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.
The difference between Hunter Wallace and Alex Linder is incommensurable. I wouldn’t even put the two in the same sentence. Linder is a hysteric.
Here is a chap who appears to have taken Friedrich’s prescription to heart:
I have no more icky feelings about Jews, Hasidic or otherwise. I don’t imagine Israel as an alien, savage, dirty place anymore – and I even know where to find it on the map. I admire survivors, and Jews are survivors. The Islamists hate them? Then I love them.
I’m done being a good, soft-spoken, withering WASP. Men wearing beanies no longer turn me off. On the contrary, they make me smile – because when I see one, I know I’m not alone.
And I’m happy to recognize a brother in arms.
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/cwinecoff/2009/02/20/confessions-of-a-recovering-anti-semite/
Here is a chap who appears to have taken Friedrich’s prescription to heart:
Sounds like this fellow is following the script that the Jews have laid out for us to a T.
Decades ago it was agitating for and successfully bringing over Third World aliens in order to make themselves less conspicuous and appear less alien in the US. They replaced themselves in the precarious position of racial “Other” by importing an even more exotic, conspicuous, and alien “Other.”
Now it’s about commandeering the US and its resources, energies, empire against one of their major enemies, the “Islamists,” and forging an imagined, forced solidarity and demonizing the alien “Islamists” in order to do so.
This chap seems perfectly happy to be under total social control and cultural domination. Good for him. Ignorance is bliss after all.
Someone mentioned Scrooby-Joo has been consistent. I’m led to believe that he was once philo-Semitic for years, and then switched to anti-Semitic. Especially strange considering his ancestry.
I don’t believe Braun has stated he wants to assimilate Jews, rather work with them politically.
Scrooby-Joo on the other hand actually believes someone can be half or quarter Jewish and they’re white, like Sarkozy. Yet, people are more outraged at Braun than Scrooby. Showing they are far more concerned with anti-Semitism than racial preservation.
From the brief time I’ve been here I’ve noticed that it’s very cliquish, how feminine.
Jews stirring up war in Russia with a false-flag ‘terrorist” attack?
Honestly I never understood why some former racialist whites became philo-Semitic or anti-racist until I was exposed to VNN and its supporters. I now understand how otherwise good white people turn against their own. There is such a negative association that one is repulsed.
Hunter Wallace in contrast is a positive force for the movement.
Scrooby Scrooby Jew!
White nationalists don’t consider Jews politically to be white. Why would they accept part Jews then? If a Jew decides that they hate Jews, are they considered politically white because biologically they appear white.
While white nationalists are free to define race however they like for their own purposes, it is my position that Jews are a nationality and ethnicity – not a race analogous to Yellows, Blacks etc. Most Jews are biological Caucasoids. I don’t believe in a spiritual race. I believe in race is material.
Linder has stated explicitly and repeatedly that he is serious about killing all Jews. Why would a man who is consistently ill-tempered and foul-mouthed, and so enthusiastically anti-Jewish, be bluffing on that subject? He isn’t even nice to his own people. Power corrupts, and I think we all know what would happen if he had it.
Caucasoid, as in resembling Caucasians, isn’t synonymous with White in my usage. Otherwise, you would be including North Africans, Middle Easterners, West Asians and other mixed people.
The traditional usage of White is synonymous with European, and having a Northern European ideal.
Ezra Pound on Jewish usurers:
I don’t mean to turn this into an HBD thread. I agree there is a north-west divide in europe. There is also an east-west divide. At the bottom of the argument, you’ll find that even though there are differences in pigmentation and bone structure, most Caucasoids are genetically similar.
Politically speaking, agree with them or not, American law and Confederate law included Jews. There was immigration restriction based on quotas, but the ones who were here weren’t considered colored. If wns disagree, then fine. Jews don’t need affiliation with WN to be racist.
Prozium is different though. He’s not just advocating kicking Jews out of the WN movement, but out of the entire country. That’s extreme.
Considering Jews have their own ethnostate as well as other countries that would take them, I hear Brazil is quaint, I don’t think excluding Jews from citizenship is that extreme. Israel excludes us.
First of all, America is now an empire. When America became an empire instead of an east coast state, it made racial sameness less likely. Israel is smaller than a state in America.
You are correct that Israel biases its immigration policy towards Jews. But there are Arab citizens and could be European citizens.
You’d be suprised to find that law of return legislation also exists in many european countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_return
So yeah, Jews have a big advantage, but there are non-Jewish citizens. And there are converted Jews.
Meir Kahane is the most extreme Zionist. Even he allowed Arabs to stay under his platform, but the Arabs had to agree to live under Jewish law and not be involved in politics.
Do you advocate that for Jews?
Ban Jews and non-whites from politics and law? It would be an improvement.
But Jews and Arabs are genetic brothers. It’s like Swedes and Norwegians living together.
You could point out that Russia is an empire too. And I’ll point out that Russians are not ethnically homogeneous.
Jews and Arabs are both Caucasoids but they aren’t equal. Even from a middle eastern perspective, Jews have a more northern origin than Arabs.
Jews also have mixed with Europeans, on the maternal side, to a larger extent.
So Jews are really like a hybrid population.
And I’ll point out that Russians are not ethnically homogeneous.
Yes, they are. “Russian” refers to the Slavic peoples from the area once called Great Russia around Moscow. Kazakhs, Tatars, Grouzhins, Chechens, etc are not Russian.
Jews and Arabs are both Caucasoids but they aren’t equal.
“Caucasoid” is a flimsy term from a genetic/anthropological standpoint – Whites and Semites have always been distinct peoples but both are called “Caucasoid”, how much sense does that make? At best this describes a certain similarity in phenotype.
But yes, Jews and Arabs share Semitic origins long since lost in the mists of time.
Jews also have mixed with Europeans, on the maternal side, to a larger extent.
Almost all of the people we call Jews have some European ancestry thanks to their long history of diaspora and living in European nations. Just like almost all of the people we call Arabs have some Black African ancestry thanks to their importation of millions of Negroes into the Middle East and North Africa for slave labor during the glory days of Islam.
North russians are mixed with mongol blood. The ones that think they are “pure slavs.”
North russians are mixed with mongol blood. The ones that think they are “pure slavs.”
No, they aren’t. Genetics has put an end to that nonsense.
http://nitro.biosci.arizona.edu/courses/EEB195-2007/Lecture08/pics/W-MAP.GIF
Observe on this map that the dominant y-dna haplogroup in Mongolia is C, and that ~0% of Russians have that same haplotype. In fact there is hardly any commonality of y-dna lineages at all between the two groups. The supposed Mongol ancestry would have come from male conquerers, yes? So why doesn’t it show up at all?
The majority of Russians are r1a, r1b, n, or i, all of which are y-dna lineages originating in western Eurasia. To the extent that there are non-white lineages in Russia, they come from e3b and j which crept up from North Africa as early as the Neolithic period.
The fact is that Mongols, far spread though they were, tended to stick to themselves when it came to breeding. Culturally, they didn’t associate with their subjects, though they were perfectly comfortable taxing and raiding them.
Genetic testing confirms that Ashkenazis are genetically distinct from Europeans and that there has been very little mixing between them and Europeans. I don’t know what Iceman is talking about.
The HBDers, especially the Jews and mischlings in their ranks, like to pretend Jews are just another Southern European branch, and if Jews aren’t white then neither on Southern Euros. When it’s clear that although Jews do have Southern European admixture, they are still distinct because of their Semitic origin.
Mark
I don’t believe Braun has stated he wants to assimilate Jews, rather work with them politically.
Scrooby-Joo on the other hand actually believes someone can be half or quarter Jewish and they’re white, like Sarkozy. Yet, people are more outraged at Braun than Scrooby. Showing they are far more concerned with anti-Semitism than racial preservation.
Braun wants us to give up the goal of a jew-free white nationalist state. Scrooby favors expulsion of the jews, he just counts some jews as white. In Braun’s white state millions of full blooded jews would still be present, eating away at the foundations of society, as well as all the half and quarter jews. In Scrooby’s white state, assuming your description of his view is correct, there would be only the partially white jews. A far less threatening group, especially if judaism were banned and half jews were forbidden from mating with each other as they were in National Socialist Germany.
That’s why I have less objection to Scrooby than I do to Braun.
But I do have objections to Scrooby’s argument. Since jewish law recognizes half jews as jews I would expel them just to be on the safe side. Quarter jews and less are negotiable.
Iceman
First of all, America is now an empire. When America became an empire instead of an east coast state, it made racial sameness less likely. Israel is smaller than a state in America.
If a white nationalist state is ever established in North America the neocon empire will be the first thing to go.
Meir Kahane is the most extreme Zionist. Even he allowed Arabs to stay under his platform, but the Arabs had to agree to live under Jewish law and not be involved in politics.
Do you advocate that for Jews?
Containment might work with negroes, it doesn’t work with jews. In fact, if you have jews it’s almost impossible to contain negroes. See South Africa, the United States, Canada…
I said there was some mixing. I didn’t say they were totally absorbed. They mix, and then marry other jews, then mix, then marry other Jews in intervals. The founding populations mixed and then stopped mixing and then started again on and off.
The maternal dna is clearly mixed with euros. The male y chromosome is pretty strongly Jewish.
Even the original Jews, however, were distinct from Arabs. Arabs are about as pure Mediterranean as you can get.
The Russian thing is totally provable. I could link you to Dienekes but I don’t feel like actually looking for it. If Friedrich ridicules Jewish Nazis, then Russian Nazis are just as retarded.
Is Dinekes the best you have? I lol’d.
http://dienekes.50webs.com/blog/archives/000619.html
That proves that russians are part mongoloid. There are better articles that prove that southern russians are pure slavs, but northern russians are not. This article doesn’t distinguish.
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showpost.php?p=7998&postcount=102
Here is a good post about Jews. I agree with what it says, and it adds a bit on top of what I said. This guy is above my level. I admit that. But I’m improving
http://www.isteve.com/2003_QA_Jon_Entine_on_Jewish_Genes.htm
Here is an article from jon entine, the writer who wrote the book “taboo” about black athletes. He was the man who got me into HBD.
Wait until prozium okay’s my post. I’m throwing some links at you to back me up.
“they are still distinct because of their Semitic origin.”
ummmm all Caucasoids eventually go back to north africa. The Mediterranean stock was the original stock from which all evolution progressed. Southern euros and middle easterners overlap. It’s just that southern europeans are mixed with other Europeans. Southern europeans are the bridge between the middle east and europe, and the bridge is smaller than WN thinks it is.
I feel like I’m spamming, but I’m responding to points others are making.
Jews are genetically distinct from Europeans:
http://www.white-history.com/refuting_rm/2.html
Jews now have to power to get their way in pretty much every white society on any issue that matters to them. That is real power.
Powerless Friedrich Braun comes to the Jews and says, “We white nationalists oppose your agenda and interests, but we will no longer say nasty things about you, and we will let you have a say in our organizations, if you share some of your power with us.”
How could one expect anything good from that? The dragon guarding his horde of treasure might raise one eyelid half-way at such a proposition, but he is hardly going to stir, much less act. After all, what’s in it for him? At the very most, the Jews might send in an infiltrator or two, just to make sure that the WNs never gain any real power.
What would get the attention of the Jews? If we White Nationalists were able to make headway, to gain real power, on our own, despite the Jews. Then and only then might the Jews be willing to cut a deal with us. But they will not deal with us when we have no power. And when we have real power, we might not need to deal with them.
Whatever happens in the end, though, the first steps are clear: we have to gain real power, drawn from our own people by our own efforts.
I’m not sure why Greg Johnson is arguing with me as I don’t have a problem with T.O.Q.’s approach. I have yet to see Dr. Johnson’s publish articles in T.O.Q on the following topics 1.) Holocaust Revisionism; 2.) pro-National Socialism/pro-Hitler or W.W. II Revisionism; 3.) anti-Zionism. Now, T.O.Q. does publish MacDonald and I’m glad that it does, but if T.O.Q. were to enter practical politics, I’d ditch any references to the J.Q. altogether. The returns are too low. Does Dr. Johnson disagree? I don’t believe that Dr. Johnson and I are that far apart. Perhaps not at all.
RE the editorial policy of TOQ: no we do not deal with holocaust revisionism, although we support the rights of revisionists to free speech; we quite often publish more general revisionism on WW II; we are not a National Socialist journal, but we do publish authors who consider themselves National Socialists, and we will not disavow a truth just because Hitler also believed in it; we definitely deal with the Jewish Question, but under my editorship, TOQ is not specifically anti-Zionist. As I have said before, I would be the biggest Zionist in the world if Jews would actually live in Israel and cease to meddle in the affairs of white nations.
My views of practical politics are quite another matter, however. And yes, in terms of practical politics, I do believe we differ.
If I were putting forth a political program, it would be as explicit on the JQ as the NSDAP’s program: Jews cannot be citizens of a white ethnostate. That does not mean, of course, that anti-Semitism would be the centerpiece of every political struggle and campaign. No, one gains power by promising people prosperity, security, and peace, not by talking about the Jews per se (although they cannot be left out of a discussion of the threats to prosperity, security, and peace). Hitler himself did not talk much about the Jews on the campaign trail either. But he was very clear about the absolute necessity of breaking their power over Germany’s destiny.
My ultimate goal is the salvation of my race worldwide. My more specific political goal is a Jew-free, whites-only ethnostate in North America. As I see it, the things you propose can only hinder those aims.
But I have a practical proposal that will eliminate the conflict between us for the time being: let us agree to revisit the question of a Jewish alliance when we have gained enough political power from our own people, by our own efforts, to make the Jews want to come to the table. In the meantime, let’s do what we can to build that political power.
Mr. Bauer, do you know any White Nationalists face to face in your area? There is no criticism implied in this question. I know for a fact that many of us have no personal contacts with fellow WNs. I ask this because the first step we can take toward actual political power is to have face to face meetings with other nationalists in our own communities. I will do all I can to put you in touch with people in your area if you are interested. Please contact me through TOQ Online.
I am sorry, I meant “Mr. Braun” in my last post.
Friedrich Braun, my links have still not been approved. There is debate over the maternal origin of Ashkenazi Jews but not the paternal origin. Some scientists disagree with your source, other agree. Nobody disagrees about the fatherline.
When you say “distinguished,” you do realize that family members can be distinguished. That Chinese and Japanese can be distinguished. That different types of blacks can be distinguished. So to say that Jews can be distinguished from Arabs or Europeans, or to say that Jews can be distinguished from each other (Ashkenazi and Sephardic) no way implies that Jews are outside of the biological spectrum of what fundamentally makes someone genetically a member of a race. Not to mention, you can distinguish European NATIONALITIES from each other, northern from southern europeans, and eastern from western.
My point is that proving Jews are not wholly European or even very little European doesn’t mean they aren’t genetically similar to Europeans. You can distinguish even family members, but that doesn’t make them entirely separate races, in a parallel sense to Blacks and Whites.
“330Iceman
Even the original Jews, however, were distinct from Arabs. Arabs are about as pure Mediterranean as you can get.”
That’s a peculiar statement, more damning to Mediterraneans than anything. Especially considering that modern Arabs have significant sub-Saharan African admixture.
LOL
It isn’t that black and white. Not all Arabs are heavily mixed with negroids. Most are not.
Mr. Johnson, you say you want to exclude all Jews from our white ethnostate, which I agree with on racial grounds alone. However, to what degree of Jewish blood do you also exclude from citizenship?
“Sub-Saharan Africa L lineages in Saudi Arabia account for 10% of the total. ?2 analyses showed that there is not significant regional differentiation in this Country. However, there is significant heterogeneity (p < 0.001) when all the Arabian Peninsula countries are compared. This is mainly due to the comparatively high frequency of sub-Saharan lineages in Yemen (38%) compared to Oman-Qatar (16%) and to Saudi Arabia-UAE (10%). Most probably, the higher frequencies shown in southern countries reflect their greater proximity to Africa, separated only by the Bab al Mandab strait.
Attending to the most probable geographic origin of the sub-Saharan Africa lineages in Saudi Arabia, 33 (61%) have matches with East Africa, 7 (13%) with Central or West Africa whereas the rest 14 (26%) have not yet been found in Africa. Nevertheless, half of them belong to haplogroups with Western Africa origin and the other half to haplogroups with eastern Africa adscription [35,30]. It is supposed that the bulk of these African lineages reached the area as consequence of slave trade, but more ancient historic contacts with northeast Africa are also well documented.”
I don’t know about you, but that’s significant admixture to me.
From my conversations with Arabs, they reject being called white or associated with Europeans. They don’t really have a concept of race, only ethnicity and religion.
“What do you think of heuristic biases and the nucleus accumbens?”
I think you’re a CRYPTO-JEW, THAT’S WHAT! Go back to Senckenberganlage 26 and leave me atop my mountain, struggling to understand why Walter Mitty has to leave so many comments on one thread.
For those OD readers who somehow believe that Friedrich Braun’s “recently acquired” views on the inadvisability of harping on about the JQ are diametrically opposed to those of his putative former stance, here is FB’s position as of mid – 2005 :
“It’s one thing to say that the Nazi – cultism is unhelpful to our cause and that “blame-the-Jews-for-everything” mentality that finds a Jew under every bed is not going to help us much in solving our ultimate problems. This is true. Most of us here would agree with that”.
http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/why_hitler_hated_jews/#c86054
BTW, Auster picked up this post and one of Hunter’s posts.
It looks as if a couple of rats scurried over to Auster to report gleefully on what they think is HW’s about-face on the JQ. Scumbags.
I don’t support his change on the JQ, a reasoned approach is best. I do understand why though, a strong negative stimulus creates a negative association which one wants to avoid. HW’s recent change is another example of why the lunatic fringe is not a positive force in our movement.
Theme song. 🙂 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xp9852hq0W0
For the record, I am reconsidering my stance on the Jewish Question. I’ve associated myself with some destructive people. I’ve shown terrible judgement in promoting Jim Giles. I have been unfairly harsh on some people and extremely tolerant of others.
But … the facts of the matter haven’t changed. What is weighing more heavily on me is my detached way of considering things. I am very much an aloof, egghead intellectual type. Unlike normal people, I don’t have strong emotional reactons to words. This can be both an asset and a burden.
I’m trying to wrap my mind around morality and the Jewish Question. Can the Jewish Question be solved in a moral, humane way, or does a solution require the sociopathy that Giles and Linder advocate? Does shedding light on the Jewish Question give comfort to exterminationist anti-Semites? Does calling myself an anti-Semite get me lumped in people like Giles and Linder?
Look at it this way: my position on the Jewish Question would be the Earth; factoring in moral considerations regarding exterminationist anti-Semites is like the moon. It is pulling at my core beliefs and making waves, but it hasn’t knocked them completely out of orbit.
Expect a lot of posts on ethics and morality.
Why was Trainspotter allowed to continue posting just to attack me in a thread that was closed? If you’re going to allow him to do that then at least let me defend myself. Do you have something against me, HW? Because I’ve always supported you.
I’ve shown terrible judgement in promoting Jim Giles. I have been unfairly harsh on some people and extremely tolerant of others.
To be fair none of us really knew Jim Giles that well, but he has proven himself to be unstable and abusive. You can only form an opinion based on evidence that is presented. Linder on the other hand you knew and defended for a long time, and as I suspected it took a personal incident to wake you up to the reality. Well, I’m glad it happened at least because now you have a better perspective. In contrast a lot of people here obviously are tone deaf as you put it.
He sent me an email demanding that he be allowed to respond to your last post.