Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old October 14th, 2014 #61
Joe_Smith
Senior Member
 
Joe_Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,778
Joe_Smith
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
This is the thing. The KM/GJ party says H is history, but it's not. It's in classrooms daily ebola-ing white minds. Not to fight on this front is to submit to child abuse. I note again the irony that the PhDs are against the actual teaching of truth, while the plebes are for it. For the decider let's go to PhD Goebbels. He said strip the truth bare and lay it out for the meanest intelligence. The public can understand what the jews are doing, why it's anti-white, and what needs to be done about it. It can all be done in a single poster, a single phrase, a single term -- holohoax -- just as the original NS did it.
What's funny is that laymen are way ahead of self-proclaimed nationalist intellectual leadership. I don't know about the South or the Midwest, but talk to any white in a big urban center with Jews and they'll all know exactly what you're talking about. Of course, the whites in Chicago, NY, NJ, LA, tend more towards being "ethnic whites" like Poles, Irish, Italians, Greeks, so I don't know if this is a factor in it.

Ironically, in-group membership in America's traditional Germanic protestant population, or desire to assimilate into it, correlates in my experience with philo-Semitism. IE, an Italian who lives in Rhode Island is way more likely to have a positive opinion of Jews than a Ginzo from Howard Beach.

My guess is that the intellectual leadership of traditional white protestant America, which is "conservative", is all bought by Jews.

Quote:
Taylor will say he's not an expert on WWII, which is and is seen to be a copout. Johnson - has he ever done a System media interview? Not that I've seen. If he had, he would know better than to pretend the H-Lie is something one can 'step over.' He's just got some fanboy necro-crush on the late dead weirdo Bowden, who apparently used that phrase the first time. It's nutso for anyone who has dealt with jewsmedia. And again - the facts are on our side. Why then these intellectuals advocate running away from them? It's past bizarre...
Yes, omitting, or worse, surrendering the Holocaust debate, is as useful as conceding the facts about race and genetics. If you want a European nation that puts its ethnic population first, the Jews will argue that you are emulating the Nazis- and you are.

How does the New Right deal with this self-made dilemma? I got it, let's call ourselves WHITE ZIONISTS!!! It may get us nowhere since real Zionism believes in racial supremacy for Jews and globalism for Goyim, but it does have the effect of trying to make common cause with ISRAEL (good for Jews, give Jared Taylor and richard Spencer more money schlomo). It's true that Rockwell's approach of putting on brownshirts and waving Swastikas was doomed to fail and bordering on the idiotic. But the polar opposite, which is packaging your racial ideology in a yarmulke and black overcoat, is perhaps the worst approach to nationalist politics I've ever heard of in my entire life!



Quote:
Exactly. All this stuff is of a piece. Anyone who tells us we must avoid X or only deal with part of Y is wrong. They're all avenues into the same hub, the same big picture: jews are trying to wipe out whites. They use this bogus historical narrative, or this bit of pseudo-scientific lying, or this propaganda term, but it all is meant to lead in the same direction to the same end: pushing whites off the historical and demographic cliff.
Not to mention there are thousands of genocides, real ones, that white people suffered throughout history, often at the hands of Jews. How about the ethnic cleansing of Germans from Eastern Europe by bolshevik Jews? White slavery in Spain by the Sephardics? Why not talk about the Greek genocide by the Young Turks? Oh, that's right, Ataturk and his doenmeh financiers were fucking kikes, doing so would be anti-semitic.

Quote:
But these dishonest ones like Liddell like to say why are we obsessed with some dead Austrian from 70 years ago. I don't know, are we obsessed? It seems more that the jews are obsessed. And we know why: the nazis figured out how to defeat them - via propaganda and media, in a democratic system. There's something to learn there.
The goal is to defame and libel Adolf Hitler so much, that people will not take the step and read what he had to say for themselves. Imagine if academic, media, and intellectual freedom to study the Third Reich was as open as it is for, say, Napoleonic France. All it would do is make people in general (white and non-white) think "shit, Hitler was right".

So Jews fib. Hitler wanted to kill everyone with brown hair or brown eyes. Hitler wanted to take over the world and exterminate everyone that's not German. Hitler persecuted Catholics and put you in a concentration camp if you had a Jewish ancestor in your family tree in 1645.

All lies. They do this to make people think Hitler was an enemy of mankind, rather than the enemy of the enemy of mankind. In fact, even people too dumb to see through the Holocaust myth would say oh wow, he only targetted and tried to exterminate Jews? This guy's a hero!

Quote:
The hidden thing, which I alone seem to see or mention, is that the British descent of all these men is the veiled reason they simply can't give the NS the respect they deserve - nor the study. No one in Britain ever defeated jews. No one in America ever defeated jews. Only those Germans did. And when you read their ideas at calvin.edu archive, you see how they did it. Why in the world would I listen to Kevin MacDonald or Greg Johnson or Colin Liddell when I could read the words of men who actually did it in the field? This is basic logic and basic humility. This is not our race's first rodeo with jews. The lessons have been learned, the basic ones. Sure we have new social media, but we know the nazis would say USE THEM. The rest - jew strategy and intentions have not changed one iota - read Mein Kampf. But Anglo-American, British arrogance, our sad conservative legacy - these define the mindset common to white nationalism in the US. There simply isn't enough thinking on our side. The way to defeat jews is known. But "we" prefer to muddle along, putting personalities and personal interests ahead of proven principles.
Even one of the greatest and ballsiest British to ever live, Oswald Mosley, was a victim of this moral and political ineptness. While blackshirts stood ready to march through Cable Street against Jews and Communists, the home secretary John Simon (who was a kike) told British police to demand Mosley call off the march because it had the potential of dragging the country into a civil war. Mosley...thought that would be terrible and went home.

What did the Jews and communists do? They rioted anyway, kidnapping and maiming hundreds of British police men in the process.

You have to walk in the shoes of the conservative and realize the only language they understand is intimidation. What happens when Jews and leftists create commotions, chaos, and problems, while the nationalists are diplomatic and even friendly towards them? The conservative, as an inherent spineless jellyfish, will do what gives him the least problems.

Even though Mosley and his BUF were peaceful and diplomatic, the Cable Street riots caused conservatives to do what the communist and Jew rioters demanded. They passed the Public Order act right after the incident and banned the BUF and its marches partially out of fear that communists would attack police again, but also due to Jewish control of the British government. The Jews and communists suffered no consequences. Instead, they increased their recognition and support by a huge amount, and the battle of cable street is a legend for communists and Jews, and hence the British education and media system.

You look at what the Nazis were doing 10 years before and you see why anglos fail. They never backed away from a fight and if it caused a Civil War, so be it. The Beer Hall Putsch failed, but it is a testimony to the will to win and sense of urgency that the NSDAP had.
__________________
"The favorite slogan of the reds is: 'No Pasarán!: Yes we have passed! And we tell them...and we tell them, we will pass again!'"
― Benito Mussolini after the Communist capitulation in Barcelona

Last edited by Joe_Smith; October 14th, 2014 at 06:13 PM.
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #62
Vance Stubbs
Hatespeaker
 
Vance Stubbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,281
Vance Stubbs
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Marr View Post
And, of course, even here I'm mocking C.I.s because they don't believe they are real jews. They believe they are the real Israelites.

I'll also include a link here to the Renegade Wildcard Show wherein Nick Spero says that Andrew Anglin would not agree to be a guest on Circus Maximus without Mike Delaney's approval.

Last I checked, Mike Delaney was not an Orthodox priest, but C.I..

And it's not so much that I have anything against C.I.. It's just that I get tired of having to sort these guys for their hidden agenda. That's why I say they are "like real jews".
I'm pretty sure Andrew doesn't believe the White race is descended from Jacob, which I guess is the main tenant of CI.

The bible describes the Israelites as fair-skinned, with princes "as white as milk" at the most extreme. The actual "Jews" are the offspring of Israelites and foreign converts, which included Edomites, Canaanites, Phoenicians, and Syrians prior to Judea's downfall. Jesus was (supposedly) a lost Israelite prince, who maligned the Jews for corrupting the laws of the Israelite prophets.

I'm not a member of the Jesus cult, but it's a decent myth.
__________________
"Surely people differ in their biologically determined qualities. But discovery of a correlation between some of these qualities is of no scientific interest and of no social significance, except to racists, sexists and the like."
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #63
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,910
Robbie Key
Default

Vantard Strategies
Greg Johnson

1,894 words



My recent article “Vanguardism, Vantardism, and Mainstreaming” was directed primarily at mainstreamers. My goal in distinguishing between genuine vanguardists and “vantards” was to force the mainstreamers to focus on the substance of the vanguardist position, which I think is entirely defensible, rather than on the non-productive strategies of the vantards, which I characterized in two ways: (1) as needlessly linking White Nationalism with German National Socialism and the Holocaust, and (2) as embracing “premature populism.”

Colin Liddell sent his initial salvo in this debate, “Andrew Anglin’s Inverted Ghetto,” to Counter-Currents, but I did not want to run it. Liddell was responding to Anglin’s response to RamZPaul’s attack on Robert Randsell. (See how complicated this gets? And this was just the beginning.) I told Liddell that I want Counter-Currents to stay above this kind of web drama because it is wearisome and usually unproductive.

I particularly objected to Liddell’s suggestion that Andrew Anglin is working for the enemy. My gut tells me that Anglin is sincere — but so is bad poetry. Moreover, I think that we should presume that people are sincere until proven otherwise. And even counter-productive behavior can be quite sincere. Too often one has occasion to ask: “If so-and-so were working for the enemy, would he be doing anything different?”

I thought RamZPaul’s attack to be pointless, because evidently he wants people like Randsell to shut up and go away, and they never will. So one needs to find a way of dealing with them. For instance, if you want to seem more moderate and reasonable, you can always point to someone like Randsell. And if you take umbrage to being linked with Randsell, well, that would not stop even if he did go away. The enemy is not “fair.” They would simply play the Hitler canard. So one has to have an answer anyway. Best, then, to focus on honing your own message than calling Randsell a clown.

Anglin then responded to Liddell, prompting Liddell to write a real stylistic and argumentative tour de force, “Stormer in a Teacup,” which at a stroke elevated the discussion to a level that prompted me to take part. Anglin then responded to both Liddell and me. (And Alex Linder has also chipped in.) Then Liddell responded yet again with “Go Straight to NAZI; do Not Pass Go . . .” To which Anglin — who obviously relishes playing the victim and collecting props from dullards — has now penned another response.

This controversy has proved useful, because it has prompted Anglin and Linder to set down some of their presuppositions, which I would like to examine critically.

They’ll Call You a Nazi Anyway, so You Might as Well Be One

Liddell’s strongest argument is that linking White Nationalism to German National Socialism is self-defeating. Our enemies go out of the way to assert such linkages. They even claim that harmless conservatives like Rush Limbaugh are Nazis. Why do they do that? Because they correctly perceive that linking any Right-wing cause to Hitler stigmatizes it in the minds of most people. Being linked to Hitler, for example, is much more damaging than being linked to the devil himself, which is quite a feat. Why, then, go out of one’s way to tie White Nationalism to Hitler, when it is hard enough to get Americans or Swedes or Englishmen concerned with stopping their own ethnic displacement in the here and now?

I think Liddell makes a good point, which I would like to amplify. I think it is necessary to reject the premise shared by both vantards and the enemies of White Nationalism, namely, that White Nationalism really, authentically just is National Socialism. If you really are a National Socialist, then that is true. And if, like me, your intellectual journey took you through the Old Right, there is no point in denying it.

But, in truth, National Socialism is just one path that people take to White Nationalism. It is not the sole path. It is not a necessary path. Why? Because White Nationalism is based on reality, which is common to all peoples, places, and times. Because White Nationalism is the only rational and moral response to the white race’s ongoing, programmed march to extinction. Because a rational man who had never heard of Adolf Hitler or World War II would still conclude that ethnonationalism is the best political philosophy for all peoples.

Anglin and Linder, in effect, argue that “You’re going to be called a Nazi anyway, so why not go full Nazi?” Rejecting the label, they imply, looks weak. Of course in this movement, it is inevitable that they will be accused of being fags, Jews, and FBI informants as well. But for some reason, they don’t wish to embrace those identities. Is denying such charges, if untrue, also “weak”?

If one is not a National Socialist, then one should indignantly reject the charge for what it is: an attempt to distract people from the present-day reality of our race’s demographic displacement. Even if one is a National Socialist, the charge is no less an attempt to distract us from the present justification for White Nationalism. For White Nationalism is justified based on what is happening in America and England and France and Germany and Italy today. And nothing that happened in Germany 70 years ago can make it either more or less true.

But one must not, like RamZPaul, think that one will be spared that charge if people like Randsell and Anglin shut up and go away. And it intensely irritates me when our people think it is clever to pre-emptively throw Hitler under the bus to appease public opinion. But, at the risk of sounding like an old drunk lecturing the youth on the virtues of temperance, I completely sympathize with the Identitiarians, BUGSters, and others who wish to create a case for White Nationalism without reference to Hitler and the Holocaust.

The “Holohoax” Hoax

Both Anglin and Linder stridently assert that (1) the Holocaust is a hoax, and (2) this hoax is the foundation of Jewish power today, such that undermining the orthodox Holocaust story will undermine Jewish power.

I think that both claims are false.

First, even if one deducts all the falsehoods and exaggerations so ably debunked by revisionists, there is still Holocaust enough for Jewish purposes. How many Jews died and how? Probably in the millions, by all causes. But whatever the historians determine in the end, we can be reasonably assured that it is enough to be (a) the worst thing that ever happened to Jews, and (b) an occasion for endless moral and financial blackmail directed at whites — until we simply harden our hearts to the sob stories.

Second, as Mark Weber has pointed out, the Holocaust is not the foundation of Jewish power. It is certainly a handy tool of Jewish power, which they will exploit to the hilt. But Jews already had enormous financial, cultural, and political influence in the white world long before the Second World War, and the ability of Jews to capitalize on the Holocaust presupposed existing Jewish power in politics, academia, and the mass media. Even if the Holocaust could be completely debunked — and no sensible revisionist argues that it can — the pillars of Jewish financial, political, and cultural power would still stand. does he truly believe that?

Fortunately, as I argue in my essay “Dealing with the Holocaust,” even if every jot and tittle of the Holocaust story were true, it does not undermine the validity of White Nationalism.

Anglin and Linder interpret the existence of laws against Holocaust revisionism and “denial” as a sign of Jewish vulnerability. But this does not follow. Such laws may be merely one more expression of overweening Jewish power, self-confidence, and vengefulness. They may not be necessities, but luxuries. Just another boot stomping on a human face, forever.

Premature Populism

In his latest, Anglin writes:

Quote:
Watch one of the presentations of Richard Spencer or Jared Taylor, and ask yourself: “who exactly it this supposed to appeal to?” Go peruse Counter-Currents – or any of these other “intellectual” blogs – and ask yourself the same thing.

The answer, obviously, is middle class White liberals over the age of 40 – precisely the most useless group of people on the face of the earth, as well as the group that is the least likely to have any interest whatsoever in issues of White survival.

That is why virtually no one at all cares about Richard Spencer, Jared Taylor or any of the rest of these people, and no one ever will.

So then, who am I targeting [in America]?

First, I am targeting all disenfranchised and angry White males under the age of thirty, which is where all of the real power lies. This site appeals to members of all socio-economic classes in that age bracket.

Second, I am targeting all age groups of traditional American conservatives, who generally come from the working and middle classes. This is still the core of America . . .
Now, Anglin is mistaken about my intended audience, which is whites of all social classes who are above average in intelligence, morality, and taste. But let’s just accept his terms for the sake of argument. Why would one wish to convert “middle class White liberals over the age of 40,” whom Anglin disdains as “the most useless group of people on the face of the earth”? Well, because middle class white liberals over the age of 40 have a huge amount of the power in this society. And Counter-Currents certainly does not neglect the tastes of the rich, who have even more power. Every society is ruled by elites. Every revolution is launched by elites. My approach to White Nationalism is to target elites: the existing elite and the elite that we will raise up from all social classes to replace them.

Anglin is also mistaken about his actual audience. He claims that he is appealing to “all disenfranchised and angry White males under the age of thirty” and working and middle class American conservatives. In fact, his site is designed to appeal to whites of all social classes who are below average in intelligence, morality, and taste — and, based on a perusal of his comments, he has hit his target. But no society is ruled by the below average. No revolution is made by the below average. Below average people are just historically inert ballast moved around by elites.

Anglin claims correctly that conservative working and middle class people are “the core of America.” But they are also politically inert and powerless. Anglin also makes the ludicrous claim that “all of the real power lies” with angry and disenfranchised young white men, who are also politically powerless and inert. Again, these people are mostly just historically inert ballast manipulated by elites.

Average whites, and below average whites, are still our people. We still wish to save them. We still represent their racial interests. But they will not save our race without leadership, and to be effective, the leadership of the white masses must be, on average, better than the masses. They must be an elite that can outmatch our Jewish and plutocratic enemy elites in brains, will, and ruthlessness. And that sort of elite will be more likely to emerge among the readers of Counter-Currents and The Occidental Observer than from the readers of The Daily Stormer and VNN Forum.

http://www.counter-currents.com/2014...rd-strategies/

Last edited by Robbie Key; October 15th, 2014 at 03:05 PM.
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #64
Robbie Key
Senior Member
 
Robbie Key's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,910
Robbie Key
Default

Greg Johnson accuses Anglin of doing drugs:

Quote:
Greg Johnson
Posted October 15, 2014 at 12:38 pm | Permalink
I don’t see this as fratricide, and I am not foolish enough to think that Andrew Anglin will just go away. I see this as a spirited but substantive discussion of important issues.

I don’t think that Andrew Anglin is a below average white person, either, although judging from his writing style — grandiose, exaggerated, graphomanical, and illogical — he is burning through brain cells by using stimulants. I think Anglin is slumming and pandering because of mistaken ideas.

Unless, of course, he takes Christian Identity seriously.
http://www.counter-currents.com/2014...#comment-56473
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #65
Gifu
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 258
Default

I've never really understood why Alex Linder endorses Anglin when Anglin is a CI whacko and almost every post on that site of his laments the downfall of christooneyism. It's somewhat contradictory and bizarre to see the news bot spam links to his website.
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #66
varg
...
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,701
varg
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gifu View Post
I've never really understood why Alex Linder endorses Anglin when Anglin is a CI whacko and almost every post on that site of his laments the downfall of christooneyism. It's somewhat contradictory and bizarre to see the news bot spam links to his website.
I made the bot that links to his site. We don't link to every article, only ones that are approved first. Usually they're not christianity related. They're usually news updates because he reports on stuff way before pretty much any other site. I don't see any problem with that. I only approve a select few because I don't want to spam his site or possibly take away views from his content (though I think it brings him more views not takes away.) The bot is programmed to cut off after set length, giving only a snippet and linking to the full article. That said, if he doesn't want us linking to his stuff anymore I would remove it from our bot. Not sure why I'm explaining myself to someone who joined just to complain about us linking to a website..
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #67
Cora McGuire
.......
 
Cora McGuire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,737
Cora McGuire
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gifu View Post
I've never really understood why Alex Linder endorses Anglin when Anglin is a CI whacko and almost every post on that site of his laments the downfall of christooneyism. It's somewhat contradictory and bizarre to see the news bot spam links to his website.
Anglin is not CI.

Also, it's been gratifying to see much admirable mention made of Alex's writings and links to VNN throughout the various "dramafest" themed threads on DS and elsewhere. Might open a new avenue to some of the younger/newer DS readers who are not yet aware of the good stuff here
__________________
"White nationalism is real butter. Conservatism is that shitty vegetable spread made out of unhealthy industrial waste products."- Alex
"Our cause is a spiritual-religious thing, not a self-interest thing." -Alex
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #68
Jimmy Marr
Moderator
 
Jimmy Marr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Jew S. A.
Posts: 3,678
Jimmy Marr
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cora McGuire View Post
Anglin is not CI.
It's unfortunate, then, that he is rumored to be.

Carolyn Yeager has suffered similarly.

Allowing one's site to become a christ-insane asylum by blocking comments critical of the disease seems to be a tried and true formula for eliciting this response.

It's sad. Christards are as vulnerable to critical thinking as niggers are to ebola, but I think non-intervention is the best practice in both cases lest the do-gooders find themselves in quarantine with their charges.
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #69
Sean Gruber
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
Sean Gruber
Default

Conservatives fear jews, period. They are cowards. They won't do what works, because they believe that if they really try to win, the jews will make mincemeat of them. They are scared. Even if you put the winning weapon in their hands, they're afraid to use it.

It's like those "No Fear" "Ain't Skeered" bumper stickers. Fear characterizes much of the paralyzed White race.

I like that recent line by Alex to the effect that the main challenge isn't intellectual, it's visceral.

But I think cowards will always be cowards, in other words useless. You can't get these faggots to grow a spine. The goal should be to get them out of the way. And keep them out of the way, since cowards are the most treacherous people on earth apart from jews and homosexuals.
__________________
No jews, just right

Less talk, more action
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #70
Jimmy Marr
Moderator
 
Jimmy Marr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Jew S. A.
Posts: 3,678
Jimmy Marr
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Gruber View Post
The goal should be to get them out of the way. And keep them out of the way...
Yep. And once that begins to happen, the problem will rapidly disappear, not because there is a reduction in the number of cowards, but simply because they have learned to fear something else.
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #71
Dan Hadaway
.
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,372
Dan Hadaway
Default

The reason people aren't moving in our direction is because people don't need us. White people are living too high off the hog. White people aren't going to want change until they are hungry. I know I get very irritable when I'm hungry and that irritability ceases once I eat. Today, white people are stuffed pigs. So, it's going to take a while.

Trying to put a cute face on National Socialism by pretending White Nationalism is something else is just self-deceptive. Nobody is going to be fooled.
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #72
ohgolly
Senior Member
 
ohgolly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Florida CSA
Posts: 1,904
ohgolly
Default

WNs should steer clear of religion, period. If pressed, indifference. Trust me, attacking Christianity, no matter how it has been taken over by the Jews' agenda, is a grave mistake.

Adolf Hitler understood this, and the only thing that defeated him was bombs.

The Jared Taylors, they deserve ridicule because they're cowards. The churches need this too. But they should only change hands again, back to the Gentiles and their religion and away from the Jews' "interfaith outreach" and such.

You're making a grave mistake in warring against Christianity. The Jews know it. Uncle Adolf knew it. Common sense tells you that warring on two fronts hasn't been a great strategy unless you're separated by oceans.
__________________
With Jews, We Lose.
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #73
Vance Stubbs
Hatespeaker
 
Vance Stubbs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,281
Vance Stubbs
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hadaway View Post
The reason people aren't moving in our direction is because people don't need us. White people are living too high off the hog. White people aren't going to want change until they are hungry. I know I get very irritable when I'm hungry and that irritability ceases once I eat. Today, white people are stuffed pigs. So, it's going to take a while.

Trying to put a cute face on National Socialism by pretending White Nationalism is something else is just self-deceptive. Nobody is going to be fooled.
What if the agricorps can produce low-quality corn products indefinitely, using pre-existing White technology and Mexican labor?
__________________
"Surely people differ in their biologically determined qualities. But discovery of a correlation between some of these qualities is of no scientific interest and of no social significance, except to racists, sexists and the like."
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #74
Sean Gruber
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
Sean Gruber
Default

Quote:
Christianity, no matter how it has been taken over by the Jews' agenda

[...]

[Christian churches] should only change hands again, back to the Gentiles and their religion
__________________
No jews, just right

Less talk, more action
 
Old October 15th, 2014 #75
varg
...
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,701
varg
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnson
Now, Anglin is mistaken about my intended audience, which is whites of all social classes who are above average in intelligence, morality, and taste.
http://www.counter-currents.com/2014...buttercup-dew/

Appealing to homosexual man-children is a much needed task, you guyth.
 
Old October 16th, 2014 #76
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

[responses below]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie Key View Post
Vantard Strategies
Greg Johnson

1,894 words



My recent article “Vanguardism, Vantardism, and Mainstreaming” was directed primarily at mainstreamers. My goal in distinguishing between genuine vanguardists and “vantards” was to force the mainstreamers to focus on the substance of the vanguardist position, which I think is entirely defensible, rather than on the non-productive strategies of the vantards, which I characterized in two ways: (1) as needlessly linking White Nationalism with German National Socialism and the Holocaust, and (2) as embracing “premature populism.”
Vanguard / mainstreamer and Overton Window are all bogus in relation to WN, but I'll discuss that another time. A better metaphor is a club with doorman, not a procession by degree.

Quote:
Colin Liddell sent his initial salvo in this debate, “Andrew Anglin’s Inverted Ghetto,” to Counter-Currents, but I did not want to run it. Liddell was responding to Anglin’s response to RamZPaul’s attack on Robert Randsell. (See how complicated this gets? And this was just the beginning.) I told Liddell that I want Counter-Currents to stay above this kind of web drama because it is wearisome and usually unproductive.

I particularly objected to Liddell’s suggestion that Andrew Anglin is working for the enemy.
As you should. Good for you for upholding a VNN standard in a field of wannabe-reputation-assassins like Liddell. Greggy likes to mock me for saying VNN upholds higher standards than any other virtual collection in WN, but we do. We ALONE don't allow atomic-bomb-level levelling of reputations via charges of felonious criminality and the like. Virtually every other site out there does. Oh, but we allow swearing and epithets, so we're dirty. Liddell should be ostracized for his atomic smear, which he flings without any evidence whatsoever. That's cowardly and ignoble.

Quote:
My gut tells me that Anglin is sincere — but so is bad poetry. Moreover, I think that we should presume that people are sincere until proven otherwise.
We shouldn't assume anything, we should eye everything like eagles. What we shouldn't do is make accusations without evidence. Once we feel strongly, we should state those feelings, while simultaneously noting just that - that we don't have any actual evidence. I modeled this in relation to Hal Turner. I said early and repeatedly the guy seemed like a very likely fed agent to me BUT I HAD NO SPECIFIC EVIDENCE OF THAT, just circumstantial factors from which I could reasonably infer.

Quote:
And even counter-productive behavior can be quite sincere. Too often one has occasion to ask: “If so-and-so were working for the enemy, would he be doing anything different?”
That's basically just a tautology since you're judging everything by your own approach and writing off others a priori. Infighting can be inarguing. Doesn't have to be filled with lies and niggerlike poo-flinging accusations a la Liddell's. Nasty or nice, inarguing, infighting, is necessary. Anglo-conservative mindset doesn't understand this. We at VNN do.

Quote:
I thought RamZPaul’s attack to be pointless,
Call him Miss Kitty, please. Thank you.

Quote:
because evidently he wants people like Randsell to shut up and go away, and they never will. So one needs to find a way of dealing with them. For instance, if you want to seem more moderate and reasonable
But I don't want to seem more moderate and reasonable, greggy. Those two are opposites.

Notice how Mr Johnson inadvertently reveals where his mind is. He's issuing platitudes where he ought to be thinking. Is more moderation and reasonableness what our cause needs? No. It is not. More laughter, energy, dynamism, ANGER and YES YES YES HATE. Our movement is DEFICIENT in hate. That is the truth. The jews call us haters because we're not. We should be full of hate - if we understand what is going on. "Moderate," "reasonable" - you should shift those from your politics to your sexual practices, Cap'n Brownbeard.


Quote:
, you can always point to someone like Randsell. And if you take umbrage to being linked with Randsell, well, that would not stop even if he did go away. The enemy is not “fair.” They would simply play the Hitler canard. So one has to have an answer anyway. Best, then, to focus on honing your own message than calling Ransdell a clown.
Or you could support Ransdell in public and tutor him with free advice in private. Or say nothing. Or act like the fairy queen and get angry that the wicked witch of Kentucky is wearing the same dress to the Hairy Monster Ball.

Quote:
Anglin then responded to Liddell, prompting Liddell to write a real stylistic and argumentative tour de force
C'mon greggy, you don't believe that and we don't believe you believe it. Tour de peevishness, if anything. Anglin dominated that exchange with aplomb, this non-Soviet judge observes.

Quote:
, “Stormer in a Teacup,” which at a stroke elevated the discussion to a level that prompted me to take part. Anglin then responded to both Liddell and me. (And Alex Linder has also chipped in.) Then Liddell responded yet again with “Go Straight to NAZI; do Not Pass Go . . .” To which Anglin — who obviously relishes playing the victim and collecting props from dullards — has now penned another response.
He was enjoying laughing at you, in a mild way, which is actually somewhat better than you deserve, which is your fruity balls broached on a pointy boot. Anyway, I made up the difference on the other side, and will continue to do so when you write stuff foolish.

Quote:
This controversy has proved useful, because it has prompted Anglin and Linder to set down some of their presuppositions, which I would like to examine critically.
But I've written out my suppositions 100x, this is not new territory.

Quote:
They’ll Call You a Nazi Anyway, so You Might as Well Be One
Simply a mischaracterization. Of both of us. So far as I know, Anglin is a Nazi. Not because he would be called a Nazi if he were something else on the right. I'm not a Nazi. I've always been called a nazis - both back when I was a conservative individualist in college in the '80s, straight through to today, when I'm a White Nationalist who favors decentralization beneath a protective racial shell. At no point along the way was I ever a Nazi. So your first statement of your opponents' argument is wrong. I guess you need to misstate our argument to make your case, which says something about your mind or morals, doesn't it?

Quote:
Liddell’s strongest argument is that linking White Nationalism to German National Socialism is self-defeating. Our enemies go out of the way to assert such linkages. They even claim that harmless conservatives like Rush Limbaugh are Nazis. Why do they do that? Because they correctly perceive that linking any Right-wing cause to Hitler stigmatizes it in the minds of most people. Being linked to Hitler, for example, is much more damaging than being linked to the devil himself, which is quite a feat. Why, then, go out of one’s way to tie White Nationalism to Hitler, when it is hard enough to get Americans or Swedes or Englishmen concerned with stopping their own ethnic displacement in the here and now?
Why worry about such at all? Do you grasp that our racial enemy controls the mass media? They can call us what they want. Which will always be Hitler, whether we are pro-jew Bill Reilly on respectable Fox, or evil-racist-haters living in our great aunt's rumpus room. You're so girlish, Greg. So afraid of what others will think. So worried about how your dress looks. Stop worrying about stuff YOU CAN'T CONTROL. Start worrying about stuff you can - like not using jew propaganda terms like anti-semitism, or repeating jewish propaganda means like Hitler was a mass murderer.

Quote:
I think Liddell makes a good point, which I would like to amplify. I think it is necessary to reject the premise shared by both vantards and the enemies of White Nationalism, namely, that White Nationalism really, authentically just is National Socialism. If you really are a National Socialist, then that is true. And if, like me, your intellectual journey took you through the Old Right, there is no point in denying it.
It's true that WN is not necessarily NS, though it certainly must employ NS techniques to win. The jews will simply brand anything racial/successful Nazi, and so long as they control the high points (the mass media, or what conservative fools call the moral high ground) there is nothing that can be done about it. Worrying about it is a waste of time. Trying to distance yourself from people is a waste of time. Worrying about what others think is a waste of time. Worrying about what you are doing, and getting it right - this is not a waste of time.

Quote:
But, in truth, National Socialism is just one path that people take to White Nationalism. It is not the sole path. It is not a necessary path. Why? Because White Nationalism is based on reality, which is common to all peoples, places, and times. Because White Nationalism is the only rational and moral response to the white race’s ongoing, programmed march to extinction. Because a rational man who had never heard of Adolf Hitler or World War II would still conclude that ethnonationalism is the best political philosophy for all peoples.

Anglin and Linder, in effect, argue that “You’re going to be called a Nazi anyway, so why not go full Nazi?”
No. That is incorrect. I have never argued that. What I have argued is that Hitler and co. defeated the jews for a time and space, so we'd be smart to study how they did that. Why do you deliberately mischaracterize my beliefs and public behavior? I highly doubt Anglin is a Nazi who was going to be a Free Republic conservative except "they'll just call us Nazis anyway, so why not be one?"

Quote:
Rejecting the label, they imply, looks weak.
Wrong. What is weak is WORRYING ABOUT WHAT YOUR ENEMY WHO CONTROLS THE ENTIRE MEDIA CALLS YOU. He can call you whatever the hell he wants. Your girlish, effeminate, peevish (in Liddell's case) whining about forced associations with nasty labels or unwanted ideas - step over it, bitches. Your enemy owns the mass media. You're going to get branded whatever he wants. Accept the label or reject it, but most important is not to worry about it. Labels are for ENEMIES, as the jew knows. Not for oneself. Your grasp of basic politics is wanting, greggy.


Quote:
Of course in this movement, it is inevitable that they will be accused of being fags, Jews, and FBI informants as well. But for some reason, they don’t wish to embrace those identities. Is denying such charges, if untrue, also “weak”?
Yes, it is weak. People can manufacture 100 lies before you can refute 10. If you want to spend all your time being defensive, the enemy will be happy to keep flinging shit at you. I really think Greg's homosexually effeminate mindset is the problem here: he's simply too worried, in a distinctly feminine way, about what other people think of him. At least with a girl, it makes sense. If she dresses badly, people will laugh. It's not so in politics, greggy. You're going to get mud splattered on your beautiful new party dress no matter how pretty your goosestep.

Quote:
If one is not a National Socialist, then one should indignantly reject the charge for what it is: an attempt to distract people from the present-day reality of our race’s demographic displacement.
Nope. 100% wrong. Time spent rejecting charges is wasted. You really are metamorphosing into a complete conservative, and it makes me puke. "I'm not a [X]" is pure LOSERVILLE. Attack. Never defend. Never get defensive. That's what Goebbels advised. He is right. You are wrong. You advocate the conservative policy of verbal wimpiness that has an unbroken record of failing and going backward. Pathetic. You of all fucking people, and I mean that literally, of all people, should know better. VNN is disappoint.

Quote:
Even if one is a National Socialist, the charge is no less an attempt to distract us from the present justification for White Nationalism. For White Nationalism is justified based on what is happening in America and England and France and Germany and Italy today. And nothing that happened in Germany 70 years ago can make it either more or less true.
Go do a MSM interview greggy. Test your theory. The media don't give a flying shit about grand canyons of difference, let alone tender vittles nuances - even if they were honest and disposed to TRY to characterize our positions accurately. Hell, you yourself aren't concerned to do that with two on your same side! You exemplify the very policy you whine and remonstrate against. You're a conservative, greggy. A mealy mouthed shit pitcher.

Quote:
But one must not, like RamZPaul, think that one will be spared that charge if people like Randsell and Anglin shut up and go away. And it intensely irritates me when our people think it is clever to pre-emptively throw Hitler under the bus to appease public opinion.
Yeah, they should post-emptively toss him like you do. Real noble, greggy.

Quote:
But, at the risk of sounding like an old drunk lecturing the youth on the virtues of temperance, I completely sympathize with the Identitiarians, BUGSters, and others who wish to create a case for White Nationalism without reference to Hitler and the Holocaust.
Waah, waah, jews don't play fair. I'm going to expend all my intellectual and emotional energy whining about what I CAN'T CHANGE. Or whining TO THE ENEMY HIMSELF about unfairness and double standards. It is to shake the head in amazement. They're the FUCKING ENEMY. HITLER DID MORE ABOUT THEM THAN ANY MAN EVER LIVED. THE HORROR OF BEING ASSOCIATED WITH HIM?? WHY YOU IMPUDENT LITTLE FRUITLOOP, YOU'RE LUCKIER THAN YOU DESERVE YOU EVEN HAVE A CHANCE TO CARRY ON HIS LEGACY. All of us are. Nazi or not.

Quote:
The “Holohoax” Hoax

Both Anglin and Linder stridently assert that (1) the Holocaust is a hoax, and (2) this hoax is the foundation of Jewish power today, such that undermining the orthodox Holocaust story will undermine Jewish power.
Greggy sure loves the adverbs these days. I've never asserted the above, though Anglin may have. The foundation of jew power is control of money and media. The H is an atrocity Big Lie they do use as the basis of opposition to anything racial or nationalist. What I have said and believe is that there is no way to separate our politics from the original NS and whatever happened back then. There is no need to, since they didn't do the bad things jews assert, and did do good things we should do ourselves - and in any case, the jews will call us by their name, as greggy acknowledges above. It's all part of one fight. That's how I see it. Our children are exposed to this jew-produced Ebola daily in the classroom. That alone means we must fight. Why is this hard to understand? Because gregg is faggy and childless? Maybe. I don't know. Maybe he's just wrong. You can't run from it. You shouldn't want to. Step over it you say - but unlike you, I've done mass media interviews, many of them. They dont care what you say about yourself and your cause, they don't care what you assert about your intentions. You'll always be a racist and anti-semite who wants to murder them. That's the ground rules. There's no point whining about them, just in working hard to take the media and money and political power from the enemy.

Quote:
I think that both claims are false.

First, even if one deducts all the falsehoods and exaggerations so ably debunked by revisionists, there is still Holocaust enough for Jewish purposes.
"Still enough" - like they need ANY. The guy doesn't get it. They run the mass media. They own all the tv. They make up whatever lies they like. Their lies have no basis in fact whatsoever. They don't need to. They are wholly fictional. Why is this so difficult for greggy to grasp? How we are treated by our enemy has absolutely nothing to do with our behavior. We can dress well or poorly, speak same, whatever - we're still going to be treated the same. JEW CONTROL OF MEDIA IS THE DEFINING POLITICAL FACT. The conservative mindset is simply unable to conceive a game that CAN'T BE WON. It insists ever more fervently we just have to play the rigged game differently and we'll come out ahead. It's like a zany going bankrupt in a casino with his system to beat the house. It truly puzzles me why people like greg cant grasp what's going on. Just look at Golden Dawn. The minute you have any real success they throw you in prison. So why in the world are you hyperventilating about who your enemy associates you with? You really do think we're in some high school debate. That's all I can figure. Relax, bitch, it's friday night. Do your thing and quit worrying about what names others call you.

Quote:
How many Jews died and how? Probably in the millions, by all causes. But whatever the historians determine in the end, we can be reasonably assured that it is enough to be (a) the worst thing that ever happened to Jews, and (b) an occasion for endless moral and financial blackmail directed at whites — until we simply harden our hearts to the sob stories.

Second, as Mark Weber has pointed out, the Holocaust is not the foundation of Jewish power. It is certainly a handy tool of Jewish power, which they will exploit to the hilt. But Jews already had enormous financial, cultural, and political influence in the white world long before the Second World War, and the ability of Jews to capitalize on the Holocaust presupposed existing Jewish power in politics, academia, and the mass media. [B]Even if the Holocaust could be completely debunked — and no sensible revisionist argues that it can — the pillars of Jewish financial, political, and cultural power would still stand. does he truly believe that?
The holocaust is an important part of a comprehensive attack on white racial character. It is a pseudo-event used to define whites to whites, children especially but also adults, to intimidate them and make them feel bad and guilty. When they feel this way, they won't breed or fight or defend themselves. The holocaust, along with christian moral inculcation (original sin and need for moral redemption and loving our enemy and doing good), is a way to forestall white resistance, not a direct source of jew power. The jew power is controlling the media and the official idea-levers, ie public school indoctrination centers (teachers and textbooks) and public-addressing authorities (politicians but also priests). Through these they promote bogus history to intimidate and inculcate guilt in whites. We don't have any choice but to resist this, and one way we do that is by pointing out that their biggest most popular story is a fucking LIE. How is it not valuable -- how is it not absolutely MIND BLOWING -- to demonstrate to our own people that the very worst things assert about our race ARE NOT TRUE. ARE DEMONSTRABLY FALSE. This is not attacking the jews at their strong point, as the Whitwoulds say, it's taking out the leader of their gang. If they're lying about the Big Thing, what's the chance they're not lying about the rest? That's the legal principle - lying about one thing, lying about everything. Here's something everybody "knows" - and we can prove it's not so. We're crazy not to. You are crazy for advocating we set aside this powerful weapon.

A revolutionary cause needs dynamism. That means energy. That comes from the young. The very ones who are exposed to Holo horseshit. We can prove that Anne Frank's 'diary' (sic) and Wiesel and the 6m and gas chambers and soap and lampshades are ALL LIES? And we shouldn't do that? That won't instill doubt in them about everything else they've heard?

Are you crazy, Greg? What you're advocating is.


Quote:
Fortunately, as I argue in my essay “Dealing with the Holocaust,” even if every jot and tittle of the Holocaust story were true, it does not undermine the validity of White Nationalism.

Anglin and Linder interpret the existence of laws against Holocaust revisionism and “denial” as a sign of Jewish vulnerability. But this does not follow. Such laws may be merely one more expression of overweening Jewish power, self-confidence, and vengefulness. They may not be necessities, but luxuries. Just another boot stomping on a human face, forever.
It appears to me and pretty much anyone who seriously consider the matter that jews want the holo treated religiously, as a matter of public worship, and do not want any questioning of it from anyone anywhere ever. That alone ought to tell you something but it clearly does not.

Just admit you've "come in from the cold," as Peter Brimelow puts it, Greg. You're gone from radical racialist to respectable conservative. If it's made you boring and faintly pathetic, that's a small price to pay for social success.


Quote:
Premature Populism

In his latest, Anglin writes:

Now, Anglin is mistaken about my intended audience, which is whites of all social classes who are above average in intelligence, morality, and taste. But let’s just accept his terms for the sake of argument. Why would one wish to convert “middle class White liberals over the age of 40,” whom Anglin disdains as “the most useless group of people on the face of the earth”? Well, because middle class white liberals over the age of 40 have a huge amount of the power in this society. And Counter-Currents certainly does not neglect the tastes of the rich, who have even more power. Every society is ruled by elites. Every revolution is launched by elites. My approach to White Nationalism is to target elites: the existing elite and the elite that we will raise up from all social classes to replace them.
It doesn't actually work that way. Hitler wasn't elite. The elites didn't come to him till he had proved himself. What you are doing is providing entertainment to bourgeois conservatives. As Vdare does. There's no revolution in it.

Quote:
Anglin is also mistaken about his actual audience. He claims that he is appealing to “all disenfranchised and angry White males under the age of thirty” and working and middle class American conservatives. In fact, his site is designed to appeal to whites of all social classes who are below average in intelligence, morality, and taste — and, based on a perusal of his comments, he has hit his target. But no society is ruled by the below average. No revolution is made by the below average. Below average people are just historically inert ballast moved around by elites.
Not accurate. His writing is good and funny - intelligent. It's quite similar to original VNN back in 2000-20005 - which you were happy to write for. It appeals to anyone intelligent who likes funny stuff, not just the high end, but all whites with an interest in politics and not scared by the usual taboos.

Quote:
Anglin claims correctly that conservative working and middle class people are “the core of America.” But they are also politically inert and powerless.
You just said they were powerful. Which is it? They are potentially powerful - they alone have the numbers. But they can only be harnessed by leaders. Short of that, all any of us do is edutainment.

Quote:
Anglin also makes the ludicrous claim that “all of the real power lies” with angry and disenfranchised young white men, who are also politically powerless and inert. Again, these people are mostly just historically inert ballast manipulated by elites.
"Inert ballast" - so your profs at minor state colleges and bathhouse queerdos will do the fighting? You won't even fight verbally, just cry about being called names. That doesn't augur well for actual battle. Back in the day, you used to beat up Jim Goad. Now you look up to him. I don't even think you realize this.

Quote:
Average whites, and below average whites, are still our people. We still wish to save them. We still represent their racial interests. But they will not save our race without leadership, and to be effective, the leadership of the white masses must be, on average, better than the masses. They must be an elite that can outmatch our Jewish and plutocratic enemy elites in brains, will, and ruthlessness. And that sort of elite will be more likely to emerge among the readers of Counter-Currents and The Occidental Observer than from the readers of The Daily Stormer and VNN Forum.

http://www.counter-currents.com/2014...rd-strategies/
And yet the very head of Counter-Currents emerged from VNN. The issue will be settled in the field, where it always is. Until then, it's just an infighting of ideas, and VNN's remain the best going.

Last edited by Alex Linder; October 16th, 2014 at 01:55 AM.
 
Old October 16th, 2014 #77
Sean Gruber
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
Sean Gruber
Default

Victory through having superior intelligence, morality, and taste and avoiding jew-crit, sez Gag Johnson.

Say, wasn't that Buckley's schtick?

How does anus "taste," anyway?

__________________
No jews, just right

Less talk, more action

Last edited by Sean Gruber; October 16th, 2014 at 12:18 AM.
 
Old October 16th, 2014 #78
Hadding
Senior Member
 
Hadding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,247
Hadding
Default

I could demonstrate the importance of the Holohoax in undermining White resistance, how it puts nationalists on the defensive, but would the demonstration have any effect on what Greggy says?

My impression is that he is committed to what he is saying out of some motive that has nothing to do with whether it is true or false, and that trying to show him that he is wrong would be a wasted effort.

Last edited by Hadding; October 16th, 2014 at 02:02 AM.
 
Old October 16th, 2014 #79
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,374
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gifu View Post
I've never really understood why Alex Linder endorses Anglin when Anglin is a CI whacko and almost every post on that site of his laments the downfall of christooneyism. It's somewhat contradictory and bizarre to see the news bot spam links to his website.
I don't endorse Anglin, necessarily, or take any position other than I like his writings that I've read. Until now, I have never read Daily Stormer. I oppose all CI. The only things I have heard about Anglin's views I don't agree with are that he is pro-christian and thinks Putin is a white hero. Other than that, he is right to be funny and energetic. He is taking the right approach, mostly, from what I have read the past few days. But the man, I don't know him and have no comment on him. If you have proof he's CI, cite it.

Last edited by Alex Linder; October 16th, 2014 at 02:35 AM.
 
Old October 16th, 2014 #80
Sean Gruber
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
Sean Gruber
Default

Seventy years on, Hitler is a code word for White, nothing more. The reason why "it is hard enough to get Americans or Swedes or Englishmen concerned with stopping their own ethnic displacement," despite this position's being "rational" and "based on reality," is that jews play the Hitler card, and Whites get defensive. That's all. Johnson has to know this, but his advice is to "step over" the Hitler card. Like Joe, I have to wonder if it's because Johnson is detached from reason and reality that he so often rhetorically invokes them.

You don't have to be NS to say there is nothing wrong with Hitler's attitude to jews, and to prove it. In fact, reality and reason would indicate that doing so is vital to WN, since the Hitler card is played every time mention is made of anything pro-White. Gag thinks you remove the Hitler card objection by "indignantly reject[ing] the charge," i.e., by going on the defensive. But the non-defensive way to remove this objection is by asserting the truth of Hitler's analysis of the jew.

It's true that Hitler was 70 years ago. What does he mean today? For the most part, he means White self-assertion today. Only an intellectual could be thick enough to misapprehend this. Hitler, Nazism, et al. don't mean (in Western Europe at least) anti-Russian chauvinism, militarism, someone's grandma's becoming a widow. That's the part that was 70 years ago. The evergreen part is what Gag runs from or imagines he will be permitted to "step over" by "indignant rejection": "You want a racial homeland? You're Hitler!"

You see, Hitler has joined Lincoln and other monstres sacres in standing for things important to the contemporary mind, despite the Beckmessers. Lincoln stands for racial integration (despite his repatriation scheme and personal dislike of blacks); Hitler stands for White Nationalism (despite his focus on Germans). We are "Hitler." No, we don't have to wrap ourselves in the swastika or march around singing the Horst Wessel song, but yes, we do have to stand up and say, in effect, "You're damn right I'm Hitler. He was right on everything you hate, and the Holocaust is a lie. Jews and their lies stand between us and a future. We've got to eliminate them, then we can get to work building a decent White society."

An additional point. Johnson says: "[M]iddle class white liberals over the age of 40 have a huge amount of the power in this society.[...] Every society is ruled by elites. Every revolution is launched by elites." He leaves out something crucial: every revolution is launched by disaffected elites. Middle class white liberals over the age of 40 are not disaffected, nor are those who "rule society." As Dan Hadaway observed, they are "stuffed pigs." Also, how many revolutions were made by anyone over 40? Most revolutionaries started young; they were unemployed young people or students who spent a lot of time arguing with each other in cafes or beer halls. And becoming street fighters. When Johnson says "[non-intellectual Whites] will not save our race without leadership, and to be effective, the leadership of the white masses must be, on average, better than the masses," what exactly is he proposing that the stuffed pigs lead the masses in? In street fights? In political takeovers? That's what revolution is. The last people in the world to do any of that work are middle class White liberals over the age of 40. The people who will initiate it and do it will be young disaffected smart men and young brawlers and toughs. Johnson's "elite" might drop some money their way, that's all (probably not, or not without many distracting strings attached) — but why should they, if they "rule society"? When Gag writes that "[tasteful intellectuals and middle class White liberals over the age of 40 must] outmatch our Jewish and plutocratic enemy elites in brains, will, and ruthlessness," one doesn't know whether to laugh or cry. Possibly this line flatters the people who write his checks, but it is, again, detached from reality and reason. Or is it that Johnson really thinks the way to revolution is solely to fund and write "ruthless" articles? Ruthless? When he advocates evading or downplaying the Jewish Question?

Johnson is simply a joke. He's everything Alex says he is.
__________________
No jews, just right

Less talk, more action

Last edited by Sean Gruber; October 16th, 2014 at 06:05 AM.
 
Reply

Tags
#1, white nationalism, wn infighting

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:35 AM.
Page generated in 0.25162 seconds.