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.
Braun,
So you have no problem with dumping the Jews after we’re done “using” them, right?
Wow, good post Friedrich Braun. Definitely the most insightful post I’ve seen at Majority Rights. I also used to be a radical anti-Semite.
lol. You flamed me pretty good over the Jew question. I wasn’t aware you altered your position.
Like Friedrich Braun and many other nationalists of our time, I’ve abandoned the Jewish question as politically unfruitful and irrelevant.
No, ogden, I’m not a man of low character.
We don’t have to go to the extremes of Larry Auster or Ian Jobling, but surely the approach to the Jewish Question adopted by Arthur Kemp of the BNP, Jared Taylor, Geert Wilders, etc., is now called for.
With friends like Friedich Braun and Yosemite, you don’t need enemies.
Hunter, let’s grant that most Jews are anti-White. I don’t think that’s necessarily the case, but even so, why can’t the White majority stand up to them? Laurence Auster is NOT my cup of tea for a variety of reasons, but I do think that he makes excellent sense in the following passage. Rather than dehumanizing or fantasizing about deporting the Jews, how about simply standing engaging them, rather than resenting them? And if it is impossible to convince them to take a pro-White point of view, then there is no harm on an ISSUE-BY-ISSUE basis in working to reduce their power by APPEALING TO THE MAJORITY and UNAPOLOGETICALLY ASSERTING WHITE INTERESTS.
Note there is one thing that you’ll have to do to engage them: show that you don’t want to exterminate them, or deport them, and you’re not allied with anyone who does. That’s why trying to implement “the Overton thesis” is so damaging to white interests.
Auster is excellent here:
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/012266.html
“Here in a nutshell is the approach I advocate to the Jewish problem:
1.To the extent that Jews as Jews pursue an anti-Western or anti-national agenda (for example, when Jews state that as Jews they are committed to open borders, or the advance of minorities at the expense of the majority, or the transformation of America into a universal nation, or the continued dismantlement of America’s Christian culture), they should be publicly confronted on that. It is legitimate to criticize and oppose the anti-majoritarian Jewish agenda as such, just as it is legitimate to oppose a harmful black agenda or a harmful Hispanic agenda as such.
2. Jews who make it clear that their primary identification and loyalty is to Jews or minorities, rather than to America and its historic majority culture, should be told that they have the right to live and prosper in America, but not to speak for America or to have an influential role in its culture and politics.
3. Peaceful and brotherly relations between the Jews and the white gentile majority is possible on the basis of the following quid pro quo: the Jews tolerate and respect the majority and do not seek to undermine it; and the majority tolerates and respects the Jews.
4. As I’ve said many times, the initiation of such an approach, like the solution to many other problems we face, depends on the restoration of a white gentile majority culture that believes in itself, and stands up for itself in a firm but civilized way, and asserts its natural leadership position in America.
Speaking of “low character,” you’re certainly willing to sacrifice some principles for political expediency, assuming of course that there will be real strategic gains made and that you hold these principles in the first place.
So do you think a Jew free White Ethnostate is a good and important thing? An end worth pursuing? Let’s say that your strategy was adopted and was a tremendous success. And then a group of Whites, perhaps a few or perhaps many, wished to establish an independent White Ethnostate that completely excluded Jews. And that this endeavor didn’t involve harming Jews. Would you deny this desire? What if the Jews were uncomfortable with this project? Would you be opposed to it then?
@Donald,
The situation in Europe is not the same as the situation in America; Muslim immigration is the number one threat to Europe and they should partner with Jews or whoever to stop it, not complaints from this side of the Atlantic.
In the USA the JQ is the number one issue, because they are promoting third-world/Chicano/anti-White immigration here. It’s a slightly different priority in the USA, and Jews are not an acceptable partner in America, due to the anti-White hate/subversion.
Obviously there is going to be different techniques for different countries.
Europe has its Muslim problem, and America has its Hispanic problem. The JQ is politically unfruitful and irrelevant in America as well as Europe.
“Crypto-Aryan” is Jew Advocate, correct? Just trying to keep it all straight.
1.) Every single time pro-Whites “stand up to the Jews” they are attacked for their “anti-Semitism” by Lawrence Auster.
2.) In theory, pro-Whites should be allowed to criticize the Jews under Auster’s schema. In practice, Auster imposes such extreme conditions and qualifications on Gentile criticism (like the protocols for addressing the Chinese emperor) that he all but rules it out. Jews, however, are under no such restraints.
3.) Criticizing Jews only feeds their paranoia. Look at the extremes the ADL has gone to sniff out the “new anti-Semitism.”
4.) The Jews have inflicted massive damage upon the racial and cultural health of the American nation. We are under no obligation to tolerate their presence here.
5.) The philo-Semites always want something for nothing: they want us to give up our “anti-Semitism” without Jews having to change their outrageous behavior in the slightest.
6.) I will consider giving up anti-Semitism when pro-White Jews talk some sense into their destructive co-ethnics and Jews offer us 1/1000th of the apologies that Whites have made to non-Whites.
The Jewish Question is indispensible to understanding the shift in American culture from explicit whiteness to anti-racist, pluralist multiculturalism in the mid-twentieth century. Philo-Semites always say that addressing the JQ is a political loser, but never explain why that is the case (i.e., the reality of Jewish power).
These “strategic gains” are ALWAYS assumed. In reality, the philo-Semites NEVER go beyond Step 1, which is marginalizing the anti-Semites. Instead, they make big promises which they NEVER deliver on: we will end affirmative action, we will end third world immigration, we will fight the culture war, we will end multiculturalism, etc.
Wasn’t the American shift to the Left incremental?
I’m posting as a wn/hdb/right winger not a wn. When reading this post, keep that schema in mind.
According to a previous poster, Auster said if Jews become minority rights advocates, then they should lose their political voice. This contradicts your statement Hunter, that Auster doesn’t set boundaries for Jews.
I agree that Jews are often political opponents. This isn’t exclusive to Jews. There are a lot of political opponents.
I agree that philosemites sometimes overestimate their ability to become superstars. I’m not disagreeing with you on that. You’re right that Jobling thought it would make him the next Bill O’riley and it didn’t.
However, antisemitism just feels like a backwards, old fashioned, 1940’s prejudice. And on a purely rational level, there is no good reason to burn bridges, even if few people cross the bridges. Few non-jews cross too. Why shut the door and close your mind against all Jews? So for me, it is not political expedience as much as it is schema.
I’m not saying that a group of Jewish elites should micromanage society like a computer game, but a wholesale condemnation just doesn’t make sense. And I say this not just because of the possibility that I may be considered Jewish or self-interest, but out of pure instinct and logic.
WHOOPS. I mean to say RR. Not WN.
Regarding Mr Braun’s recent 180 degree turn on the Jewish Problem — is it a possibility that he has recently been put on the payrolls of a Jewish organization and/or a Jew-controlled Western government for the purposes of attempting to remake WNism in to a more pro-Jewish movement?
1.) Go ask Auster if leftist Jews should be stripped of voting rights, forbidden to make campaign contributions, and removed from all positions of cultural influence in the mass media and academia.
2.) Jews are indisputably the Godzilla of the progressive left. They are the major force pushing the U.S. in an anti-racist, multiculturalist direction.
3.) Anti-Semitism makes sense. Excluding Jews will have the effect of decapitating the head of the beast in a single stroke. Sure, it won’t solve all our problems, but it would humble the Left and emancipate the Right.
4.) There simply aren’t any Jews to build bridges with. The only interest that most Jews have in White Nationalism is infiltrating the movement to “fight anti-Semitism.”
5.) A border between “us” and “them” has to be drawn somewhere. Drawing it between Jews and Whites is about as clean as one gets. As I said above, the “pro-White Jews” wouldn’t fill half of an Applebee’s restaurant. They are statistically irrelevant.
WP,
I don’t think so. I think FB was trolled over at VNN Forum and was pushed into an extreme position. Given enough time, I think he will come to his senses.
Steve,
The shift to the Left was incremental because the Right constantly watered down its position. This allowed the Left to shift toward its fringe and stake out new territory.
Iceman:”However, antisemitism just feels like a backwards, old fashioned, 1940’s prejudice.”
Anti-Semitism runs in cycles and waxes/wanes depending on where Jews are mostly living at any given time; in European history, for example, anti-Semitism always occurred wherever Jews wandered and eventually settled down for a bit, over and over again. This is briefly how it worked: Jews came in to an area and then often gained too much control and influence, especially economic — this always caused anti-Semitism to slowly but surely build up. It grew and grew until there were blatant outbursts against them. Then Jews were then very often expelled or even wholesale massacred from an area — after that anti-Semitism then slowly waned and even disappeared entirely. But whenever the Jews again wandered back in to that same area, it then began to grow just as it did before and the cycle repeated itself.
As one might expect, the vicious cycle continues: anti-Semitism is growing in White America, just as it always has in those nations wherever Jews have settled in large numbers.
“) Go ask Auster if leftist Jews should be stripped of voting rights, forbidden to make campaign contributions, and removed from all positions of cultural influence in the mass media and academia.”
How many pro-whites, conservatives, and nationalists say that all leftists, Jewish or gentile, should be stripped of voting rights, forbidden to make campaign contributions, and removed from all posititions of cultural influence in the mass media and academia?
HW, you’re making up your own arguments. These are not the arguments I’m making. I said that the inclusion of Jewish racialists and eugenicists is a good idea. I’m not talking about just any random Jews. We stake out a racialist program, if Jews want to join, so much the better. Would you have a problem with someone like Michael Levin joining a racialist movement? I said that we should stay away from the Holocaust, Nazi nostalgia, and anti-Semitism as these are political losers. Yes, Jews are very powerful, everyone knows that, but somehow that becomes an argument for taking them on? How so? Now, I’m aware that this is a blog and not real life and not a political movement. However, if I were to start a third party, a racialist party, a secessionist party, a White Nationalist party, I’d imitate what works in Europe, since White Nationalism in the U.S. is a joke. I can guarantee you that we’d get called all sorts of names anyway. That’s a given. The only difference being that by making common cause with some Jews, we’d diffuse a great deal of the rhetoric aimed to discredit and marginalize us. It’s hard to call you a Nazi when you’ve got an articulate Jew as your spokesman. A racialist party that is friendly to Jews will at least get a hearing. A racialist party with the anti-Semitic albatross around it’s neck is dead on arrival. I’m all for doing what’s feasible at this juncture and not shooting ourselves in the foot even before we start. There are so many subjects and problems, do you really want to get bogged down right off the bat talking about the Jewish Question to Whites who have not the slightest idea what you’re talking about, but associate any negative mention of Jewry with sixmillionJewsgassedbyNazis? 9/10 Whites will tune you out, even if they might be sympathetic on Black crime, illegal immigration, the welfare state, affirmative action, etc. You’ve got to be realistic and choose your battles and do what’s feasible. But I’m not saying this solely out of opportunism, Jews as a highly selected group represent an asset to any movement. We’re talking about an intellectual elite, I don’t see how declaring war on them will improve our lot. As to anti-Semitism, in the post-W.W. II West Jews simply cannot be defeated. Period. They have never been as strong, wealthy, and organized as they are now. It’s like banging your head against a brick wall, the wall won’t move, you can only hurt yourself.
Prozium, most people consider me an Islamophobe and a Muslim hater.
But even I don’t say that I’ll never ever work with a Muslim. I worked closely with Daniel Shays.
I’m just saying, taking the position that you’ll never work closely with any person who is fully Jewish is fairly extreme.
Braun,
Speaking of “low character,” you’re certainly willing to sacrifice some principles for political expediency, assuming of course that there will be real strategic gains made and that you hold these principles in the first place.
So do you think a Jew free White Ethnostate is a good and important thing? An end worth pursuing? Let’s say that your strategy was adopted and was a tremendous success. And then a group of Whites, perhaps a few or perhaps many, wished to establish an independent White Ethnostate that completely excluded Jews. And that this endeavor didn’t involve harming Jews. Would you deny this desire? What if the Jews were uncomfortable with this project? Would you be opposed to it then?
Re: Yosemite
Philo-Semites always camouflage the insidiousness of Jewish influence by referring to all leftists in general. This is after powerful, wealthy, and influential leftist Jews have succeeded in brainwashing two or three generations of ordinary Gentiles in their ideals.
If you really want to know where these movements come from, roll the clock back to when they were still marginal, and take a hard look at the vanguard of subversives who pushed them into the mainstream. Who was pushing for cosmopolitanism, anti-racism, civil rights, and open borders in the 1920s? Who was for feminism, abortion, and gay rights in the 1950s and 1960s? Who was for white guilt and political correctness in the 1960s and 1970s? Who was pushing “white privilege” and “critical race theory” in the 1990s and 2000s?
“The shift to the Left was incremental because the Right constantly watered down its position. This allowed the Left to shift toward its fringe and stake out new territory.”
This is a great point, but the culture was moving Left as well. The Culture is does not share every aspect with the Political stage. Momentum was inevitably turning Left. With more wealth, a higher standard of living, and stimulated empathy non-Southern White Americans eventually saw segregation as abnormal as they viewed slavery a century earlier. The Far-Left cared most, and had the lukewarm support of newly Moderate Liberals (probably 80-90% of the non-South population). Of course the media was another factor, but that increased and reinforced the inevitable momentum. And throughout this period, the Left made incremental gains to sabotage the White race in America.
Now, it’s our turn to find ways to turn the momentum, so we can start our incremental advances. What we need to do is find events and issues that will stop this drastic Liberal change. The issue of apologizing to Islam, Affirmative Action/Quotas, and Illegal Immigration (especially “Amnesty”) provide a great opportunity to rally the American public, and make the Left offer concessions. We must go further, but this might be a necessary start.
With the three issues I just mentioned, I will agree we cannot water down our message at all! We almost have to be extreme, to get what we want on these issues. I will admit that.
1. Hunter — “Every single time pro-Whites “stand up to the Jews” they are attacked for their “anti-Semitism” by Lawrence Auster.” In theory, pro-Whites should be allowed to criticize the Jews under Auster’s schema.
Hunter, so what?! Do you need permission from Laurence Auster to debate a Jew? Of course, Jewish opponents will play the anti-Semitism card. Your problem is that you can’t defend against that slur because in your case it’s not a slur, its true! You don’t seek to debate Jews or persuade them, you seek to remove them. Under those circumstances, what is there to talk about? Better just to reach for my revolver.
If you’re making a reasonable comment, if you’re not dripping with barely disguised animus or resentment, if you attack the message not the messanger, and if you can plausibly reassure people that you don’t want to exterminate or deport your opponents — then you should be able to make a reasonable point and over time it will make inroads if not with the Jews themselves then with the White Majority.
2. If every Jew was vaporized tomorrow, you would still have a White ruling class that wants to bring in cheap third world labor. And it would still be considered immoral to say that America must remain majority white.
3. If Jews are so powerful, how come they haven’t managed to EVEN BEGIN to ethnically cleanse the West Bank and Gaza? Within ten years or so, Jews will be minority in the land west of the Jordan River.
4. Yeah, “Crypto-Aryan” is White Advocate’s new handle.
1.) There are only a handful of racialist Jews. They couldn’t fill half of an Applebee’s restaurant. Hence, they are statistically irrelevant.
2.) Of those, the majority of the racialist Jews are more interested in “fighting anti-Semitism” than White racial preservation. Look how many of them (Hart, Auster, Levin, Schiller) have cut their ties with Jared Taylor.
3.) I’m genuinely not interested in Nazi fetishism, Nordicism, or arguing about the Holocaust. While it is politically expedient to avoid these topics, that’s not why I have chosen to do so.
4.) Again, I will ask you why is White Nationalism in the U.S. a joke? Why is White Nationalism so marginalized? The answer is that the vast majority of traditionalist Whites have involved in the philo-Semitic, aracial conservative movement.
5.) The Left has succeeded in pushing all sorts of fringe issues into the mainstream that were equally, if not more “dead on arrival.” They did so through an incremental process in which they advanced towards their fringe and the Right watered down its message to stay politically relevant. If we should imitate anyone, it should be winners, not losers.
6.) I favor an incremental approach, but I think Jared Taylor has a much better grasp on this than you do. Taylor avoids the Jewish Question, but he has never attacked anti-Semites. He doesn’t waste his time attacking the Neo-Nazi fringe scene. Instead, he uses the best arguments to introduce Whites to racial consciousness and an understanding of racial differences.
7.) Whites don’t care nearly as much about the Jews as you insist they do. The younger they are, the less they care.
8.) Jews subverted the conservative movement. You want us to go down the same road. It will produce the same catastrophic result.
9.) The fundamental reason Jews are so powerful in the U.S. is not because of their resources, which are vast, but because they have so little opposition. It is easier to go along with their agenda than to oppose it.
10.) You don’t have any solution to our predicament in that respect.
11.) You are advising us to give up something in exchange for nothing. We cease being anti-Semites; the Jews continue to attack us. No deal.
12.) As I stressed above, the philo-Semites NEVER go beyond Step 1, which is insisting that anti-Semites be marginalized. After they succeed in that task, they NEVER deliver on their promises.
Prozium was coming out hard against the single jewish cause, but based on this thread, I’m not sure if that’s still his position.
Follow the Israpundit link. The Jews have already weighed in on FB’s proposal.
Hunter Wallace,
I will also concede another point:
If White Americans cared about race, they would not just be opposed to “Amnesty;” they would literally threaten Civil War, with passage of an Amnesty Bill. But, since “race doesn’t exist and/or matter,” they view 200+ million Latinos in 20 years, as just adding one or two points to unemployment numbers (and hardly anything else). Most oppose, but most don’t care either; and there are more ethnocentric Hispanics and race-traitor Whites-EACH-supporting Amnesty than those of us pro-Whites opposing the bill(s).
So, it’s important that people care more. But, as White ethnocentrism is not reviving any time soon, or overnight, we need to take what we can-and start putting the Left on the defensive for a change.
I haven’t changed my position on the Single Jewish Cause. I’m just equally adamant that the JQ has to be addressed. It is an important factor in our decline, but not the only factor.
I used to think we should be open to not discussing legal immigration, until illegal immigration was dealt with; but, now I realize we must talk about both, as they reiforce each other. Americans do not want overpopulation, the destruction of the natural environment, or the death of the American Middle Class.
It’s not just about documentation. Sure, some support massive legal immigration, while opposing illegal immigration. But, their support for us is mostly nominal and lukewarm, already.
Also, opposition to massive legal immigration is only slightly smaller than opposition to illegal immigration (except for maybe Hispanics).
WA,
1.) You’re the one who brought up Lawrence Auster. I responded by pointing out his insincerity.
2.) I’m not interested in talking to the Jews. Is there anything about their behavior that indicates they are willing to debate the issue?
3.) I’ve been completely honest about my views. I don’t think Jews should be exterminated. I have only called for a different living arrangement – one that suits our racial interests.
4.) I’ve always opposed the Single Jewish Cause theory. If the Jews were vaporized tomorrow, White capitalists and liberals would still be around to oppose us.
5.) The Jews have plenty of settlements in the West Bank. Mainstream Israeli politicians routinely call for the ethnic cleansing of Arabs from Israel.
Sorry to digress; but another important strategy is to divide the Left’s coalition. We need to appeal to the environmentalists, as 1 Billion Hispanics in Continental America will not be good for the environment in any sense! And, we must appeal to the White (and probably even Black, for immigration) Working Class, on the issues of Affirmative Action/Racial Quotas and immigration.
Thereafter, we can try to split the Social Liberals from the socially conservative Hispanics.
Of course the mass of younger people don’t care about the JQ, they are too ignorant, propagandized and stupid to care about much beyond going to the neighborhood pornography store.
friedrich,
All of this discussion is theoretical. Where are your Jewish allies? Where are the Jews who are willing to work with you? Israpundit doesn’t seem impressed.
Israpundit doesn’t seem impressed.
We all know what trying to “impress” them entails and what it leads to. This is nothing new. We all know the history. We all know how it ends. They’re not a bunch of unsophisticated rubes and hicks. They’ve been playing this game for hundreds of years amongst all sorts of different peoples.
IF FB is so eager to follow Jews, he could do worse than taking the advice Paul Gottfried offers at the conclusion of this interview:
“The people who are conservative and want to be liked keep conceding ground to the other side. That is the worst thing you can do. [. . .] Don’t retreat on anything. Be as obnoxious as you can. I think it is niceness which has destroyed WASP America. They want to be nice to their enemies.”
I recall liking Levin’s book when I read it (probably 10+ years ago), but in retrospect what stands out most in my mind is Levin’s asserting that it’s acceptable for people like him him to be afraid of blacks on pragmatic grounds but “insane” for anyone to be concerned with racial preservation for its own sake.
Friedrich Braun
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.
The jewish issue was the first thing conservatives dropped in the fifties. The jews they let in then went on to compromise and then reverse the conservative message on every issue you mentioned until conservatism became the joke it is today, the discredited right wing of the zionist lobby.
If there’s anything to be gleaned from this issue and discussion, it’s one thing and one thing only: White Gentiles are the only group on Earth that are prohibited from independence, self-determination, and sovereignty. Every other group enjoys these rights. If not in practice, in theory.
Anybody who thinks that this is just an accident, or that it can be remedied simply by toadying up to and emasculating oneself before certain powerful groups and elements is either delusional or doesn’t believe that White Gentile independence, self-determination, and sovereignty is important and paramount.
In America’s Decline Revilo Oliver describes the gelding of the American right by jew money.
http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/Instauration/AmericasDecline.pdf
Jew Advocate:
If you’re making a reasonable comment, if you’re not dripping with barely disguised animus or resentment, if you attack the message not the messanger, and if you can plausibly reassure people that you don’t want to exterminate or deport your opponents — then you should be able to make a reasonable point and over time it will make inroads if not with the Jews themselves then with the White Majority.
It’s almost impossible for a white man to spend more than 30 seconds with a leftist jew without wanting to smash the jew’s teeth out. Some of this is just the way jews are. But other jews deliberately provoke their opponents to create propaganda. Either way, there’s no peaceful coexistence possible. Jews know that they can never be part of a white culture. They’re too rude, selfish, cruel, dishonest and perverse and they don’t want to change, not that I think they could. Jews are unwanted guests and they know it. They aren’t going to buy what Braun is selling because they know themselves better than he knows them.
They know it can never work.
Let me elaborate on why jews don’t want to make common cause with whites. We whites have a moral instinct, a conscience, that is in absolute opposition to the jewish way of life. Jews are naturally dishonest schemers. Most of them only care about sex, money and tribal power. The conflict between jews and whites has two sides. Whites offend jews with their white moral code. Especially regarding sex. Jews offend whites with their shameless greed and polymorphous perversity. Eventually there’s some incident that brings the conflict into the open. In the United States it was the Leo Frank case. The reaction of ordinary whites to Frank’s crime and especially their disgust at his other perverse activities revealed during the trial proved that the United States was no different than any other white country. Whites hadn’t become libertines when they crossed the Atlantic. They were still implacably hostile to typical jewish behavior.
The attacks by jewry on white majority culture in the United States escalated after the Frank case. That’s when the race replacement program began in earnest.
“I recall liking Levin’s book when I read it (probably 10+ years ago), but in retrospect what stands out most in my mind is Levin’s asserting that it’s acceptable for people like him him to be afraid of blacks on pragmatic grounds but “insane” for anyone to be concerned with racial preservation for its own sake.”
Really? Getting a direct quote would be great, or are you just talking out of your ass?
“All of this discussion is theoretical. Where are your Jewish allies? Where are the Jews who are willing to work with you? Israpundit doesn’t seem impressed.”
Dumb question. I’m not leading a movement of any sort. My idea is to try something that might work for a change, as opposed forever staying on the margins. I think AmRen had potential, but Taylor couldn’t bring himself to drop perennial losers like David Duke. Seriously, there’s a long list of problems with Duke besides his fixation on the Jews.
“Hunter Wallace
WP,
I don’t think so. I think FB was trolled over at VNN Forum and was pushed into an extreme position. Given enough time, I think he will come to his senses.”
Any rational person will come away with a dislike for VNN’s style of white nationalism and the people involved. The irrational ones are regulars who think anti-social behavior is normal and advocating genocide is a sensible strategy.
I credit FB for lasting as long as he did.