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

Old December 17th, 2010 #42
P.E.
Geriatric Coalburner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,825
P.E.
Default

The youtube account that was hosting those vids was terminated.

Was that A3P's official channel?

Anyway, funny to see the professor soliciting for donations now: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net...-now-possible/

It's been said by people here, the difference between modern whites, and the NSDAP in it's early days, is that the NSDAP had big backers, celebrities, prominent figures, people with money who gave a fuck about "Germans in Germany and for Germany".

The difference between the rich back then and the rich now though, is that there was a lot of rich aristocrat money still afloat, AND considerable amounts of money wasn't as concentrated in so few German hands (compared to this case, white hands), and, well, they gave a fuck about their country, where as rich whites really don't (perhaps because Germans back then weren't quite in tuned with the idea of portable wealth and jumping on their private jet when their community turned to shit).

The people that are rich in the Kwa, have lived an entire life under Judaic values and Capitalist ideals. How the people who have large sums of money now get it, maintain it, and grow it, is a far cry from how they did back then.

To ask the the uber rich white Kwanzanite - to take 5 minutes away from his 60" TV, blackberry, polishing his cars, and trying to fuck the flight attendant and babysitter at the same time - and to part with their money (thus lowering their opportunity to do those things in their mind) for "their people and their future", is like asking a nigger to part with his chicken.

I do not say what I've just said as theorizing retardation, I say it as ugly fact, and I'll let the NSDAP say it better than I


In this video, simply put, for the purpose of my point, skip forward to the part of the speech starting at 2:25 - 3:35


Draw the logical conclusions of the difference of the rich then and the rich now. The rich today (and when we say rich, we must speak of the upper echelons, since we are competing with the enemies upper echelons, and it costs a lot to set up shop and come to prominence) - EVEN IF THEY ARE WHITE - they are the same men spoken of in this speech. "The Internationale" - or, Jews, who as Hitler says in this speech "One day live in Vienna, the next in Brussels, the next in London, the next in Berlin".

That was the Jews back then, and back then the Germans with money who gave to the NSDAP, were family men for Germany - Germans who made their lives in their particular areas of Germany and LOVED THEIR COMMUNITIES - who probably had one nice home and a good amount of resources, but weren't internationalists. They were the opposite of your typical uber rich white today, of whom everything he does, is typically selfishly profit/power motivated, rather than his people/community motivated.

Today's "rich white" in the financial Jewry sludgepool of modern Judeo-Capitalist America, MUST be an internationalist, must play the stock market, must LOVE debt/interest based capitalism and fucking people over and scheming, rather than being a great producer and man of character. Yesterday, the proud aristocratic values! The contributor to society, the crafter, the tradesman, the writer, the artist, the poet, the dancer, the builder.

Today? THE MERGER AND ACQUIRER. The professional check-writer and martini-drinker. The "Quantitative Mathematician Wall Street Speed Trading Wiz Making Millions A Year". The schemers and scammers. Wall Street and American Psycho, keep them on the DVD player of the blacked out Bentley, along with the entire season of Entourage, while driving by giving the finger to the fellow white bitch driving too slow.

The rich (the uber rich whites we speak of needing to help whites to come back to power today) love their 6 mansions and 20 cars in their "Jay Leno" signature garage. They love flying their private jets to this country or that country. They love cutting deals and playing the real estate market and investing and blah blah.

They are: The Internationale

But fear not comrades! I am firm in my belief, that this wise professor will make a fine dissertation once again, that will be a fine exercise in mental masturbation for those - who historically, as Nietzsche says - seek intellectualism because they are powerless: the other 99% of whites in the Kwa on the internet bitching, and more extremely, the constituents of Kevin MacDonalds Occidental Masturbator.

Too bad the 1% of our group think our people aren't worth saving! Or, not as worth the cars and jets and mansions or Elliot Spitzers $4000/night sloppy-seconds.

The day I see a mega rich white person espouse pro-white views openly (as those rich and prominent Germans did back then that gave to the NSDAP), is the day I, fuck, I wouldn't do anything. I'd be in shock.

As a fellow Italian - Napoleon - would say in his broken French: C'est Des Conneries!
 
Old December 17th, 2010 #43
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,382
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

I don't know how many big backers the NS actually had, in the tough years. I think they had Thyssen and not a hell of a lot more. Of course, once they got close to winning, then the bourgeois came sniffing around.

Bourgeois are still bourgeois, no matter who's in power. Plenty of them were undercutting NS when they were in power, and very ready to jump sides the minute it looked like the NS ship was going down.
 
Old December 19th, 2010 #44
Rob MacGregor
Harvester of yidflies
 
Rob MacGregor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: In the Mists
Posts: 169
Rob MacGregor
Default

Being Identity I have HUGE problems with MacDonald and his "history"

Can we be realistic please? The guy is a university professor and his position is on the line here.. he has to be VERY careful what he says and he has already taken a lot of heat for speaking truth
__________________
We're surrounded. That simplifies our situation

[Formerly Son of the Mist at scamfront.. hail to my friends here, I've missed ya]
 
Old December 19th, 2010 #45
Karl Radl
The Epitome of Evil
 
Karl Radl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Unseen University of New York
Posts: 3,130
Karl Radl
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
I don't know how many big backers the NS actually had, in the tough years. I think they had Thyssen and not a hell of a lot more.
Not quite: they had quite a few big ones in Bavaria in particular. Thyssen is one of the best known (largely due his 1941 book 'I Paid Hitler' [Co-Operation: New York] as well as Otto Strasser's claims in 'Hitler and I' and 'Germany Tomorrow'), but not actually one of the most important. The Bechstein's (of piano fame) were one of their major ones and also contributed money to Hitler's personal expenses. Another example is Josef Mengele's family who gave a lot of money; which they had made in their agricultural machinery business, to the NSDAP before the NSDAP came to power.

A good book on this; particularly the early funding of Hitler and the NSDAP, is Cris Whetton's 'Hitler's Fortune' (2004, Pen & Sword: Barnsley), which deals with many of the misconceptions about the funding of Hitler's lifestyle [and to an extent the NSDAP] and points out that Hitler in general lived a very ascetic life (within the need to impress and bow to pomp and ceremony).

However; as has long been known (since the mid-1970s when the original research was done), most of the NSDAP's funds came from its membership dues and small contributions from party members. If you read Goebbels' 'My Part in Germany's Fight' (1935, Paternoster: London) he tells a representative story of a working man publicly giving him; Goebbels, his gold wedding band to help the party win back Germany and make it strong again. There is also an interesting anecdote which often gets retold in biographies of Goebbels in that when he became Gauleiter of Berlin: Goebbels immediately solicited for party faithful to pledge 10-15% of their annual income to the NSDAP's Brandenberg Gau to rectify its financial state in exchange for the future promises of good government jobs in the future Third Reich (and the promises were; as far as I can tell, kept). As I recall he got about 300 families to take part in the program at the time and may well have added more at a later date.

Quote:
Of course, once they got close to winning, then the bourgeois came sniffing around.
You mean Hugenberg's crowd and the slush fund he controlled? They did indeed back the NS, but they did so earlier than you might suppose i.e. from the big NS election breakthrough of 1929 on and off till the assumption of power in 1933 (for example the famous 'Harzburg Front'). On this you might like to read John Leopold's 'Alfred Hugenberg' (1977, Yale University Press: New Haven): Leopold might have been a marxist but his book is generally excellent in both its analysis and use of sources (IMO).
__________________

Last edited by Karl Radl; December 19th, 2010 at 10:50 AM.
 
Old December 19th, 2010 #46
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,382
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

The point is people make two bogus claims about Hitler: 1) he was a tool of big business. 2) he was a tool of jew bankers. Both are wrong.
 
Old December 21st, 2010 #47
Raymond
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 181
Raymond
Default

In a recent broadcast of The Political Cesspool Kevin MacDonald informs listeners that out of all the students and faculty at California State University there is only 1 person that would qualify as being sympathetic to his views.

http://libertynewsradio.com/shows/tpc/tpc20101218c.mp3

He asserts that:

Quote:
We're in a very hostile environment for our ideas, and especially in the university where we have a very long way to go.
 
Old December 22nd, 2010 #48
Remote
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 59
Remote
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John White2 View Post
If you want numbers you have to meet people halfway, otherwise you are expecting Jo Public, who grew up on a diet of Nazi documentaries, to become Neo Nazis, which isn't realistic.
Exactly.

Of course some lack the perspicacity or prudence to see and understand this, and start shouting "Jew" or "traitor" or whatever.

MacDonald has academic credentials that he didn't have to fly to the Ukraine to get-- he's not a complete kook or a misfit. He's essentially mainstream. That alone is something.
 
Old December 24th, 2010 #49
America First
Senior Member
 
America First's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,699
America First
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raymond View Post
In a recent broadcast of The Political Cesspool Kevin MacDonald informs listeners that out of all the students and faculty at California State University there is only 1 person that would qualify as being sympathetic to his views.

http://libertynewsradio.com/shows/tpc/tpc20101218c.mp3

He asserts that:
Find that hard to believe even though Dr. MacDonald states it. A guess would be that parents have warned their children to be very careful and say NOT word.

A majority of our folks are afraid and have no facts/truths told to them growing up.

In 1966 the USSA still have some thinking students at Brown at least.

__________________
Isn't it strange that we talk least about the things we think about most?

We cannot allow the natural passions and prejudices of other peoples
to lead our country to destruction.

-Charles A. Lindbergh
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0495c.asp
 
Old December 24th, 2010 #50
America First
Senior Member
 
America First's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,699
America First
Default

Rockwell's student experience before the tragedy of WW 2 and the years after as a student.


__________________
Isn't it strange that we talk least about the things we think about most?

We cannot allow the natural passions and prejudices of other peoples
to lead our country to destruction.

-Charles A. Lindbergh
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0495c.asp
 
Old January 19th, 2011 #51
P.E.
Geriatric Coalburner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,825
P.E.
Default

Tool.

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net...e-as-a-tactic/

Utter tool.

Whites are supposedly 65% of the u.s., and this man continues to facilitate a belief in a democratic solution.

The nsdap barely squeaked through in a 90 or better percent German population.

Not to mention they didn't have to deal with countless other factors like deeply-engrained centuries old white brainwashing.

Just look at all of the whites you saw rooting for Obama.

Anyway, his comments tend to be more amusing than him. At least they aren't all backboneless masturbation.
 
Old January 19th, 2011 #52
Leonard Rouse
Celebrating My Diversity
 
Leonard Rouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: With The Creepy-Ass Crackahs
Posts: 8,156
Leonard Rouse
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by P.E. View Post
Tool.

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net...e-as-a-tactic/

Utter tool.

Whites are supposedly 65% of the u.s., and this man continues to facilitate a belief in a democratic solution.

The nsdap barely squeaked through in a 90 or better percent German population.

Not to mention they didn't have to deal with countless other factors like deeply-engrained centuries old white brainwashing.

Just look at all of the whites you saw rooting for Obama.

Anyway, his comments tend to be more amusing than him. At least they aren't all backboneless masturbation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmac
On violence as a tactic

A correspondent concerned about the connotations of some of the commentary on this site sent the following:

Some patriots, especially the young, become frustrated and angry and want to take direct action. That is understandable because we are facing a life-and-death threat to our national existence and our political class is demonstrably failing to show leadership; indeed, major elements are leading the attack on the American people. But it is both morally wrong and tactically counterproductive to advocate or practice violence.
Reasons:

Moral.

The rule of law is critical for the maintenance of civilization. In many ways, it IS civilization. We might not like some of those laws but unless we limit our protest to legal means, we contribute to the slide to barbarity that has done so much harm.

Tactical.

Violence or its advocacy would allow our enemies to call down the full power of the state apparatus upon us. Even if we were strong and had a chance to win elections, it would be fatal to become outlaws. Many many Whites would feel compelled to withdraw their support. A movement that had taken decades to build would be dismantled overnight, its assets liquidated, its leaders jailed. And even if violence had a good chance of accelerating victory, going down that path would soil the vision of our New America. We want the freedom we seek to last; we want to set an example to other Western peoples and to other civilizations that will make our liberation permanent by setting it within a compatible international order. We can only do that by appealing to the highest personalities, to the natural aristocracy of other countries. Only then will they gain the moral courage to act in their people’s interests. We can only do that by being demonstrably decent, by being the sort of people they want to be. This is one of the practical implication of being a cultural Christian.
 
Old January 19th, 2011 #53
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,382
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Wow, KM is waaay off base on this one.

It's interesting that the pro-system people always make a caricature of their opponents. It's always reasonable, rational, high-minded moral them vs angry young people who want to kill people right now and the cowardly middle-aged men egging them on. Straight out of a jew movie, itz. Like there's no other way of looking at it. There is, and here it is.

Once you have the ability to inflict physical punishment on your enemies, then, o miracle of miracles, do you get treated with respect by the press, and do the election levers suddenly open to pulling for your candidates.

Contrast Hitler's words about your typical bourgeoisie conservative political meeting with MacDonald's idealistic bosh. Who do you think has a better grasp of reality? Hitler could have been describing an AmRen conference.

I guess what really surprises me is that MacDonald simply blips over the way the jews use murder and suppression and other illegal means as their primary means of keeping power. He has never acknowledged this, that I have seen. But it is the truth. Jews did not obtain power legally, they obtained power illegally.

Even when whites were in 100x stronger position than today, with all their cultural bases in place, jews were able to physically threaten and blackmail whites like Ford and Lindbergh. Even when a Catholic had immense media power like Fulton Sheen and Coughlin, they were able to destroy newsstands carrying their magazines, and drive them off the radio. All this was 100% illegal activity. MacDonald acknowledges none of it.

Jews have and keep power BECAUSE they cheat, lie and murder.

Just imagine how the typical jew would react to MacDonald's words. How would Alan Dershowitz react to

We can only do that by appealing to the highest personalities, to the natural aristocracy of other countries. Only then will they gain the moral courage to act in their people’s interests. We can only do that by being demonstrably decent, by being the sort of people they want to be.

Would he not laugh his ass off? Would he not shake his head in wonderment? Would he not pause for a second to ponder on the inscrutable fact that the white man who knows more about jews than any other produced this past-bizarre conception of the way to build up opposition to the greatest gang of liars, thieves and murderers the planet has ever known?

Kevin MacDonald would bring a Sunday School class to a gang fight.
 
Old January 19th, 2011 #54
Thad Charles
Master Race
 
Thad Charles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: neo-Weimar JewSA
Posts: 1,568
Thad Charles
Default

"rule of law"
Umm whose rule of law? The Jews' rule of law, dipshit, so it's completely illegitimate to any and every self-respecting White.

K-Mac,
Start thinking more along the lines of Turner Diaries. Less New Testament. kthxbai
__________________
"What are they? A religion, a race, a criminal conspiracy?" - Craig 'Chain' Cobb on the jews
 
Old January 19th, 2011 #55
procopius
Senior Member
 
procopius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,611
procopius
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Cresswell View Post
Yesterday I listened to Jim Giles interview Dr. Kevin MacDonald. In the interview MacDonald made it clear he is NOT for an EXCLUSIVE Whites ONLY homeland in the USA. He took the position that some blacks can stay in the USA. MacDonald is WRONG! ALL non-Whites MUST be forced out of ALL White ancestral homelands. You can listen to the interview at this link: http://www.rebelarmy.com/
You guys, I think that he is essentially a liberal minded professor that happens to take on many of our views. I don't think we should throw out the baby with the bath water. He is realistic, and credible.
 
Old January 20th, 2011 #56
P.E.
Geriatric Coalburner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,825
P.E.
Default

Non-violence, says MacDonald.

This is his squeamish escape. Nobody wants violence, least of all whites. But he knows as well as the rest, that non-whites would not leave peacefully, in the reversal of this multicultural terror whites live in.

So, he sacrifices the quality of life for whites, and hides behind his Christian title as his rationalization, his universal slave morality to not do what must be done for the bettering of your own, but to do what would be easier on an opposing group at the vital expense of your own.

He believes multiculturalism is maintainable, WITH RACIAL CONSCIOUSNESS!. LOL. You might as well outlaw guns now, chief! You will have the most racial violence the world has ever seen, because it will TRULY be multiculturalism with everyone racially-conscious, rather than this blurring of cultural lines that the authority presently facilitates.

Only a retard would join A3P under this notion. Anyone with a functioning brain looks at the proposed goal and makes a judgment whether or not to pursue. In this case, why bother.

I wish that "Barbara" person who commented on that post had a donate button. That lengthy comment - which I'm sure made MacDonald pissed because it opposes and dwarfs his post and already has a ton of thumbs up - marvelously ripped the "Professor" a new asshole. (About the 14th or so comment down: http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net...ctic/#comments )

Inspiring! I will continue visiting that blog, just in hopes of comments like that, and not the hack shit-ass bloggers.

EDIT: Even more inspiring, is how the majority of the comments are against MacDonald!

Last edited by P.E.; January 20th, 2011 at 10:04 AM.
 
Old January 20th, 2011 #57
Hugh
Holorep survivor
 
Hugh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The wild frontier
Posts: 4,850
Hugh
Default

MacDonald is simply stating what so far all in the WN movement agree on, including all VNN'ers, that non-violence is the answer, since none are committing violence.

If they believed violence was the answer, then they would be committing violence, and not posting on VNN.

If you aren't committing violence yourself, then cut the pseudo tough guy talk and fake warrior image about violence being the solution, and focus upon what you personally can do, now, where you are, with what you have, legally, non-violently.

There's nothing more ridiculous than potbellied suburbanites whose most radical experience of violence is hunting deer, growling about death and bloodshed in their comfortable homes.
It's a sure sign they know nothing of violence.

Look at the history of all wars.
They end.
The opposing sides make peace, the leadership exchange money and land, and life goes back to what it was.

The dead, the disabled, the widows and orphans, the destruction, were all for nothing, and get nothing.
How many wars have been fought in Europe?
And what actually changed for the families of all those who fought in them?
Nothing.
Were they better off?
No.

Jews succeed because they know what they want, organise, focus and act.
They are powerful because they control the civil service and mainstream parties.
The media, the banks, all of those are there simply to give them leverage to gain control of mainstream institutions.
The Jews greatest victory, has been convincing Whites that success lies outside the mainstream.
Victory is only attainable through becoming the government, especially civil service posts in finance, budgeting, planning departments and roles, as nationalist parties throughout Europe have realised.
__________________
Secede. Control taxbases/municipalities. Use boycotts, divestment, sanctions, strikes.
http://www.aeinstein.org/wp-content/...d-Jan-2015.pdf
https://canvasopedia.org/wp-content/...Points-web.pdf
 
Old January 21st, 2011 #58
P.E.
Geriatric Coalburner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,825
P.E.
Default

It's not about suicidally and moronically committing individual violence. It is about showing whites that the end-goal is a group capable, willing and ready to fight and die, not just a career of talking about how they are the oppressed losers (quite niggerish).

It is, preferably, about amassing a public force - a true group - that very clearly says we are the majority, and if you (present non-white authority) are going to marginalize us in YOUR media, not ours, and your questionable elections are found to not be putting us in power, then we have group force.

A group that can make whites truly feel they are fighting for what is theirs, not FEAR being public about what they all want (to live amongst their own people and not be ruled by foreign influence and usury), and know they have a competent force should someone threaten them.

People look at those characteristics and they think "Oh, you want the S.A. again".

And that is a moronic response. That is not just the S.A.. That is EVERY group that ever changed anything, whether politically or by force, from Leonidas and his small group of Spartans, to the founding fathers of the United States, to the Bolsheviks in the Russian Revolution (all who actually DID use force, they grouped up, and fought and died for their interests as a group, and that incentive was enough to bring others to join them). All the way back to Ancient times you will find that this is the common denominator in change: a group that is organized, CAPABLE OF FORCE IN THE VERY LEAST, who is attempting to obtain power without using it by saying: "there are more of us than you, this is the direction the country (or this land) is going, and you will oblige, or fall".

Of course, this is the problem with whites, to believe that you should "never resort to gangs and violence". Look how that is preached in schools. What they were really saying is "dear individualistic whites, never try forming a group that will fight for your lives again, let us continue to have our way while you TALK".

There is a time for talking. Then there is a time when you know you are ruled and slave to a master who laughs at your talking, no matter how sound your logic may be for your group, he knows that to accept it in any way, to give it any leeway, would be detrimental to his own group, so he continues to let you take comfort in TALK, and debate, while it remains as it has for the last 60 non-grouped non-force-capable talking years in white civilization: pure decline.

The Pusillanimous Era.

Last edited by P.E.; January 21st, 2011 at 02:43 AM.
 
Old January 21st, 2011 #59
Mike Parker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
Mike Parker
Thumbs up

January 19, 2011

On Talmudic Methods as Tactics: Occidental Observer



The Boromir Syndrome (BS) is rampant over at The Accidentally Talmudic Observer. They recently published this article in effort to seem sound on the issue of violence. Little do they know, they are using definitions from history's most nefarious book and thus continue to spin in their goy wheel.

On Violence as a tactic

By Kevin MacDonald

A correspondent concerned about the connotations of some of the commentary on this site sent the following:

Some patriots, especially the young, become frustrated and angry and want to take direct action. That is understandable because we are facing a life-and-death threat to our national existence and our political class is demonstrably failing to show leadership; indeed, major elements are leading the attack on the American people. But it is both morally wrong and tactically
counterproductive to advocate or practice violence.

SoE: So "taking direct action" and "advocating or practicing violence" are the same thing? If you are a BS Gentile than they sure seem to be! That illusion is part of the Paradigm Prison, which is ZC approved definitions for everything. Going by them will never lead to progress, they are designed to be ineffective.

The mentioning of "patriots" and "threats to our national existence" and other assorted tribalist vocabulary makes the failure of this article all the more plain. Failure when dealing with Zionists that is. Technically, the goal of this article is to present Babel, and in that, it succeeds.

Reasons:

Moral.

The rule of law is critical for the maintenance of civilization. In many ways, it IS civilization. We might not like some of those laws but unless we limit our protest to legal means, we contribute to the slide to barbarity that has done so much harm.

SoE: Again, they are trapped in the Paradigm Prison. The Aryan State (the true remedy for Jewish corruption) does not use the law as a "maintenance of civilization," but rather to progress civilization towards an ideal. Law, by itself, is in no way the actual civilization. By appealing to the corrupt laws that have allowed Zionist crime, how does MacDonald hope to stop it? Maybe next he'll recommend that an organized crime syndicate aide the police in catching a big time mobster, who may or may not be their boss.

Tactical.

Violence or its advocacy would allow our enemies to call down the full power of the state apparatus upon us. Even if we were strong and had a chance to win elections, it would be fatal to become outlaws. Many many Whites would eel compelled to withdraw their support. A movement that had taken decades to build would be dismantled overnight, its assets liquidated, its leaders jailed. And even if violence had a good chance of accelerating victory, going down that path would soil the vision of our New America. We want the freedom we seek to last; we want to set an example to other Western peoples and to other civilizations that will make our liberation permanent by setting it within a compatible international order. We can only do that by appealing to the highest personalities, to the natural aristocracy of other countries. Only then will they gain the moral courage to act in their people’s interests. We can only do that by being demonstrably decent, by being the sort of people they want to be. This is one of the practical implication of being a cultural Christian.

SoE: The bold faced emphasis (added by me) is MacDonald's solution. Close, but no cigar, MacDonald. "Aristocracy" not only has elitist and un-Aryan connotation, but the current ruling classes, to which MacDonald suggests that his readers appeal to in order to find a solution, are the ones most likely to be most corrupted by the current system. MacDonald does not offer radicalism (the Aryanist definition) and seek allies outside of the current establishment, thus the ones most likely to have true Noble motivation.

The only thing that MacDonald gets right is by saying that those who want to enact change should be decent, but he doesn't lay out how they can also be effective and thus this is another TOO dead end.

http://swordofelysium.blogspot.com/2...s-tactics.html
 
Old January 29th, 2011 #60
Mike Parker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
Mike Parker
Default

From Culture of Critique:

Quote:
Evidence will be provided in later chapters that Jewish intellectual movements have advocated universalist ideologies for the entire society in which the Jew-gentile social category is reduced in salience and is of no theoretical importance.
So MacDonald criticizes jews for playing down the distinction, while MacDonald also promotes Jared Taylor, who denies the distinction altogether. Someone so attuned to double standards should avoid them.
 
Reply

Tags
homeland, jim giles, kevin macdonald, repatriation, wn lite= fail

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:49 AM.
Page generated in 0.16793 seconds.