Interview: Robert Lindsay

Robert Lindsay

Robert Lindsay, the most interesting liberal in cyberspace, has done two interviews with Voice of Reason. He used to be a regular commentator on OD in 2009.

Lindsay is notable for his attempt to integrate communism, anti-racism, race realism, and White Advocacy. He is a critic of Zionist Jews and White Nationalism. His rhetorical scatter shot hits targets on both the Right and Left.

Part One:

Topics include:

  • “Liberal race realism”; the definition of racism
  • Critique of White nationalism and positive White identity
  • Immigration and its affects on demographics, the economy, and environment; urban sprawl and destruction of wilderness in California
  • The flaws of libertarianism and Capitalism; Wall Street and financial parasitism
  • Zionism, anti-Semitism vs. rational criticism of Jewish culture and political activism

Part Two:

Topics include:

  • Third Positionism; the A3P Party
  • Fascism and US pro-White politics; US Southern history
  • The bankers who financed Communism; rich socialists
  • Defining fascism; the pathologization of racism
  • A comparison of how Communist and Nazi atrocities are treated and used for political gain
  • Fascism in Israel; whether Zionism is Nationalist or Internationalist
  • Islamic Imperialism
About Hunter Wallace 12380 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. Spooky,

    Perhaps I should save you the emotional strain of exposing me and go ahead and expose myself. I fully humanize Jews. I don’t hate them. I do try to explore their behavior from a sympathetic perspective. It results in a more complete and predictive model of their behavior than crude villification could ever provide. I believe all humans of every race are deserving of my respect and God’s grace until they, as individuals, disqualify themselves.

    I do have a special love for my race and my nation, just as I do for my wife and my kids. I am committed to stewardship and protection of my nation just as much as I am to my home. That being said, I don’t hate people who are not of my race and nation any more than I hate women and children who aren’t my own. My singular objective is to restore an order in which the best among us, those most committed to our welfare, determine our nation’s destiny.

    I do believe that the Jewish people are largely victims of their elites, though I’m not inconsistent about this. I believe we’re far greater victims of our own elites right now. While no oligarchy is perfect and all of them are guilty to some extent of fleecing their flock, our own is uniquely negligent, derelict, and corrupt. I don’t begrudge the masses for being manipulated; I begrudge the manipulators. Most people are unimaginative, unintelligent, and incapable of “breaking paradigm”, seeing past the world as it’s presented to them by their elites. It’s truly not their fault.

    The fault lies with the “men” among us who see do have eyes to see and yet remain silent; or worse, eagerly participate for profit and temporal esteem.

    I don’t hold Jews in any special theological regard. I don’t care to bicker about whether Christians or non-Christians “have what it takes” to prevail in this struggle. Time will tell. I’ll gladly work with those who don’t share my religious beliefs and I’ll refrain from insulting or attacking their beliefs while doing so.

  2. Chuck,

    So the question is: Is it ok to prefer this to that. When it comes to people: is it ok to prefer him to her on the basis of biology, even if the differences are small?

    I say it’s fine.

    What would it mean to say that it’s not ok? That the person saying this does not prefer others making decisions on the basis of biology, but rather prefers them to make no decisions, or to make decisions on the basis of something that THEY prefer?

    Isn’t that what the nutzi Haddock does? He wants you to make your decisions on the basis that HE prefers. He tells you that oh no, no, no; oh no you don’t; humans are biological units, not linguistic or spiritual units; their biological constitution — and all that it implies — is the most important thing about them; so, nope, you do not get off making decisions about people on any other basis.

Comments are closed.