Johnson's article drew tremendous response. Over 500 comments and climbing. More reaction is negative than positive, although that is partly because the ones who don't like what he's saying have more to respond to.
The article is so long and -- not confused, Johnson is a brilliant writer and always intelligible, but, let's say, at odds with itself, it's hard to know where to begin. You just don't come away with much except that Johnson accepts the reality of the Holocaust, finds it distasteful, doesn't want anything to do with it, so has written a few thousand words about why we should stay away from it politically. If it doesn't matter, Johnny, why does it take you 5,000 words to explain that?
Ask me, Johnson made a rookie mistake of wading blithely into something he doesn't really know about or care about. He doesn't seem to grasp the deadly seriousness of what he's very fliply, cavalierly advising: to just go on ahead and cede to jews a bunch of genocidally anti-White historical claims - claims that they used to create the current anti-White juggernaut that is ZOG, and claims that give rise to, to use WFB's words, the prevailing structure of taboos. He's advising we cede the moral basis of the genocidal campaign against us! That is beyond preposterously stupid, but then the cherry: the claims that we are supposed to cede are absolutely demonstrably 100% false; they are Big Lies. It boggles the mind, it really does. Johnson is mistaking his tastes and irritations for sound politics, and he rightly got has ass handed to him by the commenters. Look Greg, if you want to write essays and collect money and be safe, that's great. But don't act like what you want is the measure of successful radical politics. It's not. It's simply gelded conservatism.
I'm glad he wrote the article, though, because it really drew out the best arguments for the other side. In that way, the article has been a tremendous success. I'd like to think Johnson planned it, but only the very, very shrewdest among us are capable of that ultimate black art.
Not only should we be talking about 'the' 'Holocaust' (Johnson follows MacDonald in verbally submitting to the jews' labelling imposition, indeed goes so far as to call problematizers 'autistic,' of all craziness - another good example of the Ph.D. mindset being overly respectful of authority), we should be screaming and ranting and railing about it: Not only do all the arguments serve our side, as the commenters show, even if we didn't want to talk about it, by beating us over the heads with it daily -- beating our KIDS over the head with it daily (this will of course be less a concern to the childless Johnson and MacDonald) -- the jews are forcing our hand.
It makes you wonder, though. Gee, Greg: which other sectors of the battlefront should we withdraw from?
Is there anywhere we should fight?
He presses on with a virus he picked up from having intellectual sex with carrier Jared Taylor - the idea that whites have some kind of moral flaw that makes them feel guilty for things they didn't do. That isn't true, though. Whites feel guilty for the holocaust, to the extent they do, which is not as much as he thinks, because they BELIEVE it actually happened. They really believe these nasty white people MURDERED six million jews by sticking them in gas ovens. But these claims are bogus. Destroy them and whatever guilt there is goes away.
But no, that's too simple. We have to have some cultural revolution in thinking that I guess is going to trump what he elsewhere seems to be implying is a biological problem. I don't see that working.
It's all just a garbage variant of whites-are-suicidal, which is an intellectual form of AIDS spread most notably by patient zero, Jared Taylor.
I tell you - that guy does more harm than anyone realizes.
Wake up, Johnson, and pull your head out of your ass. And then pull MacDonald's head out of his ass. And then both of you activate your twin powers and give Japes Taylor a boot back to Jewville where he belongs.
Last edited by Alex Linder; July 24th, 2012 at 05:56 PM.