Greg Conte = Comedy gold! pic.twitter.com/10SyDDFcLU
— The Colin Liddell (@cbliddell) February 17, 2023
Keith Woods has written another fantastic article on “NS.”
“I wasn’t planning to do a follow-up to my article on national socialism. But then I wasn’t expecting it to spark so much discussion. There was a series of essay responses which went into far more depth than my original did, there were also a lot of attacks on me from the circles I was critiquing that mostly avoided my actual arguments. I’m not really interested in becoming the anti-NS guy, but so much discussion was sparked by this that I’ve concluded I need to do a follow-up piece surveying the discussion and giving my own thoughts.
My original piece was intentionally succinct and avoided getting into the weeds of historical arguments, so I will use this to dump all the context left out of the first piece and present some of the other contributions I found interesting. …
My response is that I have been nine years making content in these circles, hardly ever raising my issues with NS. If you read my article, you will see it began as a response to Joel Davis arguing that our movement must rehabilitate NS. People can believe what they want about the Second World War. What I resent, and what I will push back against, is them telling our people that they must all focus their struggle on their history hang-up or else whatever they’re doing politically is worthless. …”
I have some more thoughts of my own.
I keep hearing from the “NS” crowd that the movement is divided between reactionaries and revolutionaries. The “NS” fandom likes to style itself as “revolutionary.” Those of us who prefer to engage in political activity in the present, who support Trump and who are inspired by American sources are characterized as “reactionaries” who want to return the status quo ante.
What is a reactionary?
“The American sociologist Lewis M. Killian advanced still another typology based on the direction of the change advocated or opposed. A reactionary movement advocates the restoration of a previous state of social affairs, while a progressive movement argues for a new social arrangement. A conservative movement opposes the changes proposed by other movements, or those seeming to develop through cultural drift, and advocates preservation of existing values and norms. …”
Mark Lilla, the author of The Shipwrecked Mind: On Political Reaction, has the best definition.
“We live in a reactionary age. Revolutionaries traffic in hope. They believe, and wish others to believe, that a radical break with the past is possible and that it will inaugurate a new era of human experience. Reactionaries believe that such a break has already occurred and has been disastrous. While to the untrained eye the river of time seems to flow as it always has, the reactionary sees the debris of paradise drifting past his eyes. The revolutionary sees the radiant future, and it electrifies him. The reactionary thinks of the past in all its splendor, and he, too, is electrified. He is, he thinks, the guardian of what actually happened, not the prophet of what might be. This explains the strangely exhilarating despair that courses through reactionary literature and political rhetoric, the palpable sense of mission. As the editors of the right-leaning magazine National Review put it in its very first issue, the mission is to stand “athwart history, yelling Stop.”
Reactionaries are not conservatives. This is the first thing to be understood about them. Conservatives have always seen society as a kind of inheritance we receive and are responsible for. The healthiest way to bring about change, the conservative believes, is through consultation and slow transformations in custom and tradition, not by announcing bold reform programs or inventing supposedly inalienable individual rights. But the conservative is also reconciled to the fact that history never stands still and that we are only passing through. Conservatism seeks to instill the humble thought that history moves us forward, not the other way around. And that radical attempts to master it through sheer will bring disaster.
Reactionaries reject this conservative outlook. They are, in their way, just as radical as revolutionaries and just as destructive. Reactionary stories always begin with a happy, well-ordered state where people willingly shared a common destiny. Then alien ideas promoted by intellectuals and outsiders — writers, journalists, professors, foreigners — undermined that harmony. (The betrayal of elites is central to every reactionary myth.) Soon the entire society, even the common people, were taken in. Only those who have preserved memories of the old ways — the reactionaries themselves — see what happened. Whether the society reverses direction or rushes to its ultimate doom depends entirely on their resistance. …”
Essentially, a reactionary is someone who as Mark Lilla says believes there was once a Golden Age, but who now sees the debris of paradise drifting past his eyes. The reactionary is someone who is inspired by a previous state of affairs and who desires to return to it and believes that is possible. The reactionary is someone who is focused on “telling the truth” about what actually happened. The reactionary is someone who is deeply opposed to social changes and wants to overturn those changes.
There is no more reactionary scene in all of American politics than the “NS” fandom. Their lost Golden Age is the Third Reich which was ruined by the Allies in World War II. Their nostalgia for the past is so strong that they create fake political parties which do not engage in political activity, issue membership cards and dress up in period costumes like the NSDAP. They are crypt keepers who are focused on “telling the truth” about what actually happened in World War II and the Holocaust. It appeals to history nerds who write 3,000 and 12,000 word candlelight vigil essays about Hitler and National Socialism. It appeals only to people who are deeply alienated from the present and who take refuge in the past.
As I have explained in Loser Pilled, the “NS” fandom is distinct in all kinds of ways from historic National Socialism. Adolf Hitler was a talented politician who engaged in political activity. The historic NSDAP was the political vehicle of a faction in Germany that contested and won state power. The historical National Socialists were not driven by incurable nostalgia for a defunct foreign regime. They were not trying to be edgy. Their program was based on addressing contemporary political problems like economic collapse and hyperinflation and grievances like Germany’s territorial losses after World War II. Hitler had his own thoughts about geopolitics which were inspired by the blockade in World War I. The original act was nothing like the fandom that has grown up around it. National Socialism was not a reactionary movement attempting to return to a Golden Age. It is the fans who are all foreigners and reactionaries.
It goes without saying that reactionaries come in all colors and stripes, but I don’t know of anyone else who is so deeply committed to playing the part. In the Southern heritage community, there are Confederate reenactors who are nostalgic for the Confederacy who get together and reenact battles like Gettysburg and who memorize the minutiae of Civil War campaigns and battles. There are people who are “telling the truth” about Lincoln and what really happened in the Civil War. For the most part though, these people do not identify as “Confederates” and would say they love Southern heritage. No one gets totally lost in the sauce of history and adopts the identity of a “Nazi” like “NS” fans who forget it is a LARP.
Confederate reenactors take off their uniforms, meet up at Denny’s or Outback Steakhouse after their LARPs and return to their suburban families and office jobs. These … people … do … not. The stahlhelm stays on 24/7/365 and becomes the entire identity of KikeSlammer1488.
Here are some key differences between Southern Nationalism and the “NS” fandom:
- Southern Nationalism is based on the unique Anglo-Celtic cultural and historical experience in the American South. No one debates whether “Neo-Confederate ideology” can or should be exported to foreign countries. A German Klansman or a Russian “Confederate” is a joke
- Most Southern Nationalists would agree that it is neither possible or desirable to restore racial chattel slavery and the plantation complex in the 21st century
- Most Southern Nationalists would agree the Jeffersonian agrarian dream is long dead in the 21st century. Few Southerners work in agriculture on family farms
- Most Southern Nationalists would agree that industrialization and urbanization are irreversible
- Most Southern Nationalists are the descendants of Confederate veterans and admire and want to defend their own heritage. They are not latching on to a foreign regime
- I’ve never once seen a Southern Nationalists argue that, say, the case for Irish Nationalism or Polish Nationalism in the 21st century turns on vindicating Southern slavery
- No one in Southern Nationalism says things like “Jefferson Davis save us”
- No one in Southern Nationalism argues that it is the only legitimate form of nationalism or somehow indispensable to other nationalist movements
- Most Southern Nationalists recognize that American demographics are more complicated after 20th century migration. The DamnYankee isn’t blamed for everything
- If anything is true, Southern Nationalist organizations are guilty of being too accommodating of non-Southerners and going too far in the big tent “pro-White” direction
- I’ve never heard anyone in Southern Nationalism claim that Confederate ideology was perfect
- Southern Nationalists generally don’t argue over the finer points of Confederate ideology like, say, Robert Barnwell Rhett’s ideal of Free Government
- Southern Nationalists are critical of Confederate military leaders like Longstreet or Bragg
- Southern Nationalists recognize that the Confederacy was only four years of Southern history
- Jews had little to do with the War Between the States and went along with slavery and secession. It was a conflict between evangelical Protestants on both sides of the war.
Southern Nationalism is a generic ethnonationalist movement inspired by reactionary nostalgia. What matters to Southern Nationalists is preserving Southerners as a race, people and culture in our own times, reversing a generation of deracination, not relitigating the Civil War.
It is similar to people in Scotland who want to be independent from the United Kingdom. It is taken for granted that the historic Confederacy isn’t coming back, the war was lost and its leaders are dead. Southern Nationalists don’t dress in period costumes and identify as “Confederates” like the “NS” fandom. You could place “Neo-Confederacy” on the reactionary spectrum along with other modern secessionist movements, but it is not at the polar end of the spectrum like the “NS” fandom.
In spite of their self-image, there is nothing “revolutionary” about the “NS” fandom. It is more deeply attached to history and nostalgia than other nationalist movements motivated by reactionary nostalgia. It is a fandom or a subculture that strongly rejects engaging in political activity. Texas Nationalists, for example, are active in state politics. Southern Nationalists have supporters in Congress who sympathize with a National Divorce. I’ve seen candidates for state offices speak at our events. Hitler is a godlike figure in the “NS” fandom that has no real parallel among other reactionary subcultures.
Keith makes an important point here about the reactionary “NS” subculture:
“Modern NS is backward looking and recycles aesthetics that are a century old. For decades, the NS subculture has attracted the dregs of White society. …
The NS subculture is associated with criminality and misanthropy not just because of Jewish media representation, but the actual history of these movements. Why is that? Is it just because the system fears NS so much that it is bound to only attract people with little to lose? Partly. But it’s also true that identifying as NS today is analogous to identifying as a satanist in a Christian society. It’s no surprise then that it attracts the same anti-social types that were attracted to satanism in previous decades, and there is even a crossover between some NS subcultures and satanism, as well as other extreme anti-social subcultures like people who celebrate mass-shooters. …”
Insofar as “NS” does become “revolutionary,” the result is always sporadic acts of wignat crime and violence. There are other reactionary subcultures on the far right, but you don’t hear about Trad Cath mass shooters. There is no overlap between Trad Caths or Neo-Confederates and Satanism.
The SPLC has a timely new article on the Brandon Russell trial and something called “Terrorgram” which I understand is part of the wignat subculture on Telegram. The author, Hannah Gais, jokes that people like this – Atomwaffen, Order of Nine Angles types – are who keep her in business.
“Russell, 29, was found guilty on Feb. 3 of conspiring to damage an energy facility, after a six-day trial at a federal court in Baltimore. A mostly white jury deliberated for less than an hour before reaching a verdict.
Over the course of the trial, part of which Hatewatch attended, prosecutors presented voluminous evidence confirming Russell as a central figure within “Terrorgram,” a neo-Nazi collective that the U.S. Department of State named a Specially Designated Global Terrorist group in July. “Terrorgram” refers to a loosely organized network of chats on the messaging app Telegram, where neo-Nazis shared instructions for making bombs and 3D-printed weapons, glorified white supremacist terrorists as “saints,” and plotted attacks on infrastructure, minorities, public figures and politicians. …
Since then, Atomwaffen Division members have been linked to five murders, in addition to various harassment plots and weapons or explosives charges. This included Russell, whom authorities arrested and later incarcerated on explosives-related charges in Florida in 2017. Upon his release from prison in 2021, Russell continued living in Florida and became involved with Terrorgram. …
In chats shown at trial, Russell appeared to present himself as a recruiter for the National Socialist Resistance Front (NSRF). Ryan Hatfield, a former Atomwaffen Division cell leader, founded NSRF under a different name in 2020.
Though significantly smaller than Atomwaffen Division at its peak, NSRF used similar aesthetics, blending World War II-era Nazi imagery with hyper-stylized footage of paramilitary trainings. …”
This stuff is a perennial feature of the “Nazi” subculture going back to Charles Manson.
Actually, it is not indispensable to the success of White advocacy and nationalism in Europe and America in the 21st century – the optics of period costumes, the “leaders” of these groups, the history effort posts, the criminality, the federal attention magnet, the lawsuits, relitigating the baggage train of mid-20th century German foreign policy, arguing over who did what in World War II, the unserious scenesters who are just striking a pose, the sociopaths, the losers and attention seekers drawn to it, the monomaniacal obsession with issues Americans do not care about, their “strategy” of attacking White people and Christians for not being interested in their niche subculture and losing at politics to empower our enemies.
I had a front row seat to the impact the “Nationalist Front” had on Southern nationalism. I watched the oxygen leave the room whenever we did anything with these groups. Anyone who was not deeply immersed in “NS” subculture was repelled by it. There was no benefit whatsoever to associating with people who form human swastikas at police helicopters. Normal people have no interest in their program. No one anywhere in America has ever been relieved to see these people show up in their towns screaming about their free speech and acting out their identity issues on the town square.
I think the final word on this subject should be left to Hitler himself. He never envisioned this morbid postwar fandom of non-Germans scattered across the world. He never asked to be associated with it. It has always been a kind of mutant and it has a flawless track record of failure at politics.
It should be stepped over.
Note: Keith Woods has too deep of a background in philosophy to fall into the simpleminded monomania about Jews that you see in these circles. My own background in history is why I was never interested in it. White Americans struggled over race for a century before Jews played any significant role in American politics. The same was true of other European countries like France.
I am an American Reactionary, and the NS LARPers like Conte are wannabe revolutionaries. They will never win anything here in America.
The best bet for America is to acknowledge, at the least, that the outcome of WW2 which led to the Civil Rights Movement which led to Hart-Cellar which led to Wokeness – was the wrong way to go.
The best bet moving forward, which is actually realistic, is to simply 86 the liberalism. It would be unlikely to see an end to Ultra-Capitalism.
Southern “nationalism” can be categorized as petty nationalism. You will find similar types all over the world, the Ukrainian nationalists vs Russians, Irish vs Northern Irish, Polish vs Russians, Scottish vs English, Croats vs Serbs, etc. All these petty localized nationalisms are very easy for ZOG to subvert. While they think that getting the help from something like NATO or the EU (in the case of the southern nationalists its voting for Republicans) will make them “win” against their enemy, what really happens is that all these states end up with the same pattern of importing millions of non whites and having gay pride parades.
One of the core tenants of National Socialism is recognizing that the international jew is a global problem, none of the petty nationalisms do this and most will be dead within 50 years time, Nationalism Socialism as the idea will survive and transcend all the other petty ones.
@AryanUprising,
“Southern “nationalism” can be categorized as petty nationalism. You will find similar types all over the world, the Ukrainian nationalists vs Russians, Irish vs Northern Irish, Polish vs Russians, Scottish vs English, Croats vs Serbs, etc.”
So, the NS now has a word describe the Nationalism of their Furher, its petty Nationalism? Muh, ok.
Do you know how many times some obnoxious jew has told me Christ is not your lord, Hitler he is your lord? And why do you suppose that obnoxious jew wants me to worship Hitler? Because he cares about my spiritual salvation? BAHA
I commented this on his substack.
I think it’s good that he rejects Hitler’s approach to Slavs, but hope he is not implying that Hitler was right regarding Jews.
I think the ideal compromise here would be to rehabilitate the Klan in some manner. They’re far more deserving of such a rehabilitation since they already had all of the necessary elements for a White racialist movement in America and I’d wager that the Klan is seen far more negatively than the Nazis at this point in time, in part due to non-Whites finding it harder to cling onto the Klan than Hitler.
neonazis are doodoo heads and hunter keeps btfoing them again and again. why do they keep coming back here? just to be humiliated? it’s like some weird bdsm cuck fetish
thank you for writing another article btfo’ing these freaks hunter. I read every one.
ReAl NAtSoCs have that same thing that white liberals do, where they worship foreigners (nazis) but hate their own people (the kkk)
funny that
The ONLY aspect of NS history that I consider to be a valid argument for discussion is the fact that that WW2 was an inflection point where a major global war was fought against essentially three nationalist powers (Germany, Italy, and Japan) that had been antagonized by British and American political forces, and that this inflection point was defined by the revolutionary impulses of communists and fascists as these two movements rose in the first half of the century.
The historical context of those events is not well understood by most people. The baby (natural chauvinistic impulses) gets thrown out with the bath water (NS/Hitler).
People want to understand the historical context (how did we wind up with Somalian refugees taking over entire towns? How did we wind up with a transgender tolerant military? Why are women serving in combat roles).
The problem is, this doesn’t require Hitler rehabilitation.
I’ll give you another moment in history and we can see by using it as an example, that the modern world as we know it would have been very different without those events.
The Mongols once ruled the most vast empire in history. In fact, the modern fault line of civilization in Europe was largely influenced by the Mongols. Eastern Europe and Russia occupy much of the westernmost land that the Mongols invaded. History paints the Mongols as brutal savages who raped and pillaged (and indeed they did), but modern scholarship attributes a considerable amount of good that came from the rule of Kublai Kahn. Marco Polo was said to have occupied a place in his court, and east-west trade was opened up, along with shared ideas and technologies.
What I’m getting at is that the Kahns were brutal, and their conquest of empire was every bit as genocidal as anything before or since. Yet, the Mongols haven’t been rehabilitated. Nobody is trying to claim that Genghis was a well meaning but misunderstood fellow that should be idolized. No, but history can be viewed through unbiased context, and “how we got here” can be better understood.
However, this isn’t the conversation to be had with Joe the Plumber or Jill the hairdresser. Most of them have no interest in it. We can maybe make them understand that WW2 was an event where political forces that weren’t democratic manipulated public opinion, and that we live with the consequences. We can show them that we can force our collective will, but this will never happen if we’re wearing a stahlhelm and marching around with swastikas.
I think the big takeaway from the World Wars is how devastating war can be for us and why we should have a peaceful foreign policy. It is a major reason why I have never been interested in fascism. It is why nationalists in our own times tend to be much more dovish than hawkish. Something like World War II can never been allowed to happen again.
100%
And Globalization as a general concept was the trajectory that was (naively) set in motion. I think it started out less sinister, a belief that trade and more open societies would create the “end of history”. Instead, the 21st century has proven to be a powder keg of resentments and harbored grievances. The American empire has devoted trillions to a constant war footing and never ending conflicts within and without.
And that’s it? No lessons to be learnt, say, about the risks posed by chauvinistic nationalist demonization of ethnic others? None at all?
Obviously, Silver.
I don’t see much of that these days.
Neo-Nazi types are embarrassed by Nazi racial theory and try to downplay it. Hitler didn’t think the Slavs were an inferior race because of the Waffen SS or something. Hitler actually wanted pan-Europeanism. I am sure you have seen all the talking points. Even they have largely moved on from that stuff.
“how devastating war can be for us and why we should have a peaceful foreign policy” – yes, for example, why we shouldn’t bomb Yemen for the Jews
Woods Advocates Weakness, Compromise, and Intellectual Dishonesty
Keith Woods’ arguments ultimately boil down to a defense of half-measures and ideological timidity, dressed up as pragmatic strategy. His primary concern—that National Socialism carries negative stigma—is nothing more than a fearful retreat into weakness and respectability politics. Rather than standing firmly behind a rigorous, comprehensive, and proven life-affirming ideology, Woods prefers a sanitized nationalism designed to placate enemies who despise our existence regardless.
Nationalism without National Socialism is precisely the half-measure that has repeatedly failed European peoples. It offers neither structural solutions nor ideological coherence. Woods’ belief that the essence of National Socialism—its fundamental commitment to racial health, cultural vitality, economic independence, and disciplined self-overcoming—can be stripped away, leaving behind a vague ethnonationalist shell, is intellectually bankrupt. Such hollow nationalism can never provide the depth of purpose, moral clarity, or strategic vision essential for genuine rebirth and sustained revival.
Woods deliberately misconstrains the complexity of historical events, lazily parroting mainstream tropes without rigorous engagement with primary sources. He misrepresents the nature of Lebensraum, dismisses Slavic collaboration, and leans heavily on mistranslated excerpts from Hitler’s Table Talks. The reality is clear: the Table Talks—recorded firsthand in German by Picker and Heim—are authentic records, distorted only through English translations. To entirely dismiss them, as Woods does, is intellectually negligent and betrays a lack of scholarly integrity.
Woods’ rejection of National Socialism reveals more than historical ignorance—it exposes his philosophical cowardice. His ideological stance resembles National Bolshevism, a confused hybrid that tries and fails to reconcile nationalism with leftist economic populism, inevitably resulting in ideological paralysis. Woods advocates a path of least resistance, endorsing a nationalism devoid of moral clarity or revolutionary intent. He proposes nothing concrete beyond vague appeals to national tradition, conveniently sidestepping the urgent structural crises—demographic collapse, cultural degeneration, economic subjugation—that demand radical solutions.
In short, Woods represents precisely what must be eradicated from nationalism: timidity, compromise, and a preoccupation with optics. He prioritizes popular acceptance over ideological integrity, fundamentally misunderstanding the reality that true nationalism requires sacrifice, struggle, and unwavering adherence to principles that sustain and elevate life.
The Life Affirming Principle dictates clear solutions: nationalism must be bold, disciplined, and uncompromising. It cannot thrive through half-hearted populism or sanitized historical revisionism. National Socialism is more than Adolf Hitler or the Third Reich; it is a timeless truth, discovered rather than invented, a guiding philosophy for cultural, biological, and economic health. To reject it is to reject the only fully coherent system capable of achieving lasting strength and survival for our people.
Ultimately, Woods embodies a defeatist mindset. He would rather pursue polite nationalism, begging permission to exist, instead of forging an uncompromising path toward genuine national renewal. His approach offers neither hope nor solutions, only endless retreat. To embrace Woods’ path is to embrace perpetual defeat.
– Daniel Zakal
Bootlickers of the powers that be are useful idiots of kosher MAGAism and Homelandism respectfully.
“Nationalism without National Socialism is precisely the half-measure that has repeatedly failed European peoples.”
Wikipedia: 40 to 50 million Europeans died during WW2 (at the peak of NS)
Yeah that went amazingly well the first go round.
This argument is like the Tankie commie argument about communism not succeeding because it hasn’t “been done right”.
The Irish are willing footsoldiers for the jews in the War On Whites.
The idea that Americans don’t have a culture or identity is hilarious. The guilt complex millions of people have is embarrassing. Skipping too much mental leg days. The insanely disproportionate over representation of subversive heebs who are rabid ethnocentric anti-white/American weirdos is so obvious in so many different areas people get consumed by it. The fact normal Americans still think the Civil War was about slavery is unbelievable. Or that millions of simple people who think all races of men are equal… I always ask if they are equal to a Somalian… Why they have this guilt complex confuses me. They also somehow think other races are not “racist/ethnocentric”. Anyway.>
“Four Slave States Stay in the Union Despite their acceptance of slavery, Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, and Missouri did not join the Confederacy. Although divided in their loyalties, a combination of political maneuvering and Union military pressure kept these states from seceding.”
An act of Congress passed in 1800 made it illegal for Americans to engage in the slave trade between nations, and gave U.S. authorities the right to seize slave ships which were caught transporting slaves and confiscate their cargo. Then the “Act Prohibiting the Importation of Slaves” took effect in 1808. See also the US Navy and setting up Liberia for former slaves…
“In 1924 the Research Department of the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History completed a study of the free Negro slave owners found in the 1830 U. S. Federal Census. The study found 3,777 Negro slave owners in the United States. Negro slave owners were listed in 29 Kentucky counties.”
Not all blacks in the USA were slaves… The free the slaves narrative was used as a moral justification for an illegal war. Lincoln wanted to ship them back to Africa anyway. America was founded on secession from the British empire and the South wanted self determination aka the right to rule themselves politically and economically. Full stop. The Civil War was about trade, taxes, and tariffs. Don’t be dumb to me…
Thanksgiving is about celebrating the fall harvest. Modern Santa Claus was invented by an American during the Civil War… The guy on the $50 bill (General Order No. 11) tried to kick heebs out of all the area he controlled… in 1862…
“Physicians were practicing in an era before the germ theory of disease was established, before sterile technique and antisepsis were known, with very few effective medications, and often operating 48 to 72 hours with no sleep.” From what I read, seems at least some procedures were performed by drunk doctors.
Anesthesia was first introduced in the United States in the 1840s. During the Civil War, it was used in over 80,000 cases. Chloroform was preferred because it had a quicker onset of action, could be used in small volumes, and was nonflammable. During the war there were only 43 anesthesia-related deaths. Anesthesia was fairly light (stage II) leading to the misperception that it was not being used.
Three of every four surgical procedures performed during the war were amputations. Each amputation took about 2 to 10 minutes to complete. There were 175,000 extremity wounds to Union soldiers, and about 30,000 of these underwent amputation with a 26.3% mortality.”
“The year after the war ended, the state of Mississippi spent 20% of its annual budget on artificial limbs for its veterans.”
White American inventions-
Airplane
Computer
Internet
Air conditioning
Light bulb
Rubber
Modern steel process
Television
Cell phone
GPS
C-programming language
1st and 2nd amendments
1st skyscraper
X-rays
Digital camera
NFL/NBA/MLB
Charolette’s web? Blood meridian? HP Lovecraft? Etc.
Cotton gin
Walt Disney?
Thomas Edison?
Modern Santa Claus?
Model T?
Microwave
Microphone
Radio
Was Tesla a white American?
History of oil and fracking?
spaghetti and meatballs was invented in the US…
The survey sample is carefully selected to mirror the American population, and it is huge. Last year it was 238,043 people or nearly a quarter of a million. For opinion polling, a sample of 1,500 people is a big sample, and that gives a margin of error of about 2-1/2 percent. A sample of 233,000 is gigantic, and gives good results.
So let us turn to the justly celebrated and aptly numbered Table 13, which includes the figures for interracial crime. When blacks and Hispanics commit violence, whites are their most frequent victims, followed by their own race, and then the other race. So, it’s all very well to worry about black-on-black violence, for example, but according to the NCVS, there were actually 121,000 more cases of black-on-white than black-on-black violence. Hispanics attacked about 2,400 more whites than they attacked fellow Hispanics.
We can get other interesting numbers. The NCVS says that whites are 61 percent of the US population, blacks are 12 percent, and Hispanics 18 percent. Since we know the number of perps of each race who attacked someone of another race, we can calculate the likelihood that any given person of any of these three groups will attack someone from another group. For blacks and whites, the numbers are shocking. A black person was 35 times more likely to attack a white rather than the other way around. A black person was three times more likely to attack a Hispanic than the reverse, and a Hispanic was 3.3 times more likely to attack a white rather than the other way around.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics reports the data to the public every year.”
“Datahazard estimates a total of 145,695 white people – including 35,000 women – killed by blacks in the last 53 years. Just for comparison, that’s more than the 117,000 American soldiers killed in the First World War.
Over on the right are estimates of white-on-black murders, again with men in orange and women in blue, for a total of 47,876 blacks killed by whites. Given that there are about five times as many whites as blacks in the country, a black was about 17 times more likely to kill a white than the other way around. But it’s worse than that, because as Datahazard points out, for most historical data, the government stupidly lumps Hispanics in with whites, so that in these graphs, “whites” includes whites and Hispanics.”
Breaking-The NSDAP was soundly defeated 80 years ago.
“Note: Keith Woods has too deep of a background in philosophy to fall into the simpleminded monomania about Jews that you see in these circles. My own background in history is why I was never interested in it. White Americans struggled over race for a century before Jews played any significant role in American politics. The same was true of other European countries like France.”
You again paint a straw men of anti-semites. Jews are not the only cause of our plight. But Jews and their historical influence are the primary cause of our present plight. The Jew feeds whites the ideological poison that whites have been using to slowly kill themselves for millennia. It is a both-and proposition. Jews are necessary but not sufficient for the occurrence of our present plight. Many white traitors ally themselves with the Jews and follow their programs. These traitors are the greater enemy because they stab their ostensible friends in the back for money. But the Jew is paying them to betray their people. It is a both-and proposition: white traitors are secondary causes while Jews and their historical influence are primary causes. No antisemite that I have read lays all of the blame at the feet of the Jews and discounts any role that their gentile collaborators (often called white traitors) may have played in destroying the power of the white race. Such a person who dismisses the existence of white traitors is extremely ignorant. I know of no such persons.
After you read Nietzsche and fundamentally understand the Genealogy of Christian (slave) morality and its spiritual poisoning of the Aryan world of Antiquity and the manifestation of that poison in its manifold secular permutations (including liberalism, egalitarianism, feminism, socialism, and marxism) one understands the Jewish role in history and how Jewish influence in the form of the early or seminal Christianity of Jesus of Nazareth, who was a zealous racial Jew, as opposed to the Germanized Medieval Christianity of the Germanic nobility and crusaders of Medieval Europe, has led to the fall of the Aryan race. Jews have conquered the Aryan race spiritually. The Aryans worship a Jew, Jesus of Nazareth, as God and the eternal creator of the world. We have been conquered by the Jews, and our modern egalitarian understanding of good and evil as demonstrated by the Holocaust Mythos is but a derivation of the Christ Mythos, a poison that infects the brain of Christian aryans with the disease of the cowardice and guilt of the slave, rather than the shame and honor of the warrior.
To understand the transvaluation of values that early Jewish Christians worked on the pagan world, read Dominion by Tom Holland. He identifies that christianity in a secularized form is responsible for the degenerate modern world. He traces the history of ideas from Jesus of Nazareth to Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.
Unfortunately, you are a Judeo-Christian who rejects the ways of his pre-christian ancestors as the worship of demons and believes that the majority of his ancestors are burning in hell for eternal conscious torment because they did not believe in the divinity of a Jewish man who they never heard of and for whose divinity they had little to no reliable evidence. Your God Yahweh is a Jewish egregore. Snap out of the Jewish spell. Stop worshiping Jews.
https://counter-currents.com/2025/03/response-to-greg-johnson-and-joel-davis
What ist “chauvinism”, has it something to to mit Derek Chauvin? Or with Anglo-American centuries of never ending wars/imperialism/colonialism?
Hitler’s war in the East was was not as “racial” against Slavs, as it is claimed. It was ideological (like that of the “Allies” against Germany, though “American” Jews wanted to eradicate “Amalek” indeed for racial reasions from the very beginning).
Slavic children from the East were often even “Germanized”. But the National Socialists realized a strong genetic Central Asiatic/Tatar/Mongol influence in the Russkies.
Axis-allies like Bulgaria, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia etc. were Slavic nations/peoples. Many leading National Socialists were (at least partly) Slavic themselves. https://en.everybodywiki.com/List_of_Nazis_of_non-Germanic_descent
” Nationalism without national socialism is precisely the half-measure that has repeatedly failed European people’s ” I disagree, in the United states, the YANKEE’S failed American nationalism and America specifically, they let everybody in, National Socialism suits continental Catholic Europe, they are used to being told what to do and think anyway.
Apart, perhaps, from a brief moment when you ran a blog literally called “antisemitica.” (The usual “news and Jews” fare.) Sorry, but some of us remember.
I’ve always written about Jews including this morning.
I just spun my posts about that subject off into a separate blog. It was too much of a hassle though to update two blogs which is why I shut it down. There was briefly another one called Confederate Renaissance which contained all of my posts about Southern politics and history. I closed it down for the same reason.
” Southern ” Nationalism ” can be ,categorized as petty nationalism. One of the more stupid comments ever posted, Southern Nationalism/Founding Stock Americanism, really what it is, a noble effort to preserve the work of our forbears, who created with God’s Blessing, the finest country their has ever been, but regrettably our wayward brothers up north, have labored to screw up, Southern Nationalism/ Founding Stock nationalism, ain’t for everybody Sir, just us, who have skin in the game and love in our heart, for our people and for this land our Fathers conquered.