Featured Articles

The Lesser of Two Evils: Responding to Joel Davis and Keith Woods

/13 Comments/in , , /by

1559 Words

Before a hot war begins, when the bullets start flying and the bombs start exploding, political warfare rages. We witness political warfare these days almost every time politicians open their mouths. Before political warfare, however, we have cultural warfare, which is where metapolitics becomes important. This kind of warfare consists of various historical, ideological, or religious narratives which shape the worldview of ordinary (read: non-political) people. These narratives compete to the point where politicians become champions for the dominant narratives of the people who elect them. And if such narratives become anti-White in nature, so be it. In fact, anti-White politics have become the norm among most non-White politicians in America these days (as well among quite a few White ones).

My job as a pro-White dissident writer is to frame or re-frame narratives which will assist ordinary Whites in combating such anti-White narratives. Metapolitics, basically. In metapolitics it is not necessary to surpass or deny a narrative. It is necessary only to match it with a counter-narrative. Victory in such conflicts depends as much upon the spirit of the interlocuters as it does on logic, evidence, and clarity. A side could be dead wrong in the face of the facts, but if they possess greater spirit than their opponents, then they will have greater influence in steering the dominant culture into the future. This is what we see with narratives that favor both Black and Jewish history.

I was reminded of this while reading about the recent debate between Joel Davis and Keith Woods. Davis, an Australian nationalist, finds that rehabilitating Adolf Hitler and National Socialism is crucial for today’s White Nationalism, while Woods, who is from Ireland, feels that the various stripes of White Nationalism do not need either to thrive. It was a fascinating and civil metapolitical exchange, and it greatly benefited the Right. In effect, the men differ on how to counter the prevailing Jewish narrative which claims that A) Hitler and the Nazis were a uniquely odious evil, and B) anyone who professes beliefs even remotely close to Hitler’s is potentially genocidal and should be suppressed.

In basic terms, Davis attempts to surpass the Jewish narrative with a unabashedly pro-Nazi one, while Woods attempts to go around it by not emphasizing Nazism at all. Both sides of the debate possess profound elements of truth and deserve respect from the Dissident Right. Yet, I find both sides a bit wanting. I also think that both men are working too hard, thereby requiring their followers to work too hard as well. For example, ascribing to Davis’ position 85 years after the fall of Nazism would require a lot of reading and documentary viewing as well as the ability to discern good sources from bad. By the same token, ascribing to Woods’ position would require some fairly deft mental gymnastics to articulate a rightist position that does not evoke the Nazis in the minds of a disinterested audience. The bar for entry here is a little too high.

There is a third way, however, one that combines the strengths of both sides of the debate and, in its simplicity and directness, promises the substantial metapolitical victory that has been eluding White people since the end of World War II.

But first, why are both sides wanting? Because Davis’s approach entails too much risk to be successful, and Woods’ approach ultimately leaves the Jewish narrative uncontested. Since in metapolitics truth often plays second fiddle to spirit, it doesn’t really matter how correct either side is, how well-researched or watertight their arguments are, or how persuasive their advocates are. What matters is how well either side can galvanize the spirit—or enthusiasm—of their followers. Unfortunately, neither Davis nor Woods make the most of Rightist spirit. Anyone goosestepping in Davis’ pro-Nazi direction would have to wade into the teeth of the globalist Left, which means giving up on the idea of having a career and children, and accepting a life of constant struggle and danger. For ordinary people, this is a spirit killer. On the other hand, side-stepping along with Woods offers no defense to the Nazi/genocide charge coming from the proponents of the uncontested Jewish narrative. By attempting to go around the narrative rather than face it head on, Woods appears to tacitly concede the truth behind it. He can invoke Irish or Slavic nationalists all he likes, but in the eyes of a disinterested audience, this will come across as a bit of a dodge. This is also a spirit killer.

While neither approach is without merit, each gets us closer to our ultimate goal of White ethnostates only by baby steps—steps which may or may not keep up with the vagaries of history.

The third way I’m promoting entails meeting—but not defeating—the Jewish metapolitical Nazi narrative. This has the advantage of being less risky than Davis’ approach yet more direct than Woods’. It’s also easier to swallow than either counter-narrative, and no less true. Basically, we need to look at Nazism as a defensive wartime ideology, which was preferrable to its alternative: Bolshevism. At its worst, it was evil, sure. But it was the lesser of two evils.

This is it. This is all one needs to rouse the spirit of the Right and stem the odious tide of the Left. For one, it widens the tent to include both Davis and Woods. People in both camps can agree that the swastika, for all its merits and demerits, was morally superior to and less destructive than the hammer and sickle. This history is undeniable. Secondly, by keeping the reasoning so basic and simple, most White people will not need to read lengthy essays or watch obscure documentaries to climb on board. All they need to know is that the Bolsheviks killed more people than the Nazis did, and for less reason. The Nazis at least had the decency to wait until England and France had declared war on them before kicking their atrocities into high gear. The Soviets, on the other hand, had no such qualms and put to death tens of millions between 1924 and 1939, when they were at war with no one. We should also note that England and France had been egged on the entire time by US president Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who had a clear anti-Nazi bias. How do we know this? Because the Allies had declared war on Germany for invading Poland, but not on the Soviet Union, which had done the exact same thing. Again, very simple. If the Allies were really on the side of good in 1939, why didn’t they attack the Soviets who had over an order of magnitude more deaths on their heads than the Nazis did? It’s a fair question, and one that the defenders of the prevailing narrative would have a hard time answering without resorting to blatant Jewish chauvinism.

We should also remember this passage from Hitler’s Reichstag speech of January 1939, as channeled through notorious Hitler hater William Shirer in his Rise and Fall of the Third Reich:

If the international Jewish financiers . . . should again succeed in plunging the nations into a world war, the result will be . . . the annihilation of the Jewish race throughout Europe.

See that? Hitler was actually being comparatively nice here by warning the Jews what would happen to them if they instigated another world war (which they did, they totally did). Did Stalin offer such consideration before murdering 15 million in the Holodomor and untold millions more in the Great Terror and the Gulag Archipelago during the 1920s and 1930s? Of course not. Hence the Nazis were the lesser of two evils. Does this seem like a weaker claim than what either Joel Davis or Keith Woods is offering? That’s because it is, and that is a good thing. I call it the Weak Claim Paradox.

There’s another reason for this as well. I personally am not a Nazi. However, gun to head, if I had to choose sides during Ragnarök, I would plop for the Nazis over the Bolsheviks. Why? Because as a White, straight, conservative male who is not consumed with guilt and self-hatred, the Nazis are much less likely to shoot me. This is an excellent reason. And given how prone the disproportionately Jewish Soviets were to shooting White people, Whites today should realize that Jews were not the only ones who suffered during the 20th century—nor were they absent among the people inflicting the suffering. In fact, it could be argued that they did more of the latter than the former.

None of this means that Joel Davis or Keith Woods should change their beliefs. Davis should continue praising the Nazis, and Woods should continue eschewing them. There is truth on both sides, and it is good they balance themselves out in pro-White circles. However, it couldn’t hurt if both men and their followers were to employ the Weak Claim Paradox from time to time when reaching out to normies. Believe what you want about the Nazis, but they were and still are objectively better than the alternative. And what we’re getting today with unfettered globalism, immigration, crime, and degeneracy is the alternative.

And if anyone hits back with the Nazi smear, simply respond, “At least we’re not Bolsheviks. They were worse.”

Tuukka Kuru interviews Dr. Tom Sunic

/2 Comments/in /by
  1. Greetings, Tom! How are you and your family doing?

We are exercising the art of psychic survival amidst our troubled times. Having survived the fraud of communism, there is no reason we cannot survive the deception of liberalism.

  1. You have actively followed Trump’s second term and carefully assessed its impact on global politics. Was Trump’s re-election just an isolated event, or a sign of a larger cultural shift?

With or without Trump, the cultural-political shift was already in motion long before Trump’s arrival at the White House. President Trump’s contribution lies in his unintentional effort to preserve the Liberal System through illiberal policies that challenge the international order established by the United States and the Soviet Union in 1945. Though few are willing to acknowledge it, the liberal capitalist system has exhausted its potential and has become dysfunctional. Trump’s protectionist measures align with what sociologists call the paradox of unintended consequences, where actions yield unexpected and often contrary results.

  1. The rift between the United States and the EU is a situation that nationalists did not foresee. How do you see this rift changes the EU’s ideology in the near future? Will the European Union become a more authoritarian actor?

The European Union is not, has never been, and will never be a political actor. It was designed solely as a monetary transfer mechanism and a tariff-free zone. Its existence owes much to American post-World War II influence in Europe, embodied by figures like Maurice Schumann and Jean Monnet. The EU’s original purpose was twofold: to serve as a bulwark against the Soviet Union and to prevent Germany from emerging as a unifying force for other European nations. This presents an intriguing paradox where President Trump deserves recognition—he correctly sees that propping up this fragile, artificial construct is no longer worth the trouble. Despite the witch hunts against free thinkers, orchestrated or tolerated by zealous EU commissioners and local prosecutors in member states, the dream to transform the EU into an authoritarian surveillance state remains unfeasible. There is no such thing as a ”European nation,” just as there are no true ”European nationalists.” Too many dissenting voices fracture the Brussels-based oligarchy, while rifts persist among the more than thirty nationalist parties and movements across Europe—often at odds with one another. The EU’s engagement in Ukraine exemplifies this discord, revealing divisions both among Brussels elites and between nationalists in individual member states.

  1. The reduction of the United States’ military presence and the ongoing war in Ukraine have increased the need for Europe’s independent defense. However, the rearmament of many European states has proven to be extremely challenging. Could Europe ever become a credible military superpower?

Europe has never been a credible, unified military power. This follows up on your earlier questions and my previous response. Let’s abandon the self-deluding myth of a common European homeland. For over three millennia, Europeans have waged civil wars —from the mythical  Trojan War to the thirty years-long Peloponnesian War, from the Thirty Years’ War in the 17th-century to the catastrophic thirty year stretch from the First to the Second World War. Name a single European nation-state that hasn’t clashed with its neighbor. Take Finland, locked historically in recurring struggles with Russia, or the brutal recent conflict between Serbs and Croats. Today, we see Russia and Ukraine—two European nations—tearing each other apart. It’s time we stop fooling ourselves with the notion of “common European homeland”.

  1. International cooperation has always been a tough pill for nationalist movements to swallow. How should European states organize themselves – as a centralized “Fortress Europe” or as independent nation-states with minimal interaction with each other?

With over 40 million non-Europeans residing in the EU, the notion of a “Fortress Europe” sounds bizarre. Furthermore, the era of the nation-state is over, as European nationalists across the board have consistently demonstrated a drive  for self-destruction. What is needed now is a revival of the concept of empire, or the Reich. In hindsight, the Holy Roman Empire (often referred to as the Reich) and the Habsburg Empire appear to have possessed greater durability—and thus legitimacy—than the current EU construct. A case could be made for resurrecting the decentralized model of the Holy Roman Empire, which stood in stark contrast to the centralized, proto-Jacobin structure of France or the sprawling overseas empire of Britain. Today, the British and French are grappling with ugly consequences of their earlier globalist and messianic ambitions, which uprooted their societies in pursuit of multiracial  and universalist goals.

  1. You wrote the book Homo Americanus, in which you sharply analyze the American psyche. Are the European and American ways of understanding the world fundamentally irreconcilable? What are the biggest differences between these worldviews?

Homo americanus emerged as the American mirror image of  the Soviet Homo sovieticus. Both sprang from the same ideological root: an egalitarian, progress-driven vision of the glorious future. Yet, by the late 1980s, Homo sovieticus disappeared precisely because its twin brother, Homo americanus, proved to be more adept at realizing those same Soviet communist principles in America and Western Europe. Over the past half-century, utopian ideals, such as multiculturalism, DEI, wokeness contained the messages already well tested in former communist Eastern Europe and Russia, where they had yielded catastrophic results. President Trump recognizes that these communistic policies, championed by Homo americanus, threaten to hasten America’s decline. This awareness drives his shifting course: he rejects these liberal, quasi-communist agendas while simultaneously trying to preserve the broader Liberal System.

  1. The war in Ukraine has been ongoing for over three years, with hundreds of thousands of men fallen on both sides of the front. A war between two states with very low fertility rates is a historical anomaly. How do you think these warring nations will recover after a potential peace?

The origins of the war Russian-Ukrainian war remain underexplored in the Western mainstream media. The role of U.S. neoconservatives in the former Obama and Biden administrations deserves scrutiny, particularly their interest in leveraging Ukraine as a strategic foothold to undermine the Russian Federation. Even if a peace treaty between Russia and Ukraine were signed tomorrow, the conflict’s aftermath would be far from resolved. Deep-seated resentments between the two sides will prove challenging to mend, ensuring a lingering bitterness.

  1. Currently, more children are annually born in Nigeria alone than in all of Europe combined. How do you think Europe’s fertility rates will develop in the future – will the current era of low fertility be a historical misstep, or become a permanent state? Is the racial extinction of Europeans a real threat?

Since 1945, Europe has embraced the politics of multiracialism, often cloaked under the euphemism of multiculturalism. One of the liberal-communist strategies to subdue and pacify European populations was the importation of cheap labor from Africa and Asia. This policy has given rise to a consumerist mindset of  ”dictatorship of well-being”—a misguided belief among many Europeans that history can have its conclusion, and that by refusing to identify an external enemy, perpetual peace will automatically  emerge. This flawed, unpolitical notion of politics will have dire consequences for all Europeans.

  1. The worldviews of young men and women have sharply diverged — surveys in Finland, for example, show that the so-called “woke” phenomenon is highly genderized, with its values rarely gaining support among young men. What do you think is causing this gender divide, where did it originate, and how could these increasingly estranged young men and women be brought back together?

The woke phenomenon and the rise of academic self-censorship align fully with my earlier statements and my numerous writings on the communist roots of transgenderism, multiracialism, and their various crypto-communist derivatives we are observing now in Europe. The much-touted mystique of liberalism and democracy is unraveling because it defies the laws of nature. The modern Liberal System built on freedom and nation-suppressing edicts is nearing its collapse. Just as the communist experiment, in order to survive, morphed into its liberal Double, this very same liberal ”Double” is now facing its own demise.

  1. The theme of our upcoming conference is “The Rising Tide of Color.” Last time, you gave an interesting speech about the coercive measures applied by the liberal system. What will be the topic of your upcoming presentation?

The upcoming conference takes its title from Lothrop Stoddard’s book. Likewise, a century ago, German historian Oswald Spengler also foresaw ”the revolution of the colored people” (Die Revolution der Farbigen). In my presentation, I will survey  the process of racial decline in ancient Greece and Rome, with a focus on the hereditary curse among some mythical and historical figures. As modern behavioral geneticists have argued, addressing future challenges requires integrating the social sciences with the natural sciences.

www.tomsunic.com

Avatar photo

Tuukka Kuru

Olen vuonna 1990 syntynyt rovaniemeläislähtöinen koneinsinööri, joka tunnetaan erityisesti Awakening-konferenssista, 612-marsseista ja Monokulttuuri FM-nettiradiosta.

To burn or not to burn, Part 3: Reflections on Ireland’s refugee lunacy

/9 Comments/in /by

Only two foreigner-related burnings in the last six months, two buildings destroyed by masked men with hand tools, the end of a Brother War and a battle that never happened.

Some good news: Two refugee centres have been stopped, without the need to burn them.

In Athlone, the 1,000-man camp caused repeated marches. Even local government politicians got the Council to take legal action. The court has ruled that the development is illegal, and it seems it will be closed, though this is quite possibly just a ruse. There are a few dozen refugees in the camp already.

While the court case was ongoing, there were repeated protest marches through the town to the camp. It is possible, that if there were no marches, the court would have quietly decided that the refugee camp was perfectly legal. Even the most peaceful crowd  in the world is a statement of power, and a warning to the judge: We are many, you are few!

Once, with only a few hundred people, they got around the police lines. A few young lads got into the camp itself and ran around for few minutes roaring peaceful invitations to the refugees to remigrate themselves as soon as possible.

The refugees described themselves as terrified by this. They also complain that in local shops, the staff tell them: You’re not from around here. Get the fuck out of the shop! They complain that the locals “think we are not human beings”. It seems like the three decades of multicultural propaganda we’ve had here is starting to wear off…

The second refugee centre to be stopped was in Schull, County Cork. After “long discussions” between the owners of a proposed refugee hotel and various people including local independent TD Michael Collins, the owners decided not to bother with the refugees after all. As simple as that!

It seems that the best and simplest way to stop a refugee camp popping up in your area is to have long, repeated eyeball-to-eyeball discussions with whoever has the contract for the refugees. They will probably not want to have those conversations with you, so you will have to find creative ways to enable the conversations.

The construction of many, many, many other refugee camps is continuing, despite mostly peaceful protests. Thornton Hall and Coolock in north Dublin, Clonmel and four other camps in County Tipperary and Ballina and Knock in Mayo, to list just a few. In preparation for our November election, many refugee camp projects were paused, so as to reduce the impact on the election. Now the election is over, they have resumed construction.

It seems that the pace of mass immigration has increased.

The official Catholic Church here has promoted mass migration. But the Trad Catholics are stirring. The tiny pilgrimage village of Knock is due to be enriched by hundreds of refugees. There is not as much money in Marian apparitions as there used to be, and some pilgrim hotel owners want to pivot to the billion euro refugee business. A crowd of a hundred gathered across the road from the Basilica. Speakers criticised the priest at the Basilica for preaching a nonsense sermon saying we must welcome the — obviously fake — refugees.

It must be embarrassing for the priest at Ireland’s top Marian shrine to be publicly ridiculed outside his own church by elected Kildare town councillor, Tom McDonnell.

After the speeches, the crowd walked through the village to the refugee hotel, reciting prayers. Four men carried a table with a small statue of Mary.  The Gardai were there, but they kept a very long way from us. Definitely the most restrained Garda presence on a Remigration protest. Banners with pictures of Mary, Jesus and some saint killing a dragon added beauty and drama.

Two golden brown-skinned people were in our group, and clearly enjoyed the Remigration message. At a guess, they were St Thomas Christians from Kerala, India. Anecdotally, it seems that Kerala Christians are much more honest and less violent than other Indian/Pakistani immigrants to Ireland. When the time comes to deport their Hindu and Muslim compatriots, the men from Kerala will be happy to help us…

In Belfast, Irish and British ethno-nationalists held a small, mostly peaceful Remigration demo (23.3.25). There was a pro-migration counter demo. This is the second time in a year that the Irish tricolour and the British union jack have been carried in brotherly harmony at Remigration events in Ulster. The Catholic/Protestant split in Ireland has been used to manipulate us for four centuries. The presence of the two flags in peaceful cooperation in the Great Remigration project is a sign that this particular Brother war is over.  The MSM were very careful not to mention that this protest took place.

The non-Battle of Ballaghdereen.

There was a complaint (1.11.24) made by an ethnic Irish teenage boy that he had been raped by some foreign males. The police are supposedly looking for the men, but won’t release descriptions, except to say that the rapists were “children”, not refugees and were here legally. Sounds like a UK-based Pakistani rape gang on their “Rape a Leprechaun” Emerald Isle tour, but that’s just a educated guess, not a stereotype or misinformation..

This would just be another sad story, soon to be forgotten, except for one detail: The ethnic Irish boy who was raped, was also an ethnic Irish Traveller. Travellers have a reputation for fierce fighting and long running blood feuds.

There was a huge peaceful demonstration in the small town. Candles, prayers, calls for peace and safety. Councillor Michael Frain addressed the crowd and condemned a Remigration activist present for stirring up hate around the country. Unkind commentators posted photos, supposedly of Frain, showing him as possessor of a huge curved nose and alleging he has some Jewish ancestry.

The next day, there was a smaller peaceful demo in the town. Only fifty or sixty. All completely masked and carrying various heavy hand tools. They peacefully did serious damage to one house and did minor damage to another house.

The local Gardai prudently decided to wait until the men had left before going to investigate the damage. To arrest fifty Travellers, you will need a minimum of a hundred cops, and it would take a long time to get a hundred cops to Ballaghdereen. Much simpler just to wait until the Travellers have made their point and left.

This is hugely symbolic. This is the Gardai surrendering to Remigration protestors. If we outnumber the available Garda ten to one, we all have masks on and stout sticks and tools in our hands, give the impression that we are not to be trifled with and hint that we have some Traveller genetics … they won’t come near us.

They used the riot squad in Newtown Mount Kennedy and elsewhere. But they knew the protest was coming, they knew they were facing unarmed women and children and they had time to send the riot squad down.  The masked protest in Ballaghdereeen was totally unannounced and it was “men only”.

A few weeks later, an empty pub in Ballaghdereen went on fire. Badly damaged. If it is connected to the refugee or the Perfectly Legal Pakistani teen rapist business, nobody is saying anything. Perhaps it’s just good old “Jewish lightning” — insurance fraud?

Irish Travellers were nicer, back in the day. Sure, they might steal a chicken or take some quality tools from the shed you foolishly left unlocked  or seduce the wife that you foolishly left unsupervised. But they could sing and dance, they had lovely caravans, great style, worked with horses and made and fixed tin pots. That’s why we used to have the lovely word “tinkers”. They worked the harvests. They were useful, and not particularly violent or dangerous. That was then.

Then modernisation, the welfare state, and drugs and TV. Now they are much more violent, heavily into fraud, drugs and intimidation. There were even a few ethnic Irish traveller lads convicted of keeping homeless people as slaves in England! They do dirty jobs for rich men: evictions, property development scams, security and they even are making money from the billion euro refugee accommodation business.

It’s possible the Rape of Ballaghdereen will be the start of a blood feud between Irish Travellers and Pakistanis. If this happens, this will be good for the Travellers, good for the rest of us Irish and even good for the Pakistanis. Traveller men will stop committing suicide and overdosing: you can’t be at that when there’s a blood feud going on. They’ll stop behaving badly to us Irish and start behaving badly to the Pakistanis. The Pakistanis will get bored of Traveller harassment and peacefully remigrate back to the sunshine and mangoes of dear old Pakistan.

Readers who want comedy updates on Ireland-UK migration madness should check out Derek Domino‘s online channel. Some accuse him of Freemason membership, based on his display of the number 33 at the start of his videos, but this is flimsy evidence to hang the guy. He tells us how grim things are, which might be construed as a black pill. But he also makes fun of our Naked Emperors, shows how easy Remigration is and inspires us to take action appropriate to our station in life. His skit “Remigration, Irish style” is top class comedy

“Adolescence”: Was the Manosphere Really to Blame?

/11 Comments/in /by
The Netflix series Adolescence, where a White teenager murders a White girl, has resulted in a great deal of commentary, including Tobias Langdon’s TOO article. Until reading it, I had no idea that the media in UK reacted that way and didn’t know that the story was inspired by a real incident with a non-White teenager murdering a White girl. The media doing what it always does: reverse the races when necessary to blame Whites.
The usual reaction is to blame 13-year-old Jamie’s rage on the manosphere, as in this Guardian article:
Jamie’s plight becomes a poignant study of the nightmarish influence of the so-called manosphere – that pernicious online world of “red pills”, “truth groups” and the 80-20 rule (which posits that 80% of women are attracted to 20% of men). It’s a shadowy sphere populated by alphas, “incels”, MRAs (men’s rights activists) and PUAs (pickup artists), whose fragile egos turn into entitled fury. From mocking emojis on Instagram to the dark web and deepfakes, it’s another country to anyone over 40. No wonder parents are, as Bascombe’s son points out, “blundering around, not getting it”.
A NYTimes article also emphasized the internet.

Initially the pair struggled to work out a motivation for the show’s main character, Jamie Miller (Owen Cooper), until an assistant suggested the pair research the culture of incels, men who see themselves as involuntarily celibate and rail against women online.

Thorne said he bought a burner phone and set up new social media accounts on it, then spent six months “diving into very dark holes” of incel content online. It made him realize, he said, that the grim arithmetic of the incel worldview — the belief that 80 percent of women are attracted to just 20 percent of men, so boys must manipulate girls if they want to find sexual partners — could also seem “incredibly attractive” to many young men.

The 80-20 split is real as anyone who has ever dated realizes (the universal principle of female hypergamy), and this means that many men are frustrated. This is particularly true in polygynous cultures where high-status men are able to have multiple wives. A great strength of Western cultures is that monogamy dampens male competition for females, but there are certainly vestiges of it in the dating arena where wealthy, high-status men have no difficulty dating attractive, desirable women. As usual, the left denies reality in favor of imagining a world where all are equal — where individual differences like intelligence, physical attractiveness, social status, etc. are irrelevant.

But what the Times doesn’t say in that article is that the girl called Jamie an incel on social media and said he would always be an incel. It was extremely cruel for the girl to call him an incel in a forum where all his schoolmates would see it. No teenager wants to hear that at an age when social status is everything,  especially from a girl. So it was understandable that he was angry. The girl was the bully, Jamie the victim.
Imagine if Jamie had been cast as Black. If a Black teenager was bullied by a White girl, the media would either ignore the whole thing (likely—so it would never be cast that way) or assume that the killing was justified.
Another Times article, “Tate-pilled boys are a problem for schools,” notes:
You know by the end of the first episode that Jamie is guilty; the police have video of Jamie stabbing Katie. So the central question becomes why did he do it, and the explanation rolls out over the next three episodes. His family is loving, if imperfect, like most families. Jamie’s father, a plumber, is disappointed in him for not being an athlete and doesn’t quite know how to relate to his sensitive, artistic son. Jamie is bullied in school and filled with self-loathing, and he turns to Andrew Tate and other purveyors of sexist online content to make himself feel big.
In fact, there is only one mention in the series where Tate is named, although the writers did say that they wanted to “look in the eye of modern male rage” and examine the influence of public figures such as Andrew Tate on boys. Even though it’s a common theme in the commentary on the show, writers are never explicit about the evidence that he is attracted to the manosphere, although Tate is “namechecked once, the show is not about him. None of the kids ever mention him, which I thought was interesting.”
Yes, interesting. The media goes way out of their way to blame the manosphere but there’s really no evidence in what the viewer sees that the manosphere or “Tate-pilled boys” has anything to do with it. Teenage boys don’t need Tate or the manosphere to be infuriated at being called an incel. Both father and son have a problem with their temper, so the explanation could just as easily be genetic. One has the feeling that the show’s writers jumped on the manosphere theme after the (man-hating) reviews from the left started coming out, or else they would have made it much more explicit.
13-year-old Jamie is actually very good looking but not a big masculine guy, so he’s not going to be a big-time athlete, and it’s true that the father, like many fathers, would have loved to have a big, strapping athlete for a son. But I should have thought Jamie would be attractive to at least some girls. I thought it ridiculous that Jamie had the self-concept of being ugly. Is that what the left has done to White people?
I expected the usual politically correct portrayals of Blacks—virtuous and intelligent—but it’s so common that I hardly get upset about it. It struck me that all the White women were unattractive and out of shape, but the Blacks were physically robust and in great physical shape (the policeman must work out—his arms were very jacked, as we say). And his son was much taller than Jamie and was doubtless chosen because viewers would see him as physically attractive.  And of course, the Blacks are presented as intelligent, well-spoken, kind, and not prone to temperamental outbursts like Jamie and his father.
Detective father and son
Notice too the women in the background.
Surprisingly, I thought Jamie’s family were portrayed positively, especially the father—he had a loving marriage and never hit Jamie or his wife, although he did have a temper problem (as did Jamie). It was clear that the father was the head of household (patriarchy!!), so I suppose liberals see that as pathological, although I didn’t see it mentioned. Jamie clearly identifies much more with his father, so, e.g., he chooses his father to be the one person from the family who can sit in on the police interviews. The mother seems surprised and a bit upset about that.
But who can’t sympathize with the parents? Imagine your son murdering a girl and then having to deal with the fallout from the community. The wife wants to move but the husband realizes that the story will get out eventually wherever they are. Their older daughter is devastated.
One can totally understand the father’s rage at the teenagers on bikes who painted his truck with the word ‘nonce‘ (spelled incorrectly), meaning a sexual pervert attracted to children — and an extremely negative thing to call someone in British slang. The teenagers laughed at the family, and the father beat up one of the culprits.
It ends with both parents saying they should have done more. The last scene shows the father (but not the mother) weeping uncontrollably.

Soviet Union Style Justice in America: The Political Prosecution of Robert Rundo

/7 Comments/in /by
Police Raid Robert Rundo’s Home
This is the first in what I hope will be a series of articles about the prosecution – “persecution” may be a better word —  of Robert Rundo.  To those not acquainted with him, Mr. Rundo has been one of the foremost victims in recent decades of the political weaponization of the American justice system against the Dissident Right. This ignominious process has antecedents reaching back many years. In numerous cases in the last decade, however, this departure from impartial justice accelerated to an almost Soviet Union style disregard for the rule of law. Mr. Rundo’s case exemplifies this.

Mr. Rundo, to be sure, is not the only victim of this weaponization. The list of victims is long, including most of the January 6 defendants, about whom I hope also to write a series of articles.  Here are my reasons for writing first about Robert Rundo:

  1. I understand the legal issues in the Rundo prosecution well, especially those regarding the unconstitutionality of the federal Anti-Riot Act under which he was prosecuted and convicted.  The Free Expression Foundation filed several amicus briefs in support of Mr. Rondo on that topic.
  2.  I have extensively interviewed Mr. Rundo.  I intend in my series of  articles to quote directly from these interviews, allowing him to speak in his own voice as much as possible.
  3. Rundo’s story has the twists and turns, victories and defeats, loyalties and betrayals, dramas and comic moments of a gripping Hollywood movie.  Someday, one hopes, such a movie will be made.
  4. Rundo’s case lays bare Police State conduct by our governments many Americans  suspect but few encounter. It is disheartening to confront this reality, as Rundo’s story forces us to do. We cannot, however, take corrective action unless we confront these uncomfortable facts.
  5. Rundo’s case illustrates the power of media to fashion an alternate reality that effectively serves their political agendas. In Rundo’s case, a partisan article by an organization called Pro Publica led directly to his indictment and prosecution and the brutal treatment he received from law enforcement around the world.  Rundo should never have been prosecuted, and would not have been prosecuted but for the Pro Publica article.

As a preview that hopefully will whet the appetites of potential readers, here are a few excerpts from my interviews of Mr. Rundo.

RUNDO’S EARLY LIFE

  • Where did you grow up?

Rundo:  Queens. Yeah, New York. I didn’t fit in, school didn’t fit me. Not that it mattered. School was just a factory—overcrowded, chaotic, no one gave a damn about you. They said it was built for 3,000 students, but we had double that. So I learned to disappear. I didn’t need the classrooms. I had the streets. Back then, New York wasn’t full of artisanal coffee shops and overpriced apartments. It was real. It was a war zone, except the guns were invisible. Three blocks, you find your crew. No one calls themselves a gang. It’s just the guys, the crew, a bunch of people trying to exist. We gave ourselves names, wrote them everywhere—tags on walls, on trains, on anything that wouldn’t scream back. I would end up getting charged for that at 15 years old, and they sent me to a juvenile program for a few months. One other white kid in the whole place, 300 of us. The other youths there referred to the program as gladiator school.  It was a hardening experience, a wake-up call. I went in naïve and came out red-pilled.

  • What happened after that?

Rundo:  After that, things got complicated. You know, we were just kids trying to survive, but then MS-13 shows up in our neighborhood, and suddenly it’s not just about hanging out and doing stupid stuff. It’s about territory, power, and violence. MS-13 weren’t just some neighborhood crew. These guys were running on a whole other level. A lot of people thought it was a joke until they realized it wasn’t. I had two close friends stabbed by them. No warning, no real reason other than the wrong place at the wrong time. It was ugly. It was real.

By the time I turned 18, I had my own run-in with them. A knife fight—stupid, I know. But when you’re in it, you don’t think about the stupid. You think about survival. I came out on top, but it wasn’t a victory. The guy I got into it with? He had a long rap sheet—he wasn’t exactly some Boy Scout. He didn’t die, which saved me life in prison. I was young at the time and got “street struck” as they say, meaning caught up living.

  • What was it like in prison?

Rundo:  It’s rough for a young white going through the NYC prison system. It’s not like what you see in the movies, with a bunch of skinheads sitting at a table in shades waiting to welcome you. That happens more on the West Coast, but in New York, it’s different. Whites are few and far between and even when there are some they tend to stick to themselves.  Most of them are addicts or weirdos. There were very few I encountered I actually respected and would allow to work out with me. For the rest of it, the other inmates are like hyenas. They go for the low hanging fruit most of the time but I grew up a little rough around the edges, so I was able to handle it. Besides that, it is a nightmare of boredom that repeats itself everyday. In total it was lots of working out and reading and in the end it actually disciplined me and broke me out of that street mentality I had going in. I came out much sharper, healthier, harder.

CREATION OF THE RISE ABOVE MOVEMENT

  • What did you do after you left prison?

Rundo: I left that life behind, simple as that. I had a girlfriend who stuck by me through all of it, which, honestly, I didn’t expect. I started working as a steamfitter in the union—nothing glamorous, but it was honest work. Just the typical grind, you know? But all the while, I kept looking for something more.  I had these nationalist feelings.

At one point, I reached out to the only online group I could find.  Thought I’d give it a shot, see what it was about. Guy shows up in boots, camo, looking like he’s ready for a combat zone instead of a conversation. And I’m just thinking, this isn’t it. I made an excuse, told him I’d be right back, and just walked away.

A few years later the group Identity Europa started.  It was cool, lots of solid people I met, but it was a little too clean cut.  It was not what I was looking for; it was better than the guys dressed up in army uniforms and such but at the same time it was very white collar, I guess you would say very suburban but with all the memes and Pepe the frog, I didn’t take it too seriously. I was really looking for guys who have an activist culture and were physically fit and didn’t spend countless hours online posting frog pictures.

That’s when I came across a couple of friends that were Eastern European. They showed me some videos, videos showing Roman statues, showing guys boxing, guys at the pub with their girlfriends, something very normal. That got me actually training heavy into boxing, as I ended up taking it really serious because I was emulating all that Eastern European stuff.  So we [formed the Rise Above Movement] and did a banner drop off the L.A. freeway and stickers and boxing and working out. I don’t think anything existed close to that in America or even in the Anglosphere in general. The podcasts that were out there were super vulgar but we wanted to be the opposite, to be clean cut, so if you watch our videos there are no words in the videos and none of us did any podcast interviews that would step against the rules except one guy before joining RAM had posted some over the top stuff and that’s what Pro Publica was able to use against us.

We were well-liked. I would say we were the only group that when we showed up at those Trump rallies, people came up to us and shook our hand and said God Bless you guys for being here. It was different from what you see today. Guys today show up in masks, they don’t interact, if anything they’re confrontational.  We were the opposite;  we brought flyers, we would speak to normal people, we never came with any flags or anything edgy or arm bands stuff. We were just some All-American guys.

[With RAM] I just wanted to create a vehicle for something positive for young guys like myself. . . . I think of myself when I was 16, how different I could have been if I would have been exposed to something more positive.  Every project I do whether its working out with guys, music, videos, clothing, I think of myself when I was 16, would this change me away from the ghetto rap culture I was into that was very dangerous and got me a lot of trouble.

SWAT TEAMS AND THE FBI RANSACK RUNDO’S APPARTMENT AND ASSAULT HIM, OSTENSIBLY TO SERVE A SEARCH WARRANT

Glen Allen Comment:  Mr. Rundo and other RAM Members participated in two Pro-Trump rallies in California in early 2017, i.e., Huntington Beach (March 25, 2017) and Berkeley (April 15, 2017).  At both rallies Rundo was involved in physical altercations with individuals associated with Antifa. Shortly after that, an organization called Pro Publica published an article and then a video that included photographs from those incidents. By omitting key facts such as the violence perpetrated by Antifa, the weapons they had on them, and their role in instigating the altercations, Pro Publica falsely portrayed Rundo and other RAM members as violent domestic terrorists.

FEF’s future articles will describe the Huntington Beach and Berkeley rallies and the Pro Publica article and video in some depth, but this introduction will skip over these topics for now and describe the massive show-of-force service of a search warrant by a SWAT team and FBI agents on Rundo that followed these incidents:

Rundo:  Yeah, it was like something straight out of a movie. Crazy—that’s the only way to put it. There were probably ten of them, maybe more. I lived on the first floor, had a big window right over my bed. They didn’t even bother with the door—they came right through the window, right on top of me, while I was lying there.

They blew out the window first, then tossed in two flashbangs. I’m still half-asleep, trying to process what’s happening when they storm in with assault rifles, stepping over me, on my bed. I got dragged out by my feet, a gun pressed to the back of my head.  It was terrifying.

At one point, one of the officers pressed the barrel of his gun into my head, forcing my face into the floor. On top of that, they just wrecked the whole apartment—smashed every single window, ripped open bags of coffee, scattered everything. My clothes, my books—everything was taken. I didn’t even have anything radical in my collection, mostly romance books and some books on Roman history. They took those anyway.

So there I am, lying in my boxers, gun to my head, and they drag me out into the living room. The FBI hadn’t shown up yet. First, it was this SWAT team, all dressed up in elbow pads, helmets. They’ve got my hands behind my back, forcing me to crouch down so my head’s almost touching the floor. I look up, and I see them rifling through my cabinets, tossing cereal and coffee on the floor, just destroying everything.

  • Do you think this 3 a.m. massive force execution of the search warrant was politically motivated?

Rundo: This is how I knew it was political. They take me out front and basically march me around my apartment complex in my boxers for all the neighbors to see. Then the actual FBI guys come in with their jackets with the lettering on their shirts and all this stuff . . . and they’re like “listen can we speak to you about something?”  At the time what I thought happened was we had this problem with these journalists from Pro Publica that were really out to harm us and I thought they had done like a swatting on me and said we had guns or something. So I thought [the FBI] were like looking for something that didn’t exist, you know, because I never owned any firearms.  I’m from New York.  Guns weren’t something I really got into, so I thought they were just coming on some bad tip that we had weapons or something. . . .  so I’m like “yeah,  what do you have to say?”  and he’s like “were you at Huntington Beach?”  Now obviously I was at Huntington Beach;  my face was front page on the New York Times for being at Huntington Beach. So I say of course I was there and I’m thinking maybe the guy I got into a fight with died or was injured.  So he’s like “you got into a fight at Huntington Beach, right?” and I was like “yeah, did the guy die or something?” and he says “no no the guy’s fine, actually we don’t really know who he is.”  Basically he let’s me know they were there in connection with the Charlottesville RAM guys cases but because I wasn’t at Charlottesville, all they had was a search warrant. It was an intimidation tactic; they were saying we got your boys and we’re doing this to you even though you weren’t there, to send a message to you.  At the time of this raid there was only the first indictment for the RAM guys at Charlottesville; the second indictment for the California RAM guys was three or four weeks later.

So they end up letting me go. After they finally told me you’re free to go I was like you’re kidding me. I’m in my boxers so I asked the guy can I get some clothes back or something and they had to go into the truck and pull out a pair of jeans and a T-shirt because they took every piece of clothing I owned.

  • What did you do next?

Rundo:  That spooked me pretty hard. I mean, it was a hell of an experience, and I didn’t want to stick around for round two. I had some friends in Eastern Europe—they had a solid nationalist scene going on. I went to a boxing event there once, and I met this guy, a mentor of sorts. He told me, “Come out here. We’ll help you get settled. We’ll find you a job, figure things out.” So I said, “Alright, I’ll make it happen.” I had some savings from working with the union, so I wasn’t totally broke. I bought a flight, but instead of going direct, I took one with a layover—happened to be in the UK.

So I get to Gatwick just a day after they raided my place. I’ve got nothing with me but a few shirts, a book bag, a new phone, and a one-way ticket. Pulled all my cash out of the bank—I was going to figure the rest out once I was gone.

I board the plane to Gatwick and the minute I step off, it’s like I’ve walked into a setup. There’s this formation of airport security, some kind of Intel team. Right away they stop me and ask for my passport. They signal to each other, I’m “the guy” and form a phalanx around me.  They march me through the airport in the middle of this phalanx with at least fifteen guys forming a box around me. No one gets near me. No one’s even allowed to look at me.

Glen Allen Comment:  Mr. Rundo’s saga is fascinating and important on so many levels that I aspire eventually to compile and expand FEF’s articles about him into a full length book, complete with an appendix that would include, e.g., photographs, Judge Cormac Carney’s opinions (there are two important Judge Carney opinions, one striking down the Anti-Riot Act as unconstitutional and a later one dismissing the Rundo prosecution on selective prosecution grounds; both opinions were overturned by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals), and other interesting and relevant documents.

 If you deem this book project a worthy endeavor, all donations to defray its costs will be greatly appreciated.

By Glen Allen Esq.

Donate Today!

Academic Study on Woke Mental Instability Retracted By Major Journal . . . Because it Hurt Woke People’s Feelings

/3 Comments/in , /by

It’s quite incredible how brazenly anti-scientific Woke academia — that is to say, basically, academia — is. It’s got to the point of being comical. A study proving that Woke people are mentally unstable has been retracted by a major psychology journal because Woke people, being mentally unstable, were upset by it and felt that it used judgemental language about them; that is scientifically neutral language such as “mentally unstable” and “high mutational load.”

Last summer, the Danish independent scientist Emil Kirkegaard and I had a study proving that Woke people are more mentally unstable than controls accepted in the Scandinavian Journal of Psychology. The rather technical piece, entitled “Do Conservatives Really Have an Advantage in Mental Health? An Examination of Measurement Invariance” was accepted after two rounds of double-blind review, in which the manuscript in reviewed by anonymous experts. In the period between acceptance — when it was placed on the journal’s website — and formal publication, it quickly became the ninth most viewed article in the journal’s history.

This was a problem for Woke activists, naturally, because they tend to be Narcissistic and the study confronted them with what they are and did so very directly. It examined an earlier study which had applied a “Woke Scale” — a series of questions to discern levels of Wokeness — to 4,978 Finnish adults. Kirkegaard and I wanted to discover whether this scale displayed “measurement bias.” For example, one question was: “If white people have on average a higher level of income than black people, it is because of racism.” The original author correlated how you answered with your answers to questions about mental health. The problem is that measures of mental health may work differently on those of high or low levels of Wokeness. In other words, the fact of being anti-Woke, for example, may impact how you answer a question about mental health, meaning that the scale is not “measurement invariant.” We found that the scale was measurement invariant. It was genuinely measuring what was going on. The correlation between Wokeness and mental health was -0.41 and the relationship between Wokeness and anxiety was 0.36. Drawing upon the earlier author’s data, we also found that voters for a give Finnish political party become more mentally ill, in a linear fashion, the more Woke that party’s policies are.

The peer-reviewers asked us to expand our “Discussion” section, to look in more depth at why this might be the case. We presented the theory that it might be significantly for genetic reasons, and presented data to back up these claims: We are evolved to be group-oriented, but Darwinian selection pressures have collapsed since the Industrial Revolution, and so a significant component of the Woke are high in mutational load. This is congruent with their being, on average, both mentally and physically unhealthy, and they display various specific markers of mutation. For example, they tend to have older fathers, and older fathers have more de novo mutations on their sperm. It should be stressed that we only included these issues because the peer-reviewers asked us to. They then reviewed what we had done and recommended publication.

However, on 21st February we were informed by the publisher of the journal (published by Wiley and Sons) that “concerns had been raised” and this study had led to a “post-publication peer-review” — despite the fact that peer-review in science is supposed to be sacrosanct — with the conclusion that there were “major errors” in the article and that they must retract it.

This was a total lie. The new reviews constituted, at best, a series of minor criticisms that — were our article not about Wokeness — would have been addressed in a response piece to which we would have been allowed a right of reply. Their main issues were, in essence, what they called “normatively biased language” and, for one of the reviewers, being unethical by citing “white supremacy advocacy,” though it was unclear which of our purely academic citations fell into this category. Kirkegaard wrote about what happened on his blog “Emil Kirkegaard Things,” and a commenter noted, “Second reviewer clearly used AI. I pasted the “Conflation of Religiosity and Spirituality” section into https://undetectable.ai/ and they said it was 1% human.” So much for ethics! The reviewers also noted a problem with the Wokeness items coding, because we used 32 items, but the scale only has 26 items. However, this reflected issues with the study that we were drawing upon.

Nevertheless, we re-did the analysis in light of this very minor concern and the correlation between anxiety and Wokeness simply increased from 0.36 to 0.37. In essence, they didn’t like the discussion section and this was because it averred that Woke people had a tendency to be mentally ill for genetic reasons and conservatives had a tendency to be the opposite. They claimed it was biased because environmental considerations weren’t explored, but this is never normally a reason to retract a study. Moreover, our study drew upon studies to justify why the environmental view is less parsimonious than the genetic one. Studies that looked at purely environmental explanations do not get retracted, even though they are empirically wrong, and nor do those that portray conservatives in a negative light.

Ironically, then, the forced retraction of our study substantiated completely what it argued: Woke people are mentally unstable, on average. They cope with this be adopting a Narcissistic false self, so that they can feel superior — we literally said this in the Discussion and the new reviewers criticised us for doing so. If you question their false self, such as by proving how mentally ill and high in mutational load they are, they react with Narcissistic Rage and try to destroy you.

Narcissism strongly correlates with Machiavellianism. Having a piece like this in a mainstream psychology journal means they feel you have power over them. They also assume that you’re motivated by power, rather than truth, because that’s true of them. So, the piece must be retracted; you must be symbolically disempowered . . .

But, of course, this completely proves our point and has no bearing on the accuracy — the truth — of the study. Woke Academia is so frightened of the truth that they will retract, on spurious grounds, a major journal’s ninth most read article of all time, one whose results are not in doubt. And why have they retracted it? Because it’s hurt their feelings. And they feel negative feelings very strongly, just as the article proved.

Adulating “Adolescence”: Lie-Loving Leftists Are Morally Masturbating over Anti-White Agitprop

/6 Comments/in /by

What a gift to leftists! For days, they’ve been adulating a television fantasy called Adolescence. In leftist eyes, the show fearlessly confronts misogynist murder and the horrific threat posed to women and girls by toxic masculinity. And in the midst of their hosannas, as though God Zirself wanted to join the fight for females, reality provided a perfect example of misogynist murder and toxic masculinity. A sickening story about precisely those things hit the headlines. The parallels were deeply disturbing. In the fantasy, a misogynist schoolboy stabbed a girl to death — a girl whose only “crime” was to bully him by calling him an incel on social media. In the reality, a “dual heritage” misogynist student killed an innocent woman[1] “in a frenzied stabbing,” as the fiercely feminist BBC put it. The fiercely feminist Guardian noted that the student had “a fascination for knives and a ‘rage’ against women.” Even more horrifically, the Guardian went on, “he may have taken sexual pleasure in the killing. [Awaiting trial in prison], he asked a female officer if the killing was making headlines and then masturbated in front of her.” 

No parallels drawn 

So did the BBC, the Guardian and the rest of the leftist media draw the obvious parallels between fantasy and reality? Did they underline how the case made by Adolescence had been horrifically confirmed by news from real life? No, they didn’t. And they never will. This is because reality didn’t in fact confirm Adolescence. On the contrary, it exposed Adolescence as a giant leftist lie. The villain in the TV fantasy was a White male called Jamie Miller, which is a very English name. But the villain in the real murder-story was a non-White male called Nasen Saadi, which is not an English name at all:

A criminology student with a fascination for knives and a “rage” against women who stabbed a mother to death on a Dorset beach has been jailed for life with a minimum term of 39 years. Nasen Saadi, 21, spent months plotting the attack and questioning university lecturers about how a killer would get away with murder. He kitted himself up with latex gloves, a balaclava, wet wipes and nail clippers to try to avoid being traced.

Mrs Justice Cutts said Saadi had attacked Gray and Miles because he had a grievance against society and against women in particular. Rejection by girls and women had led to a “deeply suppressed rage” and the idea of becoming a notorious killer attracted him. She said he was an “extremely dangerous young man” who thought he had planned the “perfect crime”. […]

The court heard that Saadi harboured strong misogynistic views, repeatedly telling fellow students at the University of Greenwich that women were weaker than men and should not work in certain jobs. It is possible he may have taken sexual pleasure in the killing. While he was being held in the high-security Belmarsh prison in south-east London, awaiting trial, he asked a female officer if the killing was making headlines and then masturbated in front of her.(“Student with ‘rage’ against women jailed for at least 39 years for Bournemouth beach murder,” The Guardian, 28th March 2025)

Dual-heritage misogynist murderers Elliot Rodger and Nasen Saadi 

That story is reality and confirms that it’s non-White men, not White men, who pose the greatest threat to women and girls. Accordingly, the leftist media are drawing absolutely no parallels between all-too-real Nasen Saadi and entirely invented “Jamie Miller.” Nor are the leftist media exploring other uncomfortable aspects of Saadi’s horrific crime. The Guardian said that he was “from south London.” It would be much more accurate to say he was from the Third World. In smarmy leftist terminology, Saadi is of “dual heritage,” born in Thailand of Iraqi and Thai parents. In this, he’s like the infamous misogynist murderer Elliot Rodger, also of “dual heritage” and also full of rage at “rejection by girls and women.” 

The leftist media definitely do not want to explore those unsettling parallels between Rodger and Saadi, because the real concern of leftists is not to protect women and girls of any race, but to foment hate against men and boys of exclusively one race, namely, the White race. Adolescence is what communists call agitprop, or artistic propaganda designed, without regard for truth or reality, to agitate, arouse emotion, and advance the cause of leftism. The creators of the show have openly admitted that their fantasy was inspired by the real murder of a 15-year-old schoolgirl by a 17-year-old schoolboy in 2023. But that real killer was completely unsuitable for anti-White agitprop. He was Black, tall and athletic but also ugly, and called Hassan Sentamu.

Ugly Black and cherubic White: the real misogynist murderer Hassan Sentamu and the fake misogynist murderer Jamie Miller

Shaheen Baig, the casting director who carefully chose a cherubic White boy to play a murderer (image from Youtube)

That’s why Sentamu was race-shifted into a short White schoolboy called Jamie Miller who looks cherubic, not chilling. This was a deliberate anti-White choice and is central to the way Adolescence joins the leftist war on Truth, Beauty and Goodness. It’s no surprise that the casting director of the show is an overweight non-White woman called Shaheen Baig, who, as the Guardian approvingly notes, “looked at 500 boys for the part.”

Ugly but virtuous: the women-respecting Black heroes of Adolescence

As Edward Dutton points out in his insightful analysis of Adolescence, the principal Black schoolboy in Adolescence is virtuous, not villainous. He’s the intelligent and sensitive son of the show’s Black hero, the policeman who tries to protect women and girls against deadly White male violence. However, Dutton doesn’t point out another important thing about the virtuous Black schoolboy. Unlike the cherubic-looking White villain, he’s ugly. Again, this was a deliberate choice by the show and its casting director. They wanted to contrast the virtue of an ugly Black with the villainy of an attractive White. As I said in “A Clown Called Chleo,” the fixed principle of leftism is to champion the unnatural, abnormal and ugly. Dutton does point out another example of that leftist principle at work in Adolescence. At one point, a virtuous White man serves as the “appropriate adult” when villainous White Jamie is in a police van. And guess what? The White man is a dwarf with “scoliosis of the spine.” That is, he’s abnormal and suffers from an unnatural condition. As Dutton emphasizes, virtuous characters in Adolescence are never normal White males, who are instead portrayed as either villainous or vapid. 

In short, Adolescence inverts reality and wages war on Truth, Beauty and Goodness. And that’s precisely why a possibly Jewish leftist called Jake Kanter has described it as “flawless” and the Guardian has described it as “the closest thing to TV perfection in decades.” Where Kanter sees flawlessness, I see fapping; where the Guardian sees near perfection, I see pornography. The show is acting as a kind of political pornography for leftists, allowing them to indulge in a frenzied bout of moral masturbation. Just as literal masturbation is about pleasuring oneself without procreating,[2] moral masturbation is about portraying oneself as virtuous without actually possessing virtue or doing good. Indeed, the moral masturbation of the left does serious harm to the objects of its pretended concern. Adolescence inverts and evades reality, rather than confronting it. The Guardian claims that the show asks “devastating questions.” Wrong! It evades devastating questions and tells leftists what they want to hear, not what exists in reality. 

Misogynist master-manipulator 

That’s why the show race-shifted the reality of an ugly Black 17-year-old committing a misogynist murder into the fantasy of a cherubic White 13-year-old committing a misogynist murder. And when the show singles out the part-Black Andrew Tate as the misogynist master-manipulator behind little White Jamie’s murderous villainy, it doesn’t explore some “devastating” statistics from a survey conducted in 2023: “Those from a racial-minority background were more likely to view Tate positively — 41 per cent of black respondents and 31 per cent of Asian [e.g., Pakistani] respondents, dropping down to 15 per cent for white respondents.”

In other words, far more non-Whites are fans of misogynist master-manipulator Andrew Tate[3] than Whites are. And yet leftists are pretending that the opposite is true. They’re falling over themselves to heap praise on a TV fantasy that inverts reality, that presents non-Whites, the group posing the greatest threat to women, as the protectors of women, and that race-shifts an ugly Black killer into a cherubic White killer. Leftists love lies, which is precisely why leftists are adulating Adolescence.

[1]  The murdered woman was a lesbian and had a “wife,” which would once have made the murder seem even worse to leftists. Today, however, translunacy has made real lesbians no longer special or privileged in orthodox leftism. They’ve even become suspect. See my article “Dykes Are Dull!” for further discussion.

[2]In a sense, the use of contraception makes normal heterosexual sex into a form of masturbation, turning one’s partner into a kind of unusually realistic sex-doll. Some honest homosexuals will admit that the same can be true of all homosexual sex, which is sterile by its very nature.

[3]Interestingly, the misogynist Andrew Tate is of “dual heritage” like the misogynists Elliot Rodger and Nasen Saadi. Tate has an “African American”  father and a White mother. But leftists refuse to investigate how criminal behavior may be encouraged by miscegenation and by the psychological strains of having no clear racial identity. Indeed, miscegenation between distant races may even be genetically harmful and affect the brains of mixed-race children.