Response to Joachim Hoch

Editor’s Note: Typos have been corrected.

In his YouTube stream this evening, Joachim Hoch called for an “honest engagement” and a “serious and “well-intentioned” discussion of the merits of the 3.0 paradigm and strategy vs. the merits of the 1.0 paradigm and strategy of leaderless resistance and violent accelerationism. He claims to be interested solely in “a contest of ideas” rather than carrying on a personal pissing contest.

Challenge accepted.

Joachim claims that his position on the morality and merits of violence and terrorism as a political strategy in last night’s stream has been misrepresented (4:35)

If that is the case, then why has Joachim removed last night’s stream with Matt Parrott from his YouTube channel? Why not leave it uploaded for everyone can watch the stream and judge for themselves whether or not my characterization of it as an hour and a half of fedposting is true?

Joachim claims I didn’t watch the debate (5:35)

I got a DM on Twitter about it. I watched the entire stream last night.

Joachim offers to debate our differences (8:37)

As I told Joachim on Twitter before he blocked me, I live in a rural area with shitty internet which has given me problems doing YouTube livestreams. I would much rather respond to him anyway in this format.

Joachim doesn’t accept Matt Parrott’s belief that we are in a generational conflict (10:57)

As a Southerner, I disagree because it took us several generations to shake off Reconstruction and construct the Jim Crow South. Also, the demographics of the Jim Crow South were worse than our present racial demographics in South Carolina, Louisiana and Mississippi.

Joachim points out that our kids will inherit a world in which they have become a racial minority (11:51)

As a father and husband, why does Joachim think I am involved in this scene? I have a stake in the future. That’s why I believe we need to be confronting the outside world with a new sense of seriousness rather than just continuing with the juvenille trolling and bantzing.

Joachim characterizes my position on these issues as a continuation of the 2018 optics debate in the Alt-Right (13:20)

I disagree.

I stand by my criticisms of the 2.0 movement’s optometrists which has proven to be an ineffective strategy. I’m approaching these issues from a very different perspective.

Joachim wonders who is in the header image of the previous article (13:53)

It is a scene from the 2003 movie “Luther” in which Martin Luther confronts the fanatics who are attempting to torch a Catholic church. I chose that image and sub-titled the article “Against the fanatics” in order to draw attention to my Lutheran faith in the debate on the morality of violence. Martin Luther had a term for the fanatics of his day. He called them Schwärmer.

Joachim denies advocating terrorism (14:01)

I would say that Joachim is being disingenuous here. He really was making the case for violence and terrorism as a strategy. If we are to take his position seriously that he doesn’t believe any of it, then what is his actual strategy if everything he said last night was just for lulz? What’s the point of debating irony? He critiqued Matt Parrott’s strategy which was an earnest defense of street activism.

Joachim claims that non-violence is ridiculous (15:13)

The overwhelming majority of White people in this country believe that political violence is immoral. Joachim simply dismisses their moral beliefs as irrelevant to White survival. That’s what is ridiculous and it is symptomatic of how the 2.0 movement is out of touch with reality.

Joachim tries to argue that I am “morally broken” for writing about the Jewish Question and race relations on this website (18:38)


As a Southern antiquarian, I occasionally use the term “negro” or “negroes.” How is that morally indefensible? I don’t have any time for political correctness.

Joachim claims the 1.0 movement and 2.0 movement have a solid moral foundation (19:23)

After dismissing the moral beliefs of virtually everyone in the country who isn’t a sociopath, Joachim claims that 1.0 and 2.0 are morally sound.

Joachim claims that Whites are being genocided (19:40)

White genocide is a meme.

The purpose of the meme was to raise awareness about changing racial demographics. Unfortunately, it seems that some people have taken the meme and construed it to mean that, say, Overland Park victim Reat Griffin Underwood is literally guilty of genociding the White race which is an absurd conclusion. The truth about changing racial demographics is more complex than a meme and won’t be solved by an action as simple as going out and shooting random people like Yosemite Sam.

Joachim claims White people are going extinct (19:48)

The White population is declining from its world historical high, but it is hardly going extinct. It isn’t alone in that respect either. Virtually all developed industrialized countries are going through the same demographic transition with declining birthrates.

Joachim claims that survival is its own morality (19:55)

No, that’s barbarism.

Westerners are a civilized people with a deep and rich moral tradition. Joachim is comparing us to animals now. I don’t think we should be encouraging our people to act like animals. We’re not going to persuade our target audience by comparing them to salamanders.

Instead, I believe we should be taking these deracinated people who have been stripped of their own culture and heritage and educating them so that they can start practicing the virtues and obeying God’s law to become better men and women like their ancestors.

Joachim claims that organisms don’t need to justify their own survival (20:00)

While this is true, it is an evasion of the reality of the situation. We live in a world in which our people are being taught to hate themselves and that their displacement in their own lands is in the best interests of humanity. It would be much easier to simply confront that evil argument.

Joachim argues there is no morality in how the real world operates (20:06)

Once again, Joachim makes my point that the 1.0 and 2.0 movements lacked a strong moral foundation.

Joachim catches the contradiction (20:15)

In reality, economics and military conflict are governed by morality. It is against the law to engage in fraud because it is immoral. Similarly, the conduct of war is restrained by international law.

Joachim argues that William Pierce, George Lincoln Rockwell and James Mason were morally sound (20:48)

Why are the SIEGE posters so enraptured by this Helter Skelter nonsense? William Pierce wrote violent fantasy novels like The Turner Diaries and Hunter and even created his own cult for alienated people called Cosmotheism.

Joachim says that we should only care about White survival (22:16)

What does that mean?

If everyone has the sovereign right to murder anyone else in the name of survival, then how can any White society function? The answer is that it couldn’t function. It would just collapse into anarchy. Furthermore, the people who say we need to focus on “White survival” also paradoxically seem to be the people least invested in starting families. Look at Harold Covington or William Pierce who were estranged from their own families.

Joachim denies that there are lots of morally broken people in the 1.0 and 2.0 movements (22:47)

I strongly disagree.

My impression is that there are lots of new people who are immersed in a sort of vulgar, violent and nihilistic online discourse who are unable to articulate a moral argument beyond claiming that might makes right. The overwhelming majority of them don’t seem to be interested in really engaging with the moral arguments of their critics either.

Joachim denies advocating murdering people and claims it is a “dishonest misrepresentation” of his position (25:38)

If Joachim’s take on violent accelerationism is all “wink wink, just kidding you guys,” then what is his actual real strategy? He didn’t approach the question from the objective vantagepoint of “this is what these guys believe.” Instead, he was going to bat for it as a strategy.

Joachim accuses me of intellectual cowardice for ignoring Tarrant’s manifesto (26:01)

Is there something new in the manifesto? I didn’t get the impression it was anything other than the same old violent accelerationism. It wasn’t necessary to read the manifesto. I have been writing about people who are violent accelerationists for over a decade now.

Joachim claims that Tarrant is a soldier in a race war (26:09)

If he is saying that Tarrant was lashing out in the name of the violent accelerationist community, then he is right. However, it simply isn’t true that Tarrant was a soldier. He wasn’t fighting on behalf of a state or any legitimate authority but at best an online community of other fanatics because no one else outside that milieu shares his assumptions.

Tarrant was like American soldiers in Somalia (28:00)

No, American soldiers in Somalia were fighting on behalf of a sovereign state, which is why their actions were seen as legitimate in their communities.

Joachim claims that murder and political violence are actually different (28:05)

No, these people are arrested and prosecuted for being murderers and criminals. This is true of both Floyd Lee Corkins and Brenton Tarrant.

Joachim claims that I have justified 9/11 and defended Lincoln’s assassination and secession (29:40)

The Southern States seceded from the Union. Confederate soldiers fought for their States of which they were citizens. John Wilkes Booth assassinated a sitting president in wartime on behalf of the Confederacy. The 9/11 terrorist attacks were caused by blowback to American foreign policy. None of that is remotely analogous to various people on the internet convincing themselves that they are justified in murdering random people.

Joachim claims that Tarrant is more serious than me (30:05)

Now that a handful of Muslims in New Zealand have been exterminated, has the White race been saved? Did that action have any impact at all on the fate of the White race in New Zealand? In the sense that the result of it was banning guns, I suppose Joachim can argue that it did. The people of New Zealand were stripped of their rights for the sake of a few dead irrelevant people who could be conscripted into the anti-White propaganda as martyrs of multiculturalism.

Joachim claims that John Earnest was successful (30:33)

My reaction was that it was a damn shame that Earnest didn’t develop his musical talent to advance the movement. Instead, he was convinced by a bunch of idiots on an online forum in the efficacy of the gun that jammed on him. It’s not a mistake that he will ever come back from either.

Joachim compares the Sonnenrad to the Confederate flag (30:55)

This is an example of the sort of pure fantasy ideology of thinking in terms of tropes, symbols and narratives and individual self-expression that has no correspondence to reality like, say, the historical state that was the Confederacy that I quoted at length in the previous article. The Confederacy was real whereas all this nonsense was pure fiction.

Joachim uses group selection to justify Tarrant’s actions (33:38)

I would argue it was natural selection. In this case, Tarrant removed himself from the gene pool while leaving New Zealanders even less capable of resisting violent oppression by the state. The people who survive and reproduce will fight back in a more clever way.

Joachim reiterates the White Genocide argument (34:35)

Dude, it is a meme that is supposed to draw your attention to a highly uncomfortable truth which is a bit more complex.

Joachim blames the CofCC for Dylann Roof (38:16)

My friend Kyle wrote about black-on-White crime for the CofCC. Dylann Roof never joined the group. He never got the idea of murdering anyone from the group either. Instead, we learned at his trial that he got that idea from Hollywood movies.

Roof was highly critical of groups like the CofCC who he felt “weren’t doing anything” because no one in South Carolina wanted to be like Romper Stomper. The CofCC didn’t motivate Dylann Roof to kill anyone, but that experience made us much more aware of the existence of “wound collectors” who might misinterpret our coverage of sensitive issues and twist it to justify their own actions.

Joachim resents being compared to Son of Sam (39:48)

Joachim really was chortling on the livestream last night about Helter Skelter and Charles Manson’s cult followers.

Joachim accuses the League of the South of fantasy ideology (43:06)

In Charlottesville, the League went to Unite the Right to honor the memory of Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson who are two of the South’s greatest heroes and support preserving their monuments. Even the majority of black people in Virginia agree with the League’s position.

Joachim claims not to be familiar with Glenn Miller (46:00)

This really says it all.

I knew Glenn Miller for nearly ten years before his shooting in Overland Park, KS. He was a fixture on the internet. I dismissed him as just a buffoonish Boomer from the 1.0 movement. I didn’t take Miller’s violent rhetoric nearly as seriously as I should have because I saw him as essentially being a Don Quixote type of comic book character. As with Roof, I have tried to learn something from that experience and now I have much less tolerance for that sort of mindset.

Joachim claims the Glenn Miller synagogue shooting was random violence (47:42)

It wasn’t random violence at all. Rounder went to the synagogue to exterminate the GD_kikes after arguing in favor of it for years. No one believed he was actually serious about doing it.

Joachim laughs at the idea that violent accelerationism ends in federal prison (46:00)


Ever hear of The Order? The Fort Smith Trial? Joseph Paul Franklin? The crackdown that happened after Oklahoma City in the 1990s? There is a long and storied history of the “leaderless resistance” movement being crushed, ratting each other out and being sent to federal prison. Entire books have been written about it like Leonard Zeskind’s Blood and Politics.

Joachim dismisses 3.0 as corporate bullshit (50:00)

If it sounds like corporate bullshit, it is because I was being deadly serious about innovation as a strategy. I never hear the term innovation brought up in the strategy debate. Isn’t it obvious at this point that we should be innovating a new approach to the issues?

Joachim wonders whether I am the coach (50:11)

At this point, I am willing to make an effort to create a better paradigm, discourse and strategy because someone ought to at least be trying to construct a better vision for all these desperate people. I’m hardly alone in this respect. Greg Johnson has attempted to do so as well.

Joachim advocates reading SIEGE (56:14)

It’s not really necessary because violent accelerationism has been around for decades.

Joachim argues that Tarrant has a better idea of how to save our people (1:00:35)

By this he means the benefits (a few random dead Muslims) outweigh the costs (the people of New Zealand being disarmed)

Joachim celebrates the attention Tarrant received

It was negative attention that was used to paint the 1.0 and 2.0 movements with a toxic brush all over the world, but especially in New Zealand and Australia.

Joachim accuses me of “moral fagging”

Yes, this is proof that Joachim has a warped understanding of morality and makes the point I drove in the previous article.

Joachim claims that “politics isn’t a game.”


Joachim claims “this is war” because of crime and opioids

What the hell does that have to do with random people just trying to live their lives?

Joachim accuses me of being “afraid to rock the boat”

No, I have sat here and watched these people have these meltdowns for over a decade now and I am just saying that based on my experience of writing about dozens of mass shooters it is an ineffective strategy.

Joachim doesn’t want us to “get in the way”

The whole point of violent accelerationism is to make things so polarized and so toxic that it negatively impacts everyone else in the movement who doesn’t share that retarded worldview. It is a strategy that is designed to harm people who are pro-White, but who disagree with that strategy. Therefore, we shouldn’t “get in the way” of these people.

Joachim claims to want to sink the boat (1:07:45)

If Joachim means our boat through actions which are unwise and imprudent, then I agree he is sinking our boat. He isn’t even scratching the boat of our enemies. He is attacking them at their strongest point in a suicide mission out of nihilistic self destruction which only makes them even stronger because they are entirely capable of dealing with people like that with their narrative

Joachim compares me to Matt Parrott

I wanted to respond to Joachim directly because I felt after listening to the livestream last night that Parrott’s goal was to try to persuade some of these lost people rather than to articulate a moral perspective that I believe has been fudged in the 1.0 and 2.0 movements to our detriment.

Joachim claims that I should defend non-violence

Part of being a Christian is suffering and obeying the law:

“Christ says that we should not resist evil or injustice but always yield, suffer, and let things be taken from us. If you will not bear this law, then lay aside the name of Christian and claim another name that accords with your actions, or else Christ himself will tear his name away from you, and that will be too hard for you.” – Martin Luther

Violence isn’t the prerogative of the aggrieved individual. In our culture, it can only be sanctioned as self defense or as a just war on behalf of the community. The question is closely bound up with that of who is the legitimate sovereign authority in any given area.

Joachim believes we need “ideological purity.”

I would argue the current state of the ideology is at best a half assed work in progress with a long track record of failure.

Joachim attacks having organizations

I don’t see organizations as the problem. In my view, the problem is being isolated and immersed in a coarse, crude, violent and nihilistic discourse while being deracinated and uneducated in the Western moral tradition. The lack of organizations has atomized the movement and made it ungovernable and chaotic. It is actually one of the causes of mass shootings.

Joachim claims he isn’t going to judge any of the crazy people who lash out and engage in violence

Yes, this is a morally bankrupt position. Instead of doing that, we should be discouraging activities which are harmful to us by articulating a moral framework for our people and a compelling moral case for White survival .

About Hunter Wallace 12369 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. You have time for a quick tldr on why I (or anyone) should spend time considering what “Joachim Hoch” has to say on any topic?

  2. How do you resolve a deeply complicated issue like this when both sides exist within you?

    It’s impossible.

    Joachim is right regarding Anti-White ZOG Hegemonic Genocide.

    Ignoring Israel, White are being attacked on the streets 24/7 due to what these hominids watch on the J-Tubes.

    White Genocide is the Zeitgeist. It’s easy to notice everywhere. Race mixing is everywhere. Generations have been completely destroyed.

    Glad that the Hammerskins can patrol their women but not every White guy wants to smoke meth, tattoo their entire body up, and end up in jail for life.

    It’s nothing that Whites have ever faced before. We are clearly being invaded and genocided and infected by J-viral degeneracy. And it’s all on online video 24/7 and if we say the wrong thing we can be deleted or unpersoned.

    We’re completely boxed in. We are RULED by Anti-Whites. And many of our compatriots think that raising the Israeli flag to fight a proxy war against our Brown enemies is the answer.

    It is Clown World but it’s not funny at all. Hunter’s approach is a semi-aggressive Faith, Family, Folk and remove the GOP from power approach.

    I agree with that also. Mass violence is being committed against Whites. It has been for a while. No one respects you if you don’t strike back. But, if you strike back you can lose everything.


    • “I agree with that also. Mass violence is being committed against Whites. It has been for a while. No one respects you if you don’t strike back. But, if you strike back you can lose everything.”

      1) You’re right mass violence against Whites is not new. Blacks have been committing mass violence against Whites for decades. Funny though how all of these (((accelerationists))) like Joachim and weev are focusing all of their immediate attention on Muslims abroad when we have millions of blacks and hispanics raping and murdering thousands of whites every year in our own backyard. It’s all about Zionism and more wars for Israel . The Jews are hijacking the dissident right just like they successfully hijacked the tea party movement

      2) Joachim wants us to strike back at people who have literally nothing to do with mass violence against Whites. Terrorism has a couple of different definitions. Attacks against the people directly occupying and oppressing your people may technically be considered terrorism but as long as your people agree that they’re being oppressed then they won’t consider it terrorism. What Whites think of when they hear terrorism is killing innocent civilians for political reasons and that is exactly what Joachim is advocating for. No decent person supports that. And Whites are by far the most moral race.

      3) There are ways to strike back without violence. In between voting for a lifelong philosemite with Jewish grandchildren and committing mass shootings of random brown people there lays a huge middle ground. In 2017 we were well on our way to finding that middle ground until the present day (((acclerationists))) sabatogged everything and destroyed the movement. It can always be rebuilt though. I get a chuckle when I think back to how they would say IRL activism is too risky and dangerous yet just 1.5 years later here they are encouraging domestic terrorism. Don’t doxx ya self goyim it’s just not worth throwing ya life away. Oh hey goy how ya been? You see that mosque over there, I think it’s time for a little bit of direct action *wink wink*. Remember all the boomers in the breitbart comments section, they’ll all love ya.

      • Yup, they want us to strike back at people who have literally nothing to do with mass violence against Whites …. and they want us to fight as proxy’s for their cowardly sorry arse’s on “Russia Russia Russia” via Iran, their most hated enemy who destroyed their empire in circa 800 AD, and us via an engineered “mutually assured destruction” of all their enemies (all peoples of European descent) in one fell Nuclear exchange … the final engineered “brother war” …

  3. If it’s ok with Hunter I’d like to repost my comment from the previous article. Everyone needs to understand that Joachim is either a deranged lunatic or knowingly working for our enemies.

    I watched the whole thing last night. Joachim took down the video because of how bad it made him look. He did nothing to alleviate the concerns of him having turned into an agent provocateur during his mysterious 3 month dissapearance. All he did was make those accusations more believable. It’s not just that the points he was making were awful, but his demeaner during the debate, as well as over twitter the past few days, is very concerning. I was a member of the TRS forum during its last days and Joachim reminds me a lot of how Anglin was acting on there when he was desperately trying to shut down TWP and IRL activism. He was very unstable, highly emotional, and in 24/7 meltdown mode. Anglin was under a lot of pressure from his boss (((Weev)), who was himself under a lot of pressure from his wealthy Chabad Lubavitch backers who needed him to steer the movement in the direction they wanted it to go. Which at the time was MAGA, American Nationalism, clown shoes, no community action, no building IRL networks, etc.

    Now Joachim seems to be under a lot of pressure as well but the direction they want to steer the movement has changed. MAGA is out, it’s now time for “Accelerationism”. Weev and the Daily Stormer are calling for accleration and glorying the actions of the alleged New Zealand mosque shooter. Every day on 4chan for the past couple of months you see multiple threads lionizing Brentant Tarrant in hopes of inspiring copy cats. All the threads are created by and repeatedly bumped by Israeli shills. Why do Zionists want Americans to shoot up mosques when Muslims make up 1% of the US population? Boy that’s a hard one to figure out.

    But I suppose it could have something to do with more wars in the Middle East and the future creation of greater Israel. And while ZOG gets approval from enough Americans to enter to an all out military conflict with Iran, Syria,Lebanon, and possibly Russia it will also have enough approval to completely shut down the dissident right. We will both publicly and legally be seen as terrorists. The same draconian post 9/11 laws used against Al-Qaeda will be used against us, and remember that ZOG never saw Al-Qaeda as a real threat but they see us as one. So imagine how much more harshly those laws will be used against us. We also have Red Flag gun laws in an increasing number of states. Accelerationism will spell doom for the dissident right. Joachim is now on team weev.

    I wish honorary agent Joachim had kept the video up a little longer because he made so many stupid points that they were hard to keep track of. His handlers did a pretty bad job prepping him. He kept trying to compare Israeli terrorism in the 1940s to the domestic terrorism he’s trying to incite today. Are you kidding me? First off the Jews had the support of all of their people in Israel and abroad, they controlled the banks, the international press, they had influence and control over many governments, and they had been building up infrastructure and planning this for 50 years. You won’t believe this but then he brought up South African terrorism. Why yes when you have the support of not only all of your people but also every western government and media outlet then I suppose terrorism would work for you. The lesson is that terrorism works when global ZOG is backing you.

    Trying to compare his domestic terrorism to Hezbollah was also a silly example. Hezbollah has their own tv station, they have seats in parliament, they get lots of funding, they’ve established very serious infrastructure, they have the support of their people, they have the obvious moral high ground, and they only attack military targets. There’s no comparison between Joachim’s domestic terrorism and Hezbollah, who very few non Jews or jew lackeys would even consider a terrorist organization in the first place.

    He then had the gaul to equate Cville with mass shootings because they’re both violent. Because TWP brought shields to protect themselves from ANTIFA that’s the same thing as going into a place of worship and opening fire at civilians. He thinks that “asocial violence” ,which is a nice euphisism for terrorism and mass shooting that he was using, is more effective at getting the message out than “social violence” which is what he calls holding public rallies. He has nothing to base that on except for anonymous internet comments. Hey guys you know those worthless MAGAtard boomers we all can’t stand, they all supported shooting muslims so that must mean we’re on the right side of things. For the record I don’t even believe that those comments on breitbart were all coming from genuine American boomers. I wouldn’t put it past Israeli shills to have a bunch of sock accounts to try and sway public opinion in their favor.

    The type of terrorism that Joachim is advocating for isn’t even logical. I have a lot of disagreements with Linder but at least he advocated for going after meaningful ZOG targets. Joachim just wants people to go after civilians who are easily replaceable and meaningless cogs in the ZOG system. Terrorism is supposed to force the hand of the system to give you what you want because they can’t afford to keep paying the price. But why on earth would ZOG care about a few mosques getting shot up? It wouldn’t make any difference to them. They want that to happen and they’ll still use it as an excuse to shut us down. Immigrants and minorities have no agency or control over ZOG policy. I don’t advocate or support it because there are much better options but if you’re determined to act then you know who’s in charge. You’ll still lose but at least you’ll have the support of more people than just sociopaths and Israeli shitposters.

    • Whole NZ shooting stinks to high heaven – has Western intel paw-prints all over it.

      1) Mosque targeted by Tarrant was known radicalization center for ISIS/Al-Qaeda.

      2) Israeli spy house was busted (thanks to 2011 earthquake) a few minutes from mosque – were they spying on/handling/working with mosque?

      3) Mosque was under surveillance from NZ intelligence.

      3) Tarrant was supposedly unemployed, but six months before the shooting he’d gone travelling in Asia, including Pakistan. Who “travels” to Pakistan? Tourists in the area go to India or Nepal – Pakistan is a dangerous shithole. No – Westerners who travel to Pakistan are either linked to jihadism or Western military/intelligence.

  4. Hunter is blaming the White Genocide meme for getting people off the couch and doing something. Getting people to do anything at all is something the movement has been so far unable to do.

    So now you have all that energy what are you going to do with it? Try and shut it of? That won’t work. The survival impulse is too strong. A smart fellow wouid try and use the White Genocide energy to do something positive.

  5. Conservatives and Christians have nothing to offer pro white movements. They’re not compatible.

    Whites have effectively already been dispossessed, we are in the negative. There’s nothing to conserve. Conservatives go into complete nihilism when their defenses do not work.

    Christians have a bizarre fixation on the “end of times” when for us our civilization is over, illuminating a Christian to this reality activities all these fantasy’s of the rapture and Helter Skelter.

    Maybe 50 years ago appealing to Christianity would’ve been a worthwhile pursuit before america was unrevivable, but now they’re simply a liability.

  6. Your style of delivery irritates the hell out of me. You start off on one train of thought. Then you break off into another train of thought. Then you break off. Then you break off.

  7. AmNats: wait a little bit longer, our infiltration is almost complete

    Siegers: wait a little bit longer, the collapse is coming

  8. Wait, wait, wait…

    Is this the same Joachim who used to cohost with Richard Spencer before he mysteriously disappeared and the whole heel turn thing collapsed?

    If so, I recall him being virulently anti-violence, even claiming those of us advocating for mitigated use of force were stupid. One of the few times I was able to engage him in a livestream chat, I suggested he needed to re-think his views on violence.

    …but I meant like, duels of fists among friends and protective security type scenarios…

    How has this guy flipped so drastically in such a short span of time? Has he done a video explaining his change of mind?

  9. “Joachim Hoch” is a FBI confidential informant. This is why YouTube allows him to maintain his account/stream. Consider this in all of your interactions with him. It is also explains why he took down his video, which could be used in future legal actions by a competent defense attorney to prove government entrapment and suborning of conspiracy to commit various/numerous crimes by the next useful idiot.

    • I am close to buying your theory on “Hoch”. But wait, there’s more! “Hoch” is only one element in an online livestreaming network. It’s re-named itself “Vanguard”, a simple search on youtube will reveal a number of channels and a wealth of content. Some are monetized, some not, but they’re all there and they get thousands of views a week. Smelling a rat yet? I am…

  10. The admonition of Christianity to be martyrs and let ourselves and families be fed to lions or burned alive is likely going to go over like a lead balloon with anybody who takes the 14 words seriously, which I would say is most of us.

    The state of fallen nature is one of conflict for survival and even the catholic church recognizes a justification for self defense.

    There’s a good reason why Europeans have historically been warlike, and ready to defend blood and soil. When the chips are down, you either live, or you are killed by your enemies.

    As a person with deep Celtic ancestry, loss of culture and territory is a part of racial memory even older than Christ.

    @hunter. If we start out to form a moral foundation for a 3.0 movement, make sure it includes a right of self defense clause…. better yet, just use the cathecism of the catholic church and add the 14 words to it. Could do alot worse.

    Does the lutheran church not recognize right of self defense? If you dont define the parameters of this argument, then people like Joachim will continue to conflate murder with self defense, and it will sound like a reasonable argument given the state of our plight currently.

  11. It occurs to me that if we cannot make a case for the defense of our race on moral grounds, then either our conception of race is incorrect, or our morality is unsound.

    The state of nature clearly gives justification to defend your blood for self preservation. Our morality should be equally unambiguous.

    The Christian misconception of needing to get themselves and family killed are clearly out of line with natural law, and I dont plan to let antifa burn me alive without a fight. That kind of morality is fake and gay and I wont waste time refuting it, because anybody that believes they should let themselves die badly to virtue signal is just moral fagging, and is gonna be dead when the SHTF anyhow.

    I dont think anybody on here thinks this way, so Joachim is strawmanning.

    If, as I suspect, we all basically are of one mind on this, then it is likely we have misconceived our concept of race.

    The state I live in is more white now than it was before the civil war. I am under no duress currently and nobody is hurting me or the people I am around.

    Maybe we need to consider that the perception of some urbanite Neetsoc like joachim, or andrew anglin shouldnt be considered valid in the first place, as they aren’t my people anyhow. Most times I wouldnt even mind if someone fed anglin to a lion. Why should I care now? Especially after they made it clear that blue collar people aren’t who they care about? Do they care about rural people in the Midwest, Appalachia or the South? No. TRS is an East Coast organization. Yanks.

    Anglin is the kid of upper middle class SWPL’s. Do I have anything in common with him besides maybe being on the same color swatch? No.

    Maybe its our concept of race that is too expansive, such that it includes people who we wouldnt be morally obligated to defend, violently if needed? Would you due for Andrew Anglin? I wouldn’t.

  12. You do not understand the White Genocide mantra, since you get the main points of it wrong. Forced assimilation is point 1. Point 2 is mass immigration. To get a genocide you must have both 1 and 2 in place. If you don’t have both in policies place, then genocide is impossible.

    White Southerners only survived as a minority because they had segregation. Segregatuon is now illegal. So both polices are in place for White Genocide.

    Japan, a rich non-White country, has only started to be targeted recently for third world enrichment, because the Mantra pointed it out as an example of anti-White hypocrisy. White countries are calculated to the exact year to become minority White and it is celebrated. That makes it deliberate. Asian countries and black countries have no such concerns because no one cares if a place is majority non-White.

    Joe Biden is the expert on White Genocide policy, since he is one of those who implemented it. Lets see what Joe says about it in his own words:

  13. In the end you want to watch TV shows with your wife, enjoy reading mainstream history books and risk nothing. But you are also vain, so you declare this as some kind of new strategy. Very funny.

    • No, I am a historicist, so I see the problem through the lens of history. I see it as an ongoing process of deracination that is being driven by a number of causes. I’ve written about dozens of mass shootings for over a decade. I feel confident saying based on experience that it isn’t an effective solution.

      • Sure, if there have been any genuine shootings by desperate White men they have not sparked a fire in the docile mass of sheep. And they probably never will. Honestly, what can awaken the White mass? How to turn the survivors of diverse enslavement schemes (the Southern plantation by the British East India company is only one of them) into real fighters?

        But I have not seen another “effective solution”. So there is no reason to be smug towards the people who take some kind of action (most of these “shootings” are some kind of weird theater by the secret services and fall in the category of psyops).

        • I think we should be smug toward such people.

          There is nothing new about mass shootings. We’ve been dealing with the problem for over twenty years now. Are these people incapable of looking at the empirical evidence and drawing the conclusion that these shootings to “send a message” don’t work? The overwhelming majority of people in our society aren’t interested in the “messages” of violent criminals. That’s an awful way to “send a message.”

          • Sorry to answer a bit late, I had other commitments.

            First I want to stress that I don’t share your presupposition that there have been genuine shootings by genuine White nationalists on a regular basis. According to my judgement all the shootings you mentioned were psy ops staged by the secret services.

            How to judge whether a shooting was genuine or a psy op depends on forensic details and psychological plausibility of the presented “witnesses” and to discuss these things here would detract from the main arguments. And I have to admit that I have a certain “cry wolf fatigue” myself toward these shootings and there is a certain reluctance to revisited all these faked events. But I want to stress that you are arguing under wrong premises.

            But I will grant you your premises for the argument’s sake. Would those shootings be morally wrong and politically harmful if they were as they are presented in the jewish controlled media?

            First I would like to stress that in principle violence is pretty much the only option we have in a political fight against jewry because all other political means have been blocked by our very powerful enemy. If every form of organization as a racial group is construed as a kind of “hate crime” while every other racial group is invited to live out their chauvinistic feelings as organized racial group, what other options do you have than to break the codex of the rule makers? And this can only be done through violence. What other options had Spartacus than violence? And the status of Whites who are slated for extinction by our jewish overlords is not much higher than that of slaves in the Roman empire.

            Sure, you can play dumb and pretend that the political system isn’t completely broken for Whites. You can shill (like you did in 2016) for a politician like Trump and pretend that he is secretly pro White when he obviously isn’t. But this is only some sort of vainglorious hobby which achieves nothing in the end and only wastes time which is sparse in the desperate situation we are in. If we find no solution we will go the way of the Dodo bird very soon.

            So violence is in principle our only chance. But is it prudent to use is? It didn’t work out for Spartacus in the end and one can argue that the current jewish rule is much more powerful than the Roman Empire. So the use of violence might only some kind of heroic suicide and most people don’t feel the urge for it at a certain age.

            But I can certainly understand that a young man doesn’t want to go quiet into the night of physical extinction. So if there would be genuine shooters (mind the conjunctive!) I would certainly not be harsh on them. They would certainly not harm our cause because there is no non violent political way which could possibly lead to success. And that the sheeple would abhor the will to survive in Whites even more and feel even more self hatred must not concern us. Because the sheeple will play no role in our quest to survive whatsoever and will always act and think as they are told by their jewish overlords.

            So your condemnation of violence hinges on the other political options we have. You insinuate we still have them but I honestly don’t see them.

      • how bout the christian worship/honor of a foreign alien man claiming to be the creator of the universe in complete contradiction to any notion of kin rule and sovereignty, and the entire false and vacuous immoral principle (i.e. vicarious redemption/salvation) surrounding that notion of political global messianic monarchy, … also contra kin sovereignty and rule? …. much to do with why were are in the predicament were in now… try here for starters:

        • CM Reed,

          If there is a God who created the entire universe in all its magnificence, why do you think such a being would be concerned with only your particular tribe or ethnic group? Wouldn’t such a God be responsible for creating ALL life?

          • Why do you believe a man is God and that this man is some kind of “messiah” man-god when scripture clearly states otherwise?

            Spirit the God !!! John 4:24 ——> Numbers 23:19 “God is not a man, that should lie, NOR A SON OF MAN, that should repent; Has organized, and will not do it? Or has guided, and will not make it good?
            —> 2 Cor 3:17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, (No messianic “son of man” is the “Lord” or “King” 1 Samuel 8:7 !!!) and where the Spirit Lord is, there is liberty.

            … get back to your Confederate Kinist roots!!! “Israel” was always a confederation until alien’s tried to impose a “son of man” messianic monarchy on them (see Samuel’s warning against messianic son of man monarchy 1 Sam 8:7 and the fall out described in the Books of Kings)

            “Son of Man” Global Messianism is anti-Spirit (i.e. anti the Spirit within all of us, is despotic, and is anti-Life, … The true Temple of the Spirit: 1 Cor 3:16, and is not a temple in Jerusalem with a man standing in it claiming to be God the Creator of the Universe, and all are son’s of the Spirit, (Psalms 82:6, John 10:34-36)

          • Caritas and Philos

            adapted from josephrex / December 7, 2014

            “The highest form of Spirit can manifest in the lowest depth of matter, and can inspirit human beings. This Spirit has a very specific nature which has been exactly described by many enlightened individuals under many names. To minimize confusion, we settle upon a single word and call it Supernal.

            Beyond Supernal Spirit there is only the formless Absolute, which some call by the mantram OM, some call it the Schwarze Sonne or the Black Sun, or as physics and philosophy call it, the Void. Nothing really true can ever be said of the formless Absolute, for it encompasses all truth within itself, seamlessly melded with untruth; all opposites conjoin in the formless Absolute and are undone, unborn.

            The first child of the formless Absolute is Supernal Spirit, whose truth is One. This Singularity is a divine consciousness pervading all and everything; by nature it radiates an infinite love, which has been called Caritas. Creation begins when the One becomes Two, the Divine Dyad which then spawns the myriad beings who populate the cosmos, as the Supernal Subject seeks Objects for its love. Yet the Oneness remains intact and underlies All, the ground of being of the universe.

            Supernal Spirit can manifest in living people on a scale of many gradations. Caritas will flow through them and be expressed as compassion for their fellow humans and other sentient beings, to the exact degree that they have opened themselves to the divine influence and mastered the art of being a vessel of Spirit.

            The nature of individuals who actualize high degrees of Supernal Spirit is described in the sacred scriptures. From these we can draw a portrait of one who is profoundly detached from the troubles of the world, yet cares deeply about human suffering and strives to mitigate it or console the sufferers in ways that are consistent with a larger divine plan which he seems to understand. He is capable of withstanding the vilest affronts from his fellow humans without succumbing to anger, fear, hatred, or the desire for vengeance; but when the moment comes, he is ready to inflict the wrath of God on those who deserve it, from the same invincible position of placid detachment.

            This ability to act from superhuman motives derives from the Supernal adept’s direct vision of divine Oneness pervading all that surrounds him, whether he kneels with the worshippers in a cathedral or stands with the warriors on a battlefield. At a certain degree of advancement he recognizes every person who crosses his path, whether friend, foe, or stranger, as a kindred soul whom he loves. At a still higher degree he grasps that they are all himself, his own infinite soul acting through other bodies. He sees the Truth that All are One ~ Supernal Spirit masquerading as the numberless multitude of sentient beings who throng the cosmos.

            The fate of every single one of these myriad souls is determined by the exact degree of its awareness (vidya in Sanskrit) or ignorance (avidya) of this Supernal reality. Those locked in hard avidya thereby bring terrible suffering on themselves and those whose fate is bound up with theirs. These karmic consequences often come at the hands of others, who thereby accrue karma themselves, creating a negative matrix and a hellish world.”

            Racial Spirit

            “The insidious programming of the Matrix suppresses racial identity and seeks to pasteurize all peoples into a raceless, rootless mass of homogenous humatons. The reality of divine oneness is falsely invoked to legitimize this dehumanization, with the cant that if All are One we should live together in peace and brotherhood forever. The truth is that there is no contradiction between the oneness of Supernal Spirit, which underlies all creation, and the infinite variety of separate forms and beings which it spawns. In fact if all went back to unity, it would be the end of the cosmos.

            Spiritual enlightenment awakens an individual to the love of God for all beings, called Caritas. We have also awakened to the reality of racial identity; from this arises another kind of love, the deep primordial philos that binds together a family, clan, or tribe. Again there is no contradiction: enlightened white individuals have philial feelings exclusively for their racial kindred, and this does not diminish their Caritas for all humanity. Awareness of the overarching unity gives us the wisdom to draw the line of separation exactly where it’s needed. Dharma requires strong boundaries on every front, and legitimate conflicts of interest between peoples must sometimes be dealt with by means of war. Only this fusion of blood and Spirit can redeem us from the debacle of World War II and regenerate the race in a New Aeon. “

          • Censorship and Clearly by your question your have exposed yourself as a propagandist for the Oligarchical Socialists and is BS “messianic” globohomo monarchy

  14. Kiss, Jews print money for themselves dependent on how much they want, Yang wants to print money according to how much productivity there is. Is is objective, want is subjective. White genocide is a meme is subjective, it is complex is moronic. Jews stating that they want Whiteness as a social construct destroyed, turning around and stating they do not control what they say indicates a disassociation from reality (repeating the Skinner box programming of a metaphysical power), this Skinner box metaphysical power is common. I was accidentally driven through Benton harbor mi after chimpout, saw red were White couple pulled from car and beaten to death, showed articles and pics to people who turned around and stated it didn’t happen. The genocide meme being “complex”, is where the argument is lost, the rest of the points then made start to fall apart. When the knowledge of the Skinner box , your idiom algorithm knows to capitalize Skinner box but not yang, is known the embarrassing kkk marchers look to be cultural heroes, and the Skinner box dwellers the insane freaks that they actually are. The kkkers advantages look extreme in the common. If your sixteen candles Skinner box monkey is actually related to Catherine the great, he should know what she saw that made her expel Jews to pale

  15. I honestly don’t have any more time for the cringy 1.0 , 2.0 movements in the white wig nat movement Hunter. I’m even considering to stop reading sites like the dailystormer cause i’m tired of the rhetoric from people like anglin and company. The disgusting way he endorses psycho mass murders like brevik and tarrant obvious psy ops by the way is disgusting but i also have a problem with the way he talks about women and sure modern women today are not without criticism.

    His misogyny has reached new extremes hes now talking about 11 yr old girls as frontholes and in the recent article i’m referring to talks how all women are worth less then dogs and that all white women should be collared beaten and locked in cages just completely repulsive way of talking and the way he embraces incel idealogy is also problematic and is a losing strategy imo I don’t know much about this new character Joachim but he seems to like anglins method of throwing something against the wall and seeing what sticks

    • I don’t see it that way.

      I’m not really interesting in fighting with him or anyone else. He wanted to debate strategy. That’s fine with me. I just disagree with violent accelerationism and leaderless resistance in light of the history of that strategy.

  16. ONE CASE


    Nothing new here.

    Anyone advocating for violence online openly is a FED or
    will be investigated giving the FEDS and JEWS an excuse
    to shut you down and worse, go after you, compromise others,
    followers etc, make an example out of you, on and on … .

    Promoting Pro Western , Pro European , Pro Christian History
    is very helpful for our future. Some peoples/cultures/countries
    do this today and don’t talk ” white nationalism “. We have a
    huge base thinking about it that way. People are also interested
    in this as well.

  17. Since no one seems willing to do it, I’ll defend Joachim:

    Terrible arguments on all-sides of this but my biggest disappointment was, above, when Wallace says:

    “The overwhelming majority of White people in this country believe that political violence is immoral. Joachim simply dismisses their moral beliefs as irrelevant to White survival. That’s what is ridiculous and it is symptomatic of how the 2.0 movement is out of touch with reality.”

    Who the hell cares what the majority of white people in this country believe? And where is Wallace’s poll-data used to verify this statement? Are we to take Wallace’s off-the-cuff assertions at face-value as if he’s a renowned social scientist and his every whim is fact? I happen to know many people who would embrace political violence. (Consider the masses of ANTIFA on the left, additionally, consider how many people on “the right” would disavow the American Revolution because of the feigned “immorality” of political violence – not very many, I’d bet. Far from a “majority”, as Wallace claims).

    I ask again…who the hell cares what the “majority” of people in this country believe? This is government-school tier “cool-kid” thinking on Wallace’s part. “I’m one of the cool kids and you’re not. Nah nah nah!” Is agreeing with a mass of anesthetized, porn-addled, functionally-illiterate zombies something to brag-about? Is it a firm-foundation on which to build a moral argument for some issue or other? I thought you dismissed “democracy” Wallace, but here you are, with these off-hand democratic assertions which I find out-right appalling.

    What would Luther do if, say, the “cool kids” drug him before a court? Side with them? Or would he say, “Here I stand, I can do no other”?


    Joachim’s three podcasts (recently pulled), were rambling, ill-thought-out, and in many places incoherent. (For example, during the start of his “response to hunter wallace” podcast, he suggests it was wrong of Alt. Right figureheads to kick people out and ban those they disagree with, and yet, towards the end of the same podcast, he suggests anyone unwilling to seriously discuss the violence issue “maybe ought to be shown the door.” Which is it, Joachim? Ban and disassociate, or don’t ban and disassociate? There were many examples of this sort of incoherency but he deleted his podcasts before I could time-stamp them).

    …And yet, I agree with the thrust of what he was saying, especially about violence. He was radicalized by reading Siege, apparently, while I was radicalized by Sir. Walter Scott and Dickens. Nevertheless, democracy isn’t going to work. I’m open to expansive thinking. I wish more people were.

    It’s in our blood to go down fighting.

    ~ I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death. ~

Comments are closed.