Can anyone link me to Afterthought’s (or whoever it was) comment on how to argue with “anti-racists”, which was basically to just call them anti-white? I can’t find it.
No, Israel is not good for Jews, in fact in the creation of an ethnostate has altered the culture into what we were running from in the worst place.
Israel has turned us into our enemies, into everything we have been fighting against.
I do not support it, and will not support it.
There are Jews and Zionist Christians who will call me a “self hating Jew” which is a typical fascist response to anyone who rejects the ethno-nationalism that sits like a cancer within their culture.
I think creating an ethnostate was a bad idea with the intend to create a safe place for Jews to run to as a reactionary response to the Holocaust.
IMHO, instead of the creation of one safe place for just Jews, we should work on the whole planet being a safe place for all human beings.
I know you’re not going to like this response, Brad, but just to show you that no I don’t excuse Israel of their wrong doing as I don’t excuse other fascists.
Fascism is fascism and all fascism is anti-humanity.
And I will also add, it is almost exactly 10 yrs ago today, on Rosh Hashanah that I gave up religion and became a universal humanist/atheist, for this very reason.
Same old antiwhite Jewish BS
@ The Lamp
Zionism and the associated political maneuvering to create a Judaist ethno-state well preceded the “Holocaust”, having its organizational and political beginnings in the 1880’s. Certainly no one can argue that the Balfour Declaration in 1917, that establishing the “legal” (sic) framework for the later creation of “Israel” by the heavily influenced British government, was the result of any actions of the German government decades later. Moreover, a studious examination of the historical record clearly shows that the “World Zionist Congress” was given ample opportunity well prior to the establishment of German “concentration camps” to move each and every Judaist from Germany for the princely sum of the U.S. equivalent of fifty bucks. The top echelon of the so-called “Congress” decided (I’ll paraphrase here for the sake of my own time) not to make any effort to do so, as they argued the propaganda value of German anti-semitism was incalculable for the realization of their desired end – the creation of “Israel.”
Such a perspective is not qualitatively at variance with what former U.S. Secretary of State Madeline Albright said to C.B.S. reporter Leslie Stahl in 1997 regarding the human cost to the Iraqi population (750,000 deaths of the elderly and children) as a result of the sanctions against Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War: “It’s a small price to pay, but we think it’s worth it.” An interesting mindset indeed, hauntingly reminiscent of the line spoken by Stalin: “One man’s death is a tragedy. A million deaths are a statistic.”
To steal a line from Kurt Vonnegut, “And so it goes.”
“Dixie: Is It Good For White Southerners”?
It will only, and only be good for White Southerners, if they
1) recognize the jewish menace
2) stop worshiping money and wealth, stop looking down on poor White people
3) reform the jewish banking and monetary system, replace it with a sound one
4) end the power of jew media and ban the jew porn industry, establish a true national Christian TV and radio
5) expel the parasite jew.
Unless and until they do that, everything will remain exactly the same as now, if not worse.
“Coarse and pushy, greedy and trite
beware the jewish parasite!”
About this book: JEW FILTH. No need to waste more words for it.
Logan Smith says:
September 27, 2014 at 3:00 am
“Can anyone link me to Afterthought’s (or whoever it was) comment on how to argue with “anti-racists”, which was basically to just call them anti-white? I can’t find it.”
I think it was written by an anti-White and he was making fun of White Nationalists, but in reality, it tells us what irritates him. I Googled it and found it posted elsewhere, so you might be able to confirm if it is what I think it is.
Yes, make the world safe for all human beings–except white people. As all good progressives know, they’re an evil racist race and scarcely human at all.
“I think creating an ethnostate was a bad idea with the intend to create a safe place for Jews to run to as a reactionary response to the Holocaust.”
Zionism predates the Nazi regime by the First World War and many decades.
@ Hunter A some years ago I was talking with a good friend of mine who was a national political player, fundraiser, and major contributor, about the Jews and Israel. We had the same old argument, he claims that not all Jews support Israel, and my rejoinder was the expected, name one. LOL. I’m still waiting. In other words, I won the argument.
My friend is a very estimable White Protestant college grad.
Basically Jewish anti-zionism was given new life by “Anti-Racist Hitler” the video put out by BUGS. The whole “anti-racist” narrative changed once Israel was put to use by us for us. See the right can produce effective propaganda and not just endless essays for the converted
Richard Cohen, who writes for The Washington Post, was notorious for sharing that position until recently.
Anyone who thinks they are going to change the Jews mind on anything is kidding themselves. It just doesn’t happen. Maybe some sort of cult de-programming might work, but, I wouldn’t bet on it. LOL.
Rudel and John- About the concept of Zionism existing before WW2, this is correct, it was a concept before the Holocaust, but was turned into a reality because of.
Basically, the world out of guilt took thousands of survivors who had been through hell, many who grew up in the camps, and plopped them down in the desert with guns and gave the carte blanche to do whatever they wanted to establish this fear driven ethnostate.
These people had no therapy or mental health attention for their trauma and hence they turned into their abusers. Much like an untreated child who has experienced abuse becomes an abusive adult.
I am not stating this in excusing the Israeli government for the fascist mass genocide they are responsible for, but it is what it is.
My choice would have been to try to relocate them to the homes they were ripped from and to offer them lots of mental health and medical attention. Then work on international laws in not allowing mass genocide to happen anywhere around the planet. And when I say mass genocide I mean mass killing, not who is marrying who or who is breeding with who, I mean the actual definition of the term.
No, I am not anti-white, I am not 100% “Jewish blood” in fact I am really only half, and I am not against the other half of my genetic make up. I am against supremacy and separatism.
And on a final note, I have been to Israel, I did a long stay there for about three months and did not like it there at all. I didn’t like the way Palestinians were treated, I didn’t like the aggressiveness and the lack of manners in the way people treated each other. I vowed never to go back and I will not. I don’t feel any connection to it, I feel a connection to the country I was born and raised in which is the United States.
The term “genocide” has never referred exclusively to mass executions, Lamp.
FTR I support the existence of Israel and other ethnostates. Anyway Sailer found quite the sound bite with “ethnic extremist”. They made their bed, and of course I must say I don’t hate jews in general I do hate their racist anti-white ones
I read it as him pointing out the hypocrisy of Liberals, and showing us how to argue like them to blow their minds. That’s how I saw it.
How can anyone be against self determination? You say you’re against “fascism”, which I assume means totalitarianism, but then you’re against separatism as well?
“Israel has turned us into our enemies, into everything we have been fighting against.”
It’s turned you into white Christians?
I don’t feel any connection to it, I feel a connection to the country I was born and raised in which is the United States.
I couldn’t care less what you feel a connection to, jew. Leave white people alone.
‘I am against supremacy and separatism’:
Then you must be FOR global genetic blending and ethnic genocide, under the direction of an ‘enlightened’ Elite.
@TheLamp – how many of your grandparents were turned into actual lampshades?
Who is the “self” that determines? In the South’s case, what would be it? If the LoS would became a dominant force, how much of the population would stand behind it?
“Self determination” is a liberal catchword, masked as a conservative phrase. No wonder, “Conservatism” means Liberalism, while “Liberalism” means Socialism in America.
It is always the _leadership_ governing a country, that counts. Under a good leadership, good things happen. Under a bad one, bad things.
Question: will a Southern leadership wil be better than the current white house rule? Yes, probably. In what ways?
If we take a close look at the “conservative” ( liberal) policies that govern Southern thinking, the following outcome we got:
Jew media rule would remain the same (the government doesnt interferes in “free media”), Jew banking would remain the same (same, “non-interference” in financial matters), jew consumer-idiotist non-stop advertizing and commercials would remain the same( LoS doesnt even plan to regulate this), prob free-trade (old confederate tradition) would remain the same….
It wouldn’t matter the slightest if the secessionsts took over, because the cultural and economic positions would stay the same- in the jews’ hands. That is, if they ever take over.
Political power means very little in itself , and it means even less if you dont even plan to use it.
Making the whole world safe…
Reminds me of the lines in Tacitus.
“You made a wasteland and called it peace.”
” Solitudinem fecerunt, pacem appelunt”
See if you can start making the world safe by making one little country safe. Then get back to everyone with the results after you fail.
On topic, I’m not sure links are allowed here: The Globe and Mail just published an article, Sep. 25, entitled, “Jewish schools give kids identity, academics and connectedness” by PAUL ATTFIELD.
Quote: “They’re also looking for institutions which will interest their kids in the Jewish identity and their connectiveness to their Jewish lives and to their heritage, religion and culture, and which add to the cultural mosaic of what it means to be a Canadian.”
And there’s that Jewish community up North that produces so many children. They’re in poverty, and I can’t vouch for the quality of children produced; but they produce a lot of children. The site I used to have a link to it at has been taken down, but you probably know what I’m talking about.
Mostly off topic: Ramz Paul just put up a video in which he asks, “Why do so many obsessive anti-Semites look Jewish?” with the implication that they’re fifth column.
Whenever someone makes a great statement like that, it should be recorded – doesn’t matter who makes it.
A book title I’d like to see: Was the Southern Avenger Right? For so many Southern-Americans and erm American-Americans, ideology is their great cause. And if that’s the case, why not ditch ethnicity? I’ll support any political system provided it serves God and is good for my people. It’s weird, empty, to devote oneself to a particular ideology…
Anyway, I really like how you (and others) have taken the Southern movement by storm to create an ethnic, identitarian movement.
This post of yours is simple and spot-on.
We see in Europe with the Ukraine and some of the comments from Greece (e.g. “retake Constantinople”) that nationalism can get out of hand, lead to conflict. But without it, we have nothing. Alain de Benoist, at least in one article TOQ published, seemed to see an empire composed of nation-states as the peaceful solution that would allow ethnicity and peace. But I don’t trust empire as I understand most to want. In expansive North America though surely we can carve out a homeland peacefully.
Israel is doomed to fight, expand, and make Jews look bad in the process. Jews would do better to carve out a homeland in Russia or North America. And they’d do better to accept ethnonationalists as their natural allies rather than Nazis in the closet. Our side’s goal is to preserve some sense of meaning and identity in the world, preserve the world’s biodiversity, resist the Borg of modernity. And Jews obsess over attacking us rather than working with us – insanity.
read GK Chesterton’s “anti-Semitic” work.
Like most “anti-Semites”, Chesterton was not actually anti-Semitic. He was, erm, explicitly pro-Semitic. A google search brings up defences of him.
I think Chesterton makes a brave attempt at reconciling Jews with Gentiles. But we can’t have reconciliation. We must have no peace. So, we declare Chesterton “anti-Semitic”, and we continue the feud.
The Jews we all here dislike, like Soros, Zuckerberg Kristol, are, I expect, disliked by you as well. Chesterton proposed we separate, and by that I don’t mean deport all Jews. North America should have its own Israel. North America should also have somewhere for white Gentiles.
You can’t have a “Judeo-Christian” society. That is self-contradictory and the root of why so many Jews turn left, which is to say why so many of them turn against the US. They’re not evil; they’re simply excluded and so easily turn. TS Eliot was not being anti-Semitic when he said: “What is still more important [than cultural homogeneity] is unity of religious background, and reasons of race and religion combine to make any large number of free-thinking Jews undesirable.”
Jews should be Jews; Christians should be Christians.
What is the greatest threat to Jews? Intermarriage, conversion.
Separate states doesn’t mean we need to fight. It’s a path towards peace. We’d each be able to rule ourselves rather than struggling to rule each other or to convert, remake one another. So many of the Left-wing movements are run by Jews, and Jews are paranoid that Nazis will get them. Separation would resolve all of that. Israel has limited land, and the Muslims want to drive it out. But North America has a great deal of land. Wouldn’t it be ideal for Jews to enjoy their own land without any threat?
Thanks for approving so many comments.
I just noticed an error: “rather than Nazis in the closet.”
should read: “rather than fearing Nazis in the closet.”
They’re obsessed with defeating the very people they should ally with.
that is ethnic cleansing. It can be described as nothing less.
We’ve got libertarians trying to convert us from within, and we’ve got anti-whites trying to wipe us out from without.
Hopefully this struggle makes us stronger…
I just want to say: Bless you!
Elites run things. The question is how to choose a good elite. Aristotle wrote about how rare and wonderful an aristocracy is (which isn’t to say absolute rule). Is such a thing possible? Or are we stuck with a form of democracy? Aristotle said a people should be ruled by its own kind, and a society should be small. So, I think he’s rightly one of our heroes.
The curse of elites seems to be greed. If we can limit their greed, in a sense be ruled by monks, we win. Farming was thought by the Romans to improve one’s character. The South produced admirable leaders, and the South was agrarian.
At least I say, “bless you” if you’re wanting to make this point. It’s often the case people think they agree/disagree only to discover a poster meant something entirely different…
I think elite theory goes too far when it seems to have the elite rule for its own sake. The ideal is for the elite to rule for the whole, and again to have a balance not some sort of absolute rule. Subsidiarity is a great ideal.
Anyway, I think that is true politics. The US founders attempted such a thing. Jefferson wrote of selecting the “natural aristocracy”. I’d like to believe we can improve on things based on past historical examples, an updated system that works well for modern society today.
Another issue is how a society is best reflected in its heroes. If we worship bankers and movie stars, we’re a fairly barbaric society. But if we instead praise monks and soldiers, those great men who risk and sacrifice for the Good, then we improve ourselves. Our leaders and citizenry will then strive towards such ideals. Culture matters in this regard as much or perhaps more than whether we can solve the riddle of how to select a good elite. Ah, I don’t mean we should admire pawns who wear US military uniforms. What are they even fighting for? How does one win honour if there is no cause?
Indeed, agrarian elites tend to produce noble generals, as was the case of the German Junkers. The best generals of the Wehrmacht were of Junker heritage.
“Subsidiarity is a great ideal.”
Yes, for example in Catholic social thinking, subsidiarity plays an important role.
As for choosing the best elites… for me it’s a matter of technicality. Sure there are able and good people in a given society, the question is, how do we get them to form a leadership of a country? I think clearly defined goals and moral values certainly help.
You didnt write it to me, but I’d like to adress this:
“We’ve got libertarians trying to convert us from within, and we’ve got anti-whites trying to wipe us out from without.”
Libertardianism is a mind-virus, an ulcerous tumor, that has to be fought with absolutely everything we got. By exposing libertardianism, we also expose the jew.
I think, Weaver, that todays’ Christians have to constantly expose the Jew, as Jesus did with the Pharisees. (Todays’ Judaism is the Pharisaic religion based on the Talmud.) That is our mission.
“Another issue is how a society is best reflected in its heroes. If we worship bankers and movie stars, we’re a fairly barbaric society.”
Right. If Southern Nationalists don’t deal with the constant filth emanating from Jewlywood and the porn industry, they will be screwed for good.
I couldn’t care less what you feel a connection to, jew. Leave white people alone.
Bonaccorsi, you’re becoming very assertive I see. This post has the ring of ‘conversion experience’ to it. Do tell.
Separate states doesn’t mean we need to fight. It’s a path towards peace.
That’s very easy to agree with on paper. Taking it into the real world is a whole other matter. Nevertheless, the more mixed things get the harder it becomes for any one group to form a majority. It seems there will be little choice but for various groups to ‘unite in order to separate.’ That means anyone who is up for ethno-racial separatism is a potential ally.
I could be wrong, but the way I see it playing out is people’s coming to a realization that keeping blacks out of your community provides instant and potentially permanent relief becomes the spark that ignites the whole separatist shebang, for if there is such thing as a free lunch ‘no negroes’ is surely it. Things then pick up steam from there. Where it ends nobody knows.
Re: ‘Aristotle wrote about how rare and wonderful an aristocracy is’:
But the ‘Mixed Polity’ is the best, most just and stable system in Aristotle’s political science. Aristotle umderstood that democracy and equality (at least for all the men who can afford hoplite weapons) are just as essential to the health of a nation as ‘excellence’.
Re: ‘the riddle of how to select a good elite’;
A riddle indeed. How can an ‘elite’ be elite if it is selected by others who are not elite? A TRUE elite selects itself and imposes itself on all its servants whether or not the servants understand.
A faction would still be strongest in a mixed polity. It’s best that aristocracy be strongest.
“A riddle indeed. How can an ‘elite’ be elite if it is selected by others who are not elite? A TRUE elite selects itself and imposes itself on all its servants whether or not the servants understand.”
Well then: how does a present-day elite set up a system that chooses an elite that will care for the whole in the future?
When I wrote, “which isn’t to say absolute rule” I meant Mixed Polity.
I’ve only studied Aristotle by reading him myself, and it has been years. So, I sometimes use the wrong terms.
When you write, “Aristotle umderstood that democracy and equality are just as essential to the health of a nation as ‘excellence’.” I don’t remember this part so well, but my ideal is for a Mixed polity in some fashion. And I certainly want equality under the law and a free market.
I would love to read more if you have any suggestions btw. I’m impressed by your reply. Anyway, I loved reading Aristotle years ago. He makes more sense to me than these ideologies everyone loves.
now that I think about it, when you say, “democracy and equality” you mean Mixed Polity and large middle class. I do actually remember this. Anyway, that’s what I’d intended to call for. Aristocracy is the ideal strongest faction though.
How specifically to apply such things to modern life, I cannot pretend to have figured out. I’m falling asleep. I’m pleasantly shocked to get such a reply though. I wish everyone would read Aristotle.
What are your thoughts on Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus?
The Jewcentric activism(pro or anti) that surrounds pro-White circles is probably one of the first things I would choke the life out of if I were running an organization. The Jared Taylor types and their cuckolding to Jewish voices aren’t really all that different than the David Duke circle relegating themselves to bottom-feeding, proxy Jews by enveloping their existence in all things Jewish 24/7. Two opposite ends of the spectrum that seem to be a little, or a lot, more fixated on Jews than they are helping White people. Where’s the actual pro-White activism? These attitudes and these types of clowns have been writing, preaching and proselytizing for decades. How many White people can say they have become more balanced and more productive people after stepping into the odd Jewcentricity of the pro-White world? Come join us so you can…… revolve your life around what Jews are doing, or cater your message to attract more Jews. That’s what I get when I enter this supposed pro-White world? This is a paradox if ever there was one.
Is it good for the Jews? I’m not Jewish, so I don’t fucking care! Do you think the anti-Islam/pro-Israel mouthpieces spend even one percent of their time worrying about what’s good for those that aren’t Jewish?
@The Lamp “About the concept of Zionism existing before WW2, this is correct, it was a concept before the Holocaust, but was turned into a reality because of.”
The Jewish population of Palestine increased from 24,000 in 1882 to 348,000 in 1936 at the time of the Arab Revolt. 380,000 hardline Zionists pre-WWII are hardly a concept, they are a huge demographic invasion.
The Brits (despite such post WWII unpleasantries such as the bombing of the King David Hotel) were in various and sundry ways direct supporters of Jewish anti-Arab terrorism all through the 1920’s and 1930’s.
For those Occidental Dissent readers in search of the dispassionate truth about the Jewish occupation and colonization of the Holy Land I heartily recommend Gudrun Kramer’s masterful work A History of Palestine: From the Ottoman Conquest to the Founding of the State of Israel.
yes. Uniting to separate can be a strategy. I believe those of us who wish to preserve an identity must unite, at least in many cases.
From Candour, the intro to a book of quotes has the best quote for an intro, by the compiler of the book. It includes a comment along the lines that the Left is an alliance of traitors. That’s all I want to highlight, but it’s incredible insight. I have seen it nowhere else.
Globalism/Cosmopolitanism easily absorbs a traitor. Those who resist we might say are “right-wing”. And the Right divide up. How did early Americans defeat the Amerindians? We united. We didn’t split into tiny tribes like the Amerindians.
Separately from the unite-to-separate comment: just preserving a pan-European identity might be nigh-impossible. I think we have quite the [nonviolent, fully legal] battle ahead of us. I’m attached to the British Isles and northwest Europe, and the South is my nation of course; but I don’t know that I can be picky. I fear a pan-European mass won’t be pretty, however. That’s not to say 100% purity is necessary, being European is enough in limited numbers.
Dr. Wilson probably still condemns racialism, or at least I understood him to condemn it; but he’s right that, “no matter how bad you believe things to be, they’re worse”. I just hope we can preserve something. Brazil looks like Hell.
I care what happens to them just as I care what happens to blacks, but I don’t obsess over them, no. They can take care of themselves. It’s white Gentiles at risk.
Some seem to assume white Gentiles have the power to decide everyone’s fate. We don’t.
However, Jews should focus on building a homeland here.
We often say we should deport Muslims from our lands, and that’s accepted by the powers-that-be whereas we couldn’t say the same of Jews. However, there is a difference: Jews haven’t anywhere to go. Israel isn’t really safe. Their only other homeland is an odd state in Russia. Also, they don’t wish to convert us, so they shouldn’t pose a threat to us in their own state. New York City, Las Vegas, and other cities have many Jews. They already have homelands of a sort. They’re full of minorities, but I’m not sure the Jews want a homogeneous homeland. They seem to want workers.
North America is huge. Jews are powerful. They’ll claim some area if Balkanisation starts up. They’ll believe everyone is after them, and they won’t likely be targeted as much as Nordic looking whites will be targeted. When people say they hate America, they think of an English white, Nordic features.
Nikos Salingaros called ideologies “viruses”. They can reproduce, but they can’t sustain themselves. Only civilisations can sustain themselves. Unfortunately, civilisations can become sick with a virus.
It’s a great analogy.
It’s from a book on… architecture of all things. Kalb linked to the book before his site went the way of so many other praiseworthy sites before it… People build up amazing sites, then they hit the delete button and much is forgotten… And then I foggily remember parts in these debates.
For to be pro-white, you have to define what is pro-white.
In America or in the South, this is nigh-impossible bc there are so many white people of different origin, cultural background.
The League of the South tries to circumvent this problem by focusing on the visual message. Secede billboards, photo-ops with flag and children. This of course says nothing of their program, for example: how would they help the average white in the case of taking power and secession.
As far as I understand -correct me if I’m wrong – The LoS plans to eliminate all social benefits if they take control. Allegedly this would cause the blacks to emigrate northwards in mass proportions, taking a huge burden off the South.
I think if you take all social benefits, there would be mass death in weeks (riots, starvation).
Besides, I think all social benefits would be taken away, not just blacks’.
This is classical libertarian shock-terapy, followed by “creative destruction” which of course would be disastrous. I can hardly see, how a civil war between blacks and whites (with the usual damage – burnt neighborhoods, mass lootings, rapes, constant gunfire on the streets, loss of electricity, water etc) would benefit the South.
The LoS needs a comprehensive program, that doesn’t let a huge chunk of the population fall on the wayside. Te black problem has to be dealt with, peacefully. Cutting their benefits at once, will only incite them to revolt.
If the League of the South leaves the poor white out of the picture, and only advocates rich and middle-class interests, it wont stand for even a year. Popular sentiment will overthrow it no time.
Weaver,,,the last thing we need is a Jew homeland in our midst!