Featured Articles

Charles Fourier: The Father of Antisemitic Socialism

/1 Comment/in , /by

French socialist thinker Charles Fourier remains one of history’s most daring economic visionaries, a man whose blueprint for human harmony challenged the very foundations of the modern world. Yet, lurking beneath his celebrated theories of labor is a dimension of his thought that modern socialist circles have scrubbed from the record: his uncompromising, foundational antisemitism.

Today, his once-open discourse on this subject has been replaced by the intellectual pollution of Jewish tropes that now dominate the socialist landscape. It is time to peel back the layers of indoctrination and confront the man as he truly was an innovative thinker who saw exactly where the rot in civilization began.

François Marie Charles Fourier was born on April 7, 1772, in Besançon, France, the son of a cloth merchant. He spent much of his working life employed as a traveling salesman and correspondence clerk — in Lyon, Paris, Rouen, Marseille, and Bordeaux — an occupation he despised. He complained bitterly of “serving the knavery of merchants” and channeled that resentment into elaborate schemes for remaking society from the ground up.

Self-educated and enormously prolific, Fourier published his first major work, Théorie des quatre mouvements, in 1808, and spent the remainder of his life — until his death on October 10, 1837 in Paris — elaborating an intricate system for reorganizing human civilization.

Fourier stands alongside Robert Owen and Henri de Saint-Simon as one of the three major “utopian socialists” analyzed by Friedrich Engels. His ideas seeded dozens of experimental communities in France and America.

While Fourier is rightly celebrated as a profound economic visionary whose theories on labor and communal living pushed the boundaries of his age, many modern scholars intentionally obscure the most distinctive pillars of his worldview. In particular, Fourier possessed a sharp, incisive critique of the role of Jewish influence within the financial systems of his day—a facet of his thought that contemporary leftists routinely dismiss to maintain a sanitized, politically correct narrative. By filtering out these foundational insights, today’s movements fail to grasp the full scope of his analysis regarding how Jewish interests disrupt the social order. However, his Wikipedia page has this:

Fourier said Jews were “the leprosy and the ruin of the body politic”.[29] He criticized the government for being weak and “prostrate” when confronted with what he called a “secret and indissoluble league” of Jews. Post-Medieval antisemitic rhetoric often accused Jews of being unable to assimilate into a unitary national culture (highly valued by the French nationalists). Fourier was one of the writers to argue that Jews were disloyal and would not make good French citizens. Like others, he placed great significance on the religious restrictions prohibiting Jews from eating at the same table as non-Jews:[30]

he confined himself to sitting down at table and drinking; he refused to eat any of the dishes, because they were prepared by Christians. Christians have to be very patient to tolerate such impertinence. In the Jewish religion it denotes a system of defiance and aversion for other sects. Now, does a sect which wishes to carry its hatred as far as the table of its protectors, deserve to be protected?

It is precisely because Fourier viewed these financial and social dynamics as a corrupting influence that he sought to replace the prevailing chaotic order with a self-regulating architecture of cooperation. This desire to insulate communal life from the distortions of Jewish finance served as the foundation for his most famous social experiment.

Fourier’s central vision was the phalanx, a cooperative community of roughly 1,620 people living and working together in a large building called a phalanstère. These self-contained agricultural and industrial communities would house residents in giant cooperative apartment buildings where work, wealth, and roles would rotate continuously. In his phalansteries, wealth produced by the community would be distributed among capital, labor, and talent in proportions he specified. Private property would not be abolished but would be subordinated to collective purposes. Fourier considered trade, which he associated with Jews, the “source of all evil”, and advocated that Jews be forced to perform farm work in the phalansteries.[14] 

His concept of “attractive labor” proposed that work could be made pleasurable if matched to people’s natural passions. Tasks would rotate frequently and people would be assigned to roles they naturally enjoyed. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels later credited this as a precursor to their concept of alienated labor.

Fourier developed an elaborate theory of the passions, cataloging 12 fundamental human passions that produced 810 distinct personality types. His phalansteries would be organized around these personality classifications to maximize harmony and productivity.

His ideas inspired real-world experiments. Brook Farm in Massachusetts, the North American Phalanx in New Jersey, La Réunion in Texas, and the Familistère de Guise in France all drew directly from Fourierist principles. Behind these utopian experiments lay a sweeping philosophical indictment of modern civilization. Fourier rejected the competitive individualism unleashed by the French Revolution and the emerging capitalist order. He believed that civilization itself was corrupt and that humanity needed a complete reset.

Beyond his social theories, Fourier held views that would ruffle the feathers of many leftists these days. Notably, he expressed racism toward non-European cultures and held antisemitic beliefs that were not incidental to his thought but central to his entire economic worldview.

The Encyclopaedia Judaica summarizes his position directly: “His dream of a better world went hand in hand with a phobia against foreigners, and above all Jews. For him commerce was ‘the source of all evil’ and Jews were ‘the incarnation of commerce.'” In his earlier writings, the Encyclopaedia Judaica notes, Fourier “leveled every accusation possible against the Jews,” declaring in his 1808 Théorie des quatre mouvements that there had never been “a nation more despicable than the Hebrews.”

Scholars classify his antisemitism as economic and religious rather than the racial antisemitism that emerged later in the 19th century. Edmund Silberner and Jonathan Beecher identify him as one of the originators of a specifically socialist antisemitism, in which hostility toward Jews was expressed in commercial and moral terms rather than biological ones.

Because Fourier equated commerce with corruption and cast Jews as the human face of commerce, his entire critique of capitalism leaned on antisemitic observations — what later detractors called “the socialism of fools.” The textual record of Fourier’s antisemitism is extensive and well documented. Drawing on economist Edmund Silberner’s landmark 1946 article “Charles Fourier on the Jewish Question” in Jewish Social Studies — the foundational scholarly survey of Fourier’s antisemitic writings — Fourier had choice words for European Jewry.

In his 1808 work Théorie des quatre mouvements, Fourier declared there had never been “a nation more despicable than the Hebrews.” He identified commerce as “the source of all evil” and the Jews as “the incarnation of commerce.” The Encyclopaedia Judaica summarizes his position: “In his earlier writings, Fourier leveled every accusation possible against the Jews. He believed that their economic activities were parasitic and rapacious.” The Cambridge Core International Review of Social History confirms he attacked Jews as “the incarnation of commerce: parasitical, deceitful, traitorous and unproductive.”

The Encyclopaedia Judaica also notes that Fourier believed the emancipation of slaves and Jews had been “effected too suddenly.” Fourier’s antisemitism was taken up and amplified by his followers — most directly by Alphonse Toussenel, whose 1845 Les Juifs, rois de l’époque extended his teacher’s economic antisemitism into one of the 19th century’s most prominent antisemitic works.

Owing to the French thinker’s voluminous critiques of European Jewry, Silberner identified Fourier as the “father of antisemitic socialism” in his 1962 work Sozialisten zur Judenfrage. He concluded that most prominent 19th-century socialists, except for the Saint-Simonists, viewed Jews as the embodiment of social parasitism.

The Cambridge Core International Review of Social History confirms the pattern across the French socialist milieu: “Charles Fourier saw the Jews as the incarnation of commerce: parasitical, deceitful, traitorous and unproductive.” The article places him alongside Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Toussenel as foundational figures of a left-wing antisemitic tradition.

Fourier’s legacy is a towering testament to the power of contrarianism, showing us that true social progress requires the courage to reject the comfortable lies disseminated by the ruling class. His models for living may have been experimental, but his diagnostic clarity regarding the forces of subversion — of predominantly Jewish extraction — remains his most enduring contribution. If we are to secure the future of our people, we must refuse to settle for his economic insights alone; we must reclaim and build upon his frank, necessary antisemitism, particularly now, when organized Jewry has achieved a total and suffocating hegemony over our entire political order.

The “Seal Puppy” Hunt that’s Coming: The Ache of Envy and Other Obstacles to Change

/2 Comments/in /by

One lie has the power to tarnish a thousand truths.
Al David

The first thing you need to know is that critical race theory (CRT) is only about White people. They are mean and cruel, those damn Whites. They’re always trying to crush other races. The whole system is rigged in their favor. Who do they think they are? It’s not fair to minorities, it has to change. And according to Jewish American author and historian, Dr. Noel Ignatiev of Harvard University, the only way to change this injustice in a profound way is to abolish the White race:

Make no mistake about it: we intend to keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as “the white race” is destroyed—not “deconstructed” but destroyed. The key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race.[1]

Susan Sontag, born Rosenblatt, who felt, “as a Jew, a special responsibility to side with the oppressed and the weak”[2] agrees wholeheartedly with her coreligionist Mr. Ignatiev:

The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, Balanchine ballets, etc., don’t redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history: it is the white race and it alone—its ideologies and inventions—which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself.[3]

Ignatiev and Rosenblatt are dead, good riddance, but the Jewish war against Whites continues unabated. In books[4] and on social media, there are hundreds of Jewish “White” authors and trolls busy demonizing Whites and making it seem like righteous Whites are at war with their own race:

Because of their ability to often pass as White, one of the most effective strategies Jews have of infiltrating and subverting White Christian nations is to take on a White identity and then speak for their “fellow White people.

This shape-shifting phenomenon has been going on for years on X (formerly Twitter), and one astute observer has painstakingly catalogued over 1,100 examples of Jews pretending to be White while at the same time denigrating Whites for being White, and then switching back to their Jewish identity to shield themselves from any criticism.[5]

Jewish Anti-White Books

Jews pretending to be white on twitter pushing anti-white propaganda

Over a 1000 Shape-Shifting Jews Exposed for Pretending to Be White on Tweeter

Prominent antiracist author and activist Tim Wise, for example, who passes as White, but who identifies, as confirmed by Grok AI of X, as Jewish by heritage and ethnicity, “lectures and writes on how Whites have benefited from slavery, Jim Crow, colonialism, and ‘white privilege’ structures (e.g., land grants, citizenship laws favoring Europeans). He ties current White privilege directly to these histories and urges whites to acknowledge them without denial. In talks and books like Dear White America and White Like Me, he highlights reliance on slave labor for building American wealth and infrastructure, framing it as an enduring legacy that demands reckoning.”[6] Here is one of his most famous quotes:

You white people are on an endangered list. And unlike, say, the bald eagle or some exotic species of muskrat, you are not worth saving. In forty years or so, maybe fewer, there won’t be any more white people around, and that’s a good thing. [7]

Unfortunately for Whites, a significant number of White “willful dupes and traitors” work hand in hand with Jews and other minorities to suicide their own race and civilization. To completely demoralize their own kind and lower their will for power, and competitiveness, they systematically diminish their cultural pride and self-esteem by denigrating their incomparable achievements and by guilt tripping them about the gas chambers, slavery, colonialism, and what not.

As a result, White children come to hate their parents, their culture, their history and its heroes. Disgusted, ashamed of their seal puppy skin color, they no longer want to mate with their fellow Whites in order to free humanity from their abject presence. To redeem themselves in the end, they deploy with a vengeance the weapons used to batter into oblivion their own race and the civilization it created.

Who Invented CRT?

In his article, “Critical Race Theory as a Jewish Intellectual Weapon,” published in the June 21, 2021, issue of The Occidental Observer, journalist Edmond Connelly writes the following:

It has long been a given that CRT is linked to the social engineering of our “hostile elite,” which in the language of the magazine, The Occidental Observer, means the powerful Jews and Jewish organizations that rule America and much of the West. CRT fits squarely into the mold of Dr. Kevin MacDonald’s “Culture of Critique” category in which Jewish “gurus” concoct a Talmudic verbal assault whose main goal is the further destruction of Gentiles—literally.

More specifically, CRT is an outgrowth of cultural Marxism that weapon of mass destruction concocted by the Jewish Frankfurt School as a final solution to the White problem. The idea is to exterminate every last White, not brutally in a Trotsky type hot genocide, but gently in a Gramsci cold genocide through various means of cultural subversion such as feminism, antiracist activism, extra-European mass immigration, multiculturalism, and forced race mixing by deceitful propaganda.

And according to Edmund Connelly don’t expect Whites to take their guns out soon, as they have been psychologically disarmed:

By carefully controlling and managing schools, universities, the media, and the press, this “foreign group” has succeeded in convincing the vast majority of our racial brothers and sisters that resistance is not only futile, but immoral, barbaric, depraved, and unworthy of a “thinking” individual. By promoting the stereotype of a “racist redneck resistance,” they have made the idea of a struggle for White identity a veritable sin in the minds of nearly all Whites.

In other words, this “foreign group” and their non-Jewish allies have in fact convinced Whites that prolonged suicide is preferable to the absolute evils of racism, nationalism, and supremacism, which lead straight to gas chambers, except in Israel, paradoxically, where state racism, apartheid, exacerbated nationalism, militarism, suprematism, torture, rape, and killing of babies and women in cold blood are the norm.

Moses, the First “Führer” in History: Jewish Racial Consciousness and Supremacism

The “Seal Puppy” Hunt That’s Coming

Now that the “racist rednecks” are morally and psychologically disarmed by fear of anathema, guilt, and noble sentiments such as antiracism, love, compassion, altruism, and tolerance, there is no doubt, claims White nationalist Andrew Anglin—quoted in the above article by Edmund Connelly—that “we are on the verge of a full-scale slaughter. We’ve talked about ‘white genocide’ in terms of mass immigration and using feminism to reduce our population growth—but this cold genocide is about to get hot. People should know about it. There are warning signs everywhere.” Get ready… there will be a bloodbath, the “seal puppy” hunt is coming, especially in the United States where violence against Whites has exploded.

Now, if we presuppose that Andrew Anglin is right, we better find out fast why disparities in academic performance and crime rates between races persist or are worsening in some cities? Why are we on the verge of a “seal puppy” hunt, i.e., civil war, despite the billions invested in CRT, DEI, and the massive antiracist campaigns, which have been so salient since the days of Jewish American anthropologist Franz Boas? Why so little progress has been made after roughly a hundred years of antiracist activity boggles the mind.

In this article, I will not explore the reasons for this dire situation. Before I do, we must first address a few obstacles that stand in the way. Change is never easy—it demands effort, commitment, and resilience. Yet in today’s fast-paced, convenience-driven world, few are willing to put in the hard work it truly requires.

Symbolic Capitalism

“Symbolic capitalism is a sociological concept describing an elite class that derives power and profit from the production and manipulation of symbols, narratives, and legitimacy rather than physical goods.”[8]

Former Jewish US Attorney General Merrick Garland, born Garfinkel, who criminalized parents of students who complained about CRT didn’t seem to mind that we are on the verge of a “seal puppy” war. His daughter and son-in-law were doing a brisk business selling anti-White education materials in US public schools (their highly controversial Panorama Education Company was funded in part by Marc Zuckerberg of Facebook). “The Garland family is fulfilling its sacred mission to genocide Whites (or Amalek as they sometimes call them) while making a tidy profit,” writes journalist Chris Menahan at the beginning of his article, “AG Merrick Garland’s Jewish Family Is Getting Rich Off Selling Anti-White CRT Material to Public Schools,” Renegade Tribune, October 7, 2021.

Antiracist books like the ones written by Tim Wise, cited above, have sold in the millions, primarily to American schools, universities, and public institutions (and increasingly in Europe). Lawyers, jurists, ethicians, professors, politicians, artists, DEI consultants and officers as well as human rights groups and the various Foundations and NGOs, all theoretically devoted to the cause of antiracism, regardless of their race, are all making a living or boosting their ego and status on the fight against racism.

Salaries, careers, grants, speaking gigs, and social status depend on perpetual crisis and the comforting illusion that “advocacy” equals progress. In our civilization, materialism is the ultimate good. Why then would social justice warriors want an end to the compassion or virtue signaling industry, aka woke or symbolic capitalism, that they thrive on? Will they ever see that their refusal to put an end to what benefits them financially is inadvertently reinforcing what they pretend to oppose? It’s possible, but doubtful.

Why? Because as Upton Sinclair famously said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” Indeed, financial incentives, i.e., symbolic capitalism, often overrides the pursuit of truth or change.

However, none of this and what follows proves that genuine love, altruism, and compassion don’t exist. But it does suggest that activists—like everyone else—would benefit from examining whether their “good feelings” toward the oppressed serve their own psychological and financial relief more than the oppressed themselves.

Cognitive dissonance

Individuals, groups and nations are frequently unable or unwilling to grasp new realities if acknowledging them threatens their psychological well-being. Humans have an ideological immunity that protects them from facts, which might upset their security or in some cases the victimhood status from which they derive their identity, financial reparations, and various social and political benefits.[9]

Research indicates that “victimhood is a constructed status that confers moral capital, recognition, and resources. Individuals or groups may cultivate this status to demand justice, reparations, or sympathy, effectively ‘thriving’ on the recognition of their suffering.”[10]

The high enrolment of Jews in elite universities, asserts Ron Unz of The Unz Review, depends a lot on their victim status.[11] Moreover, the Holocaust was instrumental in building political support for the creation of Israel in 1948 and “while Israel’s existence is not solely dependent on the historical fact of Jewish victimhood,” notes journalist Rami Khouri, “its ongoing political legitimacy and international support are significantly bolstered by the cultivation and recognition of that status.”[12]

In other words, it’s uncomfortable, to say the least, when your convictions or victimhood status conflict with reality or when you realize that your activism is motivated by all the wrong reasons and because of that, is making things worse.

You can solve the conflict in three ways:

1) You can double down and follow, for example, the advice of Donald Trump’s Jewish mentor Roy Cohen:

  • Never admit guilt. Deny everything outright;
  • Turn the tables by attacking your opponents in court;
  • Work the media tirelessly. It doesn’t matter if you lose in court; what matters is winning in the media. Impose your narrative by demonizing your enemies.[13]

2) You can downplay reality by rationalizing the importance of your beliefs by convincing yourself that your actions are rooted in moral self-licensing.

3) You can face the fact that you were wrong about accepted truths and your core beliefs and you can live in truth in light of your new awareness.

Superficiality

Unlike the technical or material world, psychological change—and this is precisely what we are discussing— is not achieved through superficial activism or blind willpower alone, but it can be prepared for, through sustained and honest study. The actual shift—the moment of lucidity—is often sudden and unforced, but it rests on a foundation of careful self-examination. What blocks psychological change is fear, comfort, and the refusal to look honestly at our own motives and to examine critically opposing viewpoints.

The exact moment of lucidity is unpredictable and cannot be forced, but the practice of honest, critical examination of accepted truths and core beliefs makes it far more likely to occur. But it requires an intensity that excludes mediocrity. To put it in another way, unless you examine your core beliefs and accepted truths carefully, without compromise, from all angles, you will miss their significance and fall back into inaction.

Generally, those who clamor for ready-made solutions without having explored accepted truths and core beliefs don’t genuinely want to change. They only want to operate within the status quo. So, while they’re busy planning to change things later, at some unspecified date—usually as far into the future as possible—they continue to act as they always have. The goal isn’t change itself, but the hope of change, along with the cheap thrills it provides.

Change is necessarily a part of life; the strongest are not the most intelligent but the most flexible, and the more apt to change are those who are unafraid to dive into the rabbit hole. So, “Wherever you stand, dig deep,” says philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, “the spring is underneath! Let the grim yell: ‘That which lies underneath is always hell!’”

Ache of Envy

There is another important factor at the root of much of the unscrupulous and counterproductive antiracist activism now prevailing in modern Western societies, which is often overlooked, and to which conservative philosopher Anthony M. Ludovici was the first to have called attention: “the decisive role played by the harassing ache of Envy in prompting what Hallam in his Constitutional History termed ‘the blind eleemosynary spirit.’”

What is this eleemosynary spirit?

It is the intimate relation which, in most ordinary people’s minds — I speak of people not accustomed to be lucid concerning the nature of their feelings and the motivations of their conduct — exists between Pity and Envy. Because, wherever Envy is widespread, people’s peace of mind is naturally disturbed by the spectacle of any marked superiority — whether of health, wealth, personal gifts or merely situation — in a neighbor.

What brings relief to the ache of Envy?

Obviously, the spectacle of any inferior plight, any misfortune, in a neighbor! Every calamity assailing a human being necessarily appeases the ache of Envy.

How does this work?

In people not too clear about their mental processes, the sense of relief from Envy may insensibly prompt spontaneous feelings of gratification which incite to acts of generosity, and it often does so. They are ready, if not eager to display this half-conscious gratification by indulging in various kinds of indiscriminate and therefore often mischievous benevolence.

Thus, to paraphrase Mr. Ludovici, the idea or the sight of a poor Black person, a refugee, or a Jew, for example, who was himself or his ancestors presumably victim of systematic White racism, colonialism, antisemitism, or genocide may in some people afford some relief from Envy as to provoke good feelings towards that person and an irresistible need to help her or to get involved in antidiscrimination activity. To paraphrase Mr. Ludovici, the necessary corollary to all this would then be that where hate of Whites, DEI measures, or positive discrimination prevail, widespread Envy may be suspected in the population. [14]

Sentimentalism

Unless they can truly change, live in truth, and deal with the core issues of any problem, the actions of any type of activist can be an obstacle to change; what appears on the surface to be a quest for innocence is sometimes a comedy of innocence, a symbolic action responding to purely egocentric factors such as those described above.

This cultural manipulation serves, in particular, to resolve the moral tensions created by our lifestyle by cultivating the illusion that change is imminent. In exchange, the social justice warriors gain in self-esteem—and so does society, since they are its emissaries—in the spirit of this quote by Friedrich Nietzsche from The Antichrist:

When one is charged with sacred tasks, such as amending, saving, redeeming men, when one shelters divinity in one’s breast, when one is the spokesperson for imperatives from beyond, by the mere fact of this mission, one finds oneself immediately outside of purely intellectual evaluations, oneself already almost sanctified by this mission, oneself already the archetype of a higher order!

Thus, the issue is less about change than about the hope of change, along with the positive emotions it evokes at a low personal cost. Seventeenth-century cynics like La Rochefoucauld were well aware of this cultural trick, which they defined as “the homage that vice pays to virtue.”

This gap between appearances and reality generally goes unnoticed because in our culture, cruelty, violence, envy, greed, dishonesty, and the will for power are usually dissociated from apparent good intentions and good feelings.[15] In other words, the exploitation of antiracism or climate catastrophism, for the financial and psychological reasons just described is well perceived precisely because it often hides behind the deceptive mask of love, altruism, and compassion. These positive human qualities should theoretically lead us to paradise on earth, but since in our present civilization, they are oftentimes not genuine, they can lead us if we presuppose that Andrew Anglin cited above is right, to a “seal puppy” hunt, i.e. a civil war, if we don’t change our ways for good.

The Full Cycle

Symbolic Capitalism creates institutional incentives to sustain the appearance of change (e.g., DEI roles, antiracist publishing) — rewarding performance over transformation.

This system thrives because individuals experience Cognitive Dissonance when confronted with truths that threaten their identity, status, or worldview — leading them to deny, deflect, or rationalize.

To resolve dissonance without real change, people retreat into Superficiality — symbolic actions (e.g., reading, posting, protest) that feel productive but avoid deep inquiry or behavioral shift.

Underlying this is the Ache of Envy: the unconscious relief some feel when witnessing others’ misfortune—which fuels impulsive, indiscriminate activism (the “blind eleemosynary spirit”) as a form of psychological compensation.

All of this is masked by Sentimentalism—the conflation of good feelings with moral action—where compassion, love, and justice become emotional performances that inflate self-worth while preserving the status quo.

Institutional rewards (symbolic capitalism) → Threat to identity (dissonance) → Avoidance through shallow action (superficiality) → Motivated by hidden envy → Justified by sentimental moral self-image → No real change, but the illusion of progress is maintained.

Together, they describe not just resistance to change — but a system that profits from and perpetuates the very problems it claims to solve.

Lucidity

In the end, when you have removed these obstacles, when you have truly explored accepted truths and your core beliefs, you will clearly grasp the crux of the matter—how the pieces of the puzzle fit together—and you will see the Big Picture in a eureka way. Once you see it in this fashion, you cannot unsee it; and the solution will present itself to you, without anyone having to impose it.

This awareness is in itself the necessary condition for change. As such, what has just been described can act as a template for the exploration of ineffective or counterproductive activism in any field.

[1] Editorial, “Abolish the White Race,” Harvard Magazine, 2002.

[2] Avishay Artsy, “A life of ideas: Remembering Susan Sontag,” Jewish Journal, November 24, 2014.

[3] Susan Sontag, “What’s Happening in America?” (a response to a Partisan Review symposium questionnaire), Partisan Review, Vol. 34, No. 1, Winter 1967, pp. 57–58.

[4] Jewish Anti-White Books, https://www.thehardtruth.info/jewish-anti-white-books, The Hard Truth Files.

[5] This PDF by Christians for Truth has disappeared from the internet: “Over 1,000 Shape-Shifting Jews Exposed for Pretending to Be White on X (formerly Twitter),”August 19, 2019: https://christiansfortruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Shape-Shifting-Jews-on-Twitter-Exposed-.pdf

[6] Information obtained from Grok AI on X in response to the question: “Do you have examples of activists denigrating the achievements of Whites and guilt-tripping them for slavery and colonialism, for example?”

[7] Tim Wise, “An Open Letter to the White Right, On the Occasion of Your Recent, Successful Temper Tantrum,” originally posted on Daily Kos and his own site (timwise.org), November 3, 2010. “The quote aligns with his public record (e.g., lectures, books like White Like Me and Dear White America, and talks on privilege and population shifts). It is widely circulated in right-leaning and identitarian circles as evidence of anti-White sentiment.” From Grok AI on X.

[8] This definition is from Brave navigator AI. For a good overview of this type of capitalism see Musa al-Gharbi, We Have Never Been Woke: The Cultural Contradictions of a New Elite, Princeton University Press, 2025.

[9] Wikipedia.

[10] Alex Vandermaas-Peeler, Jelena Subotic, and Michael Barnett, “Constructing victims: Suffering and status in modern world order,” Cambridge University Press, December 22, 2022.

[11] Ron Unz, “Racial Discrimination at Harvard,” The Unz Review, 2016.

[12] Rami Khouri, “Zionism’s Perpetual Victimhood,” Harvard Kennedy School. Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, April 18, 2010.

[13] Laurent Guyénot, « Fin de l’ivresse trumpiste : gueule de bois et auto-critique »,

Substack, 5 mai, 2026.

[14] Anthony M. Ludovivi, “The Universal Ache of Envy,” work cited, p. 174 to 176.

[15] Yi-Fu Tuan, PhD, Escapism, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000.

A Model for Understanding and Confronting Western Decline

/11 Comments/in , /by

Version 1.0.0

Essays and Dramas: An Inquiry into Passions Engendered by the Idea of Reason
Paul C. Johnston
New Atlantic Media, 2025, 188 pages, $20.00 paperback

The work under review here seeks to offer models for understanding ourselves and the trajectory of our civilization. These are complicated matters, which is why models are necessary. A model is a simplification: in the author’s own words, “a simple story about a complex story.”

He begins from a simple model of human behavior: “narrative engenders emotion and emotion issues forth into action.” He begins with narrative because man learns more from example than from precept. Directly telling a child how to behave is less effective than setting him a good example. But since we cannot personally demonstrate all the behavior we would like to encourage, we resort to stories. These may concern real, legendary, or even fictional people. The author writes that “the stories we hear growing up form our sensibilities.” A sensibility is “a repertoire of emotional reactions to the world around us.” Each individual’s sensibility will reflect some combination of his own nature and the stories he has heard, especially during his formative years.

Many of these will be common across a society. Homer, for example, was called the teacher of Greece because the stories he told became the common possession of his people and shaped a characteristically Greek sensibility. The narrative lore of a people embodies its ideals and is one of the most important components of its culture. So although hardly a complete account of human behavior, the author’s model in which “narrative engenders emotion and emotion issues forth into action” captures an important truth.

Next he proceeds to an extremely condensed review of human history, the latter part of which focuses on Europeans in particular. This story commences around two hundred thousand generations ago when a species of ape somewhere in Africa, for reasons still not understood, descended from the trees and began exploring the surrounding grasslands on its hind feet. This freed its hands for making tools and weapons, which led to hunting: the basic way of life of the ground-dwelling apes from their origin until the agricultural revolution a mere five hundred generations ago. The industrial revolution only goes back twelve or fifteen generations. Because agriculture is still fairly new in evolutionary terms, we remain largely adapted through natural selection to the hunter-gatherer way of life we no longer practice. Language and intelligence, for example, are key factors in human life which probably originated as adaptations to hunting, since hunting is a type of cooperative problem-solving. Language brought story telling with it, enabling the shaping of behavior through the emotions aroused by narrative.

The author observes that there are certain areas of life about which we are especially quick to tell stories, where these stories are especially quick to rouse our emotions, and where those emotions are especially quick to issue forth into action. These three primary narrative themes are “us and them”, “high and low”, and “sex.”

One consequence of our long time as hunter-gatherers is that we had time to achieve a high degree of concordance between our emotions and our strategies for making a living. We did not then suffer from the evolutionary mismatch of having to live in an agricultural or industrial society with the instincts of hunters. On this subject, the author quotes from the book The Cave Painters by Gregory Curtis:

The culture that produced the painted caves lasted almost unchanged for more than 20,000 years. To last so long, [it] must have been deeply satisfying—emotionally, spiritually, intellectually, and practically. It must have engendered and supported a social system that reliably produced and distributed material needs like food, clothing, and shelter. It must have fostered and protected the most basic human relations—friend to friend, man to woman, parent to child—or the society would not have been cohesive enough to survive.

Shamanism is probably the closest existing approximation to our hunter-gatherer ancestors’ approach to life, one in which “emotional connections to everything around them were deep” and “no sharp distinctions were made between animals, plants, people and the spirit world.”

A hunting way of life demands about three square miles per person to be sustainable, but the very adaptiveness of the stone age way of life meant that over time this became increasingly difficult to guarantee from incursions by rival bands. So instead of hunting animals and gathering plants, a few human groups began experimenting with raising animals and growing their own plants: the pastoral and agricultural revolutions. But

a man with emotions shaped over the millennia by the roaming life of a hunter was ill equipped to clear ground, scratch earth, plant seeds, pull weeds, harvest crops—then go through the same tedious process all over again the following year in the same place.

The first farmers succeeded in guaranteeing themselves a higher caloric intake, ensuring that the new way of life would spread. But they also faced an evolutionary mismatch, one from which we still suffer to some extent. The response to this dilemma was social stratification, which occurs in three stages. First, agriculture produces a surplus which permits a minority of men to impose themselves on everyone else and continue leading an adventurous fighting existence: history’s first ruling class. Of course, they also have to force the drudges who form their tax base to stick to their allotted task. In the second stage, a new narrative reflecting this new reality rises to dominance. Third, this narrative gradually “shapes the sensibilities of individuals in their various roles as lord, serf, priest, warrior, woman, and man.” Over the generations, this stabilizes the new way of life.

The author is reticent about the history of religion under the agricultural regime, contenting himself with noting that Christianity represents a continuation of this socially pacificatory function. The observed social order is willed by God, and living well consists in performing conscientiously the duties of one’s station within that order. But, of course, the faith was not simply a matter of dissuading the servants from stealing the silverware: “Much of the cultural material produced by Christians had the characteristics of a public good,” meaning that one person’s enjoyment of it did not prevent another’s. Cathedrals and sacred music were available to high and low. Manners, although originating among the higher orders, filtered down through the social order, facilitating complementary and workable relations between persons of various stations in life.

After several thousand years of learning to mitigate evolutionary mismatch in an agricultural economy, the industrial revolution through everything into confusion once again. The author defines industrialization as a product of technology and the exploitation of fossil fuels. Its initial effects were a massive increase in wealth among all strata of a population whose sensibilities and behavior were still informed by the Christian story. But under the new conditions, the Christian story lost its vitality over time and society became increasingly fragmented.

No one narrative has arisen to replace the Christian story, but the most important contestants for the succession, in the author’s view, have been various forms of contract theory: “rational human beings living in the state of nature meet, agree on a set of rules, and establish a government based on the agreed-upon rules.” He believes even Marxism failed to break decisively with the contract narrative.

The new society shaped by industrialization created an even starker evolutionary mismatch than existed in the preceding agricultural society. But the response followed the same pattern: first, a new ruling class imposes itself (the bourgeoisie, displacing the feudal aristocracy); second, the contract narrative achieves dominance; third, the sensibilities of new generations are shaped by the new narrative:

Six, seven, eight or more generations had to pas before contractarian stories altered, weakened, or washed out deeply ingrained Christian sensibilities, but it happened. The long-term effect was astonishing. Contract doctrine did NOT do what it purported to do, i.e., guide people out of a state of nature into civil society, but the opposite: take people living in a well-established, stage-three civil society back to nature, i.e., back to stage-one . . . a battle for dominance. Contract doctrine turned out to be a time bomb introduced into the heart of European civilization.

The author agrees with an old criticism of contract doctrine: that its “natural” men are really no such thing, but rational actors such as could only be produced by a highly evolved civilization. The founders of the American Republic, for example, were the products of such a civilization, and so

they were able to make a transition to a new form of government using civilized methods, i.e., debate, discourse, compromise, agreement, and ballot. They did not know—and it is hard to see how they could have known—that changing the rules, customs, and expectations of the game of politics would change the social conditions that produced men like themselves.

The result of this miscalculation is that we, their political and physical posterity, find ourselves in a raw struggle for dominance “being fought behind a façade of hollowed out stage three institutions.”

Today’s political scene in the West is, of course, a confusing and constantly shifting struggle between racial and sexual identity groups. As always, when faced with excessive complexity, we must resort to a model. Mr. Johnston takes his from the well-known lines of Yeats’ poem The Second Coming: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

As previously noted, all men are inclined to respond emotionally and through action to stories about “us and them.” What defines the better sort of men in today’s political environment is that

their sense of who they are is formed by stories about family history, communal history, architecture, science, literature, art, philosophy, and religion. Commerce and politics, they think, have to occur within a framework of rules. Adherence to procedure, coalition-building, amendments to a constitution, reforms carried out within the rules, better candidates—such are the tactics that the Best bring to the battle for dominance.

Mentally, such men still inhabit the stage-three civilization of their forefathers. The worst men are formed by cruder, simpler stories. As a result, they have the sense of self of a mafioso or gang member. But this makes them more effective in a struggle for dominance.

They know what they want—money and power—and act accordingly. They coil themselves tightly around the interests of a leader. This leader demands control over the men under him, [but] they understand that [this] is the source of their power over everybody else. No laws of man or providence do the Worst scruple to break in order to achieve power and money. Murder, blackmail, ginned up war, bribery, strategies based on deliberate lies—such are the weapons they bring to what for them is a stage-one fight for dominance.

Such men gradually spread into political organizations such as the CIA, and eventually we end up with a government of criminals and psychopaths.

The only effective way to fight back against this development is by telling a different story. Contract theory’s idyllic narrative of rational men uniting in their own interest does not describe the world as it is but, at best, as it ought to be.

Such utopian thinking is the besetting weakness of what the author calls “the Second Synthesis.” (The First Synthesis was that of reason and faith in the thought of Thomas Aquinas.) The Second Synthesis emerged from contract theory and early modern philosophy. Here we shall skip over the philosophical details, although these are quite interesting, and go straight to the conclusion: Immanuel Kant’s doctrine of the autonomy of the moral will. Mr. Johnston explains this as follows:

Because knowledge of the moral law is rational, it is secure. Because it is secure it is possible to know with confidence what should be done. To know what should be done means that it is possible for me to know what you should do and what we together should do. [This] means that nothing stops us from making the human community the way it OUGHT TO BE.

Contract doctrine turned the human individual into a “fundamental unit of account” and a “court of last appeal” in the political realm.

Groups exist for the individual, not the other way around. Because the individual is the fundamental unit of account, no reason exists why one individual should count more than another. Privileges of birth, tradition, caste, class, race, religion or any other non-individual category have no inherent moral standing.

What the Second Synthesis did was change who has the authority to define ideals [i.e., to define what ought to be]. Under the old Christian dispensation this authority resided with the custodians of the word of God, i.e., the Church, and also with those elevated by God to positions of high degree, i.e., the king.

After the Second Synthesis, this authority shifts to the individual, which makes the political realm into a kind of town where anyone is free to declare himself sheriff. In practice, the relevant “individuals” are those who participate in the political arena, and authority devolves upon whoever wins the political struggle. The game is played, as always, by weak individuals coalescing into a more powerful “us” in order to compete against a “them.”

Politics in the age of the Second Synthesis is a matter of rallying “us” by means of stories about how the world ought to be. This is the kind of politics Michael Oakshott described as “teleocratic.” One of its advantages is that it allows men to pursue two seemingly contradictory goals, namely, to embrace ideas about equality and to establish the hierarchies necessary for playing the games of life and politics.

The author lists some of the ideals of how the world ought to be as follows:

Liberté, égalité, fraternité, a classless society, careers open to talents, equal pay for equal work, from each according to his capacity and to each according to his need, equality under the law, men judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character, a level playing field, one man/one vote, a tobacco-free society, no child left behind, etc.

So there is no shortage of competing ideas about how the world ought to be, and—with the possible exception of the tobacco-free society—all in the above list involve some form of equality.

Once an ideal has been defined, citizens (or possibly humanity as a whole) can be divided into good guys and bad guys, with the good being those who move society closer to the ideal and the bad being those who stand in the way. The task of the good guys is to form a coalition to capture state power in order to eliminate the influence of bad guys (possibly by eliminating the bad guys themselves) and make society the way it ought to be. Necessary to this process is the idea of the victim. Depending upon the ideal, these may be “Africans, women, poor people, people in other countries (victims of imperialism), cigarette smokers, homosexuals, children left behind, etc.” The job of “us,” the political faction or party, is to protect the victims from their victimizers: capitalists, racists, male chauvinists, the heteronormative, the rich, big tobacco, etc. The stories based upon a supposed rational and moral imperative to protect victims and fight powerful victimizers have proved astonishingly successful at motivating men for over two centuries now: these are the “passions engendered by the idea of reason” which the author refers to in his subtitle.

But perhaps it is time to notice that the Second Synthesis and the style of politics associated with it have only really characterized the modern West, i.e., persons of European descent. Elsewhere politics has remained closer to the original model of competing kinship groups, a pattern going back to the days of hunting and gathering. But increasing contact of non-Europeans with the West have introduced them to ideological, Second Synthesis politics. They quickly learned to adapt their natural kinship preferences to such politics by identifying European Man himself as the quintessential victimizer. This has now had profound negative consequences for the West:

So conditioned by Second Synthesis narratives are we men of and from Europe that we now are comfortable linking ourselves together politically only in the name of pursuing abstract goals such as democracy, equality, the greatest good of the greatest number, or in the name of helping victims (blacks, women, foreign victims of imperialism, etc.). Appeals made to us as “white men” arouse suspicion.

Mr. Johnston suggests that this White man’s disease be called “social lupus,” since lupus is a disorder of the auto-immune system in which a person becomes, in effect, allergic to himself. Our diseased state “leaves us passive as other people occupy our lands.”

Another consequence of ideological politics is what Mr. Johnston calls the flat society. This happens because ideological politicians have every incentive to oppose all hierarchies other than their own. For example, if a traditional society permits slave-owning, slave-owners enjoy a certain amount of power independent of the state, and therefore not available to the politician.

How does the politician counter the power of the slave owner? By extending rights to everybody, including the slave. Second Synthesis ideology is the perfect vehicle for this endeavor. In the name of equality, the politician first eliminates the right of one man to own the labor of another. Next the politician weakens rich men and titled families via taxes, inheritance laws, and violence if necessary. Next, the politician makes gender roles grist for his mill. The politician’s ideal order is one in which NO links exist between individuals except for the links he controls. The landscape that reflects the politician’s ideal is a flat plain extending out in all directions, in the middle of which stands a single, tall mountain, the state, at the top of which he sits.

This is exactly what has happened to us, a story the author illustrates by considering the example of Thomas Jefferson.

He enjoyed a position of high standing which he did not have to fight to obtain. Social capital (narratives, habits, customs, laws, usages) guided him into the role of slave owner. The same inheritance of social capital guided other men into the role of slave. The existence of this social capital freed Mr. Jefferson from having to devote his energies to the task of beating other men into submission, one outcome of which was that he had the time and leisure to reflect, to explore topics of interest, to study political history, to play a key role in the construction of a new nation, to be the president of the new nation, to build Monticello, to found the University of Virginia, and much else.

One result of Jefferson’s leisured reflections was the conviction that the institution of slavery was unjust and should be abolished. He may have been correct about this, but if there had been no social capital in his Virginia, any man who wanted a slave

would have had to do the dirty work himself of beating another man into submission. Social capital established superordinate and subordinate categories of men, then conveyed these categories across the generations so brutal battles to establish stratification did not have to be refought in each generation.

Admittedly, Western civilization did not result from rational men designing a society the way it ought to be, as Second Synthesis stories would recommend.

But European peoples established their hierarchies so firmly that it was possible for those at the top to enjoy sufficient leisure and tranquility to create by talent and patronage an inventory of public goods of great value, e.g., delicate manners, beautiful architecture, a profound literature, mathematics, science, and an artistic tradition of beauty, depth and scope.

Egalitarian Second Synthesis politics will systematically destroy the conditions of such achievement—in addition to leaving us vulnerable to hostile outsiders. The White man’s lupus is clearly a sickness unto death. The author summarizes the development as follows:

People were confident that liberal values such as equality could be applied universally. This confidence was misplaced. This did not happen. Once the legacy of social capital that established rank peacefully lost vitality, what followed was not Mr. Jefferson’s liberal vision of society minus slavery. Rather, what followed was a raw fight for political power.

Namely, the fight between Yeats’ best and worst, in which the worst have all the advantages:

The problem with a flat society is that there are no men sitting at the top of their own montecelli—their own little mountains—with the education, resources, confidence networks, and discipline required to stop psychopaths, i.e., men of no scruples and no remorse, from reaching the top of the mountain and capturing the state.

And that, of course, is exactly what they have done. We are governed by an alliance between racial aliens and psychopaths which behaves like a criminal enterprise.

We noted above that the three principal themes of the stories people tell which engender emotions giving rise to actions are “us and them”, “high and low”, and “sex.” We have explained the effects of the Second Synthesis on the first two themes, but must not conclude without saying something about what it has done to sex. Nature assigns women the job of reproduction, and men that of dealing with the consequences of reproduction,

which, if unchecked, would soon lead to our extinguishing ourselves like yeast in a petri dish [through the overconsumption of finite resources]. The job of the male is to create space by confronting other males, by keeping them at bay, by showing them that our “us” is stronger than their “them,” by killing them if necessary.

This secures the territory necessary for the provisioning of women and children. So when the men of the European tribe contract social lupus and are left “passive as other people occupy our lands,” it represents a “failure in the most basic way that the males of any species can fail.” It is no wonder our females either forego procreation altogether or make themselves into the vehicles of an alien genetic heritage.

The industrial revolution and Second Synthesis, like all cultural achievements, were largely the work of men rather than women.

These men created wealth in the economy and in the political arena they created a decent approximation to the rule of law, both significant accomplishments, but achieved at a cost. In the past, boys were expected to defend themselves with their fists. [This was part of a male culture that] required of a man that he establish a reputation such that if you trenched upon him you could expect to trigger in him a strong response. With the rise of the rule of law among European peoples, life became easier for men. A man’s willingness to respond fiercely if trenched upon was no longer crucial to his maintaining his position in the community.

Violence came to be monopolized by the state, leaving men more concerned with “perks, salaries, and status based on money.” Male culture lost its vitality, and manipulation became more important for individual success than courage. And it is the resulting softer men who now find themselves faced with a stage-one struggle for dominance with ruthless psychopaths and hostile aliens from more primal cultures. We are going to need to rebuild our own male culture quickly. A necessary part of this will be foregoing familiar Second Synthesis stories in favor of narratives better attuned to the timeless requirements of evolutionary survival—and which will probably more closely resemble those of our stone age ancestors.

According to the brief biography on the back of the book, “Paul C. Johnston earned a bachelor’s degree in philosophy from Vanderbilt University and a PhD in economics from George Mason University. This is his second book.”

Why the Jewish Establishment Wants Progressives Talking About ICE Instead of Gaza

/7 Comments/in /by

Whenever the spotlight on Israel’s actions becomes too bright, the Jewish institutional apparatus predictably shifts the national conversation toward other subjects such as immigration. By promoting aggressive pro-immigration agendas, organized Jewry provides a safe harbor for the progressive base, effectively drugging the public with endless debates over immigration policy while the Jewish occupation of Palestine proceeds without the hindrance of American scrutiny.

More importantly, Jewry achieves a dual victory throughout this process: they effectively shield Israel from the fallout of its own atrocities while simultaneously accelerating the mass migration that serves as their long-term grand strategy for demographic replacement.

The No Kings protests that swept across America in 2025 and 2026 highlighted this dynamic. A recently surfaced clip featuring William Daroff, CEO of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, exposed the delicate balancing act Jewish groups have taken in light of these protests that have emerged in the wake of Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

Chris Menahan posted the clip on X with the observation that Daroff “says progressives being distracted by ICE is providing an opportunity for a ‘reset’ on Israel, especially with images from Gaza ‘subsiding’ on TikTok” (presumably at least partly because Larry Ellison now controls TikTok).

The clip comes from Lazar Focus, a Times of Israel podcast hosted by diplomatic correspondent Lazar Berman. Daroff leads an umbrella group representing roughly 50 national member organizations including AIPAC, the ADL, the AJC, and the Jewish Federations. The Jerusalem Post has named him among the 50 most influential Jews worldwide. He serves as a key Washington policy player who lobbies on U.S.-Israel relations, Iran, and antisemitism.

What makes the clip remarkable is its candor. Daroff lays out a strategy that treats the Gaza war as a public relations cycle to be waited out rather than a moral reckoning that demands a serious conversation regarding U.S. foreign policy and its subservience to Jewish interests.

When asked about the emergence of young progressive Jews publicly disaffiliating from Israel, Daroff identified this “non-Zionist” movement as the thing that disturbs him most. “I don’t think we’ve lost them,” Daroff said. “I think that they’re loud, many of them are uneducated, as I talked about, the need for Jewish education to ensure that they understand their connection to the Jewish people and to the state of Israel, to the land of Israel.” Notably, Daroff argues that these young Jews are lacking proper education. The problem, in his telling, is information rather than policy.

Even more revealing was the portion of the interview where Daroff provided his assessment of American political dynamics. He argued that the recent ICE crackdowns serve a calculated political purpose. They are designed to energize the progressive coalition, which includes both Jewish leaders and their non-Jewish pets. Furthermore, these raids serve as a strategic distraction; they shift public focus away from Israeli military actions in Gaza and back toward mass migration, an issue that is much more comfortable for political allies to debate.

“The American progressive world of the moment is focused on ICE, not focused on Israel, and that gives us an opportunity,” Daroff said. “With all due deference and nods to our friends in Minnesota and those who are in that battle, it gives us an opportunity, I think, while there is this relative quiet, to reset the engagement and to try to reconnect not just with the young American Jews, but with all of America without these images clouding those images.”

Daroff’s comment about waiting for “TikTok images to subside” is equally telling. Social media coverage of the Gaza conflict transformed public perception of the war, particularly among younger Americans. Daroff’s strategy involves waiting for these images to stop circulating rather than addressing the atrocities—subsidized by U.S. taxdollars—they depicted. “I think again, though, that as the TikTok images subside and we have a new baseline, that we have an opportunity to reengage with them, to reconnect with them,” Daroff said.

The full episode is available on the Times of Israel and on YouTube.

The No Kings protests themselves illustrated these internal progressive tensions that organized Jewry has had to grapple with since October 7. Indivisible, the primary organizing force behind the mobilizations, was founded by Leah Greenberg and Ezra Levin, a married couple who are both Jewish. However, their political orientations place them firmly in the progressive camp rather than pro-Israel advocacy.

Greenberg has stated: “I see myself as being part of a tradition of Jews organizing for social justice, and recognizing that our own status as a minority group that has been persecuted calls on us to support others who are under attack.” In January 2024, Indivisible issued a statement calling the situation in Gaza a catastrophic crisis and demanding the Biden administration pressure Israel for an immediate ceasefire. On the one-year anniversary of October 7, 2024, Greenberg issued another statement characterizing Netanyahu’s military response as having “taken a horrendous toll on Gaza’s people.” This critique mirrors the approach often taken by J Street. While they openly rebuke the excesses of current Israeli policies, they stop short of addressing the underlying reality. They refuse to confront the system of Jewish supremacy that fundamentally sustains the occupation of Palestine.

This pattern of selective criticism serves as a convenient front for a movement that relies on institutional backing far removed from the grassroots. The reality of this patronage is made clear by the massive influx of Jewish capital from established power players like the Open Society Foundations.

George Soros’s Open Society Foundations gave Indivisible a 2-year $3 million grant in 2023 and has awarded a total of $7.61 million in grants to Indivisible between 2017 and 2023. Tom Perriello, who employed Greenberg before she co-founded Indivisible, served as executive director of Open Society Foundations’ U.S. Programs from November 2018 to July 2023, creating a documented financial link between the Soros network and the organization.

The No Kings protests blended immigration enforcement concerns with other causes, including Palestine solidarity. At various rallies, Palestinian flags appeared alongside signs protesting ICE raids. This created precisely the dynamic Daroff describes benefiting from. When progressive energy disperses across multiple causes, the focused pressure on any single issue—challenging the Israeli project in this case—diminishes.

For establishment Jewish organizations, the immigration enforcement controversy represents something close to a strategic gift. It absorbs activist bandwidth, dominates news cycles, and pushes Gaza coverage further from the center of progressive attention. Daroff essentially admits this on camera, treating it not as a coincidence but as an opportunity to be exploited.

Having the conversation focus on immigration is a much more preferable option for many Jewish leaders like Daroff, who view this as an opportunity to allow the “invade the world, invite the world” order to continue apace without issue. An easily distracted and polarized population is one that is putty in the hands of Jewish interest groups.

American Free Press Panel Discussion on the SPLC Indictment

/4 Comments/in , /by

The Department of Justice recently announced that a federal grand jury in Alabama has charged the Southern Poverty Law Center with multiple counts of wire and bank fraud. Talk radio host James Edwards assembled a special panel of attorneys and activists and asked them to express their thoughts about the indictment.

To ensure a diversity of perspectives, these expert contributors were asked to share their initial reactions and personal experiences with the SPLC and were otherwise encouraged to focus on aspects of this development they believed readers would find most compelling.

* * *

Glen Allen, Esq., Chief Legal Officer and Director of the Free Expression Foundation (FEF): I was a victim – one of many – of the odious SPLC’s fraudulent and criminal conduct. In 2016, the SPLC, led by the hateful Hedi Beirich, orchestrated a campaign against me with the aim and successful result of having me fired from the Baltimore Law Department, impairing my family and social relationships, and sullying my reputation as an attorney. What was my crime in the reptilian eyes of the SPLC and Beirich? Just this: certain perfectly legal associations decades prior with Dr. William Pierce and the National Alliance, plus – horrors! – my attendance at a Holocaust revisionist conference on National Alliance property. And how did Beirich and the SPLC learn of these aspects of my private life? By bribing or otherwise illegally inveigling a National Alliance employee to turn over confidential information regarding me and others to the SPLC.

I fought back. I sued Beirich and the SPLC in federal court, alleging multiple causes of action. The court, however, dismissed my complaint on the rationale that the facts I alleged – and I alleged in detail the SPLC’s odious and illegal tactics – were not “plausible.” So, at one level, I feel vindicated by the DOJ’s indictment, which confirms numerous incidents of SPLC’s criminal behavior, including its illegal manipulation of the National Alliance employee as set forth in my complaint.

On another level, I remain disappointed and frustrated at how our legal system treated me and other SPLC victims, failing to give us the impartial justice to which we are entitled. The system did not rise to the occasion but sank to a shallow political Wokism that for many of us will always tarnish our view of the judiciary. What’s next in this SPLC saga? You may be assured that I and other legal minds in FEF’s milieu will zealously investigate which old claims can be revived and which new claims can be pursued against the SPLC as a result of the DOJ litigation.

Lydia Brimelow, President of the Berkeley Springs Castle Foundation and half of the husband-wife team that ran VDare: My only question about the SPLC indictment is, what does this mean for the Historic American Nation? There are several facets of the answer that particularly interest me.

1. Does it damage the SPLC? Undeniably. Even if a large portion of their donors rally around and they drum up support to defend themselves against “persecution,” a flaw has been revealed. It will have repercussions. Not only will some portion of their donors lose enthusiasm, but the ability for our enemies to use the SPLC as their weapon of choice in Cancel Culture battles has been profoundly handicapped. And who knows, some of them might even go to jail. A girl can dream!

2. Does it benefit the SPLC or any of the Leftist with whom they are in league? They were hiding these transactions for a reason. If they thought the exposure would help their cause it would have been in their public communications. Even in the worst case for us – they beat the charges – great! It’s still an ugly clean-up job. The more resources they waste the better. Best case scenario for us…could be historic.

3. Does it damage the Historic American Nation? Not directly. It is extremely annoying that some influential voices of the mainstream Right are using the SPLC indictments to falsely claim that Unite the Right was a hoax, and it is worth correcting them. On the one hand, it shows how profoundly uninvested in our people they are. On the other hand, the distance (however inappropriate given the facts) that Fake News creates between the massive smear job that Charlottesville turned out to be, may permit some normal Americans to reconsider their fear in associating with right wing activism. Scapegoats have a purpose after all, and they do important psychological work. There is obviously the question of the paid informants and the people who were informed on, but I have to assume that if any juicy tidbit was shared, the SPLC has already cashed in on it. It’s all from years ago. The damage there is most likely already done.

4. Does it benefit the Historic American Nation? Yes. We should take any and all opportunities to celebrate, unconditionally. A federal indictment that will precipitate massive discovery against our enemies is an objective good, even if the SPLC manages to throw it off. In the best-case scenario – and I’m just talking about logical possibilities here, not realistic ones – the SPLC gets shut down.

Hope is a dangerous thing because disappointment is so painful. I have seen months lead to years when there are no victories. In that interminable desert, keeping the faith takes real effort. And, ultimately, God’s time is not our time – we may never see victory. But we’re called to fight, and we’re called to rally, and victory comes one win at a time.

So, pop some champagne and take this win, patriots! We’re joining you in a toast at Berkeley Springs Castle.

Kyle J. Bristow, Esq., Founder of Bristow Law, PLLC: I was pleasantly surprised when I first heard that the Southern Poverty Law Center had been indicted for having committed felonies. The SPLC has, for decades, viciously targeted and harassed law-abiding American citizens who espouse traditional, Christian, politically conservative, and patriotic ideals, and I am optimistic that the SPLC’s campaign of hate is coming to an end.

For far too long, the SPLC has smeared the reputations of people and organizations that are opposed to the SPLC’s degenerate, leftist worldview. Such smearing fosters a culture of self-censorship and ostracism at best, but violent crime at worst, which is antithetical to core American values. After a gunman walked into the Family Research Council’s Washington, D.C., headquarters in 2012 with the goal of gunning down Christians, the FRC president, Tony Perkins, said that he believed that the shooter was motivated by the SPLC.

Although I am hopeful that the SPLC will be convicted and severely punished, such as losing its tax-exempt status or even being dissolved as a corporate entity, the legal process itself will be horrifically painful for the SPLC. I enthusiastically anticipate Republican state and federal lawmakers conducting invasive investigations and holding public hearings to deeply delve into the political and financial misconduct of the SPLC. A law firm that litigates class action lawsuits may even file a major racketeering lawsuit against the SPLC to recover the hundreds of millions of dollars the SPLC has unlawfully and fraudulently received over the years, after engaging in systematic mail and wire fraud against its duped donors.

The SPLC is morally rotten to its core, and this is readily becoming apparent to the public. The federal criminal indictment and significant press coverage associated with the same are far more damaging to the SPLC than even the 2019 allegations of rampant sexual harassment, gender discrimination, race discrimination, and toxic work culture, which culminated in SPLC co-founder Morris Dees being terminated.

There is nothing “southern” about the SPLC. There is nothing “poverty” about the SPLC. And now it is clear that the SPLC may be more of a criminal syndicate than a “law firm.”

Sam Bushman, Owner of the Liberty News Radio Network and CEO of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA): For decades, the Southern Poverty Law Center has cast itself as America’s moral authority on hatred and extremism. That authority is collapsing under the weight of its own record.

Their most dangerous weapon is the “hate map.” In 2012, a gunman entered the Family Research Council headquarters intent on mass murder — after finding them listed on the SPLC’s website. He said so himself. That is not incidental. That is a direct, documented line between reckless labeling and real bloodshed.

I know this personally. I am a radio host, patriot advocate, and CEO of the CSPOA. Sheriff Richard Mack and the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association were falsely branded by the SPLC as advocates of violence. It was a lie. They retracted it — quietly. Accusations travel fast. Corrections don’t. Sheriff Mack and I have offered $10,000 to anyone producing credible evidence linking either of us to violence. No one has claimed it. Not one person.

The walls are closing in. State attorneys general have raised formal concerns about the SPLC’s conduct. Federal scrutiny has followed. Then came Atlanta — an SPLC attorney was arrested on domestic terrorism charges after Molotov cocktails were hurled at a police training facility. The organization that has spent decades branding others as dangerous now has answering of its own to do.

This is not a political disagreement. It is a reckoning. The same standard of accountability that the SPLC has weaponized against patriots, sheriffs, and citizens for decades must now be applied to them. Full investigation. Full transparency. Prosecution where the evidence demands it. The rule of law has no exceptions. Not even for those who built a career deciding who deserves to be called dangerous.

Sam Dickson, Esq.: The indictment is greatly overestimated in the minds of our adherents. It is thin soup that charges the SPLC with technical violations of bank regulations. The “crimes” seem improbable. Since when have donors been entitled to a line-by-line breakdown of the activities of the group getting the donation?

Hasn’t it been pretty much common knowledge that the SPLC plants agents in organizations it targets and bribes officers and members of such organizations to steal information so the SPLC can use it to damage the professional careers of members of such organizations?

The indictment conceals the identities of the sleazeballs who took the bribes, which, to me, indicates the government’s desire to pull its punches. I am pessimistic that we will ever learn the identities of the plants and the bribed informants.

The indictment also fuels the misleading narrative currently being pushed by cuckservatives that by bribing members of these organizations to provide the SPLC with information with which to harm the careers of adherents, the SPLC was “financing hate.”

In a sane society (not one like ours), the SPLC would be a laughingstock. The SPLC is a parody of the liberals’ parody of Senator Joseph McCarthy. For three generations, liberals have ridiculed McCarthy for “guilt by association.” The SPLC practices guilt by association (it calls it “links” to avoid triggering memories in the atrophied brains of liberals) on meth.

The “links” used by the SPLC to smear its targets include geographic guilt by association (“John Doe comes from an area of North Carolina once known for “racism”), audience guilt by association (“John Doe spoke at Berkeley University and a known neo-Nazi sat in the audience”) and even quotation guilt by association (“John Doe denies that he is a Nazi but SPLC research proves that something he wrote was quoted in a Nazi publication”).

The SPLC’s mode of thinking mirrors that of schizophrenics. Normal people’s brains do not hatch screwball ideas that a shared geographic location, the presence of someone in an audience listening to a speaker, or the mere fact that someone wrote something and was quoted by someone else establishes any rational connection.

Schizophrenics think and talk that way. So does the SPLC. We should focus on exposing the intrinsic madness of the SPLC and take a more sober view of this indictment, which will likely be a financial bonanza for the SPLC and will be used to raise another several hundred million dollars.

Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression (CAFE): The indictment of the SPLC is an amazing breakthrough and may help weaken one of the most morally corrupt organizations in the United States with its gargantuan $800 million endowment. That it paid agitators to create the “racism” and “hate” it purports to fight should sit poorly with many donors. It’s like a fire department setting fires to justify their existence and hours of overtime.

Hopefully, it will weaken them, especially among those corporations that send them fat checks. It may also chill the trust the lamestream media has placed in them as the go-to source to tell them who the “haters” and “extremists” are, with the SPLC’s “hate map” having included everyone from conservative Christians and parents protesting perverted curricula in their schools.

In Canada, we have the pernicious Canadian Anti-Hate Network, which got its start-up seed money from the SPLC and, like the SPLC, spies on nationalists and dissenters and briefs the media as to who the “haters” are. Both groups have cost many good people their jobs, making a mockery of the right to freedom of speech. In the U.S., after a trial and, hopefully, convictions, perhaps citizens who have been defamed, deplatformed, debanked, or fired because of the SPLC may find justice.

Dr. Michael Hill, President of the Southern Nationalist League (SNL): Yes, Charlottesville was a set-up involving high-level officials and likely numerous infiltrators. But it was also a legitimate outpouring of White/Southern nationalist sentiment that scared the hell out of the establishment. Now, after nine years, someone is looking to refashion the Charlottesville story for their own benefit. That’s why those of us who were there should be the first and loudest to insist that the truth be finally told.

The recent indictment of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) by a federal grand jury in Montgomery, Alabama, for, among other things, paying over a quarter-million dollars to someone who was at Charlottesville at the Unite the Right rally (UTR) in August 2017, has reopened the important question of just what actually happened at the event and why. Trump says it was organized and paid for by the SPLC (who we all want to see go down for good) for the sole reason of making him look bad. His acolytes/influencers in the various media, especially social media, laid the groundwork from the beginning for Trump’s claims about Charlottesville being paid for, organized, and orchestrated by the left. They said, in effect, that any organic outpouring of pro-White and pro-Southern sentiment was by its very nature fake and a product of the left designed to embarrass the “real conservative” movement in America: Trump and MAGA. No “racists” and “antisemites” need apply to this respectable club.

I was in Charlottesville as Chief of The League of the South (LS), the largest single organization to participate in UTR. Michael Tubbs (LS Chief of Staff) and I were at the head of that column that marched down East Market Street and had to fight our way into Lee Park while the local and state cops stood down and watched the mayhem take place. In other words, I was there and solely responsible for the LS and its UTR logistical planning and funding, its tactical and operational planning, and its overall goal of defending our beleaguered Southern culture and heritage. I sure as hell know better than Trump and MAGA about what went on that day. In short, they are liars. To what larger purpose remains to be seen, but I’d bet whatever it is goes to the benefit of Trump himself.

But as with much of Trump’s bombastic and ego-driven babbling, Charlottesville, too, is a flimsily constructed falsehood. As my friend and compatriot Brad Griffin posted on X: “Hundreds of White Nationalists got together in 2017, plotted with the SPLC how to make Trump look bad, and drove to Charlottesville to carry out their plan. Part of the organizers’ plan was to get sued for millions of dollars while not being able to afford legal representation.”

May the God of our fathers separate the truth from lies and bring His wrath and judgment upon the purveyors of the latter.

Jason Kessler, Unite the Right organizer and author of Charlottesville and the Death of Free Speech: Obviously, the SPLC indictment is great news and yet another example of the benefit we get out of Trump that we wouldn’t get from any other president.

It’s a double-edged sword regarding the revelations about an SPLC informant at Unite the Right. On the one hand, sunlight is almost always a good thing. We want to know who this is and pray that the identity of F-37 is revealed. And yet, on the other hand, the revelation has sparked a wave of false conspiracy theories about Charlottesville being “staged.”

I am not an attorney, but I have spent many years in legal combat, including as a successful pro se litigant. On its face, the allegations against the SPLC clearly and logically have merit. It’s about committing wire fraud and money laundering, not hiring an informant. For once, the shoe is on the other foot, and our enemies will face trial in a potentially hostile jurisdiction in Alabama.

Some people say that this part of Alabama is the “Black belt” because of the high Black population, but I could see Black people also being offended about SPLC paying people to make “racist posts online.” Time will tell.

Kirk Lyons, Esq., Founder and Chief Trial Counsel for the Southern Legal Resource Center (SLRC): Since the indictment, I’ve fielded about 15 calls about the SPLC case, including an FBI inquiry about my 1989 quote on their involvement in the Shelby Bookstore murder case. This suggests a broader investigation.

Most of the former SPLC leadership has left, including Morris Dees and Richard Cohen in 2019, as well as Mark Potok and Heidi Beirich. But they still have an estimated $800 million endowment, and they are rallying with other left-of-center “civil rights” groups to fight the indictment.

We need to push the administration to proceed vigorously, find ways to share information with the DOJ, and encourage them to expand the investigation through our Congressmen and DOJ contacts (especially in the US Attorney’s office in Montgomery).

The SPLC’s strategy will be to delay, including by filing a motion to quash the indictment, and, if there is a trial, to appeal any verdict they don’t like. I seriously doubt they will settle with the DOJ. I assume they will fight for all they are worth and try to run out the clock on the Trump administration, because when it’s over, this all shuts down.

Dependent on any proven revelations of wrongdoing from the DOJ, any groups looking to jump in on this with a private cause of action need to be united, well-organized, and well-funded.

Experiencing the SPLC discovery process was quite an education for me and was unrelenting and brutal. Whatever we do, we need to take advantage of this situation to learn all we can about SPLC’s skullduggery and inner workings, and keep the press spotlight on the SPLC’s many scandals and abuses. I look forward to seeing what the DOJ can prove.

Rev. Bret McAtee, Pastor of Christ the King Reformed Church (Charlotte, Michigan): I popped a cork from the finest champagne and celebrated when I heard of the SPLC being hoisted on their own petard. I only pray now that the ADL, B’nai Brith, and the ACLU will also soon get a similar comeuppance. Finally, the loathsome SPLC has been indicted. “Whatsoever a man soweth he shall also reap.”

Of course, this doesn’t mean that this organization will be convicted in a court of law, but for now, the spotlight has been turned on them to expose the hate-filled nature of their hate-filled lies.

My objection to the SPLC was their contention that there was something errant or unworthy about hate. Scripture clearly teaches that God hates all workers of iniquity (Ps. 5:5). Scripture tells us that there are six things the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to Him (Prov. 6:16 and Zech. 8:17). The Holy Spirit instructs His people to “Hate that which is evil, cling to that which is good.”

Next, Christians have to get past thinking that there is something intrinsically wrong with “hate.” How can we not hate that which the Lord Christ loves? How can we not hate that which seeks to destroy the good, the true, and the beautiful, as Christianity defines the good, the true, and the beautiful? Instead of defending ourselves from charges of hate, we should step up to the mic and say, “Of course I hate that which is vile, false, and ugly. Who wouldn’t?” Christians who don’t hate the SPLC and the parallel organizations are not right in the head. Tolerance of evil folks is not a virtue.

Finally, and this will probably fly right by people, Christians need to realize that Biblical hatred is built on the foundation of love. It is because we love people that we stand in opposition to them when they attack those things God counts as lovely. We should communicate to the Christ-hating cosmopolitans that we understand their attack on that which is virtuous is part of their pursuit of the establishment of the perverse.

Because of these instructions, I gladly admit that I hate the SPLC with a holy hatred since it has consistently revealed itself as an organization that hates that which God loves (Ps. 139:21). Indeed, the SPLC has always used its hate list as a proxy war to seek to destroy Biblical Christians and Biblical Christianity. It’s clear that any organization that claimed to be an authority on identifying hate while refusing to name “antifa” as a hate group was working with an ax to grind.

Sheriff Richard Mack, Founder of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA): I have been lied about by the SPLC for over 25 years. I have called them out on it numerous times. As I analyzed their modus operandi, I discovered what they were just indicted for: lying to their donors about me and who I was to scare them into donating more money. This is what the SPLC has always done, and they have made a tremendous amount of money doing it.

For example, the SPLC has said numerous times that my national organization and I have promoted and advocated violence and that the CSPOA is a paramilitary organization. I challenged them to show one example in which I ever promoted violence or committed an act of violence in my life. I even challenged them to an open debate about any of their baseless accusations. Of course, they refused.

Why? Because they cannot afford to be exposed to the public or to their supporters regarding their “sales tactics.” Now, finally, they have been exposed, and I would be happy to testify against them.

Padraig Martin, former government contractor and author of A Walk in the Park: My Charlottesville Story: I may be the last individual outside of the criminal justice system to have seen James Fields in person. In fact, in many ways, I became an inadvertent eyewitness to the depths at which the system fought against those of us who simply wanted to preserve a monument and a people’s heritage. Why? Because I was arrested in Charlottesville after the Unite the Right rally was deemed “unlawful,” I was charged with a criminal offense entirely unrelated to the event. That which I witnessed was a study in government tyranny.

After UTR, I had the misfortune of losing the keys to my car. While attempting to break into my own vehicle, the Virginia State Police stopped me. I explained it was my car and told them that I had a gun in my pocket and where to find it. I also explained that I had a legal concealed carry permit in my home country, Florida. Given that Virginia and Florida had a reciprocity agreement, the matter should have ended with a misdemeanor citation (failure to carry said permit, which I left at home). I was not engaged in criminal activity, and I had a legal right to carry. Instead, the State Police chose to process me in a makeshift, underground station beneath the Charlottesville courthouse, where I sat, watched, and listened.

At the time, because I was in their custody, I had no idea about the James Fields incident. I listened to the State Police complain more about Terry Maculiffe’s decision to fly to Charlottesville and the resultant helicopter crash. I heard them speak about a car crash (the Fields incident) and that a woman hospitalized as a result would be fine. I watched as they took calls from various city officials, discussed matters with federal law enforcement wearing White Nationalist regalia (including several whom I recognized at the park earlier in the day), and joked amongst themselves quite frequently. After finally allowing me to wash off a strange irritant that the antifa had thrown at us, they took me to the Albemarle County jail to get processed in front of a Magistrate.

While sitting with handcuffs behind my back on a wooden bench, a disheveled young man in a polo was brought into the room by officers and sat on a bench somewhat caddy-cornered from me. I thought to myself that this was a poor kid who got a DUI on the wrong day. He looked flushed and almost stoned. I genuinely thought he was drunk. I told him, “Don’t worry. It will be alright.” That solicited a bark from one of two officers behind the glass not to talk to one another.

An officer came into and out of the Magistrate’s processing room several times, asking Fields questions or making declaratory statements on his behalf. Fields answered willingly or agreed to the statements without the privilege of an attorney. “Is that when you sped up?” “Did you say you did this?” “Do you admit you did that?” His answers were mumbled, further reinforcing my belief that he was a drunk college kid – not the monster he was later made out to be. He was then led into the Magistrate’s room, and I assumed I would see him inside. Instead, I was let out simply because I owned a home in Virginia, which I had to put up as some kind of collateral. It was not until Monday that I found out who Fields was, when we were both arraigned in Charlottesville court. I sat in the courtroom surrounded by antifa having their charges dropped one by one; his arraignment was via video. At that moment, I knew I was a witness to a crime – one committed by the State of Virginia against Mr. Fields.

Lew Moore, former Congressional Chief-of-Staff, Ron Paul’s Presidential Campaign Manager, and host of the Hour of Decision podcast: I believe the indictment of SPLC had been in the “hip pocket” of the Trump DOJ for some time, to be brought out if/when needed for maximum political impact. After all, the liberal Montgomery Advertiser newspaper exposed a mountain of perfidy on the part of Morris Dees and this strange “poverty” law center as far back as the 1990s. We’re told even the Biden administration was considering a crackdown. There is much evidence that the Trump political operation is currently trying to pivot to fire up the base for the upcoming election, and away from bad war and economic realities. This move at the SPLC is one element of the “pivot.”

The SPLC had overreached, extending its “Hate Map” toward Trump allies Dennis Praeger, Franklin Graham, and TPUSA. The hideous greed of this organization eventually made it a liability to the Left as well, not to mention increasing allegations of internal discrimination against Blacks, etc. This left them with no political cover, allowing the hammer to fall. But whether actual individual actors will be perp-walked and the organization completely bankrupted, not merely fined, remains to be seen.

That the DOJ’s point of attack has been the infiltration of provocateurs within right-wing groups offers Zionist-influenced elements around Trump an opportunity. This malign foreign influence has openly sought to purge influencers within the old Trump base who have exposed them. Unfortunately, through ignorance or design, some of these same influencers have decided to defame, without evidence, the organizers of the Charlottesville rally and other patriots as SPLC plants. Watch this entire turn of events carefully, and all lies must be called out.

Dr. Tomislav Sunic, former Croatian diplomat: I have long had the dubious distinction of being featured on the SPLC website as “a white nationalist author, radio host, and fixture on the white nationalist speaker circuit.” I have also had the privilege—albeit not noted by the SPLC—of growing up in communist Yugoslavia, becoming familiar at an early age with the nature of the communist totalitarian mindset, its lawfare, and its ceaseless manufacturing of “fascism” and “white supremacism” threats. Even if there were no longer any fascists around, the communist judiciary would fabricate them in order to provide itself with international legitimacy.

Having been subjected to such communist demonology, and having seen my late father—a Catholic lawyer—spend considerable time in a Yugoslav communist prison for his anti-communist writings, I had no problem detecting the same language and legal patterns in the SPLC. This did not surprise me, especially given that in the early 1980s, I encountered more communist-minded professors and grad students on U.S. college campuses than in the entire Eastern European communist educational system.

Most Americans still do not realize that the SPLC is not the only player in this demon-hunting game; there are dozens of similar antifascist, communist-inspired, well-funded virtue-signaling leagues all over the US and the EU: the Jewish-Zionist-inspired ADL, the UK-based Hope Not Hate, the powerful and government-funded Amadeu Antonio Stiftung in Germany, the DÖW in Austria, and the CRIF and LICRA in France. All of them function on the same principle: resurrecting dead fascist foes in order to cover up their live academic and media smearing campaigns against dissident voices. With the massive racial changes due to decades of uncontrolled migration, coupled with a still-resilient and strong DEI-influenced judiciary, in the years to come the US will likely face a Soviet-like scenario of mutual hatred of all against all.

The fundamental mistake of self-proclaimed US and EU white nationalists is their often childish sporting of fascist and martial insignia, which provides additional fodder for bans or deplatforming by local authorities. Often, it is their total ignorance of the genealogy of cultural fascisms and their offshoots in prewar Europe that makes them look grotesque and dangerous in the eyes of the wider population. Whoever marches along with “Hollywood Nazis” or their look-alikes must know that there are powerful interests behind them who profit from such silly—if not outright retarded—behavior.

An edited version of this article was originally published by American Free Press – America’s last real newspaper! Click here to subscribe today or call 1-888-699-NEWS.

When not interviewing newsmakers, James Edwards has often found himself in the spotlight as a commentator, including many national television appearances. Over the past 20 years, his radio work has been featured in hundreds of newspapers and magazines worldwide. Media Matters has referred to Edwards as a “right-wing media fixture” and Hillary Clinton personally named him as an “extremist” who would shape our country.

Alabama Opens Its Own Investigation Into the Southern Poverty Law Center

The law center, based in Montgomery, has drawn the ire of conservatives in recent years. Last month, the Justice Department charged the group with financial crimes.

Listen · 2:58 min
A light-colored building that is the headquarters of the Southern Poverty Law Center

The Alabama attorney general’s office announced on Monday that it was opening its own investigation into the Southern Poverty Law Center, less than a month after the Justice Department charged the organization with several financial crimes.

The law center, which is based in Montgomery, Ala., has drawn the ire of conservatives in recent years for targeting groups that many of them consider mainstream. That conflict came to a head in April, when the Justice Department charged the organization with crimes that included wire fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

In a statement, the Alabama attorney general’s office applauded the Justice Department’s actions and said that it was separately investigating the law center to determine whether “the S.P.L.C.’s activity within the state also ran afoul of the state’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act or state laws related to charitable organizations.”

“Thanks to the U.S. Justice Department’s action to deal with the S.P.L.C., the state’s efforts have now received a shot in the arm,” the attorney general, Steve Marshall, said in the statement. “We look forward to learning more about the inner workings of an organization that we have long believed was rotten, but until recently, has been impervious.”

Continues…

M.I.G.A. in the woodpile

/8 Comments/in /by

The year is 2028. Trump is now 6’4″, according to his doctor. He has survived more assassination attempts than the other presidents combined. He’s managed to avoid impeachment by way of a backroom deal with the Democrats that granted citizenship to a million Dreamers. Trump says he’s days away from a deal with Putin to end the Ukraine war, just in time to give JD Vance a boost in the polls, but by now only a sprinkling of Evangelicals and diehards remain from his original grassroots base.

What a difference a few years can make. As Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones and Candace Owens wash their hands of this administration, the company that the president keeps leaves little mystery as to where things go from here. These days the president prefers to bathe in the sweet and soggy praise of those who were against him when he first ran for office: Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro and Lindsey Graham. As strange as it is to say, Trump has become a Never-Trumper.

Back in 2015, I wrote the semi-satirical piece Why Donald Trump Should have held a Miss Universe pageant in Iran. Before the Islamic Revolution of 1978 Iran actually used to host beauty pageants, but the broader point was that commerce and cultural exchange often succeed in relaxing political barriers. The article was initially rejected for being too negative about Trump’s personal baggage at a time when he was the next big hope, but indeed many of the early warning signs were there that in the slipstream of this populist Pegasus was a neocon Trojan horse. Trump was already a huge war hawk on Iran and an advocate of massive military spending. His extensive business and familial ties in New York were completely intertwined with Jews, including in-laws and grandchildren. So while some red meat was thrown into the mix in the form of anti-immigrant nativism, the overall manifestation of the two Trump administrations hardly diverges from its headwaters. These days, Trump rarely utters the slogan America First – perhaps a Freudian pink slip of termination – but what you will hear coming out of the woodwork from a growing number of defectors is the Make Israel Great Again lampoon. Let’s assess the claim.

Over the Trump era, we’ve seen the embassy moved to Jerusalem, recognition of Golan’s annexation and the conclusion of Gaza’s demolition. The 1.9 million refugees slowly being redistributed to neighboring countries could also end up in a neighborhood near you. The ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, is an open supporter of the Greater Israel Project (and he is the Christian in Trump’s cabinet). Appetites for a chunk of the fallen Syrian state persist as rumors for now, while Israel has invaded Lebanon up to the Litani River and may well convert this “defensive buffer” into eventual annexation. The fighting is so fierce that one IDF soldier was forced to use a sledgehammer to defend himself against a statue of Jesus.

On the socioeconomic front, inflation in Israel is a mere 1.9%, compared to 3.5% in the United States and up to 6% in some EU countries. New Jewish immigrants continue to arrive in Israel and the country even ranked eighth in the recent World Happiness Report – remarkable in the midst of intermittent war. Israelis are a special breed, not only do they repeatedly choose Benjamin Netanyahu to lead them but also Knesset ogres like Itamar Ben-Gvir, whose recent role in the bringing about Palestinian death penalty law was celebrated by his wife baking a birthday cake with the image of a noose and the words “Sometimes dreams come true.”

Out in the Diaspora, the morale of Jewish activists might not be quite so plucky but it nevertheless endures with aggressive litigation of everything deemed antisemitic. Australia recently completed an inquisition following the Bondi attack by two Muslims, with the expected fallout that free speech and gun rights will be further stymied. It’s unlikely there’ll be many more influential youth leaders who dare take a stand on Israel the way Charlie Kirk did before he was wiped off the map. There’s a saying among political pundits that nothing is true until Benjamin Netanyahu denies it, and sure enough the Israeli PM embarked on a strangely prolific campaign to deny Israeli involvement in the Kirk assassination.

A similar run of good luck with plausible deniability has carried the Jeffrey Epstein affair to an anticlimactic stalemate, even if it’s widely assumed he must have been running a blackmail operation on behalf of the Israelis. No indictments, no justice for victims and not even a minor scandal about the use of Jewish supremacist language in the emails. Instead of a Goyim Lives Matter awakening, Americans were treated to this hysterical exchange in the congressional hearing in which antisemitism became the focal point. Who knows what will be written about the Protocols of the Elders of Epstein a century from now? I say that because the passage of time invariably gives Jewish narratives the benefit of the doubt.

Last week in Brussels, stained glass windows more than a century old were removed from the Cathedral of St. Michael and St. Gudula because they were said to be antisemitic depictions of a blood-libel from 1370. Not knowing precisely what happened seven centuries ago might be one reason to remove the murals, but what the clergy have agreed to do is to kowtow with an apology plaque in place of the windows and grovel to the Jewish community for forgiveness. This is the direction that atonement and reconciliation always travels in between these groups. The Middle Ages may have been a time of rampant superstition and religious mania, however I see no reason why such zealotry would have been confined to Christians while Jews be considered paragons of equanimity not at all prone to neurotic curiosities and conspiracy.

The lifetime work of Ariel Toaff is a good place to start for the alternative perspective, as the Israeli-based professor of medieval history proved through meticulous research that European Jews were involved in ritualistic blood sacrifice beyond the garden variety of kabbalah. The modern State of Israel hardly inspires more confidence given some of the civic ordinances that transpire, quite contrary to its reputed secularism. Footage from recent protests in Israel caught my eye for I had never noticed that the country’s ambulances were marked with a red hexagram instead of a Red Cross. Thus the Israelis have done what Muslims have done with the Red Crescent, even though the humanitarian movement of the Red Cross has nothing to do with religion (the logo is an inversion of neutral Switzerland’s flag). At any rate, the Rothschild family sign has come full circle in modern Israel, but it hasn’t stopped the pathological aversion to anything that looks like a cross. The education system in Israel has gone to the extreme of banning the international plus sign because it resembles the crucifix. In its place, the up tack (﬩) was implemented to placate all of the “pious” Jews – for whom spitting on crosses is a 1,800-year-old tradition.

The other week at a protest in northern Israel police confiscated a Hungarian flag from an anti-Netanyahu demonstrator on the grounds that it looked too similar to the Palestinian flag! Poor Viktor Orban just can’t catch a break these past few weeks. The sole democracy in the Middle East they keep telling us, but such are the level of frivolous sensitivity, irritability and institutionalized chutzpah. Last month an Israeli lawyer and politician serving in the Knesset called for the billions in aid that Israel receives from America to no longer be called aid but rather a “security exchange” and “one of the most cost-effective strategic investments” – especially given the “coordination in confronting Iran.” As with the historical understandings that Western leaders reach with Jewish counterparts, the financial ones seem a lot like Heads: Jews win, Tails: Gentiles lose – with Trump’s visage on upcoming US coinage to supervise the formality. This rather cynical dialectic reminds me of a famous quote from Israeli PM Menachem Begin in which he said “I wish both sides good luck” just as the brutal Iran-Iraq war was beginning. If you like dark humor then wait until you find out that Begin was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1978, in spite of being responsible for the King David Hotel bombing that killed 91 people.

This sounds a lot like the trajectory that Trump is on, pining for shiny accolades while being responsible for grievous crimes. Trump and Netanyahu – two chickpeas in a falafel – have managed to revolt even traditional allies like the servile European ones. Furthermore, Israeli daily Haaretz reports that a critical mass of Jews in America is now disgusted with Israel, although this is a motif we’ve heard before and deserves suspicion. Performative outrage is a staple of the political left, which is the tribe of most American Jews, and so when Israel periodically “mows the lawn” in Palestine the expected outrage is largely performative and temporary, for in the interim period they typically drift back into the fold, recycle their final straw and allow the cycle to repeat. Figures like Bernie Sanders and Chuck Schumer are clearly reluctant critics of Israel, while most Jewish anti-Zionist media are to some extent controlled opposition. One need only look at the editorial staff of the formerly communist now anti-Zionist publication Jewish Currents, which includes born and bred Zionist apostate Arielle Angel and Israel damage-control operative Peter Beinart. In 2021 the publication apologized after being called out for running ads for a “leadership” training program in Israel.

Beinart is the archetypal Jewish activist who advances Jewish interests through the politically correct framework, and is therefore legion with the bipartisan chorus of those still denying Israeli designs and impetus behind the latest war in the Middle East. Too late it seems, as plenty of American normies have crossed the Noticing™ Rubicon, but just to make it official, Secretary of State Marco Rubio had his blond moment (just as his Spanish surname connotes) and inadvertently revealed that Israel forced America’s hand.

Unsurprisingly, social media in recent weeks has been awash with sobering testimonials from Americans of all walks of life who have finally realized that their team has actually been the bad guys all along. Those in active duty appear to have come to the same conclusion, because two incidents of fires on US Navy carriers suggest sabotage from war-shy personnel. It’s been a real treat to watch average Americans call to account not just the Levins and Shapiros, but all of the Shabbos goyim on the AIPAC payroll – folks like Mike Johnson, Ted Cruz, Tom Cotton and Rick Scott. Meanwhile the popularity of Thomas Massie is skyrocketing.

The fault lines of the second Trump administration are now well and truly entrenched and regrettably he has chosen all that glistens – from the gaudy opulence of his material accumulation to the sparkling words of his sycophantic counsel. He at least has the self-awareness to admit that he’s “not heaven bound.” You could almost begin to feel for Elon Musk, who got a raw deal on the EV mandate while the rest of Trump’s inner circle enriches itself beyond all shame. Even Baron Trump now has an estimated net worth of $150 million. Not bad for someone too young to vote, but with that kind of money he can start buying politicians. Joining the fray is sleazebag lawyer Alan Dershowitz, who joined the Republican Party last month, while nutcase Laura Loomer solidifies her face in Trump’s good books. Jews really have a way of getting their foot in the door – readers may recall that Loomer was a speaker at the 2022 American Renaissance Conference, meanwhile luminaries of academia like Kevin MacDonald and Tom Sunic still await an invitation. It would probably take a constellation of experts to understand the totality of Trump’s psychology and physiology; the multiple personalities between campaigner and president, the junk food eater who never sleeps and the teetotaler who is drunk on power.

If Trump is being blackmailed into waging war on Iran then the obvious question is why such blackmail wasn’t active during his relatively pacifistic first term as president. That would be giving him too much credit, and credit is something he can’t get enough. Americans are paying for this spectacular misadventure through a variety of camouflaged ways, meanwhile Trump has the sensibility to mock inflation, Jesus, Tucker Carlson’s IQ and Candace Owens’ looks. It’s still a mystery how he manages to pivot from childish tweets on social media to 90-minute phone calls with the Russian president, the content of which remains highly secretive. It must humor Putin to have Trump’s laconically named social media platform Truth Social translated into Russian, since that’s more or less how the old Soviet newspaper Pravda was named.

There’s a well-known aphorism in diplomacy that says if you aren’t at the table then you are on the menu. That doesn’t bode well for Ukraine, which is now solely reliant on an energy-starved Europe. Zelensky, who is involved “up to his neck” in money-laundering according to a former Ukrainian diplomat and prosecutor, keeps registering his interest for nuclear weapons. Lousy timing indeed, following the recent advancement of the so-called Doomsday clock to a record 85 seconds to midnight. In an era of erratic, contemptuous and nihilistic Western rule we may ask whether the bothersome convention of daylight savings adjustments actually serves a wise purpose: confusing the timekeepers of our Armageddon. Whether Trump is the cuckoo or just the cuckservative of this late hour, I leave readers to decide.

 

Could President Trump Be Crazy Like A Fox?

/22 Comments/in /by

Could President Trump Be Crazy Like A Fox?

Breaking The Zionist Grip On America: The Greatest Service A U.S. Statesman Could Do?

Patrick Cleburne
May 10, 2026

 

Mount Rushmore National Memorial (U.S ...

See also So, The Israelis Control U.S. Middle East Policy. But Are They Wise?

Continuous war drum-beating notwithstanding, the fact is that shutting down the Iran effort now could yield tremendous benefits for President Trump and America, even justifying the action.

Yesterday I read The war on Iran will likely end in American retreat By Jeffrey Sachs and Sybil Fares Aljazeera 9 May 2026.

Putting aside the emotional triumphalism in this essay, it provides a plausible explanation of why this mess occurred:

The US – Israel war plan was a decapitation strike, sold to President Donald Trump by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and David Barnea, the director of the Mossad. The premise was that an aggressive joint US–Israeli bombing campaign would so degrade the Iranian regime…that the regime would fracture. The United States and Israel would then impose a pliable government in Tehran.

Obviously that has not worked, for totally predictable reasons that the essay discusses.

In war, shutting down an attack or a whole offensive because of lack of success is quite normal. In more rational and less emotional eras like in 18th-century Europe (as opposed to 20th-century) this applied to whole wars. Bureaucratic and political enemies try to make capital from disappointment, but the mass of opinion sees reason.

In October 1956,the British, French and Israelis launched the Suez operation, to reverse Egypt’s Nasser’s theft of the Suez Canal. The Americans led by President Eisenhower threw a petulant tantrum and the Allies had to withdraw in humiliating defeat. This was the end of the UK as a world power

Obviously this was a disaster for the ruling Conservatives in Britain. The very strong Left there exulted and was confident of a sweeping victory at the next General Election. But in fact in October 1959 the Conservatives won with a sharply increased majority.

How did this happen? A British friend had the following insight:

At the time, the BBC had a program called “Any Questions?. A panel of quests, usually including an MP from each of the major parties, answered a range of queries. In one show, in ’57 or ’58, they were asked about the impact of the Suez fiasco on the next election.

After the Labour MP had finished gloating, the Conservative said that he was certain that his party would be returned with an increased majority

“…because when the British People go to vote they will recognize that what the Tories did at Suez, right or wrong, successful or unsuccessful, was done with the best interests of this Country at heart, and for no other reason.”

Retreat is to Trump’s advantage. As the recent Midwest primaries showed, his core base has not wavered. The considerable swathe of disaffected Rightists is likely to welcome his change of mind like the return of the Prodigal Son. And reopening the Strait of Hormuz will quickly reverse the adverse economic impact of this escapade, cheering up the Public as a whole.

Life will not be so easy for the Democratic Leadership. Israel’s Gaza activities since October 2023 have turned substantial majority of Democratic voters against her. So attacking Trump for closing down the effort is not possible. And with the shutdown, with its implicit admission of error, the question of why it was initiated will become academic to most.

Life will become extremely difficult for the Zionists and the Israeli Government. Since the Iran strikes on February 28, Israel has, per a Grok search this evening, occupied 232 square miles (5.7%) of Lebanon, killed up to 2,600 Lebanese and displaced over 1Mm people (19% of the population). Israeli bulldozers are leveling villages and there are mutterings that the plan is to establish a DMZ-like buffer of perhaps 10% of Lebanon.

Meantime, killings in Gaza have accelerated and there is continued connivance at the ethnic cleansing of the West Bank by Jewish settlers.

These facts are less well known to the Americans than they are to the rest of the world because of US MSM repression. But via Podcasts, Social Media and by following foreign news sources, those who are interested can find out.

And the younger generation of Leftists is extremely interested. Quite apart from sincere outrage, the situation provides copious ammunition in the brewing inter-generational war. The surprisingly geriatric Democratic Leadership is weakly positioned to defend itself against charges of being negligent on the Israel question.

Anyone following the Primaries knows this battle has been joined. I believe it was at the root of the strange purge at the Southern Poverty Law Center in 2024. Wherever young Leftists are influential, conflict erupts.

An important demonstration of this is the progress of H.R.3565 “To provide for a limitation on the transfer of defense articles and defense services to Israel.” This Bill was introduced on May 21, 2025, and was endorsed by 56 Democrats by the time of the Gaza ‘’Ceasefire” on October 10. (No Republicans have signed.) At year end the number was 60 and now stands at 68, with 5 signing up in April. This is 32% of the whole Democratic House delegation. Ominously for the Leadership, support is heavily drawn from non-White Members

A decade ago, the Sponsor of such a measure would probably have been expelled from the Party.

Although many Donor-owned GOP Congresscritters would no doubt like to sign up for the job, the prospect of holding the Republican Party in a Zionist posture is also poor. Discontent with Israel among younger Rightists is strong, as a recent article in The New Yorker bemoaned. And the role of Neoconservatives in the last generation is well known and deeply if quietly resented.

So if President Trump were to abruptly shut down the Iran confrontation, the Israelis would be left conducting massive operations of conquest and virtual extermination in Lebanon, the West Bank and Gaza which their friends around the World will not be able to protect.

Major inflection points in world affairs often have a cogent meta-myth. George III and the American Revolution, Bismarck’s engineering of a united Germany, Hitler’s decision for war in 1939 all come to mind. When studied at the granular level these accounts are generally quite hard to detect. They retain an explicative value.

So it is not necessary to fully believe that President Trump went into the Iran venture thinking it could ultimately end the Zionist grip on American affairs. (Although he may at a subconscious level have grasped that he could withstand failure better than his tormentors.) The recognition of the effects of shutting down would presumably be conscious – if not admitted.

However arrived at

’tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish’d.”

[Hamlet (Act 3, Scene 1)]

Is there room on Mount Rushmore?

Subscribe to Patrick’s Substack

By Patrick Cleburne · Launched a year ago