Missouri
“Johnson’s engaged in “blame whitey” by another means, which is particularly ironic in light of his ‘right-wing con job.’ The Mormon church in Utah was behind most of the California campaign, as the left gleefully and hatefully exposed, and there is no reason to think they were kidding. Hell, their side WON. How often do right-wing con jobs actually win? It was the left-wing court that reversed the popular vote. Which is par for the course. Exactly what we see on race. And illegal aliens. See California’s, again, Prop. 187. It’s a tiny elite setting the agenda. Let’s not blame generic heterosexuals for the imposition of a tiny-elite agenda. It isn’t far. It isn’t accurate.”
Note: It needs to be stressed here that the “gay marriage” supporters lost the metapolitical argument even in California.
Prop 8 was a constitutional amendment that banned “gay marriage” in California. After the opponents of Prop 8 lost at the ballot box, they sued and the issue went to the Supreme Court, where the 5-4 “conservative” majority voted 5-4 to deny standing to its supporters to defend the law in federal court.
California also passed Prop 187. Arizona passed SB 1070. Alabama passed HB 56. In all three cases, the supporters of illegal aliens lost the metapolitical argument with voters, but because of the existence of the Union, the opponents were able to find federal judges to gut all three laws.
Prop 8 was yet another illustration that you can often win within the system at the state level (every Southern state has a constitutional ban on gay marriage), but because of the existence of the Union, every issue of importance that affects the lives of hundreds of millions of people is decided by a tiny liberal elite in Washington.
There is already a pending lawsuit against Alabama’s ban on gay marriage. We know from our experience with the Loving decision (which struck down every anti-miscegenation law in Dixie) and the Brown decision (which integrated every public school in Dixie) that as long the Union exists the issue will ultimately be decided by a tiny cabal of non-Southern liberals in DC.
The Left is running the same plays that it ran against segregation, the anti-miscegenation laws, and with abortion. It never won any of these arguments. It used federal power to impose its will on the states and then announced that the issue was settled. Homosexual marriage, illegal alien amnesty, and gun control are all distractions from the real issue – the existence of the Union – in the absence of which the states would still retain the power to legislate these issues to the tastes of the people who live there.
I don’t know why we can’t just handle this at the state level. If the North East and Left Coast want this, let them have it. But let the southern states decide this at the state level.
The people who were saying “it should be handled at the state level” are already saying that the gay marriage bans in every Southern state should now be struck down by federal courts after the Supreme Court ruling.
Just like Prop 187, gay marriage was handled at the state level in California, and the pro-gay marriage forces lost that battle and took the case to the Supreme Court which said that there was no standing to defend Prop 8 in federal court.
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/30/critics-say-supreme-courts-proposition-8-ruling-ta/?page=all
That’s why I say in literally every post here that the Union has to be dissolved.
Deviant sex, drug use, self-worship (self-esteem) – whatever it is, the jewish goal is to get the goy focused with himself, his stupid, worthless feelings and opinions, thereby taking his eyes off the world and its unbending factual reality. If you do what the jews advise, soon enough you will have so many personal problems you’re unfit to participate in politics. Which is the intent.
Just a sliver from his posts on that thread, but this insight alone is powerful given how many ‘struggle’ with this kind of crap.
Thanks for linking this. Yer a good guy Hunter .
Here’s an irony for you:
California’s Prop 8 passed only because of black and Latino voters. The majority of California whites voted against it.
The strange thing to me is the passive reaction to all these federal judge’s decisions over the years.
The thing about conservatives is they only react. They reacted to all the different attacks on traditional pro-natal marriage over the years and then after they lost each battle they gave up and accepted it until the the next attack, reaction, defeat.
What they need is a goal – a version of marriage they support – which they will fight to achieve i.e. attack for once instead of defend.
Linder’s article is mostly right however if you imagine the old form of pro-natal marriage and then imagine *just* adding gay marriage to it then *on its own* it wouldn’t have made much difference. This doesn’t refute his argument but it does illustrate that Johnson is right that gay marriage is basically mocking the corpse of marriage rather than the death blow.
Liberals controlling the media/schools etc make it difficult to reverse the changes in a single form of marriage that applies to everybody however if conservatives had a brain they would define for themselves what they consider to be the best set of rules for a traditional pro-natal marriage form and then push for that to be a voluntary legal *alternative* form of marriage so people could choose the current form of marriage or they could voluntarily choose the traditional form as an alternative.
I’m pretty sure that’s politically possible if they attack for once rather than just defend.
Greg Johnson responds to these threads, as he’s done before, by placing James O’Meara front and center today. In your face. It says to readers and contributors at Counter-Currents, if they want me, you have to take my foul-smelling monkey, too. The second I saw the name, I clicked out of the site.
It’s because Greg is such a strong thinker and writer that he does more damage than his weird monkey whose brain is steeped in 60’s purple haze. Greg speaks and writes eloquently about White values, while at the same time he adamantly promotes a person who, in interviews and writings, pushes an agenda that is completely contrary to White values.
Good White nationalists who want to be able to believe in Greg massage their instinctive resistance until they can do that.
People can always click past O’Meara’s work if they don’t like it.
I don’t believe O’Meara is pushing an agenda contrary to white values. Unfortunately, it’s impossible to have a reasonable discussion of what he is or is not pushing without participants invading who can’t do better than so-and-so is a fag.
What are “White values”?
This should be good.
Why do you repeatedly give voice to your enemies and compliment them, Hunter? Do you have some kind of a masochistic fetish?
I hope you realize that these individuals are just as much of a threat to your goals as Jews and Yankees.
An elite are in control… oh really, never heard that one before. That’s common knowledge not some novel insight.
That sociopathic scumbag has been saying the same stupid shit for over a decade and he’s achieved nothing. Why, because it’s all really a shrine to his demented ego, nothing more. He’s a loser and he will die a loser.
Dissolving the Union, destroying the great Satan, conquering America… this isn’t the first time we’ve heard this and you’re not the only one that thinks it’s a good idea. WNs, non-Whites, they all want to destroy America. The type of reorganization is the key difference, that’s what we’re fighting for. Know what side you’re on when it happens.
What are “White values”?
For him and his ilk: homosexuality, pederasty, rewriting Germanic history and claiming the founders of civilization were a big circle jerk of intellectual queers.
Oh, but if he can just manage to somehow impregnate a woman, and reproduce, then it’s all okay right. Fucking idiots.
The southern states wouldn’t vote back segregation if they had the chance.
Things have changed.
Linder is correct that homosexuals can now easily find each other when before they had technical constraints.
Greg speaks and writes eloquently about White values, while at the same time he adamantly promotes a person who, in interviews and writings, pushes an agenda that is completely contrary to White values.
I disagree, rather some people just have that perception. Much like how a cultists are confused and worship their sociopathic leader and think he’s so wonderful when others on the outside are saying WTF.
He’s co-opting, hijacking the White cause for his own perverted agenda. Be wary of these types, there are many.
It’s starting to click for you a little bit, that’s good, you’re looking deeper, analyzing everything. More people need to do that.
Hunter has “friends” that are Odinists so they can spew here.
He likes pussy so gashes can vent here.
Politics is the sphere of men, not children playing at paganism, not women….
Certainly not people that shove stuff into their rectums like Greg Johnson.
who can’t do better than so-and-so is a fag.
The sexual acts one undertakes are inseparable from their psychology and consequently worldview. E. Michael Jones explores this concept lost on degenerate moderns.
The southern states wouldn’t vote back segregation if they had the chance.
Things have changed.
Sounds like sour grapes, typical. So many sadistic, anti-Southern trolls here.
Without Yankee pressure and federal power the South would rise again, as much as it would just spoil the fun of all the trolls who want to see the South suffer.
The South, Germany and South Africa have good racial instincts, a will to live and be free. More liberal areas of the US, Canada and Britain, I don’t see this racial will to live, they would self-destruct on their own without outside intervention.
It’s not just about having political and personal differences, he gives voice to and compliments people who have personally attacked him, defamed him, organized a mob against him and would probably put a knife in his back in a situation of power struggle. Wake up.
Lew says: I don’t believe O’Meara is pushing an agenda contrary to white values. Unfortunately, it’s impossible to have a reasonable discussion of what he is or is not pushing without participants invading who can’t do better than so-and-so is a fag.
______________________________-
There’s no way that you can have listened to the Voice of Reason Robert Stark interview without realizing how extremely repulsed by White values revolving around marriage, family and lifestyle issues O’Meara is, and how strictly his interpretations conform to a homosexual framework. It’s true that in any discussion, there are participants who can’t do better than ignorant name-calling, but there are others that can do better; Alex is one of them, and he has taken the time to write this response.
As time goes by, and our situation continues to worsen, Alex”s aggressive stance becomes less and less untenable.
Which Stark interview?
I agree with many of Alex Linder’s points too. I left a link to his comments myself in the other thread.
It’s true that in any discussion, there are participants who can’t do better than ignorant name-calling, but there are others that can do better; Alex is one of them, and he has taken the time to write this response.
You barely have a functioning brain to say something that ridiculous. Alex doesn’t name-call, bwahahaha. Just shows you how utterly stupid and deluded his followers are.
E. Michael Jones explores this concept lost on degenerate moderns.
Jones himself says that the North never thought in racial terms, only religious. Racial group identity has historically been a Southern phenomenon.
“Racial group identity has historically been a Southern phenomenon.”
And that’s what I like about the South!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCSWZTzJJaU
Deo Vindice
I don’t take the Bowel Movement nearly as seriously as I used to. As for this thread, I was just reposting the link that Lew provided in some comment.
You used to get offended when people either attacked the white nationalist movement or promoted alternative ideologies (eg Ian Jobling). That’s an improvement imo.
The Bowel Movement is nothing but electrons flying across the internet. I consider it a source of entertainment only.
I don’t take the Bowel Movement nearly as seriously as I used to.
There’s nothing to take serious. A movement led by Asperger nerds, sociopaths and homosexuals… LMAO.
They only deserve contempt and ridicule. Any rational person comes to that conclusion, some sooner, some later, and some never get it.
Racialism won’t succeed on a large scale outside of ethnonationalism. Seems like Hunter has come to that conclusion as well.
alternative ideologies (eg Ian Jobling)
Yeah right, that little shabbos goy who had a fit and left AmRen because they weren’t pro-Jewish enough.
“but because of the existence of the Union, the opponents were able to find federal judges to gut all three laws.”
Just by a stroke of a pen. They wouldn’t do so without the federal forces at their disposal. Robes in black are bullies backed by guns.
Lew wrote: Which Stark interview?
The regular voice of reason link doesn’t work for me (something about a PHP version), but the cache link below does. You seem to be quite on top of things, so it’s possible that you already listened to it and had a different reaction than mine, which was extremely negative.
http://72.30.186.176/search/srpcache?ei=UTF-8&p=voice+of+reason+radio+james+o%27meara&fr=yfp-t-900-s&u=http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=voice+of+reason+radio+james+o%27meara&d=4963312460827108&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=6hTVFUo0bLXRDd6-RyK-1-5-fySwTZtD&icp=1&.intl=us&sig=sMmdHQutF1htl.Y4yhvlug–
The amp; has to be removed from the link to make it work. I wonder what inserted it, since it isn’t in the link I submitted.
The CA prop 8 ruling is a repeat of the Arizona immigration ruling. Just at the resident-serf vs state level. If the Fed or State gov doesn’t want to enforce or defend a law, it doesn’t have to and nanny nanny boo boo you can’t make them or do it yourself, as you have no “standing”. Despite voting on it. But you know, nullification is like just totally evil, unpatriotic, and wrong. Hey look, Paula Deen said a naughty word! Get her!
You seem to be quite on top of things, so it’s possible that you already listened to it and had a different reaction than mine, which was extremely negative.
That’s a contradiction. He can’t be on top of things and have a positive reaction to it, makes no damn sense.
Anyone who has to be shown evidence over and over and over again, and needs their hand held while you guide them along has the mind of a retarded child and isn’t worth the time.
I liked this point from that link:
“A family is anything, who are we to say? It’s certainly not a man, his wife, and his children. They’re all independent agents, who might temporarily combine, if it suits their interests”
Such is the mindset of libertarians and many, if not most, conservatives. I’m to the point where any emphasis on “individualism” instantly hurts my chest. And I used to be a disciple of individualism (also “limited government”). Conservatives will have NO argument when the left advances to the stage where (White) parents shouldn’t favor their (White) children. Why, that’s discrimination!!
Mosin,
“WNs, non-Whites, they all want to destroy America.”
That’s how I used to feel to. Now I realize why the White Nationalists, and the Southern Nationalists, want to do that: Because America is indeed the most vile creation ever foisted upon a decent people, as Greg Hood said in his famous memo. Different interests, perhaps even conflicting interests, but the same goal: Dissolve the Union.
As for the non-Whites, I don’t think they realize they’re doing normal Whites a backhanded favor with their anti-American rhetoric. And their rhetoric is contradictory: On one hand, it’s clear their anti-Americanism is just coded anti-White hatred, but on the other hand they insist that Whites aren’t the only people who can be Americans. Sure, their anti-Americanism riles up the patriotards, and as a result it’s a great source of fuel (and money) for Conservatism Inc. But it doesn’t mean anything for us in the pro-white movement. In the last several months I’ve learned the lesson that we can’t judge much from how our enemies react to things. Cripes, they think that the Tea Party is a crypto-National Socialist group. They make too much noise to discern anything of value. Their anti-Americanism says nothing about the supposed validity of the concept of America.
“The type of reorganization is the key difference, that’s what we’re fighting for.
And that reorganization is the creation of different White ethnostates, one of which would be Dixie. I don’t think that “Taking Back Amurrica” or creating a White ethnostate based on nothing but Whiteness are the answers. We don’t need a one size fits all solution just because it feels good.
The sacrament of marriage was trashed by Henry VIII 450 years ago. Once he beheaded Thomas Moore, there was no turning back. Marriage has lost it’s meaning for most people. Face it – it’s either sacred or it’s no different from buying a car. Don’t expect the state to make it holy.
Why do you repeatedly give voice to your enemies and compliment them, Hunter? Do you have some kind of a masochistic fetish?
He’s a weird one, this Hunter Wallace.
Look at his response: “I don’t take the Bowel Movement nearly as seriously as I used to.”
But the trolls he allows to take over threads also derail discussions of issues he does take seriously. And that this is so is too obvious for words. Yet he won’t even take the most elementary step of banning people. That doesn’t require him to ‘nanny’ the comments. He just needs to issue the ban and delete posts from those posters. Sooner or later they get the message and give up. (Remember “Joe”?) Or he could empower Jack Ryan – who is quick on the trigger – to delete those posters’ posts; this would speed those posters’ departure. The improvement in discussions would be dramatic. A handful of blog comments by themselves aren’t going to change the world, but it’s utterly idiotic to imagine that the exchange of ideas (by serious men) is an exercise in futility.
put a knife in his back
At this point Hunter’s net-nazi nemeses would have to pull a knife out of his back to make room for another stab. The Phora was stolen from Hunter by an ex-WCOTC and some Hitler-worshippers back in ’07, it’s been open season on him by the bowel movement ever since yet he surrounds himself with people, Jack Ryan included that do nothing but diminish his future earning potential and efficacy as a southern patriot.
I nominate “No-man” the first to be banned under the suggested policy.
In fact, if Hunter bans “No-man” (and any of his subsequent manifestations, because a slimeball like that is bound to try again and again) I’ll voluntarily depart this site as a gesture of goodwill.
How about it, Hunter?
Hunter,
If you ban Silver I’ll send you $300.
Behind the promotion of race replacement and gay marriage, allegedly by “the Left” and “the Union”, we find a small minority of far-left activists led by Jews. So, it isn’t really a matter or left and right. I doubt whether most left-wing voters support gay marriage, and I’m sure they don’t support race replacement. The support for those policies only comes from left-wing political parties and institutions, not from the population itself. The left/right interpretation is misleading because it gives the impression that normal White people are equally divided between two opposing sides. Actually, the real opposition is between the Normals (90% of the White population) and the Jewish coalition against them.
“Conservatives will have NO argument when the left advances to the stage where (White) parents shouldn’t favor their (White) children. Why, that’s discrimination!! ”
Listening to Brit Hume, a senior foxnews analysis. On amnesty bill. Libs meme have infected the conservatices. To revise Americans (white) is blasphemy. Meme, Latinos,African Americans, Indian American native. Americans <scratch are simply refer to as white; guest in this continent who founded and built upon.
Homosexuals attack a Christian protesting gay pride.
http://www.komonews.com/news/crime/Video-shows-crowd-attacking-religious-protesters-at-Pridefest-214151861.html
“Homosexuals attack a Christian protesting gay pride.”
No brakes.
While not any form of a rightist, as everyone probably knows Glenn Greenwald has been going toe-to-toe with the US government the last few months. In particular, he has been going up against the Obama administration, American media and the worst elements inside the US intelligence agencies.
While reviewing the latest developments this morning, it occurred to me that it’s largely because of men like Greenwald that I believe people ought to RETHINK and REJECT the silly, strident, unreasoning anti-homosexuality that often rears its head in rightist circles. The perspective is immature, stale, and backwards-looking.
Homosexuals are as capable as anyone of showing great courage. There is no reason that homosexuals can’t be as much of an asset to all sectors of the right as Greenwald is to the civil liberties-oriented left. Greenwald is an asset to everyone opposed to the US government including the dissident rightists.
http://www.chron.com/technology/businessinsider/article/GREENWALD-Now-I-m-Going-To-Report-On-Government-4743630.php
Lew, sodomy is a threat to racial unity. A race is nothing more than a large family descended from a single pair of ancestors. Introduce sodomy into the family, and racial and family unity is destroyed.
Destroying the moral authority of the regime is a key precursor for radical change.
In the last 50 years, who would you say has done more than GG to undermine the US government’s moral authority in front of a global audience?
Stephen, I DO agree fully with your foregoing comment — that sodomy is “a threat to unity” — a different angle and effective understatement!
What words did Jesus speak against homosexuals? Please be specific.
I’m not sure I want to go around this track again, but as far as I know every anti-homo Bible verse comes from the JEWISH Old Testament and from Paul, a converted JEW and quite possibly one with sex hangups himself (…”why do I do what I don’t want to do?”…).
Christian principles in my understanding don’t require treating homosexuals any better or any worse than adulterers and fornicators. Excluding homosexuals from nationalism makes about as much sense as excluding fornicators which is everybody.
Jude, perhaps the brother of Jesus: “Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire”.
Paul: “to them that do lechery with men”; “the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God (…) neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, NOR EFFEMINATE, NOR ABUSERS OF THEMSELVES WITH MEN”; “even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature, and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence”.
Jesus: using Greek terms porneia, malakos and arsenkoites that can refer directly or indirectly to homosexuality, in various places, such as: “from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, SEXUAL IMPURITIES, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride”; et cetera.
Common sense. Sanctified common sense, Lew. It is still sin in the New Testament, and even more so.
As it appears to be a condition of natural law that 1% to 2% of the population will perform homosexual acts regardless of the political regime the practice should probably be ignored as long as it remains behind closed doors. OTOH pedophilia (which is predominately gay,) gay marriage, and gay adoption should be vigorously repressed.
Mosin,
Thank you, but I still don’t understand the scriptural basis for treating homosexuals any better OR any worse the heterosexual fornicators or adulterers.