being ruled by clowns floating upwards from the bottom.

  28. Barbara
    Barbara says:

    A positive and useful thing we can do with Christianity no matter what you think about it. Marjorie Taylor Greene has started a big controversy by saying that we should have Christian Nationalism. I’m on board. They say that Christians should rule over Christians which is as good as saying white nationalism and white rule and that Semites should not rule over us.

    • charles frey
      charles frey says:

      Barbara, since your above Bismarck citation does not provide a Reply, let me ask you here.

      Where did you get that citation. I lent out my BISMARCK GRUENDET DAS REICH long ago but never got it back.

      Therefore, I was obliged to paraphrase it here previously, when the Civil War was discussed; without it. Perhaps too simplistic, but Charleston, S.C., near where the first shot was fired, still has many wealthy Jewish families. FDR’s Baruch came from there.

      Though having spent many of my younger student years in the South, inundated by the War, I had never heard B’s comment mentioned. Simply air-brushed out of history, like so much else. He, of all people, would have known, since, so to speak, he had the biggest ears in Europe, enabling him to get rid of the Paris Commune.

      • Barbara
        Barbara says:


        The Bismarck quote is on a lot of sites on the internet. I just searched for it but don’t recall the specific website where I found it this time. There is no aspect of our lives that the Jews don’t stick their big ugly hooked noses. It is terrible to think of all the ways in which they kill the best Gentiles but the War Between the States was one of them.

        • John D. Alder
          John D. Alder says:

          And thanks to jew Soros and jew Zelensky they are willing to plunge us into world war 3 . We can see them setting the stage for it right now plain as day.

        • Autisticus Spasticus
          Autisticus Spasticus says:

          I would advise you to take up the Bismarck quote with Dr Robert Morgan, by far the most knowledgeable person around here when it comes to the Christian role in freeing the negroes. You can find him over at Unz Review.

  29. Waldemar
    Waldemar says:

    Since I am not superstitious, I do not believe in demons either. But I do believe that “demons” exist: in the minds of the people who believe in them.
    That Hitler believed in demons I consider highly speculative. The very fact that it was allegedly only discovered in 2003 that Hitler allegedly possessed this book suggests that there are quite different demons at work here. Hitler was still quite young at that time. If he was under the “spell” of a demon, then that demon’s name was Erik Jan Hanussen and he was Jewish. The only one who really had power over him (and thus world history) was his Jewish personal physician Theo Morell.

    • charles frey
      charles frey says:

      Many comments ago, you mentioned, that your parents came from the East, including Silesia; as did mine. I asked you by Reply, from where, and how they made it out. But my querie was never posted. Could you share that with us ?

  30. SimpleMale
    SimpleMale says:

    I find it interesting that writers conclude that they need to deconstruct meaningless words such as “Anti-Semitism,” “racism,” “sexism,” etc. To me, these words conspicuously stand out as being meaningless and undefinable, like the words “freedom” and “liberty.” For example, if a person shared some data with me, and another person said that the data was “this-ism” or “that-ism,” I would immediately understand that the empirical/tangible issue is whether or not the data is correct, not whatever subjective or ad hominem words exist that can be used to denote the data. It’s kind of like one of the first articles I read on “racism” – “What is Racism?” by Thomas Jackson – a long article on the deconstruction of the word “racism.” None of this is complex mathematics, just simple linguistics, and it just seems to me that if our collective cognitive abilities have become so low that we need to spend so much effort trying to explain that these subjective words are meaningless, then this just means that we are collectively just too unintelligent to survive.

    Over the last several decades the have not even pretended to engage in a make-believe Judeophile mimicry; their veneration of Jews is hyperreal, if not surreal, with the existence of the state of Israeli serving as Germany’s stated raison d’état.

    I conjecture that this is indeed all insincere philo-semitism. These ethnically German elites, being extreme sociopaths, fully understand who they need to support in order to be granted the approval to amass large quantities of resources.

    Also, what is illogical about using the word “ideology” to describe National Socialism? National Socialism is an idea, a political model, a social model, or a philosophical model. It empirically makes no difference which of these words one wants to use to describe it. Thus once again, I state that if we collectively have become so unintelligent that using the word “ideology” instead of “social model” or “political model” is enough to confuse or change the opinion of the typical voter, then this to me indicates that we have collectively become too unintelligent to survive.

    Another point is that I never liked the word “Fascism” because it seems to me to be a subjective description, similar to “freedom.” The common use of the word Fascism is used to describe a government that does not support the laws that are endorsed by the Ashkenazim. If a government supports the Ashkenazi system, its nation is described as “Free”; if it does not, it is called “Fascist.” Does this make sense? So, why even ever use either of these two words? Much more descriptive words exist that can be used to describe various political systems.

    Also, I’m not sure if Christianity can be blamed for the fall of Europeans in contemporary times. There is a tendency for evolution to relegate to a state of extinction a population that is innately built to embrace a religion that is not reproductively advantageous. However, throughout most of the last two thousand years, the European tendency to embrace traditional Christianity served them well in the evolutionary sense. What other race can be said to have done as well as the Europeans in the past? Yes, an argument can be made that in some ways, Judaism served the Ashkenazim better in the evolutionary sense than how well Christianity served the Europeans; however in other ways, the Europeans did better than the Ashkenazim, specifically when it came to the evolution of a combination of personality and intellectual traits that gave rise to the ability for mathematics, scientific discovery, technological innovations, and philosophical insight. However, the contemporary fall of ethnic Europeans can be attributed to other factors instead of the modern reformulation of Christianity.

    I find it academically worthwhile to study the actual origins of Christianity, but I see no practical usefulness to attempt to get the European masses to reject Christianity and become atheist. The intelligent races need religion to function as a collective family, which without, they become nihilistic and just engage in hedonism – “living for the moment” – since tomorrow they can die and cease to exist for eternity. Lower races such as Africans may not need religion since they are not smart enough to contemplate about their own existence, the “meaning” of life, and what will come for them the next month. They just live for and enjoy the moment. But the more intelligent races cannot help but think about these things, and if they don’t have religion to give them eternal purpose and meaning, they can’t function as they were evolutionarily designed to, which is to follow a Group Selected and K-Selected model. Thus, it seems to me that instead of trying to convert Europeans into atheists, it would be better to slowly remold the beliefs of Christianity to a more evolutionarily adaptive one. Typical Europeans are not going to engage in deep academic debate about the veracity of the belief system; they will just follow them if told to by trusted leaders.

  31. Waldemar
    Waldemar says:

    The sneaky Jew alway plays for time. Even Orban will not live and govern forever. If necessary, Mossad will have him assassinated, which will seem like an accident. He would not be the first. Eurocratic corrupt willing Jew servants who sell their own people are everywhere. They are already impatiently waiting in the wings to “diversify” Hungary.

    This could be done, for example, by making Hungary’s social system more “attractive” for third world immigration. In addition, of course, the entire machinery of brainwashing (white guilt / worship of everything foreign) has to be anchored in the “education” system, which the West has undergone since decades.

    Finally, the island of Hungary cannot be defended forever against a surrounding overpowering sea of “multiculturalism, tolerance, cosmopolitanism and diversity”. The superial high priest of all hypermorality in the postmodern age clarifies with the raised warning forefinger: “Nationalism never again, it will end up in anudda Shoah!”

  32. Armoric
    Armoric says:

    « As the German troops were preparing their retreat from France in the late summer of 1944, [Jean-Paul Sartre] drafted a short book in which he commiserated with the French Jewry, comparing their plight to the hero in the Franz Kafka’s novel The Trial, “who knows that he is considered guilty; judgment is continually put off – for a week, two weeks… »

    The hero of Kafka’s novel is a man who doesn’t know why he is on trial and is going to be executed. I’ve found Kafka’s books painful to read. I’m sure his promotion was organized by his tribe. According to a Jewish translator (quoted by wikipedia), the hero of The Trial «stands for the ‘guiltless guilt’ that imbues the Jew in the modern world». But what it reminds me of is how the Jews use the judicial system to go after their targets without making any precise accusation. This makes it impossible to prepare a defense. A good example in the United States was the 2021 civil lawsuit “Sines v. Kessler”, in relation to the 2017 Charlottesville “Unite the Right Rally”.

    WW2 revisionists are in a similar situation: they know they are not allowed to contradict the Jews on a whole list of subjects. The obvious solution would be to debunk the Jews on every other subject. But the Jews won’t give a list of the Jewish claims that cannot be legally disproved.

    It’s the same with everything: they call everyone a nazi, a racist, an antisemite… They play on the ambiguity of those words, and they refuse to discuss the evidence, the facts, the arguments, and the technical details. All of this is so Kafkaesque!

    « Very likely Sartre rushed to publish this little Judeophile manifesto of his in order to better adjust himself to the spirit of the vindictive antifascist times in Europe, but also … »

    He had to do so unless he had some hidden Jewish ancestry. Any prominent figure who had not retired for the duration of the war had to invent some story of being anti-German. Anyway, Sartre owed his career and celebrity to the Jewish dominated media and universities. It had little to do with natural popularity.

    On the subject of France under German occupation, I recently discovered the existence of Walter Kapps, a filmmaker born in 1907 in Istanbul. Judging by his very short wikipedia entry and by the titles of his films, he was a Jewish man with an interest in sex and race-mixing, and his career was barely affected by the war. In 1943, for example, he directed the movie “Mahlia la métisse” (=Malhia the half-breed). I guess he received public financing to romanticize race-mixing! I wonder how many Jews remained in the French administration during that period.

    « Jesus certainly didn’t carry the facial features of a blond-haired Nordic superhero that we observe on crucifixes of all churches from Manila, Mexico or Munich »

    I like how Jesus has been nordicized. Similarly, it seems to me that until fifty years ago, people depicted on the covers of Christian books and magazines were mostly super-Aryans.

Comments are closed.