Reframing the Jewish Question: The Weak Claim Paradox

Any effective political movement will know its own strengths and weaknesses as well as its enemy’s. Obviously, this helps enable it to attack where the enemy is most vulnerable and to protect itself where it is also most vulnerable. For the Dissident Right and White Nationalists in America—and for all European nationalists in Europe—the principal enemy must be seen as organized Jewry. As I like to call them: Left-wing Diaspora Jews, or LDJs.

The greatest weaknesses of LDJs are, of course, small numbers and a limited martial presence among gentiles. Their greatest strengths, however, include high ethnocentrism and in-group cohesion, high IQs, the ability to acquire and weaponize large amounts of money, a sense of urgency resulting from the cult of their own victimhood, and an overwhelming will to power. An impressive battery of strengths indeed.

The LDJ’s most important strength however is their prodigious ability to control popular opinion among gentiles through various forms of media. This, more than any other, best explains the ascension of Jews to elite status in the West mere decades after their emancipation in Europe in the 1870s. Call it the Pop-Op hypothesis. By propagating different shades of egalitarian ideology (for example, anti-racism in the West and communism in the East), LDJs effectively told gentile majorities what they wanted to hear, thus molding popular opinion to manufacture hostility against the existing gentile elites—for the benefit of the LDJs themselves, who always intended to replace them.

The old guard was wholly unprepared for this since not in centuries had any European aristocracy of note been put in the position of having to persuade the people to follow them. “We lead because we are pre-ordained by God to do so and likewise are better suited for it than you are,” somehow seems less persuasive than “Since everyone is equal, we must overthrow those who impose inequality upon us!” That the former argument resides closer to the truth by reflecting the inegalitarian nature of the human condition makes little difference. Those who were led, didn’t know any better; and those who did lead, knew better and didn’t care.

If this seems like an oversimplification of the rise of Jewish power, that’s because it is. All general explanations of historical events will resort to oversimplification to some extent or another. I will bet, however, that the Pop-Op Hypothesis explains the facts most economically compared to all other hypotheses. Prior to Jewish emancipation, Jews still had their ethnocentrism, high-IQs, financial acumen, and other strengths, but only a fraction of the influence they enjoy over gentiles today. Emancipation, for the first time in modern history, gave Jews a means by which they could directly communicate with and ultimately control the gentile masses—namely with art, academia, music, journalism, propaganda, and literature. It quickly became apparent that Jews far surpassed the gentile elites in this regard.

The Pop-Op Hypothesis dictates that in order to break the LDJ grip on power, a competing movement must challenge the LDJ grip on popular gentile opinion. But if this is where the enemy is strongest, then wouldn’t it be foolish to attack him there? Well, yes and no. Ingroup messaging is where the Dissident Right, with its more-truthful inegalitarianism, is strongest as well. Arguments may be less pleasing at first to the ear of the masses, but they will often be more elegant—and humorous as well—and thus more persuasive. This is why Jews so vigorously censor the Dissident Right. And it’s not like finding arguments to counter the LDJ narrative is difficult. How the egalitarians must torture logic in the face of damning evidence provides fertile ground for counterargument and mockery from dissidents.

The problem arises in where and how to stake a claim. Combating an aspect of the LDJ narrative with a strong opposing narrative succeeds inversely to the time the narrative in question has had to metastasize across gentile populations. The more time a narrative has had, the more difficult it is to argue against it with a strong opposite claim. Paradoxically, weaker claims would serve better against deeply entrenched LDJ narratives. I call this the Weak Claim Paradox.

For example, the LDJ narrative which claims that . . .

  1. Gender is a social construct.
  2. Transgender people by law must be considered to belong to their chosen gender.
  3. Children have a right to sex change operations.

. . . is a relatively recent one. Since the vast majority of adults today remember when this narrative didn’t exist at all, strong counterclaims which would have been perfectly mainstream in 2003 can be made to good effect twenty years later:

  1. No, gender is not socially constructed.
  2. No, transgender people don’t have the right to dictate how people view them.
  3. No, children don’t have a right to transition. Furthermore, anyone who aids in their transition should go to prison.

These are strong counter-claims—and popular since the offending narrative has had such little time to grow roots in the gentile mind.

On the other hand, consider this more-deeply entrenched LDJ narrative:

  1. The Nazis were evil.
  2. The Nazis started the Second World War in order to conquer Europe.
  3. The Nazis murdered six million innocent Jews for the sake of racial purity.

This narrative has had much more time to marinate among gentiles. Since very few are still alive today who remember when this narrative didn’t exist, strong counter-claims which would have been perfectly mainstream in 1943 will likely be dismissed as beyond the limits of civilized discourse eighty years later. Human beings are creatures of habit, after all. A lifetime of being inundated with a particular narrative—false as it may be—simply cannot be overturned over the course of a single conversation no matter how bright or well-intentioned a person is. Thus, the following strong counter-claims are bound to fail.

  1. No, the Nazis were the last, best hope for the white race.
  2. No, English and Jewish elites initiated the Second World War as a means to annihilate Germany.
  3. No, the Jewish Holocaust is wildly exaggerated.

And it does not matter how true these claims actually are! There is simply too much time for such strong counter-claims to overcome.

Observe, however, how much more effective weak claims can be when faced with such a severe time handicap. Note also that such claims should always begin with the words “even if.”

  1. Even if the Nazis were evil, the Jewish-led Soviets were more evil.
  2. Even if the Nazis invaded Poland in order to conquer Europe, so did the Jewish-led Soviets.
  3. Even if the Nazis murdered six million Jews, the Jewish-led Soviets had already murdered tens of millions of whites prior to the Second World War.

Such weak claims are every bit as true as the strong ones above. Of course, they don’t push the dissident envelope very far. They certainly don’t attempt to deliver checkmate as the strong claims do. But that’s okay. Dissidents need to take baby steps when leading people out of Plato’s cave—and back in time, so to speak, to when the existing narratives either didn’t exist or were more easily dealt with.

Such weak claims outperform strong ones in this case because they counter the prevailing narrative without contradicting it. Most gentiles have been brainwashed over generations to strenuously resist contradiction as if it were taboo. For dissidents, direct contradiction should be a non-starter. Yet most gentiles are unaware of how atrocious the Gulag Archipelago, the Great Terror, and the Holodomor actually were. By introducing this information—and by effectively presenting the Nazis as the lesser two evils when compared to the Soviets—dissidents effectively enter the deep water of the LDJ narrative, and then go deeper. This is why the study of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn has become so crucial to the Jewish Question. Most gentiles are simply not prepared to refute him. And when presented with solid data on the atrocities committed by so many Soviet Jews—during peacetime, we should add—a new vision of history gradually emerges—not to refute the current LDJ narrative, but to augment it with a more accurate information.

The analogy of the ten-speed bicycle works best to explain the Weak Claim Paradox. Let’s say a hill’s steepness corresponds directly with the amount of time a certain narrative has had to embed itself in a people’s mind. Let’s also say that high gears correspond with strong claims, while low gears correspond with weak claims. When we ride a bike up a steep hill, do we shift into high gear or low gear?

We shift into low gear, of course. This greatly increases the amount of peddling we have to do—and decreases our speed—but at least it keeps us moving. Shifting into tenth gear on a steep incline, however, is a recipe for only standing still.

By incorporating the element of time, the Weak Claim Paradox shows respect for the Pop-Op Hypothesis and the unparalleled ability of LDJs to control popular opinion through various forms of media. If LDJs have had decades with which to embed certain ideas into the minds of ordinary gentiles, then strong arguments will likely fail and only weak ones will stand a chance of succeeding.

Weak claims can be embedded in our very language as well. Note how, in this essay, I often use the term “LDJ” where most dissident authors would simply use the term “Jewish.” This, in itself, is the weaker claim because it limits our focus to a small subset of Jews rather than Jews as a whole. Kevin MacDonald makes this very distinction in the preface to The Culture of Critique when he excludes the scientific work of Albert Einstein and other early-20th-century Jewish theoretical physicists from what he calls “Jewish intellectual movement[s].” Unlike Freudian psychology, Boasian anthropology, or the Frankfurt School, theoretical physics did little to promote Jewish ethnic interests (at least until the late 1930s), despite how a disproportionate number of physicists at that time were Jews.

So people who’ve been brainwashed into anathematizing so-called anti-Semitism may very well plug their ears or run screaming when dissidents speak of “Jews,” as if all Jews think alike and are actively plotting the demise of the White race—which is not true in any event. But when presented with a neologism like “LDJs”—as well as with information on the Soviet gulags and terror famines—they may be prepared to listen. They have not been brainwashed against that.

The Weak Claim Hypothesis has obvious ramifications among those in the Dissident Right who investigate and promote strong claims against the primary LDJ narratives. What to say to those who continue to lionize Adolf Hitler and the Nazis? What to say to those who continue to revise down the Jewish Holocaust? Should they stop? Is what they are doing counterproductive?

Not at all. But if the Pop-Op Hypothesis and the Weak Claim Paradox have any validity, then perhaps such research would best be consumed by those already red-pilled, so to speak. Teasing out what Hitler really meant in a certain speech or determining exactly how many Jewish inmates died of typhus rather than gas chambers in a certain concentration camp surely is appropriate for discourse among dissidents, or for pure scholarly reasons. But when dissidents reach out to non-dissidents to challenge the LDJ grip on popular gentile opinion, perhaps it would be prudent not to ignore how tight that grip really is. Perhaps dissidents should consider a more gentle, weak-claim approach to set their own people free. Then perhaps the gentile masses will join the dissidents more willingly, rather than plugging their ears or running screaming in the opposite direction every time someone says the word “Jew.”

141 replies
  1. George Kocan
    George Kocan says:

    The essay provides an excellent review of the Jewish problem and provokes my pet peeve. Why have Jews taken control over the movie industry in the US? They have a small population, yet succeeded in owning the eight film productions companies in Hollywood during the studio system. Christians failed in this area of social influence and control. Christian leadership failed. Certainly, collectively, Christians had the wealth. In a population of millions, certainly, Christians had the IQ’s necessary for such entrepeneurship. After all, they built steel plants and bridges and sky-skrapers and auto-mobile plants, airplane factories. Yet, they neglected the film industry. Why? Which leads me to the big question: WHAT are they neglecting today?

    • Anon
      Anon says:

      Making movies is an expensive paintbox and risky. The studio system was modeled after the auto industry and product was mass produced. The founders of these studios were workaholics and motivated immigrants. They had fixers who would deal with anyone who created problems. It is a capitalist institution and anyone with drive and investment is free to make product.

      • George Kocan
        George Kocan says:

        Christians (I’m mostly thinking of Catholics) had the money and talent and energy to create and fund magnificent churches, their own school system, universities and colleges, ethnic newspapers, radio programs and other expensive projects. But, they did not bother to create one film production company, not one. Even Black people had their own production companies. I blame a failure of leadership. And, I take this as a warning about the current crises of today.

        • timothy murray
          timothy murray says:

          Mel Gibson changed the world;

          But, yes, you are right. #InformationWarfare , Michael Yon’s term, should be a defensive weapon..

          We see Hungary, Japan and others the LDJ attack vectors in information space.

      • charles frey
        charles frey says:

        01 Produce away, but only in a narrowly delineated space.

        02 Otherwise face the wall of the Jewish-syndicated movie theatres chains.

    • Lady Strange
      Lady Strange says:

      Hollywood was a Jewish mafia enterprise and a money laundering machine. I have learned all of this on this very site. And I must ad that it was also an easy way for Jews – especially the ugly ones – to subdue American blond ” shiksas ” in the process ). Not very Christian.

      Anyway, it’s the only thing that Jews created with a certain touch of ” glamour “‘ that I like and find sometimes memorable, this, and the old Las Vegas ” a la ” Bugsy Siegel . It’s my opinion of course. And It is significant that the two were oriented toward criminal activity.
      For all of the rest, it’s either self agrandissement or nepotism and Aryans ( or whites ) do exactly the same or way better and without this pathological need for criminal profit.

    • Clark Evans
      Clark Evans says:

      Some years ago, there was a book entitled “An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood.” The subtitle was not accurate, as the studio system was invented by Thomas H. Ince, a New Englander who, to my knowledge, had no Jewish ancestry. The subsequent takeover of the industry by East European Jews was based on their following the template created by Ince. In a case where truth is sometimes stranger than fiction, one Catholic who made a niche for himself as a Hollywood mogul was Joseph P. Kennedy, patriarch of the Kennedy political dynasty. He was the head of the Film Booking Offices of America (popularly known simply as FBO) in the mid to late 20’s. Of course, the key to being a major Hollywood studio during the Golden Age was predicated on owning a large chain of theatres. It was for this reason MGM, Warners, RKO, Paramount, and 20th Century Fox were known as “The Big Five.” When the Keith’s chain of vaudeville houses was included in a merger to form RKO in late 1928 (negotiated in part between Kennedy and David Sarnoff), the door was essentially closed for anyone attempting to create a new major studio as by that time all the reputable theatre chains in America’s largest cities were owned by the established studios. While Wikipedia should always be taken with a grain of salt, the historical info contained in the entries for Thomas H. Ince and Film Booking Offices of America is generally solid. Also of interest is the entry for Herbert J. Yates, founder of Republic Pictures who, if I’m not mistaken, was not Jewish.

      • George Kocan
        George Kocan says:

        Thanks for the info. I did read the book, “An Empire of their own.” many years ago. I do not remember much anymore. Joe Kennedy is not the kind of Catholic or Christian that I had in mind. A Catholic film industry could have shown its film in every parish which had a school or an auditorium. But, I guess that is just all water over the dam. The big question now is, what are Christians neglecting that could work for them to preserve a Christian culture against the attacks of neo-pagans, atheists, commies, Jews etc.?

    • Gerry
      Gerry says:

      @ George Kocan

      When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, and my scrolls, especially the parchments.
      2 Timothy 4:13

      O, how the mighty have fallen? St. Paul was at great pains to try and communicate the gospel to the Church and world of his time. Imagine the expression on his face to see the current state of affairs in the Church with our amazing almost miraculous technology? In my teens I often listened to the Bible on cassette in my car and thought wow what a pleasure this is and thought about Hollywood and all that we could have accomplished putting the entire history up on the silver screen? That the Jewish race didn’t bother to even do this with the Old Testament speaks volumes does it not about what is truly important to them? Takes me back also to the movie Independence Day. At the end of that movie I dosed off while letting the film run and was startled awake by a song that started playing through the credits. Hallelujah!!?? I’m still scratching my head over that one?

      Would I be correct to say that it all started with pornographers and all Hollywood really is, is just glorified pornography and what Christian would want to be a part of that?

      There is some light though as the current movie reveals.

      For me to see and read that it is based upon truth is quite telling. Sadly that it had to come by way of an advertisement for Cineplex is the unfortunate part but goes to show and prove doesn’t it the great power of the media. Education hardly comes by way of “parchment” anymore. Universities have failed? A movie that by the way, its story line is not foreign to me as I understand the subject matter very well having my own encounters. To that I will also bring up the Alien franchise and lo and behold ones shock to learn about the creator of the Alien was this guy here:

      Upon a brief reading and study of this individual and his morbid fascination only proves to me the truth of the movie The Popes Excorcist!!!. Switzerland has a presence of evil within that I find terribly disturbing.

      Cheers and thank you

    • Dirk Manly
      Dirk Manly says:

      Christians didn’t have any interest in propagandizing their fellow citizens, nor in pushing smut and porn in any of its various forms.

      The movie industry started in New York City, but the Jewish movie makers, wanting to escape syrict enforcement of copyright laws, and obscenity laws, started moving to the Los Angeles area in the 1910’s, as the federal government had a very small presence there (mostly just immigration and customs officials at the port of Los Angeles, and a few forts for coastal artillery to deter seaborne invasion — and the Posse Comitatus act prevents the use of the army for policing purposes except in dire circumstances when a state’s governor allows it — which is rare and short lived when it happens because during such time, the governor looks weak or overwhelmed, as being unable to handle a situation himself).

      Christian film makers had no desire to escape the arm of their own laws.

      Being a small city with very little property, and with nearly no rain ever, Los Angeles turned out to be a much more profitable location to make movies (varied terrain, wide open spaces with mountains in the background, and sets could be built anywhere and in period pieces, without the problem of having to hide all of the existing newer buildings in the area.

      • George Kocan
        George Kocan says:

        The whole point of organizing a Christian film production is to entertain people without pornography subtly anti-Christian propaganda. It is to present dramatically a point of view which follows Christian values and competes with Jewish dominated industry. After all these years, only a few Christians have figured this out.

    • timothy murray
      timothy murray says:

      When you say “Christians” are you referring to Protestants or Catholics or Orthodox something else?

      As a former 30+ year protestant, I blame protestantism.

      The distinction is important because, as E.Michael Jones documents in Logis Rising, the philosophy..ontology..of the Protestants castrates them .

      The Dr. of Sodomy, who ran Twitter’s trust and safety is a Yale graduate. The prots could not defend their universities.

      Protestant America was easy pickings…the LDJ’s conquered them completely within 3 generations.

      Meanwhile, Orthodox Russia is kicking LDJ ass globally.


      • JM
        JM says:

        @timothy murray

        “Protestant” eh?

        Protestantism gave up the fight well before your 30 years association. So that makes that hardly worth mentioning in the credibility seeking context you give. In Australia in the late1930’s, the Protestant religions (Methodist, Congregationalist, Church of England…, all supported the establishment of a Jewish homeland in Northern Australia. Can you imagine the certain fruits of this had it not been blocked by the ex-Catholic/secularized Catholic leftist, John Curtin on the grounds that such schemes went against Australian tradition of all in together). They were incompetent by then. I saw all the fruits of this in the 50’s. They were the first to go soft in all spheres, in the religious and the more secular.

        E Michael (“Mick”) Jones is a bigot (Opus “Dei”?) and as such is one-eyed (notwithstanding the fact that he has done some good and interesting work). He reminds me of a 1950’s bigoted Catholic. His story about the Protestants teaming up with the Jews against Catholics who NEVER engaged in White Flight (!!!!) is one-sided. Even from my antipodean perspective and way back in the past, not least viewed from the output of Hollywood, it was obvious that Jews cultivated Irish Catholics and that the latter were only too happy to go along with it (without doubt there were outliers who refused the kind offer). The motive was to mutual: marginalize the WASP (the origins of that term would be interesting/enlightening in itself). So why compete when your major goal could be realized within the existing ownership set-up?

      • George Kocan
        George Kocan says:

        As a Catholic, I do not want to pick on Protestants. I do think that Catholic leadership has failed regarding the most powerful mode of communication every invented. I class all Christians together because they all have an interest in preserving the Gospel and the Divine person of Jesus and the basis of culture, law, art and morality.

    • Birhan Dargey
      Birhan Dargey says:

      Thomas Edison was a gentile inventor of the Motion pictures machine. The jews did anything/everything to steal his patent, including moving to Hollywood CA. Imagine How much royalties they owe to Edison and his heirs if any still alive. That’s why it is amazing the jewish ablity to violate THE LAWS and never be prosecuted in a wider gentile country. The reason JEWS dominate Hollywood is mainly bacuse jews target/divide/conquer…The jews that run Hollywood are a tight insular unpenetrable group that consists of a few families, that usually live , wordship, and attend the same educational instituiosn. when a young college graduate jew is ready to join the Hollywood industry, his father/sponsor would simply make a phone call,a letter, a family lunch reunion. Then young Isaac is instantly hire to star his real education a journey from the mailroom to the top corporate positions. These network will never be available to a gentile no matter how smart./ntelligent/brilliant/talented he is. But even within Hollywood jews are a minority with veto power over the masses of talented writers/directors/actors/etc.. all of them GENTILES..whose professional fate is dictated by jews. In my home country all media is owned by two jewish families..They always say that they work hard and suffer much as Holocaust survivors. I believed tem, later I heard the real story. In 1930s The jews in New York, Hollywood WOULD NOT license their content to even if the richest gentiles wanted to buy the companies/frequencies the USA Jews refused to approve IT., The local domestic broadcasting license had to go to a JEW..or NO deal.

      • George Kocan
        George Kocan says:

        Catholics and other Christians failed to understand the power of motion pictures and therefore failed to use them to their own advantage by creating their own production company. It has nothing to do with getting permission from Jews to do such a thing. Christians need to learn from the past, They should learn this lesson of failure as well as the lesson of how Jews did it in Hollywood. My big question now is, what technology or innovation in communications are they neglecting? I commend a Chrstian, Andre Torba for starting Gab. So, what else is there for Christians to do?

        • Birhan Dargey
          Birhan Dargey says:

          YOU are diluted..Take your own example Torba/Gab..will never compete with Youtube. Gab is being blocked/starving financing..and Content by Jewish dominated Google/Play..etc. Now jews are targetting Twitter/Musk..why? They ordered AG/Garland DOJ to prosecute Musk for alleged Epstein connections..while ignoring Dershowyts, Soros, etc that are in the plane list..why?? What happen to TCarlson?? the best/most popular highest ratings show…the jews do not tolerate GENTILE talent/brilliance/intelligent competition..they deplatformed see IT now..JEWISH POWER above/beyond any gentile LAWS.

  2. Brian Rockford
    Brian Rockford says:

    There is no harm in “Holocaust revisionism” so long as it is competent, as in the case of Carlo Mattogno, or in the exposure of ridiculous stories. Yad Vashem itself has commented on the vast proportion of “false memories”. Let the Muslims get on with it, and kill two birds with one stone.

      • Carolyn Yeager
        Carolyn Yeager says:

        @Kevin MacDonald:
        “Quinn’s point is that you don’t start trying to convert someone with holocaust revisionism no matter how factually based.”

        I’d like to engage you on this point and hope you will be willing. You say you agree with Quinn, so I ask the question, why NOT start with holocaust revisionism? Has it been proven not to work? Or is it because it’s too entrenched?. But how did it get to be so, when it’s a completely unsupportable STORY from beginning to end. IF one reads the revisionist historians & investigators the lack of real evidence becomes clear The only truth the Holocaust story contains is that the German govt. beginning in 1933 wanted the Jews out of Germany and (slowly) put policies and programs in place to help facilitate that. THAT is what to the Jews is a ‘holocaust.’ A ‘catastrophe.’ Because they (LDJs) wanted to own Germany in the same way they wanted to own Russia in 1917. I believe they now want to own Ukraine and are manipulating both Russia and Germany to help them do it.

        I, and others, have discovered that to the Jews the “truth” is subjective, not objective. See They can believe anything they create a narrative around. Therefore, Spencer’s hypothesis that confronting low-intelligence or conformist white people with a “weak claim” rather with a strong claim will be easier for them to accept does not really solve the problem of why we believe stuff.

        It’s my personal experience that we ‘awaken’ to that which we previously couldn’t consider in an almost spiritual, whole picture recognition. The German “gestalt” ( describes it well and is what we’re looking for. It’s hard (or impossible?) to explain in words, however. It’s beyond words and into the realm of “feeling.” Maybe too scary for some because once one sees it one can’t unsee it.

        So Holocaust revisionism, I would submit, is a perfectly acceptable place to start *if it comes up*, and actually the most effective CURE for what ails us. Many have said that what ails us is a spiritual problem or crisis, and I would agree that the “LDJ” agenda (a la Quinn) is to undermine us spiritually whenever that is possible. By spiritual I mean our understanding of who we are. When we lose that, we are truly lost. We can’t be both Euro-Whites and diaspora Jews.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            The “Holocaust” myth is only entrenched because the elite intelligentsia – the leadership of the nation – continues to endorse and enforce it. Any intelligent person that studies it even a little bit knows it’s not credible–including you, Dr. MacDonald. What does this tell us about ourselves? Nothing very good.

        • Anne C
          Anne C says:

          Thank you for posting the link to your article about Elie Wiesel, Carolyn.

          Even though I knew The Weasel was a liar, I had no idea just how far he had taken things. He is a case study in inverting the truth.

          That this madman (the kindest word to describe him) has been venerated as some kind of saint and awarded the Nobel Prize, tells you everything you need to know about what is wrong in our world .

          Oh Vey. Or, more appropriately, God Help Us.

    • Captainchaos
      Captainchaos says:

      Take everything the most extreme Holocaust deniers claim as gospel and you’d still have enough of what Hitler undisputedly signed off on to put him squarely in the psychopath camp. How many here want to have a psychopath as their absolute ruler, any takers?

      • @ Captain Chaos
        @ Captain Chaos says:

        Also true, as I and others have been trying unsuccessfully to point out to Carolyn Yeager and others.
        The main problem with “The Holocaust” is that is being turned into the only genocide that ever really mattered, that it was the worst example of human evil, that it was caused by Christianity, that it symbolises white racism, that it is used to justify simultaneously Israel Zionism and Woke Tyranny, that it shows what happens when people start talking about migration control and eugenics, that it is at once the New Religion and a Financial Resource for a particular group, that it protects Jews from justifiable criticism, and that it is the Pole Event of human history.
        To upset parts of this artificial construction is not to condone racial persecution, nor is it to betray the innocent victims of Nazi crimes upon whose suffering it is cynically constructed.

      • What’s up Skip
        What’s up Skip says:

        So how would you have managed Germany from the Munich agreement on?

        Don’t forget USSR was massively arming with US help. Bohemia ( now Czechia ) lies almost within artillery range of Berlin.

        Hitler always insisted on jews not being harmed ( unless they were acting as partisans obviously). He was no psychopath, but had an uncommon degree of love for his countrymen and for humanity in general.

        • Brian Rockford
          Brian Rockford says:

          Just for the record, please quote authentic examples of Hitler’s perpetual insistence that Jews should never be “harmed”.
          I could quote many clear contrary statements but expect only to be told that these are all fabrications by Jews, Communists or Allied intelligence operatives.
          Hitler is one of the most interesting personalities in history, and I would compare his views on Jews to religious convictions held by otherwise highly intelligent and likeable people.
          Anyway he is dead, and we are all still coping with the long-term effects.

          • What’s up Skip
            What’s up Skip says:

            Ludicrous, of course he would never have said jews should never be harmed, only that they should not be killed or tortured merely on account of their jewishness. Their power and influence had to be destroyed as a collective and they were to be uprooted from the German Reich and sent to Palestine, Madagascar or wherever would have them. In wartime their privations would not be less than the Germans’.

            If you have a specific threat to kill or torture jews emanating from Hitler which you feel you need to discuss………

          • charles frey
            charles frey says:

            01 ” Anyway he is dead, and we are all still coping with the long-term effects “.

            02 NO !

            03 We are all increasingly coping with the long-term effects of an ever-increasing full spectrum assault: which created/necessitated him in the first place !

      • dogismyth
        dogismyth says:

        We are being ruled by psychopaths!! They (the US psychopaths) are killing millions (an ongoing genocide) with medicine (vaccines, pharma, infection, misdiagnosis), food (poisoning, GMO), air (chemtrails) and water. For god sakes….just look at what was done down in Palestine Ohio.

        And your focus is on the holohoax during WW2? There is no definitive verifiable proof whatsoever that six million people were killed in Germany camps.

        You should focus on the truths of today, and maybe save yourself, your family and friends and country.

        • charles frey
          charles frey says:

          01 It can be safely assumed, that a whole lot of all-powerful, stakeholding people had to agree to reduce the Auschwitz II granite tablets of their ” gassed ” from 4 to 1.1 millions. [ I visited twice and witnessed the official reduction, and later spoke personally by phone, with their Museum curator Piper ].

          02 Which leaves one wondering about even lower numbers reasoned by some negotiators; based on their documentation, to compromise on a consensus.

          03 Some time ago, I linked a video here, as part of my comment, of the ADL’s chubby Foxman, wife and retinue of six, lecturing a Ukrainian Minister and his staff, in a large hall within their Government compound in Kiev.

          04 Abe, in a studied, threatening tonality, made it quite clear to the Ukrainian Minister: ” Your comparison of your Holodomor with our Holocaust won’t do either of us much good “.

          05 Since Abe was at the lever of Washington power and policy to subsidize the Ukraine, what he was really communicating, in my opinion, was this: ” You’re confined here, while I return to Washington, HQ of the IMF and World Bank via Geneva, Basel and its all-powerful Bank of International Settlements, and, may I remind you, our first Zionist Congress in 1897; and the City of London, with its not exactly English-dominated Bank of England. It is of little use if the public is reminded of the fact, that the Holodomor cost you at least twice as many beastial deaths as our Holocaust ! “.

          06 Interviewed in the hallway, after said lecture/conference, Mrs. Foxman admitted in response to a question: ” Yes, we often employ the Guilt question “, before being whisked off by their handler.

          07 Her verbatim quote, repeated by a female Jewish personage on Democracy Now.

          08 Let’s remember, that their Babi Yar massacre of allegedly 34,000 Jews, in 1941, followed the Kaganoviches’ at least 9 million Holodomor by a mere 8 years.

          09 From there we jump directly to critically placed, Neocon super activist Victoria Noodlemaker and possible mushroom clouds. Wife of Robert Kagan, himself son of Donald Kagan, and, given the Russian patronymic, just another Kaganovich.

          10 Predictably, I can no longer find said video anywhere. But it’s buried in the TOO’s archives: if doubted.

      • Hanna Haverbeck
        Hanna Haverbeck says:

        “How many here want to have a psychopath as their absolute ruler, any takers?” And instead of simply insinuating, prove indisputably where these “signed off” occurred.

        How shameful it is to falsely defame the Great One, Adolf Hitler. If such is the level of disgenic stupidity of a person whom you are reasoning with on world history truths, then move on to others instead of wasting your time and effort there.

        The White Aryan world that is worth saving must be one that is worth saving. Whoever comes across the teachings of Adolf Hitler and what the National Socialist ideals stood for but still remains hostile to it should be hasten to perish as nature ordains.

        There is no other White Aryan future than a fully racialist political Weltanschauung represented by National Socialism of The German Third Reich. Those ‘English elites’ and others that partnered international jewry in barbarically destroying the German volk have no place in an Aryan world. White or not.

        @Bryan Rockfords Adolf Hitler was sadly shocked by the Kristallnacht incident and regretted the spontaneous show of German volk anger against jewish businesses triggered by the murder of a high ranking German diplomat by a jew. Nay, he wasn’t at all tough enough in dealing with these criminal terrorist parasites.

        • Captainchaos
          Captainchaos says:

          Hitler signed the order to have mentally ill and physically handicapped people murdered. QED.

          • charles frey
            charles frey says:

            01 Yes, he subscribed to US eugenics, already in fashion when he was still languishing in Landsberg Prison.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            As Brian Rockford requested above, ‘please quote authentic examples’ of mentally ill and physically handicapped people who were murdered.

            Oh, you can’t?

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            The wording in the order signed by Hitler was “incurable” institutionalized patients. I didn’t see the words “mentally ill and physically handicapped” anywhere. These people were not living on their own or even with their families, who did not feel they had the resources to care for them 24/7. Why should the state, which has limited resources too, be burdened with them? After all, the state is the people, you and I. Yes, it’s a moral question that people like you don’t face head on; you only want to point fingers.


        • James Clayton
          James Clayton says:

          Today’s MSM on even Salvadorians being willing to have a get-tough policy amending their in-fact one-way contract with government that has enabled such weaponizing. None here dare call governments’ titular heads traitors from homeowners associations to the White house.

      • Emicho
        Emicho says:

        “How many here want to have a psychopath as their absolute ruler, any takers?”

        Sorry, am I missing something? Is there anyone her who DOESN’T have psychopaths as their absolute rulers?

  3. Karol
    Karol says:

    I am guessing that American Jews with money have a lot of it in Swiss, Israeli, and other safe banks, and have more than one passport.

    They know that America is coming to an end and want it to.

    It’s their revenge against White Christians.

  4. Captainchaos
    Captainchaos says:

    This is why I push Red State secession instead of racial rebellion: the stupid cattle won’t mobilize for the latter but very well might for the former.

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      Cc: Who is going to be living in your “Red State” territory? Whoever wants to? You’ve never spoken of any racial or other restrictions. Who’s going to run the place for the “stupid cattle” once it secedes from the US? This is a pipe dream.

      • Captainchaos
        Captainchaos says:

        Getting power is the hard part, using it is easy, just ask Hitler. The primary purpose of Red State secession is to tear as much people, territory and resources away from ZOG’s power as can be managed. It is not a final destination, it is a starting point. What could be accomplished with ZOG’s security forces taken off the board? Could paramilitary political gangsters like those in Northern Ireland during The Troubles make a decisive difference in matters of policy formation? Use your imagination. We have enough bean counters to keep the machine running, we just need stern men to tell those bean counters what to do.

      • Captainchaos
        Captainchaos says:

        Marjorie Taylor Greene says Democrats should be barred from voting in Red States. Ron DeSantis recently said all illegal migrants who entered the US during the Biden administration should be deported. Keep in mind, these are ZOG’s controlled opposition mouth pieces delivering these talking points. Take those as a policy baseline right out the gate after Red State secession. Paramilitary political gangsters can apply leverage to see even more radical policies implemented.

  5. Be pro-White not anti-White!
    Be pro-White not anti-White! says:

    Yes, the distinction between weak pro-White claims and strong pro-White claims, the latter being counter narratives against anti-White propaganda that’s had much longer to take deep root in White minds, is good to be aware of.

    The difference between the two types of claims, if one thinks about it, is the reason Tucker Carlson will speak vigorously against the gender blurring that anti-Whites are forcing, but will actually join with anti-Whites in plastering their mighty word-weapon “nazi” on Whites who want to organize.
    “Hey, Tucker Carlson! Will you call God a ‘Nazi’ for programming humans to love their race?”

    Such behavior by Tucker is, if we’re generous toward him, illustrative of a weak sense of the effect of particular words that’s pretty common on the right.

    The idea of making weak claims that begin with “even if” seems worth trying. Strong claims may make some headway among mass audiences when delivered by figures with charisma like Nick Fuentes.

  6. Kevin MacDonald
    Kevin MacDonald says:

    I think this is an important article and certainly pertains to what we are trying to do. Our strong arguments are too much for most people right now. From my comments on Tucker:

    Tucker’s approach to Jewish issues is not what people on this site would like,  but I think he has woken up a lot of people and will continue to do so if and when he reemerges. That’s why he has a huge audience. And it’s entirely plausible that he understands Jewish involvement but believes (reasonably) that it cannot be a good strategy to win political power any time soon. That’s for writers at TOO and like-minded venues playing the long game—putting ideas out there so that intelligent observers who are now in the mainstream understand what is going on, even if they don’t say anything publicly.

    • Be pro-White not anti-White!
      Be pro-White not anti-White! says:

      What a great summary of Tucker’s work your linked article is! Very helpful to me, because I’ve mostly just watched clips of him, and so I haven’t had much material to think about when I would try to gauge if his good works have outweighed the negative effect of his opposition to Whites organizing as Whites to resist anti-Whiteism.

      Seeing the scope of his programs in your article, I have to think his effect has been mostly positive, but I don’t have confidence in that conclusion because I don’t have a “feel” for the extent of his negative effect. I’m in the same condition re anti-CRT hero Chris Rufo, who seems even more opposed to White “identity politics” than Tucker, saying “White identitarianism is pathetic and disgusting.”

      “Chris Rufo hates Critical Race Theory but loves White Genocide!”

      But Tucker probably wouldn’t have been allowed to do the good programming he’s done if he hadn’t declared openly that it was not his intent to arouse Whites to collective action as Whites!

      So assuming Tucker pretty much continues in his same groove, having a movement of Whites organized to defend Whites awaits someone equally attractive who will make forming a movement his main project. Nick Fuentes is the only one I see at the moment who appears to be a possible in that department.

    • George Kocan
      George Kocan says:

      Tucker’s critics have called him “anti-semitic” among other things. What do they know that we don’t?

    • timothy murray
      timothy murray says:

      Sundance at CTH fits the bill too.

      Also, thanks for your work; ciurage is contagious

    • Emicho
      Emicho says:

      I had a recurring thought in my head I’m going to bore you guys with now, but couldn’t Tucker club together with enough ‘respectable’ Con Inc types who know the score but keep quite, say if two dozen+ made a major surprise announcement at the Press Club or whatever(everyone would think they were forming a party).
      If they just stated, simply, the JQ must be on the table, and it’s ALL our conviction that this is the root of basically ALL our troubles?
      Ok, 24, 34, 50 mainstream conservatives would all be sacked from their employers, but they’d become a legendary group of martyrs, all would find some future work, and it would be a wonderfully patriotic thing to do for their nation. Perhaps the only thing that would save the USA as a future entity.
      The Founding Fathers were willing to give their lives remember.
      Such a thing, which would electrify the nation and cause splits & schisms even on the left, will it never happen because these types are at bottom mercenary individualists?

  7. Anne C
    Anne C says:

    Brilliant piece, Mr. Quinn.

    With respect to approaching questions like the official narrative of WWII: as much as I admire the admirers of Adolf Hitler for their praise of the man, I often wonder how Hitler would view their oftentimes strident approach.

    Hitler was no fool, and I suspect he would shake his head at the utter lack of strategy employed by some of his modern day supporters. Because he had a deep love for his people, I think he would have understood the idea you are proposing: i.e. the need to earn popular support by addressing the people’s real needs and concerns, and meeting them where they are at.

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      We know what Hitler would do and say by what he did and said. There is an extensive record, so no one needs to speculate and wonder about it. Refer to his last words and his Final Will and Testament if you’re in doubt.

      • Anne C
        Anne C says:

        Glad you have weighed in here, Carolyn, since I consider you the resident expert on Hitler in these parts! (You certainly know more about him than I do.)

        I found some info on Hitler’s last will and testament here:

        Do you consider this a good translation of his intentions?

        It seems to carry the mark of his character – a warrior and leader with deeply held convictions until the end. The last line pulls no punches:
        “Above all I charge the leaders of the nation and those under them to scrupulous observance of the laws of race and to merciless opposition to the universal poisoner of all peoples, international Jewry.”

        I get all this. My question has become… how do we best go about achieving this? I know your work is an essential element in achieving the goal. But if you have thoughts on incorporating what Mr. Quinn is suggesting in his article as a larger part of the strategy, I’d be very interested in hearing them.

        • Brian Rockford
          Brian Rockford says:

          So no change there, then, from (say) his speeches in Bavaria two decades earlier, cited by Eberhard Jaeckel (ed) “Hitler: Saemtliche Aufzeichnungen 1905-1924” (Stuttgart 1980).
          Zyklon-B facts or fantasies are another matter.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            The same ending paragraph from which you plucked the word “merciless” also contained this admonition:

            ” Let them [the new leaders of the nation] BE HARD, BUT NEVER UNJUST, above all let them NEVER ALLOW FEAR to influence their actions, and set the HONOUR of the nation above everything in the world.”

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          Dear Anne,
          Yes, I consider it an adequate translation of his intentions. It’s the only one I’m familiar with. You ask, How do we best go about achieving [his intentions]. I wrote my thoughts on Spencer Quinn’s article but my comment was not published. My opinion of Quinn is low. I said, basically, that his suggestions are not new; they have all been tried over the years by different people, without success. I don’t believe it would be successful now.

          I can only follow what Hitler himself said, not because I’m a ‘cultist’ or don’t understand strategy but bc Hitler’s words and the feeling(s) inherent in them are always persuasive to me, and I mean deeply so. For example: “Centuries will pass away, but out of the ruins of our towns and monuments the hatred against those finally responsible whom we have to thank for everything, international Jewry and its helpers, will grow.” That is unequivocal. Also this: “After six years of war, which in spite of all setbacks will go down one day in history as the most glorious and valiant demonstration of a nation’s life purpose” — I understand what he meant by “a nation’s life purpose.” Life is fleeting and is wasted by chasing after luxuries and ease. All Americans are now infected with that, and that’s why so many see Hitler as doing more harm than good. It’s OUR values that are screwed up, not his.

          He ended with his thanks and “my wish that you should … on no account give up the struggle but rather continue it against the enemies of the Fatherland” and ultimately “the realization of a true community of nations.” We know that the “community of nations” (UN) created by FDR and International Jewry was a set-up, and is a hoax. It seems to me that Spencer Quinn is catering to that, which smells too much of capitulation.

          • Spencer J. Quinn
            Spencer J. Quinn says:

            Hi Carolyn

            And my opinion of you is not low. From what I have read of you here and on your site, I sense a person who is tenacious, indomitable, and well-informed.

            I promise you I am not capitulating. I am contributing to the most confounding issue of our day the best way I can. My ideas may be right or wrong, but they come from an honest place, and I do hope other dissidents take them seriously to at least try them or counter them with something better. Thanks.

          • Anne C
            Anne C says:

            Carolyn, I love the way you can pull up this wisdom from Hitler’s oeuvre so easily. I was aware of Hitler’s understanding towards the end of his time that the meaning of his work would ultimately not be appreciated until generations had passed, but it’s great to have your direct quotations of his actual words.

            It gives me a lot of hope – that his work was not in vain, despite the appearance that he “lost” WWII. Only recently it has begun to dawn on me… how much worse things could have been if Hitler hadn’t gotten in their way, even if only temporarily.

            I realize that a lot has gone wrong since the end of the Third Reich, in Germany and the West in general, but sometimes I think the harder they try to bury his legacy, the more people get interested in finding out what he was really about. (It’s a bit like the regeneration of an ecosystem after what looked like a permanent catastrophe – all those little sprouts springing up!)

            You’ll have to excuse the gardening analogy (I’m up to my elbows in dirt these days!!). All’s to say, Hitler certainly stands in very stark contrast to our modern day politicians and “leaders,” and the more ridiculous things get, the more obvious that becomes.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            “… sometimes I think the harder they try to bury [Hitler’s] legacy, the more people get interested in finding out what he was really about.”

            Yes, you have to be right. It’s like the Trump phenomenon: whenever some “bad conduct” or comment got the press piling on him, his poll numbers went up! Publicity, plus a general fascination for ‘badness’. So maybe I should not try to change any of that. He could become boring like the rest of them. LOL

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          One of the objections I now recall from my prior “lost” comment is that people who are not already antisemities don’t make a connection between the behavior of Jews in pre-WWII Soviet Russia (or Germany for that matter) and Jews of today. They don’t or won’t see them as the same group or having the same mind set. So pointing out all the murder and mayhem of that time and place doesn’t make the desired impression.

          • Spencer J. Quinn
            Spencer J. Quinn says:

            “people who are not already antisemities don’t make a connection between the behavior of Jews in pre-WWII Soviet Russia (or Germany for that matter) and Jews of today.”

            But they make a connection between whites of the past and whites today. So why not with Jews?

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            We’re talking about White people. White people are sensitized to Whites being guilty, but not to Jews being guilty. We need to work on the guilt problem more than the race problem. Guilt is the real killer. (Someone like Brian Rockford tries to use it against us in every comment he writes.)

          • Brian Rockford
            Brian Rockford says:

            There are similarities in the mindset of many Jews today with those of the Jews of 1917, but there are also differences, and the situation in 1947 was different; as is the situation in 2023.
            There are two difficulties here: (1) the information available, and (2) its credibility. There is really no point, in making the effort to dig out, for example, details of compulsory euthanasia, which Hitler first supported and then checked after ecclesiastical protest, but which fitted in with his general “biological” world-view, if they are just disbelieved, or dismissed as Jewish propaganda.
            A noticeably persistent general characteristic of Jews is self-righteousness, though one can find more than a few examples of self-criticism (usually dismissed as Selbsthass); the “longest hatred” is the fault of everyone else (David Nirenberg is a good recent example). This is a form of political autism, and it may even have some genetic basis like their capacity for numerical calculation. But we should not emulate it: we need to have some empathy with their motivations, especially if effective defensive action is required.

      • Carolyn Yeager
        Carolyn Yeager says:

        Hi Spencer,
        I’m going to reply here to your comment directed to me above re our difference of opinion. The following is what I see as a poor showing:

        Even if the Nazis were evil, the Jewish-led Soviets were more evil.
        Even if the Nazis invaded Poland in order to conquer Europe, so did the Jewish-led Soviets.
        Even if the Nazis murdered six million Jews, the Jewish-led Soviets had already murdered tens of millions of whites prior to the Second World War.

        Your “even-if” statements are outright false when it comes to the “Nazis”, not just “not as bad as what the Soviets did.” The “Nazis” did NOT invade Poland in order to conquer Europe, but only to conquer Poland OR to force Poland to the bargaining table (and to stop Poland from continuing what it was doing to its ethnic German population.) If your opponent SAYS the “Nazis” wanted to conquer Europe and started with Poland, it’s incumbent on you to correct his error before you proceed further.

        The “Nazis” did not murder 6 million Jews or anything close, neither did anyone else at any time since the beginning of time! By using such language, even in an “even-if” format, you’re going along to some extent with the Jewish narrative. NEVER go along with the Jewish narrative, no matter under what circumstances.

        Never use the term “Nazi” either, and you’ve used nothing else throughout the article. I don’t call that being fair. You have put yourself at a disadvantage by accepting the terms “Nazi” and “Holocaust” when you didn’t have to. If this issue is confounding, as you rightly say, Western White men have certainly played a role in keeping it so.

        • Spencer J. Quinn
          Spencer J. Quinn says:

          Hi Carolyn

          We are talking past each other. You are arguing before God. I am arguing before men. You are concered with honor. I am concerned with tactics.

          You wish to tell people who are brainwashed by the enemy that they are 100% wrong — and then you expect them not to hate you or run away from you screaming. *Nobody* likes to be told that they’re that wrong. This is because most people inherit notions of right and wrong from whatever tribe they identify with. And these notions entail not so much what is true or not true or what is morally right or wrong, but what is deemed permissible and not permissible by the tribe elites.

          When you engage the brainwashed with your brazen claims (true as they may be) you threaten them, not only because you impugn their adopted tribe, but also because you are tempting them to take a deep dive into the impermissible. And that scares the shit out of them.

          I, on the other hand, advocate *starting* by saying that the brainwashed are only 51% percent wrong. And the best way to do this is to use the old Socratic gambit of building up your opponent’s argument as strong as you can, and then besting it. This has the benefit of not (directly) impugning what the enemy tribe deems permissible, and greatly reducing the square footage of impermissible real estate we are asking the brainwashed to place their big toes upon.

          We’re gonna get more takers that way.

          Tactics, tactics, tactics.

          Yes, I know Hitler was not bent on conquering Europe, and I know that the Jewish Holocaust was wildly exaggerated. But using the ‘even if’ argument in no way capitulates to the enemy or admits that these two facts are not facts. ‘Even if’ is shorthand for ‘Even if, for the sake of argument, I accept that…’ It’s engaging in the hypothetical to demonstrate that our position is stronger than theirs. Once they realize this, at the very least their fealty to the enemy tribe will be loosened. The braver ones will try to continue the argument, and *that’s* when you drop truth bombs on them — when they come asking for it, and not a moment before.

          But at that point, they will be coming to us, not the other way around. This is how we win.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            Thanks for your extensive answer, Spencer. I’m not persuaded however. It seems heavy on theory and short on any reported results. It’s a hope and a prayer.I would say straight holocaust revisionism has proved quite successful, which is why LDJs hate it so much and made it a priority to get it LEGALLY banned everywhere they can. They are unable to refute it. The main element we’re missing is well-known, Jew-critical personalities like KMac & Greg Johnson endorsing holocaust denialists, or holocaust denial itself. It is fear of Jewish power, but also, I fear, a desire to keep Jews in society, but subdued somehow. The “Holocaust” is the only area that Js consider completely off-limits, and even garden-variety Js observe that rule. That tells us it’s the key to their power and should therefore be our target.

          • Liosnagcat
            Liosnagcat says:

            Spencer, I understand your ‘weak claim’ approach, and you did an estimable job of presenting and defending it. But the examples you gave make it seem like nothing more than repackaged what-aboutism, which comes across as evasive and changing the subject, and is easily refuted by one’s opponent citing the old axiom, “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” In the meantime, the use of the conditional “even if” notwithstanding, discursive ground is perceived as having been ceded. I’ve tried the approach before myself, but I felt a bit grubby in the process, so I simply gave it up. Rather than water down the straight truth to get my foot in the door, I start with less controversial topics to acclimate my audience to Jewish behavior. That’s where the knowledge gleaned from KMac’s books has proven so useful. In time, they’re ready for holocaust truth.

            Speaking of which, in your comment above to Carolyn, you wrote “. . . I know that the Jewish Holocaust was wildly exaggerated.” No, the holocaust was not exaggerated; it was completely invented by twisting events into something they were not.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            I don’t want to let too much time go by before commenting on Liosnagcat’s reply to Spencer Quinn. IMO, it’s the best of the thread and deserves a gold border. I especially liked “easily refuted by one’s opponent citing the old axiom, “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” That is so right on and so possible.

            I also experienced the same reaction to the “even if” examples used, that they ceded too much ground right in the beginning. How do you then get that back? I brought that up to Spencer and wasn’t persuaded by his answer. What I DON’T want is any watering down of the “straight truth.”

            I’d like to see you reply to Lios, Spencer. Wouldn’t what he said come under the heading of “tactics”?

        • Spencer J. Quinn
          Spencer J. Quinn says:

          Hi Carolyn, since you didn’t respond (yet) to my response about tactics and instead started talking white guilt (which I agree with) does this mean that I should have a scintilla of hope that you might concede that the weak claim paradox might just have an infinitesimal amount of validity?

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            I guess I didn’t pick up on that bc i don’t *think* that I respond much to tactics myself, more to sentiment. I could be wrong, of course, but tactics seldom enter my mind. Truth does. Rather than battling against Jews, I must think of myself more like a missionary bringing the “true gospel” to those still in darkness. Since I am persuaded by what seems to me to be the truth, I suppose I ‘assume’ others are also. I’m just now realizing many think in terms of “what’s in my best interest?” Hmm.

            So now, back to your question. All I can say is, Show some evidence. Is it effective?

            I like to discuss the big questions — like the question of guilt. I just want to say that imo all white vs colored guilt should be thrown to the curb as useless … and I’ve entertained guilt all my life. Now I see it has no value at all. That’s one way I’m in agreement with the adherents of Paganism — there’s too much guilt and seeking for perfection or virtuousness in Christianity. Many of those who conspired against Hitler and helped destroy Germany were believers in that kind of Christian virtuousness. Honesty is the greatest virtue in my book. How about “Be true to thine self and thou canst not be false to any man.” Ancient Greece. That’s something one can live by.

          • Brian Rockford
            Brian Rockford says:

            Regarding “guilt” – this is indeed a suicidal feature of the western mindset, particularly in regard to white-black relations. I think it is largely a decadent remnant of Christianity whose chief adherents have lost their supernatural beliefs but retain them as a sanctimonious veneer for their woke secularism.
            I have opposed this “guilt” weakness publicly and explicitly, I think even here on TOO blogs. For Carolyn Yeager to say I use it in “every” contribution she dislikes is rubbish, and tells us more about her own psychology. My historical points about Hitler (d. 1945) may be right or wrong, but I do not think a 100% revival of his personal ideology is quite what white people need now .

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            @BR: In response to your charge against me, “For Carolyn Yeager to say I use [guilt] in “every” contribution she dislikes is rubbish, and tells us more about her own psychology.”

            As one example, in your comment dated May 13 @ 6:17 p.m. you wrote:

            … residual issues remain, ranging from the role of the AktionT-4 personnel in certain camps to **Himmler’s instruction to murder the children of Jewish resisters in occupied Russia.**

            This I consider throwing guilt on anyone who would defend Himmler without your really addressing the issue — therefore in a sneaky, dishonest way. And yes, you do it quite often.

  8. DrExCathedra
    DrExCathedra says:

    Ever since the end of WW2 at least, 75+ years, Whites have been bombarded with a 360 degree surround-sound campaign that makes “racism” and “antiSemitism” the most reprehensible and immoral attitudes conceivable. These themes are larded into every aspect of culture, both overtly and subtly.

    Consequently, for the vast majority of Whites not being “racist” or “antiSemitic” is the very foundation of their sense of moral self-respect as Nice White people.

    Prying them out of that suicidal world-view is and will be a very difficult task.

    • Lord Shang
      Lord Shang says:

      Yes and no. You are obviously correct that there has been a sea-change in what might be called “Western paramount morality” [WPM]. Once upon a time, WPM emphasized fidelity to Christ – and denying Christ’s claims was seen as the greatest moral failing. Today, the indoctrinationists have somehow convinced a majority of our race that being a “white supremacist” (the content of which keeps changing, and enlarging) is the greatest failing. What a victory that has been for the enemies of the West!

      Yet this change in WPM is inherently weak insofar as it’s rooted in easily exposed falsehoods. Whites are in empirical fact the least racist race – and this can be demonstrated in many ways (not least being – paradoxically – our unique and excessive concern about our own group’s racism!). Likewise, the origins of “racial disparities” can be shown to reside in morally neutral, unequal modal racial endowments, and statistically predictable group behaviors – and many mainstream, formally “colorblind conservatives” (eg, Heather MacDonald on policing and crime/race issues) are already doing the hard work dredging up the relevant facts.

      And is it being “racist” to support white preservation? According to mainstream white notions of morality, it is surely racist to oppose white preservation!

      My point is that the entire antiwhite agenda rests on what most whites would concede is a very intellectually shaky foundation – but only if someone is able to explain this to them, to carry them step by step towards clearer thinking. And that’s what I tend to think is our real problem – not the strength of our moral position vs the weakness of our enemies’ (again, in terms of how most [but by no means all] whites understand morality), but the great difficulties we have in reaching our people, especially subliminally. The Right has the true arguments, but the Left has both the cheap slogans and the means to propagate them incessantly.

      The only way I can see to circumvent this dilemma is through some sort of Great Man, someone who can get masses of people to hear him. The problem there is that The System, our current soft-totalitarianism, is completely stacked against such a person. Because I therefore think that a Great White Savior is unlikely, I have (mostly at counter-currents) stressed the need for “white nationalist nationalism” [WNN] as the last hope to prevent white extinction. WNN argues that our main (but obviously not only) white preservationist focus should be on WN territorial ingathering within one or a few existent jurisdictions (in America, this means one or more contiguous states) wherein we can become the local electoral majority. Once that threshold has been crossed, we can begin tirelessly pushing for eventual secession and new sovereignty – the Ethnostate.

      IOWs, I agree with what I take to be your implicit position, that we will never be able to convert most whites to our cause, though I think we can and will keep reaching ever more, simply because we have the truth. But it is getting to be doubtful if we will ever convert a majority of an existent sovereign nation (US, Germany, Italy, etc) to ethnostatism. Yet if we can territorially/jurisdictionally ingather most prowhites, together I believe we number in the tens of millions globally, and could potentially reach a hundred million or more [out of what? 500-600 million “true whites” on the planet?] as conditions for our people continuously worsen. One hundred million prowhites, ranging from mere conservatives uncomfortable with increasingly strident leftist traitors and aggressive nonwhites, all the way out to exterminationist Nazis, ingathered into a sovereign nation, would rapidly become a major global power, thereby securing our racial existence.

      To me, the real issue is not countering media lies so as to convert racial boneheads (many of whom I have long argued are evolutionarily defective), but building up among already prowhites the intense racial consciousness necessary for the making of major sacrifices purely for long term racial survival; in this case, for the relocation to the territory of the eventual Ethnostate. I have some ideas on this, but it won’t be easy. Ultimately, only a kind of religious commitment to WP will be sufficient motivation to see ourselves as a kind of Noah’s Ark, making sacrifices now to preserve our race unto distant future times. And this is why I strongly oppose WN attacks on Christianity, despite my own philosophical agnosticism. I believe that only a new Great Awakening within the parameters of a racially reformed Christianity – one in which WP takes on the character of a sacred obligation (at least for whites, though as I conceive of this, for nonwhites, too) – will prove sufficient to engender the mass individual hardships required to save our race.

  9. Robert Keith
    Robert Keith says:

    I think this is a giant step forward. It is the kind of thinking the jews have indulged in for decades, only going in the other direction. They have spent billions on getting us in the hole we’re in. Hopefully, if won’t take billions to get us out, nor will if take decades.I express my appreciation to Spencer for unlocking this logjam, which I personally am familiar with.

  10. Crush Limbraw
    Crush Limbraw says:

    Blaming Jews is like blaming termites for being termites……and then go back and sit on your ass….and rinse and repeat the next time. Useless !
    Jews are just the servants of Satan, just like Churchians whose religion is self-absorbed piety. There’s enough blame here, so we can spread it around liberally. For instance, most of this grew under our watch if you’re anywhere my age – we believed the bullshit and propaganda and even when we might have had some doubts, STFU was pretty much our modus operandi.
    So now what?
    Studying history – both secular and biblical – each wave of cultural and societal apostasy runs its course, disintegrates and then rebuilds from a remnant which is always there…..even now. That is very clear from biblical history.
    I could go on and on …but here is a starting point for those big picture analysts – – and if you follow the links enclosed on this subject, you should have a fair grasp of what I’ve been learning for 15-20 years. We’re simply living what has historically happened before time and time again….why? Because Christ’s Church has been deceived and redirected from its mission…..which is NOT a secret in the Bible……but you hardly hear it from DaPulpit or in DaPews.
    So DaSeculars blame Jews while DaChurchians worship them…..both are DaBlind leading DaBlind!
    And just like any other task….keep repeating until we get it right!
    Carry on!

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      “Studying history – both secular and biblical” …
      “That is very clear from biblical history.”

      There is no such reality as ‘biblical history.’ The bible is myth, story-telling — quite intriguing, even carrying major truths, but not what we call documented history. If we were all more careful with our words and our claims, instead of just throwing stuff out there to support our shaky intellectual structures, we might make more headway.

      What you call Christ’s Church is not the center and purpose of history unless one believes it is. We KNOW very little but BELIEVE a lot of different things. Subjective ‘truth’ is stronger than objective ‘truth’, and that’s basically what you’re saying.

      • Brian Rockford
        Brian Rockford says:

        @ Carolyn Yeager
        We may see eye to eye on something at last, though that may not please you.

  11. Marge Smith
    Marge Smith says:

    Hitler was right…..and he was not psychotic.
    The German people knew what had happened in Russia…..they knew the jews had slaughtered millions of innocent people…..and they also knew that they were NEXT.
    Essentially, Americans are in the same position today, facing a genocide that has been engineered by organized jewry.

  12. Forever Guilty
    Forever Guilty says:

    Bedtime AI stories 🙂

    Little Jacob was a 10-year-old boy who lived in a small village in Germany during the Second World War. His family was Jewish, and they were being persecuted by the Nazis. Jacob’s parents always told him to be brave and to never lose hope, even in the darkest times.

    One day, the Nazis came to their village and rounded up all the Jewish families. They were taken to a concentration camp where they were treated very badly. Jacob and his family were separated, and he never saw his parents again.

    Jacob was sent to a special section of the camp where they experimented on children. They wanted to test a new Masturbation Machine that they had developed, and Jacob was selected to be the first one to try it. He was terrified, but he knew that he had to be brave for his family.

    The Nazis placed Jacob in the Machine and turned it on. He felt a Strange feeling go through his body as the Machine started to work. But instead of screaming , Jacob closed his eyes and thought of his parents. He thought of how much they loved him and how proud they would be of him for being so brave.

    As the machine continued to masturbate him, Jacob fought with all his might. He tried to resist , but it was just too much for him. In the end, Jacob passed away.

    His sacrifice did not go unnoticed by the other children in the camp. They saw how brave he was, and it gave them hope that they too could be brave in the face of such terrible adversity. Jacob’s courage inspired them to keep fighting and never give up.

    The war eventually came to an end, and the concentration camps were liberated. Jacob’s story was told as an example of the bravery and resilience of the Jewish people. He became a symbol of hope for future generations, and his memory lived on long after he had gone.

    Today, we remember Jacob as an inspiration for all of us to be brave and to never give up hope, no matter how dark the times may seem.

    • Bernard Simpson
      Bernard Simpson says:

      The story of Jacob and the masturbation machine has a happy ending!
      Jacob enjoyed using the machine and he encouraged all of the men in the camp to partake,
      and everyone had a most enjoyable experience.
      Then when the war was over, savvy Jacob built a huge factory to make masturbation machines for both men and women, and today he is super rich for his efforts and he funds many liberal causes.
      There is no end to jewish brilliance and the ability to innovate even under the harshest of circumstances.

  13. Montmorency
    Montmorency says:

    I wish the myth of Jew-Bolshevik Soviet Union would stop being used. It’s much more nuanced than that; in fact the Soviet Union was much more Russian than anything else. It was also Jew-aware from the beginning.
    Jewish power was crushed in Russia 3 times in the last hundred years: after 1917 (in particular 1918-1923, the so-called civil war), after the Yeltsin nineties and right now.
    Jewry is being fought as we speak with Slavic weapons and blood. Not by the Tuckers of the West in their million dollar mansions.

  14. Bobby
    Bobby says:

    Thank you Spencer for this great essay on what is an important and fascinating subject. It is also my favorite subject in regards our cause.

    I am starting to research how the National Socialists turned the tide in their favor, how the Jewish problem in Germany at the time came to be front and center. What was the tipping for them?

    You brought up time. We have been indoctrinated for over eighty years in anti-white, anti European negativity and lies. Maybe one reason that the tide was turned in Germany against Jewish supremacy on the massive scale that is was, was that there was such little time that Jewish supremacy had the chance to seep into the vernacular the lies that are entrenched today in the U.S., in our minds, since we’re born due of course, to the Jewish controlled education system here which stand at all levels of our education system.

    I do agree with you very much Spencer on the ‘weak’ approach, which, I’ve found, turns out to be a very strong approach. I used to be one of those people who, when around normies, would say things such as; ‘oh, come on, the holocaust is bullshit! You really believe that crap?’ Or, ‘come on, the Jews control everything, it’s so obvious, can’t you see that?’ And I can tell you now, from experience, that the weak approach, passive aggressive we can also call it, is much, much more effective. I now say things like; ‘you know, I’m very concerned with this current Biden administration, did you know it’s over 70% Jewish?’ And then, ‘did you know that the Russian revolution in 1917 was not a revolution? Nope. It was a country taken over by Jewish revolutionaries. By the time Stalin died in 1954, over 52 million Russian Christians had been slaughtered. Many who worked under Stalin and carried out these mass murders were Jews such as Lazar Kaganovich, Matvei Berman, Genrich Yagoda….’ And I always am very gentle when talking about this and giving these facts. ‘Even Jewish writers have written about these atrocities that were carried out by their own people.’ Then I tell them about Sever Plocker, Richard Pipes, etc. ‘I‘ll email you some information’. Then I do. I have opened many minds this way. I have found that a gentle, caring voice loaded with facts goes a long way and greatly helps in getting someone’s attention. ‘You know, Mao, the Jewish Russian Bolsheviks, Pol-Pot, Genghis Khan, the Armenian genocide, the Holomodor, all much worse than what Hitler did. ‘So, how did he become the epitome of evil? You ever wonder about that?’

    The current Bud Light fiasco is very interesting. What’s happening now is that the virus of Jewish supremacy that seeps into our language, has backfired against itself in the case of Bud Light. They’re finding out that people, especially young men who were the main customer base of Bud Light, will not order it any longer since they will be mocked by their friends! “Goin’ over to the other side huh?” “I didn’t know Joe, well congratulations for having the courage to come out of the closet!” Bud Light was Anheuser Buschs’ number one selling product. They have lost so much revenue that their stock rating has been down graded by all the big banks. Experts are reporting that the damage seems, irreversible. I can’t remember her name at the moment, but the marketing executive who came up with the trans marketing campaign that caused Anheusers disaster is a Jewish women.

    The Pepe crypto coin, became a target of Coinbase, the largest crypto exchange in the world. They pointed out that it was once a symbol of the alt-right and the meme was a “symbol of hate.” Huge numbers of people on social media protested and called for everyone to delete their Coinbase accounts which many started to do. What happened? Seeing another Bud Light scenario, Coinbase apologized. One major crypto influencer also stated that he had information that the ADL had pressured Coinbase into issuing the negative statements about the Pepe meme.

    So there’s a lot of hope. That’s why I always feel it is so important, although things do seem extremely daunting for all of us at times, it is so very important to keep spreading our message in a gentle, fact based way to as many as we can.

    • Ted
      Ted says:

      You don’t think they will stick Grump on the can next and get all the money back and then some ? I told my old man and he’s like…no…I am not being manipulated here 🤣

    • Mr. White Christian.
      Mr. White Christian. says:

      Why are conservatives boycotting ONLY Bud Light and not ALL Anheuser Busch products?

      You see how stupid mainstream conservatives are?

      I see new ads for Busch beer on TV. It should be boycotted too.

      Here are Anhueser Busch products.

      They’re not even an American company!!

      The GOP is bunch of cowards.

    • Spencer J. Quinn
      Spencer J. Quinn says:

      Thank you for the kind words, Bobby. I’m glad the article struck such a chord with you.

    • Brian Rockford
      Brian Rockford says:

      There is no need to accept grossly exaggerated “Rudolf Rummel”-stylr statistics for the victims of either Bolshevism or National Socialism.
      The 20th-century Jewish connection with revolution in Russia, Hungary, Germany and elsewhere is (or should be) beyond dispute, but its motivations must be objectively considered. See, for example, the relevant studies by Philip Mendes, “Jews & the Left” (2014); Bertram Wolfe, “Three Who Made a Revolution” (2001); Jonathan Frankel (ed) “Dark Times, Dire Decisions” (2005); Andre Gerrits, “The Myth of Jewish Communism” (2009); Antony Sutton, “Wall Street & the Bolshevik Revolution” (2011).

      • Carolyn Yeager
        Carolyn Yeager says:

        Once again (time & time again) you recommend entire books for people to read instead of presenting the message you’re hoping they would get from reading it.

        You’re a walking librarian!

        If these books you so freely recommend have a message that you concur with and want to pass on to the TOO readers (such as the Jewish motivations for fomenting the overthrow of other people’s governments!!), you’ll have to sum it up in your own words, at least. I have no intention of reading any of the books you’ve recommended to me already, which number in the double digits. I decide what books I want to read, and I read *your comments* to find out what you have to say. This habit of yours just reinforces that you have nothing real to offer.

  15. Ted
    Ted says:

    What about fascist like Henry Ford? Although he seems to have quite the Jew hating problem 😬 he could have helped out lots of poor white people with all the money he spent publishing muh antisemitic feels

    • Pierre de Craon
      Pierre de Craon says:

      It’s useful to have a devotee of the mass media and the (((Establishment narrative))) here to remind those of us who have a serious interest in white (and Christian) identity, interests, and culture what they are up against. Thanks for serving that purpose.

    • Nancy Sparks
      Nancy Sparks says:

      What an idiotic comment.

      Ford was a super patriot genius of a man……something you will never be.

      Ford provided great jobs for many thousands of people and made great cars. He also watched over his employees and demanded honorable behavior from them.

      He bought a newspaper and hired the best writers to delve into the jewish question, and the newspaper series was turned into an incredible book detailing the machinations of organized jewry.

      Ford was truly a great man, a giant both intellectually and morally.

      You are a cowardly fool to criticize such a great man.

      Ford and Lindbergh rank highly as the greatest of all Americans.

      Ford’s “anti-semitism” was based on solid knowledge. If Americans had listened to Ford and Lindbergh we would not be in the dire situation we are in today.

    • Space Cowboy
      Space Cowboy says:

      Actually, only a Jew can claim that Henry Ford harmed white people. It is a projection in disguise. Because John Ford, in truth, only harmed Jews. And that was wonderful, good and right!

    • Space Cowboy
      Space Cowboy says:

      An intruder that spreads such pathological (dis-) “information” is recognized, isolated and eliminated by the white blood cells, just as in the healthy organism. This is how it should be, because nature is OUR “commandment”!

      At least here still the immune system is intact (although with our beloved TOO-Admins this defense mechanism failed in this case obviously because of their “general world openness” unfortunately).

      The damage is done, and that was what the intruder intended. It is his antinature, incomprehensible to the entire world, to do this; he cannot help but lie, for the lie alone keeps him and his kind alive (so far).

    • Space Cowboy
      Space Cowboy says:

      If TOO actually objects now, “This is
      about freedom of opinion.” Jammers
      are not about truth. There must be an
      area, a sphere, in which we are protec-
      ted from them. This principle should
      be extended to the whole of society.

      • Carolyn Yeager
        Carolyn Yeager says:

        I agree with you on this. “Jammers” like Ted should be recognized and eliminated before being posted. It’s not hard. Obviously some much longer comments are read and rejected, so why not Ted’s?

  16. Dr M
    Dr M says:

    Being retired, I finally had the time to read all 720 pages of Hitler’s Mein Kampf, mainly looking for his views on the Jews. Interestingly, there were only two 3 page sections in the entire book on the entire subject. The bulk of his book was about his political machinations and rise to power in the 30s.

    He was VERY concerned about the Jewish nepotistic and usurious behavior and business practices during the hyper-inflationary interwar period from 1918- 1939 that hurt the German people so much.

    Back in the 80s I was an ER doctor in Key West and one night had an elderly German couple who’d lived during this time. They told the story about how struggling German merchants would try to start and run a business. They said that a Jewish merchant would often be doing the same and would start off by cutting their prices ridiculously low for the first 6 months. This would slowly bankrupt the other German merchants, eventually forcing them out of business. Then, the Jewish merchants would raise their prices to ridiculously high levels, hurting the local community and bankrupting these other German merchants.

    On his views on the Jews, in his book he never said he wanted to kill them, his main goal was to just get them out of German society, thus the move to put them in camps. It’s a known fact that many Jews survived the war, so the sacrosanct “6 million” number is open to question. The bulk of camp inmates suffered (and died) from typhus, dysentery and malnutrition and the ovens were the best way to dispose of the infected bodies. German citizens were also suffering from food shortages and malnutrition so the fact that the camp inmates got any food at all is interesting.

    • Brian Rockford
      Brian Rockford says:

      @ Dr M
      Having spent some years reading Hitler’s statements, and books about him (e.g. the Toland, Fest, Maser, Schramm &c &c), I offer the following brief comments:
      1. The 1939 Murphy translation of MK is beside me as I write. The Jews are specifically discussed in detail on pp.251 to 276, but are often noted elsewhere, for example on p.530 where he says that only the sword can thrust the clutch of the cosmopolitan Jew from the national throat – with bloodshed. He describes Jews in terms of poisonous bacilli and diabolical vampires who destroy every nation they occupy. His logic entails protective counter-genocide. The Testament from February 1945 recalls his warning that in the event of war, he “would exterminate this vermin” this time “once and for all”.
      2. However, the numbers of Jews who actually died from all causes during WW2 was recalculated independently by Gerald Reitlinger and Wenzel Jacksch as around 4 million, since when the Jewish death-toll at the huge Auschwitz-Birkenau camp has been officially further reduced by 3.5 million. Like many other mortality estimates (USSR, Cambodia, Armenia) careful examination of archival material and demographic analysis lead to substantial numerical reductions. The utility of “The Holocaust” to Zionist propaganda and ethnic solidarity has deterred proper investigation of this particular matter, though that has its critics from Avraham Burg to Norman Finkelstein.
      3. It is not difficult to refute received opinion on crematoria capacity in the so-called “Vernichtungslager” and to expose numerous fake, often ridiculous “survivor stories”, but residual issues remain, ranging from the role of the AktionT-4 personnel in certain camps to Himmler’s instruction to murder the children of Jewish resisters in occupied Russia.
      4. Hitler was content in general to allow the forcible deportation of Jews, assets expropriated and sexually segregated, from all across Europe, to work for the NS war effort, and if necessary succumb in the process (Admiral Horthy & Henriette von Schirach interviews).

      • Brian Rockford
        Brian Rockford says:

        Typo correction, with apologies. Auschwitz death-toll reduced by 2.5 (not 3.5) million from 4 million to approx. 1.5 million. There have been substantial reductions since then.

      • Anne C
        Anne C says:

        Mr. Rockford:

        My reading of Mein Kampf (Stalag Edition, 1940) tallies much more closely with Dr M’s than yours.

        For example, you state that, “The Jews are specifically discussed in detail on pp.251 to 276, but are often noted elsewhere, for example on p.530 where he says that only the sword can thrust the clutch of the cosmopolitan Jew from the national throat – with bloodshed.”

        You make it sound like Hitler wanted to carve up the Jews with a sword – but the full context of the quote gives a different impression. From pg. 704 of the Stalag Edition:

        “There can be scarcely any doubt whatsoever that only through bloodshed could we achieve the restoration of the 1914 frontiers. One must have the simple mind of a child to believe that the revision of the Versailles Treaty can be obtained by indirect means and by beseeching the clemency of the victors ‐ apart from the fact that for this we should need a Talleyrand, and there is no Talleyrand among us. Fifty per cent of our politicians are artful dodgers who are without character and hostile to our people, while the other fifty per cent is made up of well-meaning, harmless, and complaisant incompetents. Moreover, times have changed since the Congress of Vienna, it is no longer princes or their courtesans who haggle and bargain about State frontiers, but the inexorable cosmopolitan Jew who fights for dominion over the nations. The sword is the only means whereby
        a nation can ward off that strangle-hold. Only when the concentrated might of rampant patriotic fervour is organized can it defy the menace of international enslavement of the nations. Such a course of action entails, and always will entail, bloodshed.
        If we are once convinced that the future of Germany calls for supreme effort, then, apart from considerations of political prudence, we are in duty bound to set up an aim that is worthy of that effort and to struggle to achieve it.”

        I will leave it to the intelligence of the average TOO commentator to draw their own conclusions about what Hitler meant when he wrote these lines.

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          Thanks Anne. Very effective.
          Yes, “the sword” meant a nation having to resort to war when diplomacy was not accepted by the party (side) actually desiring war. Bc at that point, it was either “war” or capitulation/loss of honor and autonomy/sovereignty. It’s well documented that Hitler sought diplomatic solutions first, and even doggedly, in every case.

      • What’s up Skip
        What’s up Skip says:

        So are you saying the jewish death toll was around half a million? Even if Himmler ordered the killing of the families of terrorists, at the same time as German children were entering the armed forces to try to forestall the Morgenthau Plan, this would have been intended as a last ditch deterrent from a nation facing annihilation by the Bolsheviks.

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          Regarding BR’s casual claim about Himmler, I note that he calls Jewish saboteurs — wherein the whole family devoted themselves to capturing, TORTURING, and killing German soldiers in uniform — he terms them “resisters” who apparently should be spared if they are ‘innocent’ children (under 18). In truth, we know those ‘children’ could be more vicious & sadistic than their parents. Remember, it was Himmler’s job to look out for the well-being of the Germans, not the Jews or Russians. This is accepted without argument for all other participants in this war, i.e. “to save American (British, French, Jewish) lives.” Why not the Germans?

          I would also question “The Testament from February 1945” that he mentions as some kind of key evidence. Is that perhaps the FAKE Political Testament of AH?

          • Brian Rockford
            Brian Rockford says:

            I recommend MK to every intelligent reader, including the specially prepared Stalag translation, along with all the speeches of Hitler on record. As for SS treatment of the children of guerrillas resisting invasion, consult the actual motive given in Carlos Porter’s translation of Himmler’s Posen speech.
            Of course, if Carolyn doesn’t like something, the Jews must have faked it. Simples. A PhD in history straight away from the Chancellor of Craon university.

    • Lucy
      Lucy says:

      @Dr M
      Alas, most people have easily swallowed the omnipresent lies about AH and the Nationalsocialist Germany. Unsurprisingly, very few of them have a clue about the true content of Mein Kampf or what the “horrible Nazis” tried to achieve. People in the by “nationalconservatives” governed countries in Eastern Europe (particularily Poland) are so imbued with hatred to all German that they would’nt believe even if they – by a miracle – had come across a copy of Mein Kamph or some alternative, i.e. trustworthy, info on what actually took place before and during the two anti-White world wars. Since I am fluent in Polish (grew up among those “victims” number 2 after the Jews) I do know what I’m taking about.
      Ignorance makes an incredibly powerful weapon, because it is supporting/encouraging grotesque impudence. (I have yet to find one single Pole that would not be supporting the government’s demands for war reparations from Germany, despite their keeping territories that belonged to Germany for a long time.The Germans are to be blamed for all the misery/that ever had afflicted the great Polish nation.) Recently some of the blame got relocated on the Russians, but there is so much of it that the German people does’nt risk to “lose” their “status” of being number one enemy to the Poles. This outlook prevails in all kinds of media in Poland. When it comes to Russia/Russians, you however find some pods that make an effort to contradict the official anti-Russian propaganda. There are, of course, no such efforts when it comes to Germany and German people.

        • Lucy
          Lucy says:

          Dear Mr Franklin, Wikipedia is far from reliable on such “sensitive” matters as history.
          By the way, the hostile attitude is to all German; the Poles actually have bought into the on alternative media prevaling “truth” that it is wrong to think that only the supporters of National socialist/Nazis were evil. “All Germans are cruel beasts, and allways have been.” It was the latter “revelation” that made me to dig into the subject, after having moved to Western Europe when I was able to find other info than the omnipresent one about the Polish victimhood. (If you visit Polish alternative media you hardly can avoid running into hostile attitude towards the Ukrainians; they are regarded almost as evil as the Germans.) Kind regards.

          • Franklin Ryckaert
            Franklin Ryckaert says:

            If a victim group has prejudices, that doesn’t prove that they never were victims.

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          And here’s Franklin touting his same old Wikipedia pages, written by the Poles, for the umpteenth time. Well, at least I know he’s reading this.

          You’d think after receiving so much criticism he’d try to present some real documents. But no, he never does.

    • charles frey
      charles frey says:

      01 From 1970 to 1976 I had a dream job, taking American retired persons, mostly teachers, to 80 countries around the world. Grand Circle Tours, at 555 Madison Avenue was a non-profit owned by a Mr. Davis, late founder and CEO of the still extant Colonial Penn Ins. Co..

      02 Everywhere we went, we were scrupolously looked after by local handling agents. Though a Jewish company, it chose a Catholic-Palestinian
      owned handling agent to look after us during our usual four days in Israel.

      03 After hours, our superb guide asked me whether I remembered a certain entire street of one storied buildings with shops on the street level.

      04 He then told me, that merely a few years back, this entire business section was entirely Palestinian owned.

      05 Through some mortgage manipulation a single Jew would inject himself into this situation and underbid his Palestinian neighbor out of competition and into bankruptcy in a certain line of retailing. Even at the expense of certain loss over a given period.

      06 After 18 months the entire street was owned by Jews: straight out of the playbook recounted to you by your German, Key West guests.

      07 Further, the only people who didn’t hunger and freeze during the War and well after, including the five of our Berlin family, were the friends of Otto Frank, who had sufficient funds to purchase his in-house forged food ration stamps: which resulted in his arrest by three Dutch Administration Officials, accompanied by a single German Police sergeant.

      08 Otto of course absconded with the criminal profits of his brother in Frankfurt, where he was convicted well before Hitler took power. He survived the camps, as where Anne died of typhus in Bergen Belsen: inadvertently giving rise to a number of profitable and contending enterprizes.

  17. The Trust
    The Trust says:

    Even if some vegans are sold on the idea of looking for kosher seals to determine if there’s meat in a product, wouldn’t it undermine the essence of their dietary values as their support for the kosher seal scheme ultimately grows the power of kosher slaughterhouses?

    Even if supporters of today’s kosher agencies often say, “Businesses can do as they wish” and certify their entire line of products “kosher” if they please, weren’t large companies of the 1950s and earlier permitted to “do as they wish” and hire hundreds of White male employees without consideration for other races and ethnicities? As the civil liberties for gender in America have become fluid, are we overdue now for expanding the Constitutional definition of “Religious Freedom” to recognize and accommodate our rights to purchase secular goods free from the overriding control of a powerful religious minority and monopoly?

    Even if the kosher keeping Orthodox Jewish community representing 0.3% of our population easily recognizes that most all essential and popular packaged food and inedible products today are kosher certified with tiny and obscure labeling, isn’t it the moral and right thing to do to insist and legislate large transparent labeling of religious certification for the 39% of American consumers who object to this century-old scheme and may wish to avoid it?

    Even if the IRS grants exemptions for taxing and disclosing the revenue of religious organizations like kosher agencies, does it seem reasonable that a poor and humble non-Jew from Oklahoma might unknowingly contribute more of his lifetime savings to the interests of a New York City-based kosher scheme and its myriad programs than to the local church of his faith, especially given that illusive kosher seals average just ten percent the size of other common certification seals found on labeling?

    Even if kosher agencies and mainstream media have enforced the perception or myth that kosher goods are healthier than non-kosher goods, wouldn’t it be fair and honest to disclose the truth that rabbinical authorities of these agencies make no such guarantees? And as for Christians who naively buy into this marketing pitch, wouldn’t it be righteous for their fellow travelers to remind them of John 2:16-17, where Jesus demanded to “Stop turning my Father’s house into a marketplace!?”

    Are these brief and easy arguments? Not entirely, and perhaps they can be given more brevity by a wordsmith. Are they weak claims involving a domineering influence found in everybody’s home, in front of everyone’s eyes? Absolutely! And it may be the most helpful baby step towards revealing how many of our institutions are, in fact, kosher certified! Learn more at:

  18. Mr. White Christian.
    Mr. White Christian. says:

    Most White American Christians have just wanted a normal country without crazy left wing and LGBTQ ideas.

    They are no match for very determined Bolsheviks, angry LGBTQs, and Jews who want White American Christians to disappear.

    These abnormal people have the energy and commitment.

    White Christians are different. They just want to live their lives, raise good children, and pay their mortgages.

    Few White Christians are conspirators (except the Globalists).

    Their adversaries ARE.

    And now they have brainwashed kids to be Bolsheviks. Our kids have become captives of the left and LGBTQ.

    We White Christians are losing to the crazies.

    European heritage must be emphasized and we all have to be more publicly frank about what our adversaries are planning, which is basically to imprison us and destroy us.

    I say all this without malice toward others.

    But, please, don’t push us.

    • James Clayton
      James Clayton says:

      “… pay their mortgages…”
      Everything’s mortgaged now, if not prices quoted on AMAZON as the mortgage payment size rather than the retail price for their plastic hair curlers (HT to Dr. Pierce), then it’s the price of the “money” itself.
      Like pit bulls, They will not stop doing that for which they’ve been bred. And teaching, learning is environment rather than genetics. They will not stop pushing and both eugenics and genocide are among those words and phrases that will not provoke a knee-jerk reaction when explained, understood. It’s science but not fiction and particularly difficult to explain to duller tools:

  19. Joe
    Joe says:

    This author is wise. We must address our fellow gentiles as the sub-80-IQ individuals that they are. They have been purposefully bred NOT to think… thus, they are eternal children. Even the most clear and base facts must be administered to them in an anesthetical way… drip by drip.
    However long it takes… I, personally, rest assured that the TRUTH will always win out in the end and that those who malevolently peddle lies will not only perish in a truly justifiable holocaust, but also spent the rest of eternity in such a conflagration.

  20. Hanna Haverbeck
    Hanna Haverbeck says:

    This tactical terminology substitution ‘Left-wing Diaspora Jews’ is much like using zionist. Has this helped or slowed down the awakening to the ultimate evil: organized international jewry? Minds must be strong to handle the truth.

    Another strategic angle to this “The weak claim paradox” vis-à-vis the jewish problem, is to start off with just sussing out if a productive start could be made with appeals to racial preservation, upright social norms and national sovereignty issues as simpler fundamental agreement points. Some are to far behind the curve.

  21. Franklin Ryckaert
    Franklin Ryckaert says:

    @Carolyn Yeager (reply to Captainchaos)

    You will of course deny that your hero “Saint” Adolf did order the murder of the mentally and physically handicapped (“life unworthy of life”), but following article gives all he information about it, including a copy of his personal order to that effect, :

    In total some 200,000 people in Germany and some 100,000 people in the occupied territories were murdered, many by gassing. If you still foolishly deny this fact, you will have to explain why the highest authorities of the Catholic and Protestant Churches in Germany protested against it, if nothing of that kind happened. You are living in impossible denial, just like a flat-earth cult.

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      I have never denied that NS Germany had a euthanasia program and that Hitler signed the order, but I have denied that it was “murder.” My problem is in the way BR, Cc, and you characterize it inaccurately. Competent and compassionate doctors, like Karl Brandt, were running it. Okay, it turned into a very controversial issue and was ended, but so were similar programs installed in the U.S. during that same time, and later. It doesn’t ‘prove’ Adolf was a murderer, plain and simple. You’re beating a dead horse and no one cares.

      • Liosnagcat
        Liosnagcat says:

        You, Carolyn, are a force of nature! I sit back in awe of your conviction, certitude and moral courage.

        Thank you!

  22. N. Mason
    N. Mason says:

    Facts, whether presented weakly or strongly, are of ultimately little significance to most of the American population. What matters is Myth. The Myth of the Good War and the hall of costs will die when they no longer give meaning to people’s lives. The boomers will take it to their graves and we should make sure it dies with them. There should be zero tolerance or coddling of younger generations in this respect. They have the consequences in front of their eyes. Blasphemy and iconoclasm are the correct approach.

  23. charles frey
    charles frey says:

    01 JANUARY 30, 1933: Hitler appointed Chancellor.

    02 MARCH 24, 1933: ” Judea Declares War on Germany !”; inter alia, calling for a worldwide Economic Boycott.

    03 AUGUST 25, ff., 1933 : HAAVARA-AGREEMENT to freeze BUT NOT TO SEIZE Jewish bank deposits, which they could access to buy German products for personal use and resale in Palestine, in order to minimally lessen the impact of THEIR INTERNATIONAL BOYCOTT.
    By comparison, ca. half of the US states require a signed agreement not to engage in the anti-Israel BDS Movement, if they work for their State Administration, contractors with State contracts, educational institutions, as well as participating private companies !!! [ Recently a U professor who took his First Amendment seriously, was fired, for refusing his signature: prooving, indeed, that they, but not you, can have it either way ! ]

    04 1933 – 1938; FIVE YEAR INTERMISSION !

    05 NOVEMBER 9, 1938; Herschel Grynszpan, resident of Paris, previously of Hannover of Polish Jewish parents, who immigrated there in 1936 !!!, fatally shot 29 year old Ernst vom Rath, German Foreign Office diplomat.

    06 NOVEMBER 9 – 10, 1938 : Entirely inexplicably, Germans indulged in the Kristallnacht, looting Jewish businesses and burning AT LEAST 900 synagogues, according to, among others, National Public Radio.

    07 APPARENTLY the German marauders forgot about Europe’s second largest synagogue on Oranienbuger Strasse, in Berlin -Mitte. It is widely publicized, that it too was destroyed during Kristallnacht. It is a twenty minute walk from the Reichskanzlei.

    08 Here is an excerpt from its current website: available to all.
    ” Services were held here until 1940 when the building was confiscated by the Nazis AND ALMOST COMPLETELY DESTROYED BY ALLIED BOMBINGS IN [ NOV.] 1943 “.

    09 Exactly as my aunt, having lived the greatest part of her life a block away had told me.

    10 The modern Jewish Hospital existed until the very end of the War.

  24. Franklin Ryckaert
    Franklin Ryckaert says:

    @ Carolyn Yeager

    “Real documents” according to you are:

    # Not Wikipedia because that is “controlled by Jews”.
    # Not testimonies by Jews, because “Jews always lie”.
    # Not testimonies by Slavs, because “Slavs always lie”.
    # Not testimonies by Nazis, because they must have been “traitors” and therefore also lied.
    # Not testimonies by captured Nazis, because they must have been tortured.
    # Not Nazi documents because those must have been falsified.
    # Not forensic evidence because that too must have been falsified.
    Remains: nothing. Congratulations, I now offer you a free membership of the Flat Earth Society where you can feel at home:

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      Testimonies are not “documents” originating in/from the Third Reich government. Wiki articles are full of testimonies and other inferior sources that no one should have to wade through. We’ve gone into all this before; I’m not going to pollute this thread with repeats of old discussion points.

    • charles frey
      charles frey says:

      01 Any impartially informed person can contradict your 7 advanced #’s.

      02 Without going into several or all of them just answer my # 1: whether Katyn was on the docket at Nuremberg; # 2: who put it on the docket ?; # 3: who removed it ? ; # 4: why ?; # 5: give me the name of the US Judge who removed himself from the Tribunal, describing it as ” a high-class lynching party !”

      • Terry Bull
        Terry Bull says:

        #5. Harlan Stone.
        The World Jewish Congress was a major influence in the concept and early preparation of the IMT.
        The Soviet participants introduced a lot of material which the western allies ruled out to avoid making the proceedings a laughing stock.
        You cannot teach the likes of Frau Yeager or Monsieur De Craon anything, but whereas NS Judeocidal ideology is easily demonstrated, even from a public movie like “Der ewige Jude”, there ARE issues about the “forensics” of mass-gassing and cremation, which have received a rare and limited “debate” online between Mattogno and his critics like Muehlenkamp and Zimmerman.

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          “You cannot teach the likes of Frau Yeager or Monsieur De Craon anything, but whereas **NS Judeocidal ideology** [?] is easily demonstrated, even from a public movie like “Der ewige Jude”, there ARE issues about the “forensics” of mass-gassing and cremation, which have received a rare and limited “debate” online [?] between Mattogno and his critics like Muehlenkamp and Zimmerman.”

          What total junk-talk this is. Impossible to take it seriously. Easily demonstrated by a movie?? An online debate between Mattogno and Muehlenkamp & Zimmerman?? When? Where? Who is Zimmerman btw? [Oh, I found him: His only book, out of print.] Muehlenkamp is not much better known.

          And why only Mattogno? It brought to mind this from a few days ago, which I noted at the time:

          Brian Rockford,
          May 12 @6:49
          There is no harm in “holocaust revisionism” so long as it is competent, as in the case of Carlo Mattogno or in the exposure of ridiculous stories.

          He goes on to mention only Yad Vashem as what he considers a competent authority on the other side. This fuels the suspicion that Terry Bull and Brian Rockford are indeed the same Hasbara agent working this thread, along with one or two others mentioned by Pierre de Craon. You two think & express yourselves alike; your purpose as I see it is to create DISTRACTION away from any convincing argument in favor of the National Socialist state of Adolf Hitler, by keeping the Holocaust viable. You do it by trying to appear open-minded, even neutral; and to represent reasonableness, when in fact you’re always working to target NS Germans as thugs & murderers.

          • Brian Rockford
            Brian Rockford says:

            1. The movie cited is just one minor element in the total evidence. It portrays the Jews as an evil race of irreformable criminals with no redeeming features, comparing them to a swarm of pestilential rats. Where I live near farmland rats are exterminated.
            2. You are not susceptible to normal criteria of historical evidence, let alone a balanced view of NS ideology and activity in peace and war, and further discussion is probably futile in your personal case.
            3. You mistakenly suppose I am a Hasbara agent, but the fact that you even entertain this false assumption merely exposes your own psychology.
            4. I do not target all NS supporters thugs, or think so. I have noted positive achievements of the Third Reich, and have works by Alfred Rosenberg, Hans Guenther, Martin Heidegger, Hans Grimm, Hermann Greife, Joachim Hoffmann, among others, on my shelves, plus collections of Hitler’s speeches, a fair collection of Barnes Review and other “Holocaust Denial” books, etc. Childhood friends included a charming German family whose eldest son had fallen on the Eastern Front.
            5. My brief reference to Yad Vashem’s significant admission of “false memories” is typically twisted around by you to suggest deceit or Jewishness, while my criticisms of the political exploitation of “The Holocaust” and of other Zionist activities are ignored.
            6. If I were an agent of Israel, or whatever, why would I have even bothered to draw attention to Mattogno, when even you seem unaware of this area of research and discussion?

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            Oh, get off your high horse. I’m just noting the resemblance of “Terry Bull’s” comments to yours. I said it “fuels suspicion” of your being Hasbara, not that you were. You *wish* I would say that though.

            Your “brief reference” to Yad Vashem is typical of your style – to reference something just to imply it, but have nothing further to add. A form of name-dropping. Same with Mattogno, who is not everyone’s most ideal revisionist, but we’re on friendly terms and have exchanged meaningful emails. So what “area of research and discussion” concerning Mattogno that Terry Bull referred to am I unaware of? I’m sure I’m not. Would it have to do with books written and not “online debate” as it’s usually understood? If so, please see my 2-hour podcast:, and there are four follow-up 2-hour podcasts on the book, plus a “summing up.” I cover the “debate” quite thoroughly. I also have this one:

            Re your #1: The very popular American film Inglourious Basterds (2009) shows Germans & “Nazis” as fair game for being exterminated in the most painful manner that their killer can dream up. It doesn’t substitute rodents as symbols, it just happens to real blonde-haired, blue-eyed people while the audience cheers. Yet it wouldn’t occur to me to reference that movie (Basterds) to prove how evil Jews are.

            Re your #4: “I do not target all [I didn’t say ALL -cy] NS supporters [as] thugs.” Oh yes you do, just not the ones you mention here. You do target Hitler and Himmler, and call them murderers. Who else, Joseph Goebbels? You call all National Socialists “Nazis”; even unnamed ones you accuse of many crimes that have clearly not even been investigated.

Comments are closed.