About Hunter Wallace 12380 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

50 Comments

  1. Hilarious, Silver. Fuck you too. Have no idea know what I ever did to draw your ire.

    No one thing in particular. It’s just been accumulation of slights, like skipping right past substantive points I’ve made because they threaten the integrity of the “perfect case” for WN (or against Jews) that WNs love to believe themselves in possession of.

    You want swap insults? Fine. Let’s get it out of the way. A lot credible people in these communities regard you as slithering vermin. Maybe they’re right.

    That’s not news to me. I’ve always known that. The really pertinent fact about that is that it’s proof positive of just how far gone so many WNs are. I’ve made this request on numerous occasions before and I’ll make it again here: if you think I’m so FOS then extrapolate the policy implications of statements I’ve made and tell me whether the result is pro-white or anti-white, whether the prospects of one day achieving your Jew-free white ethnostate would be enhanced or diminished. It’s a simple request. And if the conclusion one draws from that exercise is that is that I’m an enemy I would really have to wonder whether even God in heaven Himself could help you.

    Now give me something to work with. Otherwise, I am going to ignore you. IR Regarding alliances, I cited several facts that make alliances with Islam problematic. Why am I wrong? If you reply, I’ll answer if I don’t feel your reply is baiting. You already put words in my mouth with your first reply, so I’ll keep my expectations as low as possible.

    I don’t mind discussing this, but I really have to run right now. I just wanted to reply quickly to ward off your suspicions about ‘bating.’ Very briefly, it’s a case of age old divide and conquer. You want your enemies as divided against each other as possible. The WN approach seems to be to unite as much of the world in furious opposition to you as can be done. I doubt a more boneheaded strategy has ever existed. If Sun-Tzu were reading he’d be so upset he’d have your guts for garters. Particulars, especially with respect to Islam, will have to wait to next posting.

  2. Brutus wrote: “Jews will dominate for as long as Christianity exists. Liberalism and anti-racism are the children of Christianity; both are directly derived from it. It is also obvious that the character Jesus is in fact a repressed homosexual, if not an actual practicing one, in the pages of the New Testament. Many of the early Christians were simply a sect of homosexuals, practicing homosexual orgies in tribute to Jesus. Judas Iscariot was a scorned ‘bottom’ who got mad at Jesus for taking another apostle to bed after The Last Supper, instead of him. ‘He is risen’ is a reference to…(Okay, I made up that last part, but the rest is true.)”

    I thought I agreed with most of Brutus’ comments, ideas and positions before, but this blasphemy under his name seems to prove he is one of the worst enemies of our people, as anti-Christian and anti-white as any Talmudist. Anti-Christianity is in fact anti-whiteness — including anti-“Southron” whiteness!

    The Babel of universalist, false Christianity and the slave-based, money religion of Secularism would destroy us all. If the Lord does not build the house of “Dixie” they labour in vain that build it.

  3. What is even the policy here on the JQ anyway?

    There is no policy here. This place is a free for all.

    I have no use for the Jews in a free Southland.

  5. Brutus – You are either a dog, returning to its vomit, or an idiot for those blasphemous and uncharitable remarks, that neither show any grasp of history, religion, or (supposedly) your own race’s perception of the Lord Jesus Christ.

    I’m trusting you are an idiot savant, who knows how to use computers, but has the intellectual IQ equivalent of a mentally-retarded moron… i.e., your standard Black American Male.

    And in that, I’m being generous.

  6. “There are a great many aspects, premises, and doctrines of Christianity that are simply detrimental to our race.”

    Name them. Your complete ignorance of Christianity will probably prove that you don’t know sh*t from shinola, and are confusing perversions of the Law/Gospel of God, with reality.

    It’s amazing that you could make such a narrow-minded statement, without corroboration, and then say that WE who are Christ’s, are the ones at fault….

  7. “Many whites are very fearful of being left isolated and friendless if they take the white side. The unremitting world-hating hostility from your side in their eyes very much threatens to leave them friendless and isolated so they keep their distance from you, in many cases despite privately believing you’re onto something.”

    That is both cowardly and (dare I say it?) implicitly anti-white, because it is also ‘anti-Ecumene’- or against the moral order that once was the norm in Christendom. I currently am reading a book that takes place during the era of Charlemagne, written in the 19th Century. The cameraderie, racial awareness, masculine honor, and protection of women (all basically White, Eurocentric, Christian traits of White Men, prior to the Gramscian attack on the institutions, and the hedonistic 1960’s) of the knights as they face the Muslim Saracen foe (shades of the present!) are palpable.
    In this book, one would rather die for one’s kinsman, than live among the ‘Xenos.’ That’s their operational credo. And it was clearly made flesh, at the Battles of Tours in 732, and Roncevalles as well, in our own [common] history.

    One does not need to wonder where this ‘kinist’ racial idea comes from (an example, slightly O.T.) J.C. said that identical idea in the Gospels, in fact- “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” [ John 15:13] Of course, as we have drifted away from the knowledge and implementation of that knowledge of what/Who the Ultimate laying down of one’s life means (pardon me for quoting Gill here): ” for he [Christ] not only came down from heaven, and laid aside his glory and royal majesty, but he laid down his life; not his gold and silver, and the riches of this world, which were all his, but his life; than which, nothing is dearer to a man, is himself, his all: and besides, Christ’s life was not a common one, it was not the life of an innocent person only, or the life of a mere man, but of a man in union with the Son of God…” we have cheapened our own ethnic and racial solidarity.

    Because we have cheapened our own ethnic and racial solidarity, (our Kinist stances) we don’t wish to go against the Empire redevivus- that is the state of modern Multicultural Moloch Man, worshiping a Nigger as King. Amazingly enough, that cowardice is exactly what the early Christians had to face, in light of THEIR “Obamanation unto the Lord” in the person of Nero, Vespasian, et al. And God judged them for their wishy-washyness:

    “So, because you are lukewarm–neither hot nor cold–I am about to spit you out of my mouth.” [ Rev. 3;16, NIV]

    Nothing left of their lives, but to be God’s spit. What a waste. Frankly, don’t think our own unwillingness to die for our brethren (racial, cultural) will not be judged as severely as either the examples of cowards in the O.T., or our own ancestors in Megala Europa.

  8. Liberalism and anti-racism are the children of Christianity; both are directly derived from it.

    If they are then so are the whole concepts of conservatism and “whiteness.”

    Our pagan ancestors would have blood eagled a Mexican-‘White’ like that Chechar faggot on sight….

  9. “The way you define it, I believe you mean Christendom, which is almost completely defunct in the Europe of today. Good luck reviving that corpse.”

    Apu- (how rightly I named you!) the Body of Christ is not, and never will be, a corpse. It is the Theanthropic Body of Christ, the Church. It may be small, but only in this time, and this locality. It is eternal, and will endure forever.

  10. “Western Civilization” has nothing to do with democracy or free markets and the like. It is simply the culture of European Christian people–and *only* European Christian people–writ large. We need to reclaim this important concept from our neocon globalist enemies: Western civilization = white [Christian] civilization, it’s that simple.”

    Jeppo, thanks for the link, the post, and this final comment; with my added delimiter in [ ] brackets.

  11. “John K – in the coming White Empire – I will be in charge of Die Jude.” – Denise

    Hallelujah! With Denise in charge, it would be a ‘kosher’ Nirvana, devoid of all Deicides.

    I give you Brutus, as well, my diminutive Kommissar! Do with him as thou wilt.

  12. Cam ust be reading this post! Here’s his comment on all the BS going on in these comments, this week:

    “In his autobiography, the marvelous humorist and post-Civil War chronicler of the Southern people Irwin Cobb stated that he thought the teachings of the New Testament were sublime but undoubtedly a very impractical guide for living in this very hard, practical world. Minus the admiration for the sublime teaching of the New Testament, Cobb’s opinion of Christ’s teachings is the opinion of the white nationalists who have been advocating more democracy and more secularized pragmatism as a solution to white genocide. They have refused to come to terms with the satanic nature of liberalism because then they would have to acknowledge that Satan’s divine antagonist, Jesus Christ, is the only genuinely pragmatic answer to the seemingly hopeless plight of the white nations.

    “I’m not interested in metaphysical bull—,” the white nationalist intones. Maybe you should be, because that is what distinguishes the true white man from the colored barbarian: he has a passion for the “impractical” things of the spirit while the colored tribesmen seek the fleshpots of Egypt. I think the white nationalists’ obsession with the Jew as the only enemy of the white race, while they often ignore the white, post-Christian liberal, stems from their desire to have one easily identifiable material symbol of the enemy. But that ignores the reality that is staring us in the face: most Jews are liberals, but not all liberals are Jews.

    It is liberalism, the liberalism of Rousseau, of Voltaire, of Descartes, and a whole legion of anti-Christian Christians, as well as the Jews, against whom we are fighting. The key element in liberalism is a hatred of Christ and those who believe in Christ. The reason the white nationalists are always seeking for some kind of compromise with the democratic liberals is because they are of the same opinion as the liberals regarding the central event of history. They believe that Christ be not risen. And if you don’t believe Christ rose from the dead, you can never march into a European future while holding on to the threads of the past, because the past, in Europe, belongs to those who believed in Christ.

    The liberals are simply more consistent than the white nationalists. Since Christ be not risen, the white Europeans have perpetuated a falsehood on mankind. They don’t deserve to live in the future. So say the liberals. The white nationalists agree that Christ be not risen, but they want to be forgiven for the Christianity of their ancestors and accepted in Babylon on the basis of their intelligent genes. Hence their unwillingness to give up on democracy. They are always hoping that they can win the liberals over by intelligent pleading.”

    http://cambriawillnotyield.wordpress.com/2013/06/29/the-return-home/

  13. I still am not getting the animosity toward a practical, limited alliance with Iran and other Islamic powers. We have common enemies in Zionism, American pop culture, and materialism. Amicable relations between White advocates and Muslims needn’t entail support for Muslim settler-colonialism here; even if we “get” nothing from them, we have much to gain simply by reminding conservative Whites that there are bigger fish to fry, and discouraging the portrayal of Iran et al. as our enemies. “Why attack conservative Muslim countries when the Marxists are at home?” As long as they don’t come here, they do us little harm.

    Our pagan ancestors would have blood eagled a Mexican-’White’ like that Chechar f_ggot on sight….

    Rich, my friend, rich. Of course, our Christian ancestors would have burned the ignominious blasphemer on the stake, so problem solved either way.

  16. I answered this (this is for you too Silver). Here is one reason. Suppose WNists in the future achieve success to the point where Iran would consider a meaningful mutual alliance with American or Euro nationalists. Islam is not monolithic. As soon as WNists align with Shia Islam, they will give Sunni Islam more reasons to hate us. Do you think siding with their eternal enemies will make Sunni Muslims more inclined to vacate Europe and white nations or less? It’s also not clear AT ALL what the many people who yammer about Iran expect to get out of any future arrangement. If it it’s not money, a lot of it, then I see no point. What benefit to whites do you foresee?

  17. Reply to the usual strawman arguments about “supernatural” Jews.

    Jews exist as a scattered mercantile minority. To maintain tribal cohesion in that context they developed a culture where they bring their kids up to believe the whole world wants to kill them. This puts them into a permanent state of war with everyone and leads them to try and weaken the majority population of whatever country they’re living in from the inside as – in their mind – an act of pre-emptive self-defence.

    That’s the default motive.

    They achieve this weakening through a) destroying the host’s ethnic cohesion, whether through importing slaves, opening the gates to invaders or promoting mass immigration and b) destroying the host’s cultural cohesion, basically by taking every piece of the culture which 95% of the host population agrees with and then promoting the opposite until the society is split 50/50 e.g. gay marriage.

    The end-result in theory is a population too divided to be a threat to the Jews. In reality a nation or civilization that divided will start to collapse and decay so most Jews will end up moving to the next tallest poppy where they’ll repeat the process. They’ve already started doing it in places like Japan.

    There’s nothing strange or supernatural about any of it. It’s all a result of their twisted tribal cohesion strategy.

    They main reason they succeed, apart from the ethnic nepotism that follows from the group cohesion, is at the beginning of the process they are too few to be considered a threat. Once they’ve stealthed their way into a position of institutional power they use that power to maintain the position but initially it is simply they are too few to be considered a threat.

    That’s the opportunity.

    Nothing supernatural about it.

  18. Test, I think you’ve actually described the Jewish extremist pretty well.
    ‘
    I just don’t think broad brushes should be used to pain Jews in general or the argument should be made that Jews are more important than the other causes.

  19. If you spent less time studying them, yammering about awesome they are, and more time taking political action like they do, you might get somewhere.

    Intellectuals writing essays are of no political use, because only other intellectuals that also write the same kinds of essays are interested in their work. 99% of the White race just aren’t interested.

    The guys at the May Day protest showed you the way. Get in front of anti-White demonstrations and disrupt them.

    No anti-Whites on our streets!

  21. Metal Gear
    “Test, I think you’ve actually described the Jewish extremist pretty well. I just don’t think broad brushes should be used to pain Jews in general or the argument should be made that Jews are more important than the other causes.”

    I agree that the *active* element is probably quite small. The caveat to that is the rest will defend the active element if they’re attacked – so in the end they act as a single group even if it doesn’t start that way.

    I also agree it is only one element but it can’t be ignored (although you can pretend to ignore it for tactical reasons depending on the context.)

  22. “Christians worship a Jewish God”. Utter nonsense! Christ was Jewish biologically because his mother Mary was descended from Judah, but the Jews rejected Jesus Christ and his teachings and by doing so, they rejected Moses and the prophets. They accepted the traditions of the elders, later called the Talmud, but we Christians rejected the Mosaic law, (and by extension, the elders tradition’s) at the Jerusalem council mentioned in Acts 15. Jesus was Jewish because he was descended from Judah through his mother the BVM, but his religion wasn’t the Old Covenant or the Talmud, so he wasn’t “Jewish” in that sense of the word, so it’s a lie we worship a “Jewish” God.

    “Liberalism and anti-racism are the children of Christianity” is a half-truth. Both of these are the products of infidels who turned their backs on true, historical Christianity. Liberalism came out of the Enlightenment, which was Anti-Christian, and the Enlightenment came out of the Protestant reaction to the Catholic Counter-Reformation. The leaders came from Catholic, Protestant, and Jewish backgrounds, so the blame for this can be shared by all.

    The “anti-racism” charge is also hooey. Under the Old Covenant, several ethnic groups were discriminated against because of their behaviors. The Canaanites, the Moabites, the Ammonites, and the Amalekites were not to be socialized with and some were to be wiped off the face of the earth. And the New Covenant doesn’t teach racial equality either. All it says is that people of all races can become Christians (Acts 8, 10 and 15, Gal.3:26-29). And racial and cultural differences were recognized in the early church. Acts 6:1 tells us that the office of the deacon was set up because the Greek Hebrew widows were being neglected in the daily administration of food. Notice they didn’t shame them (the Hebrew speaking Jews) because of this. They just appointed Hellenistic Jews to take care of the matter, instead of shoving “anti-racism” down the throats of the Hebrew speakers.

    The charge of sodomy as a practice among early Christians is totally baseless. Sodomy is condemned in many New Testament passages, especially Rom 1:18-32.

  23. But I also think the Jewish question is a money making racket. It’s not just a cultural thing.

    Jewish organizations make profit off of the fear they instill in lower level Jews about the next holocaust.

  24. >Ignorant
    >Retarded
    >Troll

    The only possibilities for a person who speaks in terms of super-natural Jews.

  25. “If you spent less time studying them, yammering about awesome they are, and more time taking political action like they do, you might get somewhere.”

    You expose yourselves when you unconsciously blow-hard in the middle of your strawman argument.

    However to the point.

    Since finalizing their coup Jews have two advantages, institutional power and much more importantly they have used that institutional power (schools, media etc) to gain the moral high ground. Most pro-whites aren’t scared of Jews. They’re scared of ostracism from their kith and kin and that potential ostracism is a consequence of the moral high ground. White people aren’t defending their borders because being anti-immigration makes you a bad person to enough White people to make group defence difficult to impossible.

    The battle therefore is over retaking the moral high ground.

    One part of that battle is providing people with a plausible motive why Jews are a threat i.e. that as long as Jews retain their eternal victim culture they will always automatically seek to weaken the host from the inside.

  26. I’ve seen Jews who are really brainwashed and really believe it. For some reason bringing this up seems to anger white nationalists, but I am of eastern european and partial Jewish ancestry. And I knew my Jewish ancestor. The one family member who was raised Jewish indeed had the “everyone was out to get me” mentality. It wasn’t intentional, because she did intermarry. But you could tell someone raised her that way.

    Even though I am related to a Jew who fits the profile, I still think many Jews don’t.

  27. Metal Gear
    “I still think many Jews don’t.”

    I don’t doubt it. However I think the situation is like a town containing a large extended family who are very close and say two of them like to cause trouble. The rest of the family might be fine in themselves but if the people in the town try to deal with the two who cause trouble then the whole family joins in to defend them.

  31. I’m not sure what it says, but it says something when supporting the allies in WWII meets with collective condemnation (as if any of you shut-ins have moral authority)…… While calling Jesus ‘gay’ is seen as relatively reasonable by comparison. Apuleius’ post was a response to Christians being called proto-fags….. And then he is tut-tutted by LLD for potentially offending Germans. Unreal. The fact that I even know this corner of the internet exists troubles me.

  32. test says:
    June 29, 2013 at 4:22 pm

    “You expose yourselves when you unconsciously blow-hard in the middle of your strawman argument.”

    Not a straw man at all. You have listed all the ways Jews have taken countries from White men, just by virtue of them being Jews.

    Now if I went to a Pro White website and heard someone reel off as much information about White people, as you just did about Jews, I would be pleasantly surprised.

  33. June 29, 2013 at 5:39 pm
    PWJ,

    Fuck off troll. He didn’t say that.

    No-Man,

    Your defense of the allies is tiresome and makes no sense except maybe to you due to your German-phobia. The allies, the “victors,” have imposed liberalism at every turn. You know this. Death to the allied leadership if anyone ever invents a time machine!

  34. PWJ
    “just by virtue of them being Jews.”

    You’re doing it again – just can’t help yourself.

    I gave the specific reasons:
    1) Their eternal victim culture which generates great group cohesion at the cost of extreme paranoia of and extreme hostility towards non-Jews.
    2) Small numbers so they’re not initially seen as a threat.

    That’s it. No superpowers.

  35. test says:
    June 29, 2013 at 5:50 pm
    “I gave the specific reasons:
    1) Their eternal victim culture which generates great group cohesion at the cost of extreme paranoia of and extreme hostility towards non-Jews.
    2) Small numbers so they’re not initially seen as a threat.”

    Again no work/activism involved for Jews to take over. Just the magic effect of their culture, right?

    This is why I prefer Southern Nationalism to WN in general. Southerners have something to talk about other than Jews. They have a deep history and culture they can talk about intelligently. WN only have Jews in common.

  36. The south worships negros in sports and Jews.

    The South had segregation in sports and society for as long as it could, until we were forced to integrate by Yankees at gunpoint.

  37. Dixie would allow Jews

    Only if Jews supported Dixie, which is doubtful.

    Personally, I will reconsider my position on Jews when they found a significant organization that advocates for White racial and cultural preservation, at least as much as they fight for themselves. I doubt that time will come.

  38. I’m not sure what it says, but it says something when supporting the allies in WWII meets with collective condemnation . . ..

    It really says something when liberalism’s greatest triumph is defended.

    While calling Jesus ‘gay’ is seen as relatively reasonable by comparison.

    Don’t put words in my mouth. I didn’t see the original post calling Jesus gay and, since there is no tendency among Southron nationalists to call Jesus gay, I see no particular reason to comment on it.

  39. Brutus, the “Christian” sects that you mentioned that were sodomites were not a part of the mainstream church. They were gnostic heresies that the true church condemned in no uncertain terms. One only has to read the Early Church Fathers to know this is true.

  40. Most Southrons are of British stock, while most (or at least, many) New Englanders are southern or eastern European. Both white, but different types of whites.

    Subracial differences are real, and significant. WNs typically hate to even discuss it, as much as Jews hate to talk about racial differences. There are some eerie parallels when you start those types of discussions, which, unless there are explicit Nordicists in control of the forum it breaks out into hysterical trolling by non-Northern Europeans which isn’t much different from the Jew in that video.

    The South has some of the highest percentages of Northwest European DNA of all the states, I believe last time I looked at it Alabama was the highest. The most significant difference with some NE states is of course Southern European and West Asian DNA.

  41. The Bible is Jewish from cover to cover. It is therefore not surprising that Jews dominate the white race. Jews will dominate for as long as Christianity exists.

    How do you explain the 1000+ year period, ending in the West with the Enlightenment, in which Christianity was interpreted to encourage anti-Jewishness?

    Christianity is what Christians are. In the liberal west, Christianity is as mushy and liberal as the people are. In the east, Christianity is much more manly and traditional. In Greece, for instance, a bishop of the Orthodox Church has publicly supported the Golden Dawn, which itself is a pro-Christian party.

  42. In the West, WWII was the hard-won victory of a British constitutional monarchy American semi-segregated republic and ultra-nationalist France over a radical, anti-aristocratic mass movement based in a country whose very foundations were due to anticlerical liberalism.

    You can support Germany all you want but find a better reason than being anti-liberal.

    since there is no tendency among Southron nationalists to call Jesus gay, I see no particular reason to comment on it.

    Fair response. Not trying to put any words in your mouth.

  43. In the West, WWII was the hard-won victory of a British constitutional monarchy American semi-segregated republic and ultra-nationalist France over a radical, anti-aristocratic mass movement based in a country whose very foundations were due to anticlerical liberalism.

    Hook, line, and sinker.

  44. The allies, the “victors,” have imposed liberalism at every turn

    Why don’t you extend this critcism further back to the US revolution or to the US Civil War that inspired Bismarck? Or even further back to the reformation? That’d be too “divisive” for white nationalism which is based on religion not being important.

  46. Liberalism is the only successful ideology under modern capitalism.

    If you don’t have the government giving out handouts and promoting individualism, then capitalism would fall apart.

    Hitler lost because he was a loser, plain and simple.

  48. PWJ
    “Again no work/activism involved for Jews to take over. Just the magic effect of their culture, right?”

    Straw man again. Obviously the paranoia culture drives the activism – no magic.

  50. >>>White people aren’t defending their borders because being anti-immigration makes you a bad person to enough White people to make group defence difficult to impossible.<<<

    That's why Whites overwhelmingly voted for Prop 187 here in allegedly liberal California. It was overthrown by federal jew female judge mariana pfaelzer.

    ". . .California Proposition 187 (also known as the Save Our State (SOS) initiative) was a 1994 ballot initiative to establish a state-run citizenship screening system and prohibit illegal aliens from using health care, public education, and other social services in the U.S. State of California. Voters passed the proposed law as a referendum in November 1994; it was the first time that a state had passed legislation related to immigration, customarily an issue for federal policies and programs.[1] The law was challenged in a legal suit and found unconstitutional by a federal court. In 1999, Governor Gray Davis halted state appeals against the ruling.

    Passage of Proposition 187 reflected state residents' concerns about illegal immigration into the United States and the large Hispanic population in California. Opponents believed the law was discriminatory against immigrants of Hispanic or Asian origin; supporters generally insisted that their concerns were economic: that the state could not afford to provide social services for so many illegal residents. . ."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_187_(1994)

Comments are closed.