At Majority Rights, friedrich braun has outlined his new stance on the Jewish Question, which is a 180 degree turn from his old material at The Civic Platform. Needless to say, I disagree with a number of his points:
1.) friedrich says that only a “Right” friendly to Israel and the Jewish community can succeed in the political arena.
In the United States, the “Right” has been defined by the philo-Semitic conservative movement since the 1960s. It has had a lot of electoral success … but so what? White Americans are worse off in every single way, racially and culturally speaking, than my grandparent’s generation.
Voting for conservatives isn’t an option for the pro-White movement. We get absolutely nothing in return but the scorn of these people and the tireless promotion of Jewish and non-White interests at our expense. It is better to do nothing at all – retreat from the public sphere and enjoy the pleasures of private life – than to support conservatives.
2.) friedrich claims that anti-Semitism is a political loser.
I’m not so sure. I don’t think the American public cares nearly as much about “anti-Semitism” as the philo-Semites insist they do. David Duke won the majority of the White vote in Louisiana. In Alabama, the race-mixing Holocaust denier Larry Darby won 43% of the vote in the 2006 Democratic Party primary for Attorney General.
In the popular imagination, I live in the heart of the Bible Belt. Everyone around here is supposed to be uber philo-Semitic evangelical Christians. I know my peers fairly well and this couldn’t be more untrue. Most of them are either irreligious or outright atheists. None of them care about the Jews. They don’t have any opinion on the issue.
3.) The Right should put Jews in position of authority.
We already have the neocons in control of the conservative movement. A Right that puts Jews in a position of authority will never be anything more than a front group for Jewish interests.
4.) There are plenty of racialist and rightwing Jews with whom we can build alliances.
Name them. I don’t think all of them combined could fill more than half of an Applebee’s restaurant. What’s more, these racialist and rightwing Jews are more interested in “fighting anti-Semitism” than any other pro-White cause. Bringing them into White Nationalism is tantamount to creating just another ideological vehicle for the promotion of Jewish interests.
5.) White Nationalism hasn’t accomplished anything in the postwar era.
There is a good reason for that. After the demise of segregation, racially conscious Whites flocked into the aracial, philo-Semitic conservative movement where they became steadily deracialized. friedrich is advocating more of the same. It will produce exactly the same result.
6.) A friendly disposition towards Jewry will get us into the media and political area.
No, it won’t. It will get us about where Jared Taylor and American Renaissance are now. Jews will persist in their hostility to us. They will continue to relentlessly push their interests at our expense. We won’t get anything in return for abandoning our hostility to the Jews.
7.) We must counter the Nazi image.
I disagree. We should wait for the “Greatest Generation” to die off and the Boomers to retire. Gen X’ers and Gen Y’ers don’t care nearly as much about the Jews.
8.) Jews will bring vast resources into our movement.
No, they won’t.
9.) Jews are moving to the Right.
No, they haven’t. See Steve Sailer’s recent column about American Jewry.
10.) We should emulate Vlaams Belang, the BNP, the Front National, and Geert Wilders.
Why? They haven’t accomplished anything. Muslims continue to settle to Belgium, the Netherlands, France, and the UK. The only thing they have accomplished is watering down the “Right”; thereby pushing the next generation further to the “Left.”
11.) It is time to adopt a winning strategy.
The conservative movement has already adopted the philo-Semitic strategy. Its existence is arguably the single biggest cause of White racial decline since the 1960s.
Excellent rebuttal.
Where has forty years of selling out, accommodation, and watering down gotten us?
Answer: well on the road to extinction.
We retreat. They advance. A winning strategy? More like a recipe for disaster.
I posted this on MR a little earlier.
I especially enjoy the house Jew Fred Scrooby giving me Hell for suggesting that of anti-Semitism should be abandoned in politics. What a nut. I wish I could inform his Jewish family of his online activism. How do you look at yourself in the mirror leading such a crazy double life as one of the biggest anti-Semites in cyberspace while being Jewish and having your sisters married to Jews after converting to Judaism? Yeah, I know you’re not Jewish. Ask anyone here whether they consider mischlinge as part of their team. We know that Linder would have you exterminated, but you lick his ass nevertheless. What is one to make of Jew Scrooby? You need help and I mean that. In my ways, just like Norman Finkelstein, Jew Scrooby is a very well-known type: the neurotic, self-loathing Jew. I remember this unhinged individual crying to me for weeks that I he got banned from a German language forum administered by real German National Socialists. Again, what a nut. A clinical case. A Jew who wants to be a Nazi (put that into your pipe and smoke it for a moment) and throws a tantrum when German Nationalist Socialists consider him to be a Jew and exclude him. Isn’t that what you’re advocating, Jew Scrooby, for your co-ethnics? Why should we make an exception in your case? Because you’re trying to outdo the most vicious anti-Semites? Not good enough. Biological anti-Semitism is a bitch, no? No anti-Semite will trust you in real life, Jew Scrooby. Again, what a nut.
It’s well established that Jew Scrooby is a mental case and I don’t plan to talk about this repulsive and damaged individual again.
But let’s get serious, what I’m suggesting is already happening in Europe with the most successful nativist, anti-immigrationsits political parties. I’m not breaking new ground. People here want to go in the direction of neo-Nazi costume fetishists like the National Front or some obscure outfits filled with low I.Q. psychotics and hobbyists. And no results!
My model is Geert Wilders.
I’m really saddened that people here can’t see that I just want to come up with a winning strategy. I want what’s best for our race, that is my sole motivating impulse. I don’t see White Nationalism getting any traction if wedded to the losing and marginalizing formula of anti-Semitism, Holocaust-denial, National Socialism nostalgia, and Hitler worship. Am I crazy or stupid for coming to that conclusion? At any rate, since I’m not a masochist I’m going to stop posting here, and all I get is personal attacks, sarcastic comments, and name-calliing instead of a cool-headed debate and a willingness to consider my arguments.
I don’t worship Hitler or write about the Holocaust. I rarely write about the Third Reich. I never write about subracial differences. I’m just not interested in these topics. It is not a strategy on my part.
Geert Wilders has succeeded in one thing in the Netherlands: watering down the “Right.” That’s all he has done. The Dutch are still wedded to political correctness. The Dutch mainstream is still wedded to a batshit crazy version of liberalism that is far to the left of the Democrats in the United States.
When William F. Buckley died, the columnists who wrote his obituraries were unanimous that his greatest accomplishment was purging the “respectable” right of racialists and anti-Semites. They couldn’t point to any other lasting conservative success.
What do you mean by “watering down the ‘Right'”? Do you mean that he doesn’t parade in Amsterdam in S.S. uniform? That the doesn’t shout: “DEATH TO THE JEWS!” No, you’re right, he doesn’t. But I don’t see that as watering down the message. He’s the most successful anti-immigrationist politician in the West right now. I call his approach a winning formula. Look, what counts a the end of day is our biological survival, our ethnic genetic interests. Wilders might not be perfect, but at least he’s a great improvement. Incrementalism is very useful. Wilders offers a breach in the liberal ideological hegemony. Hopefully, the Dutch will build on that. His efforts have been extremely valuable as he has moved the entire political discourse in the Netherlands to the Right. The philosophical destruction of the liberal consensus must be gradual, otherwise it won’t work. I hope that the men who come after him will further racialize their discourse, but in the present climate I don’t think he can go any further. You have to keep in mind that he’s already been prosecuted for incitement or hate speech and undergone a lengthy trip through the Dutch judicial system. In the current climate, he’s taken that horse as far as he could. You can talk big about watering down the message or whatever from your bedroom in Alabama but he’s actually the one getting dragged through court system and lives in fear for his life, surrounded by body guards 24/7, never sleeping in the same house two nights in a row. So spare your lectures about personal courage and watering down the Right. Who are you to pronounce judgment on someone who’s actually fighting for his people in the public arena? What have you done, apart from anonymously running your mouth on some blog?
Is there no middle ground in white nationalism between extreme anti-Semitism and extreme philo-Semitism? Is no one able to draw a distinction between moderate, reasonable, responsible criticism of Jewish group behavior that is anti-assimilationist and hostile towards non-Jewish Whites, on the one hand; and hateful, hyperbolic and delusional ravings imputing to them malevolent intentions to “kill gentiles” coupled with apparently near- supernatural power to carry these intentions out. Only the most extreme Jews match the malevolence of white nationalists who claim “free association” gives them the right to deprive American Jews and half-Jews of their basic rights as citizens to life, liberty and property.
Crypto-Aryan (formerly White Advocate)
Why do these two Judeophile idiots “Friedrich” Braun and “Jew Advocate” keep posting here on this blog?
Nobody cares what they think.
1.) No, I did not. Dressing up in a Nazi costume and screaming “Death to the Jews” are in no way essential to White Nationalism.
2.) Geert Wilders is a Zionist neocon. Like Pim Fortuyn, he objects to Islam because it represents a threat to Dutch liberalism. This is considered “far right” in the Netherlands. This is what I mean when I say he succeeded in watering down the Right.
3.) Please tell us how Wilders’ approach is a winning formula. Have Muslims quit settling en masse in the Netherlands? Has the Netherlands closed its borders? Has the Netherlands quit the EU? Has the Netherlands rejected multiculturalism, political correctness, or liberalism?
Again, what has Wilders succeeded in beyond watering down the Right and pushing the mainstream further to the Left? He is another William F. Buckley.
4.) The only incrementalism I see is a shift to the Left. The so-called European “nationalist” parties are less extreme and marginally more successful than they were twenty years ago. They have given up ground; the Left has moved further towards its fringe.
5.) Where, pray tell, has Wilders called for a destruction of the liberal consensus?
6.) The Democrats in Alabama are “far right” compared to Geert Wilders.
7.) Doesn’t he have an Israeli flag on his desk? Is that what you call “fighting for your people”?
8.) It is better to do nothing at all than to do something harmful.
Z.O.G.,
friedrich is a friend. I’m not sure what prompted this change on the Jewish Question. I think he will come to his senses eventually.
I’m not going to spend a Sunday repeating myself. Wilders isn’t the Prime Minister yet, although if elections were to take place today he would be. Unlike you, I’ll judge him once he can actually do something.
Your approach has been shown again and again to be a loser in post-W.W. II West. I refuse to bang my head against that wall.
White Advocate,
The question is: why does a White ethnostate need a Jewish community?
1.) The overwhelming majority of Jews are hostile to White Nationalism. Read the responses to David Kelsey over at Jewcy.
2.) Jews have played a leading role in undermining racialism and marginalizing White Nationalism. The neocons hijacked the conservative movement and turned it into a vehicle for Jewish interests.
3.) There are only a handful of Jews who are sympathetic to White Nationalism. Of those, the majority of the “pro-White” Jews are more interested in “fighting anti-Semitism” than anything else.
Wilders opposes Muslim immigration. While he is problematic on other issues, this is the #1 issue for the white race in Europe. It also is highly unfair to criticize him for not stopping Muslim immigration when he holds very little actual power at this time.
We’re not going to elect someone who holds *all* of our beliefs before its too late to do anything about the demographic problem.
I also agree with White Advocate above regarding the need for a middle ground. I think HW does a reasonable job with the ‘middle ground’.
White Nationalism never gained traction because racialists followed your advice in the 1960’s. Instead of taking a harder line, the segregationists and the overwhelming majority of racially conscious Whites decided to get involved in conservative politics, avoid the JQ entirely, water down their message, drop the overt racialism, take up an anti-government line, fight the “culture war,” emphasize their “values,” include Jews and non-Whites in their organizations.
If Wilders stops Muslim immigration to the Netherlands, I will happily take a pie to the face and savor every morsel of it.
You’re beginning to annoy with your litany of straw men. Present my real position and speak to it. Where did I say that we should de-racialize our message? What I’m talking about has nothing to do with the South of the ’60’s. On the contrary, I’m advocating racialism, eugenics, anti-immigration, segregation, genetic engineering. I’m saying that the Jewish Question should be abandoned if we want to have shot at achieving at least some of the things we want to achieve.
You want us to follow Geert Wilders example. To my knowledge, he isn’t a racialist. He isn’t selling a racialist message in the Netherlands.
Neither side has been very successful yet, so I don’t think we can be wholly conclusive.
I think Braun is just trying to be more practical. In the past it was easier to have a complete revolutionary change, but now incrementalism seems to be more realistic.
Personally I like to read what FB thinks, he at least adds balance to arguments dominated by VNN Kool-Aid drinkers here.
So here are the three choices as evident from this thread:
(1) Wilders-style anti-Muslim populism.
(2) A party that expouses explictly WN views (does NL have such a party?).
(3) Do nothing.
Here is my analysis:
(1) Gets the votes and has a real chance of winning power and will (presumably) deal with the Muslim immigration problem (which is the #1 demographic issue in Europe)
(2) May enjoy *some* support. I don’t know what goes in in NL, honestly, but I know with, say, the NDP in Germany, its a very fringe party with no real power.
(3) Stupid. The demographic crisis continues unabated. The danger of this being irreversible after a certain point is very real.
My prescription:
If an explicitly WN party is electable, then I prefer the WN party every time.
If not, I would seek out a moderate like Wilders who frames issues culturally that has more appeal to the timid voters.
The comparison to conservatives in the 1960’s isn’t a good one, imo. Conservatives in the 1960’s could have taken a real racialist stand and enjoyed wide support, as you state. Today isn’t the same, except outside regional pockets of America and Europe.
That is my $.02 and I am not going to go back and forth on this all day.
I’m in favor of incrementalism. That means pulling the mainstream in our direction: the conservatives adopting our positions, the left moving towards the center, White Nationalists staking out more extreme ground.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
Hunter’s view on incrementalism is correct. We, who have a more developed understanding of the matter, should stick to our guns. Make Wilders (and others of his ilk) appear as a moderate and safe guy. Boring, really. Make it both possible and necessary for Wilders to move more and more in our direction, and bring the center of gravity in Dutch politics closer and closer to our position.
I posted this over at Majority Rights.
Braun: “Am I crazy or stupid for coming to that conclusion? At any rate, since I’m not a masochist I’m going to stop posting here, since all I get is personal attacks, sarcastic comments, and name-calliing instead of a cool-headed debate and a willingness to consider my arguments.”
Understandable request, but somewhat misleading. Posters are in fact debating your arguments. Instead of responding to valid objections, you instead focus on a personal screed against Scrooby.
So, putting the petty name calling and personal animus aside (from all parties), what are your responses to the valid objections raised above? Also, Hunter has just posted what I consider to be an effective rebuttal on Occidental Dissent.
Look, I agree with you that White Nationalism has to change. Certainly the costume clownery and ravings of defectives have got to go. Lord only knows how much ink I’ve spent railing against that sort of thing, just in recent months.
We have a pretty good idea of what we don’t want to be, a few weirdos and cranks notwithstanding. But we still haven’t settled upon exactly what White Nationalism is to become. People like GW are working on that, I hope fruitfully. In this eleventh hour, we’d better figure it out. What we come up with may well be our last and best hope, as we aren’t going to get too many more tries at this before our homelands are duly and truly lost. It is entirely possible that this is our last try, and that what we come up with on sites like this in just the next few years will either win the day or all will be lost.
Our situation really is that stark and difficult. In short, we’ve got to get it right this time. If this is the spirit in which you approach matters, I can certainly respect that.
I’m open to argument and debate, but I sincerely do not believe that trying to win allies in the Jewish community will come to anything at all. I believe that, instead, it will merely divert us and subvert us in this our final hour. We simply don’t have the time to waste.
History shows the Jewish hostility to our cause. History shows that no accommodation, no sacrifice, no kingly ransom can dissuade the Jew from his attempt to genocide the white peoples of the planet. We have absolutely nothing to offer the Jew that hasn’t been offered on an infinitely greater scale before, all to no effect whatsoever. Or, I should say, no positive effect from our point of view. The only result has been to push us further along the road to marginalization and extinction.
My reading of history, not to mention a dollop of personal observation, also shows how dangerous it is to dilute principles in the name of political expediency. Even if it were expedient to do as you suggest (which, as noted above, I do not believe to be the case), it would still be a very dangerous business. For example, in America we have seen the gradual evolution of aracial conservatism. When the modern conservative movement first got going several decades ago, there was a lot of speaking in code about race and wink wink, nudge nudge. It was assumed that the white audience would understand, and would be able to ignore the public lip service the conservative was giving to diversity and multiracialism. Initially, this was more or less true. But, as the saying goes, the fool you flatter is the fool you become. In time, repeating the mantra of diversity and never being willing to explicitly advocate white interests, or even acknowledge the right of whites to exist as a people, had its effect. The propaganda is cumulative. It doesn’t work right away, but it does work.
It has now reached the point where modern conservatives will viciously attack, with mouth foaming rage, anyone who has a hint of white racial consciousness. They mean it, too. The very people they once appealed to in code would now be derided as vicious, hateful scum. Keep your mouth shut, redneck. It has been a disturbing thing to watch as it plays out, but play out it certainly has.
Having said all of that, I’m not entirely sure which way White Nationalism should go as far as the Jewish Question. Maybe it should be something as simple as “They’ve got a homeland, it’s called Israel. We want our homeland back too.” Perhaps leave it at that. Anyway, more thought needs to be dedicated to this, and a policy developed and stuck to.
But I’ll tell you this: the only way we are going to win, and I mean really win, is to develop a movement that has true appeal – something with strength, integrity, and zest. A movement with a true vision and real promise, one that captures the imagination. Vibrant and robust.
I know I’m giving lots of descriptors here, and little substance. But what I’m talking about has a lot to do with attitude, and the above words convey some of that. Robust and vibrant as opposed to currying favor. As opposed to hoping that the Jews will tolerate us, or let us exist on sufferance.
We aren’t going to get anywhere by trying to slick it, least of all by a hopeless attempt to curry favor from the Jews. That’s the wrong attitude to take, the wrong spirit. We need a motivating vision, a view of the world, not hope against hope that the Jews will play nice with us, “If only we stop doing X.” It’s just not going to happen that way, as best I can see. Unrequited love: it’s a bitch.
When Alex Linder says Death to the Jews or the NSM parade around in costumes, I look more reasonable. The Left understands this. The Right does not.
The Left hardly ever attacks its fringe. The Right constantly pronounces anathema on its own. The Left stakes out new territory. The Right waters itself down.
“You want us to follow Geert Wilders example. To my knowledge, he isn’t a racialist. He isn’t selling a racialist message in the Netherlands.”
If he were an anti-Semite, he wouldn’t be on verge of power. The French Front National has been doing for decades what you’d like to see, and is a marginal rump party that will never achieve anything. They have an anti-Semitic, Holocaust-denying leader for over 3 decades now. There’s no doubt that that has hindered its progress. I firmly believe that had the French Front National adopted Wilders’ discourse, they would be running France today.
It doesn’t matter whether Wilders talks about race or not, the effect is the same, as Muslims in the Netherlands are extra European.
Your prescription for a political movement has been tried and is a loser. My way of doing things has a future.
“. . .I’m not entirely sure which way White Nationalism should go as far as the Jewish Question. . .”
“Learn your lines, find your mark, look ’em in the eye and tell ’em the truth.” Jimmy Cagney
HW, only when a racialist Right shows the Jews that it’s a safe option will we know how many will join. Michael Levin, one of the best racialist authors I’ve come across, left AmRen because he was uncomfortable with the overwhelming anti-Semitism on the identitarian Right. True or False? Ditto for Michael Hart, another brilliant mind. Rabbi Schiller springs to mind as well. I don’t want to lose these people. You know that Jews founded Fascism in Italy and produced first class eugenicists. The Jews are born racialists. What has happened to you? You used to make such beautiful arguments to counter anti-Semites and their single cause monomania.
Abdandoning the Jewish question won’t gain us any political capital with the white masses or help us curry favor with Jewish elites. Amren has publicly put out the “Not Welcome” sign to so called “anti-Semites”, that is, folks who believe it’s a subject worthy of discussion and debate. Nevertheless, the Jewish dominated SPLC and Jewish ADL still smear and condemn Jared Taylor and his organization for their pro-white activities.
Republicans of all stripes routinely prostrate themselves before AIPAC yet what has it gained them as a party? If anything the Jewish neo-conservatives now have a controlling interest in party affairs which they use to further the Israel/Zionist agenda of endless war and genocide in the Middle East. Our borders remain unprotected while Israel resorts to extreme violence to protect their borders and fellow Jews. The neo-cons at FOX news aren’t exactly friendly to white racialism and white nationalism. FOX almost seems like a news agency for the Israeli government.
Furthermore, contrary to the spate of propaganda being disseminated on the internet by some posing as WN’s, Jews do not simply see themselves as white people practicing Judaism. And, if we just woo them a little and blow kisses their way they’ll become less hostile to our interests and possibly assist our cause. The John Birch Society trod that path and are politically irrelevant today.
It seems like Friedrich is drinking from the same Kool-aid bowl as Guy Blight and Lawrence Auster concerning the JQ.
friedrich,
In the U.S., we have tried what you advocate. It is called conservatism.
American conservatives are not racialist, segregationist, anti-immigrationist, eugenicists. A considerable difference.
1.) You’ve named all of three Jews who are more interested in “fighting anti-Semitism” than White racial preservation.
2.) I have never subscribed to the Single Jewish Cause theory. I still don’t. At the same time, I don’t believe the Jewish Question is irrelevant or should be ignored.
3.) We surrender. They advance. I’m not convinced that is a winning formula. As in football, incrementalism works when the other side loses ground and we advance.
There are two issues here. One regarding means, and another about ends.
Braun, are you advocating your position simply based on a consideration of means? Or is this also a position on ends? Namely, that you are against the idea of a Jew free White Ethnostate?
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
You keep invoking Vlaams Belang and Party for Freedom as your model. I don’t recall either being eugenicist, racialist, or segregationist. They are neocons.
Using my incrementalist approach citing at the beginning, the next step is the Party of Freedom and Vlaams Belang approach. We must first break the intellectual hegemony of liberalism. Once that is done, a great deal becomes possible.
Those Jews who want to help me break down liberalism and usher into a new age are welcome. I won’t turn against my allies. I would have no problem nominating Michael Levin at the head of a Race Office.
Braun, can you answer my question?
Whatever theories you want to put forward, they’re meaningless if we don’t have any power to implement them. We have no racialist political representation of any stripe, so at this point I think extremism and advocating genocide are pure negatives. If you really believe this makes moderate racialists look good, then why complain about NSM rallies? It makes you look good right?
The Left doesn’t have to complain about their fringe because they’re holding the reins.
Plus, as a general rule I don’t like psychotic assholes of any political persuasion.
“Tanstaafl
monomania
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
Nice movie reference, Tans. Nothing wrong with a little levity.
It is easy to see both sides on this issue, but we should consider: Until we are ready to stop doing nothing and become willing to play at the same level of or opponents, it remains just a debate. I’d marry a jew (remaining childless) if it would advance our interest’s. I’d promptly throw her out on her hairy ass once we reached the promised land.
Obviously I am speaking metaphorically. The point is that we passed the point of white gloves and principled nobility quite some time ago.
So keyboard warriors, how far are you willing to go and how dirty will you fight? Your opponent has all of the momentum, is an experienced, dirty fighter, and this ain’t no friggin’ rugby match with beers and song at the end. It means death to you, your progeny, and the entire history of your people.
If you don’t know how to clean a gun and shoot straight, don’t have a strong political conviction, cannot call upon a Higher Being, or some other way of demonstrating your plan to stay in the game (and bring some others along for the ride), you are already dead. Enjoy yourself while you consume the last fumes of the empty tank…
Mike
That isn’t true — you know damn well that the ‘new White Nationalism’ distances itself from the Neo-Nazi types in an attempt to move in a more publicly acceptable direction.
But I do agree with you Mr Braun that White Nationalist ought to abandon full-fledged public anti-Semitism, because endlessly ranting and raving about ‘the Jews’ in public will get a person labeled as a loony-toon by the Jewish-controlled mass-media which is then transmitted on to the clueless White public. But in private, on websites like these, it is an entirely different story; in private and amongst people who know what the real deal is, Jews ought to be hounded endlessly because they are the ones mostly responsible for running Western culture in to the ditch during the 20th Century, not even a century after they had been fully liberated from their ghettos.
And I’m still waiting for your DNA results Mr Braun since I posted mine here recently.
FB:”We must first break the intellectual hegemony of liberalism.”
Which means dealing with the Jewish issue, because Jews have obviously been the main promoters of liberalism ever since the time of Karl Marx or even before.
Again, after reading through the rest of the comments, I do agree that if we want to begin to bring White Nationalism more in to the mainstream, we are likely going to need to abandon blatant and public anti-Jewishness for the time being. But as I wrote above, in private we should hammer away at them mercilessly and work to undo their nefarious wrongdoings in the White West.
FB:”You used to make such beautiful arguments to counter anti-Semites and their single cause monomania.”
Straw man. Not all anti-Semites are monomaniacal.
Vlaams Belang is very restricted with what they can say and do, having already had a legal decision against them. Their hands are tied, they’re taking their EGI as far as they can.
ogden, I did.
Why not just wait to see what Wilders and Vlaams Belang do with power once they get it and not push for Jewish involvement?
I hope FB is prepared to take a verbal beating.
Because moving your stance on Jews within racialist circles is a sure way to get it. I speak from experience, lol.
I hope FB is prepared to take a verbal beating.
Because moving your stance on Jews within racialist circles is a sure way to get it. I speak from experience, lol.
(Prozium you don’t have to approve my last comment. I’ll stick with iceman as my name here.)
“Iceman
I hope FB is prepared to take a verbal beating.
Because moving your stance on Jews within racialist circles is a sure way to get it.”
Within a immature, anti-social, American subset of racialism yes. It’s like shouting nigger among a group of blacks.