|
October 14th, 2014 | #61 | |||||
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,778
|
Quote:
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:
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:
Quote:
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:
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. |
|||||
October 15th, 2014 | #62 | |
Hatespeaker
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,281
|
Quote:
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." |
|
October 15th, 2014 | #63 | |
Senior Member
|
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:
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. |
|
October 15th, 2014 | #64 | |
Senior Member
|
Greg Johnson accuses Anglin of doing drugs:
Quote:
|
|
October 15th, 2014 | #65 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 258
|
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.
|
October 15th, 2014 | #66 |
...
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,741
|
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..
|
October 15th, 2014 | #67 | |
.......
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,737
|
Quote:
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 |
|
October 15th, 2014 | #68 |
Moderator
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Jew S. A.
Posts: 3,679
|
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. |
October 15th, 2014 | #69 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
|
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 |
October 15th, 2014 | #70 |
Moderator
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Jew S. A.
Posts: 3,679
|
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.
|
October 15th, 2014 | #71 |
.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,923
|
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. |
October 15th, 2014 | #72 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Florida CSA
Posts: 1,904
|
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. |
October 15th, 2014 | #73 | |
Hatespeaker
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,281
|
Quote:
__________________
"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." |
|
October 15th, 2014 | #74 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
|
Quote:
__________________
No jews, just right Less talk, more action |
|
October 15th, 2014 | #75 | |
...
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9,741
|
Quote:
Appealing to homosexual man-children is a much needed task, you guyth. |
|
October 16th, 2014 | #76 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Administrator
|
[responses below]
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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:
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:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Alex Linder; October 16th, 2014 at 01:55 AM. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
October 16th, 2014 | #77 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
|
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. |
October 16th, 2014 | #78 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,247
|
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.
__________________
Anti-Nazi is a codeword for anti-White. www.national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com www.noncounterproductive.blogspot.com www.williamlutherpierce.blogspot.com Last edited by Hadding; October 16th, 2014 at 02:02 AM. |
October 16th, 2014 | #79 |
Administrator
|
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. |
October 16th, 2014 | #80 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
|
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. |
Tags |
#1, white nationalism, wn infighting |
Share |
Thread | |
Display Modes | |
|