Tag Archives: white nationalism

Whites Talking to Whites About What’s Best for Us

Inspired by the example set by Voice of Reason, for about two months now Carolyn Yeager and I have been working on a new, explicitly pro-White internet talk radio site. We’ll launch with her long-running The Heretics’ Hour, my new weekly program Age of Treason Radio, and another program or two we haven’t quite settled on.

For several weeks now we’ve been putting off going live for just one more week, but it’s looking like next week all the essential pieces will finally be in place. Further details will be posted here and at Carolyn Yeager as they become available.

IREHR: Human Rights is Anti-White

Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights

The About link points to A New Statement by a Renewed Organization for New Times, by Leonard Zeskind:

The white nationalist movement consists of an ever-shifting array of organizations, publishing houses, think tanks, websites and individuals with an interlocking leadership and cross-pollinating memberships. Two relatively distinct trends exist in the movement: a mainstreaming wing that hopes to build a political majority among white people, and a vanguardist wing comprised of hard-core cadres with a more violence-prone tendency. Both movement wings aim at establishing a whites-only political, cultural, and social dominance over the United States. The long-term goal of the most significant sector of the movement is the creation of an Aryans-only nation-state, separate from the rest of the country.

The influence of the white nationalist movement has far exceeded its size. In the post-Jim Crow years, it has re-articulated racism and white supremacy in American life, and turned them into an ideology of white dispossession. The expected loss of majority status by white people, projected by the Census Bureau to occur around mid-century, has animated this idea. One immediate outcome has been that the public discourse about affirmative action has been dominated by notions that white people are the new “victims.” Talk of discrimination quickly turns to charges of “reverse racism” and “special rights” for “minorities.” More, white nationalists years ago cut the turf for the anti-immigrant sentiment that has swelled behind it. In the United States, anti-Semitism exists in its most congealed form in the Jewish conspiracy theories that white nationalists have propagated; and the notion of Holocaust denial would barely exist at all if white nationalists had not turned it into their movement’s calling card.

The so-called Christian right, paleo-conservatism, and other far-right movements exist in a symbiotic relationship with nativism and white nationalism; and ideas and people flow between these movements, sometimes creating a whole that is bigger than its parts. In the current period, during the first months of the Obama administration, white nationalists have grown stronger in a milieu of racist and nationalist opposition to the status quo.

The combined experience of the Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights’ board members represents nearly a century of direct experience countering racism, anti-Semitism, white supremacy and white nationalist movements.

Individually and together, we have investigated the smallest corners of white nationalist activity, in the process building one of the largest research archives on white nationalism in country. We’ve also helped conceptualize the broadest band of understanding of the problems at hand. We have written extensively on these issues for publications in the United States and Europe. And we have helped build trans-Atlantic relationships to trace and disable the international designs of white nationalists.

We have organized to protect Native Indian sovereignty rights in the Northwest, fought Klan groups in the Southeast, and helped build a family farmer’s movement that opposed anti-Semitism and the Posse Comitatus in the Midwest. We organized a broad-based opposition to the militia. We initiated peer-based responses to the white power music scene and were the first to point out the white nationalist origins of the anti-immigrant movement.

IREHR brings both a long-term perspective and a short-term urgency to our work. We aim to continue examining racist, anti-Semitic, and far right social movements, analyzing their intersection with civil society and social policy, and to educate the public and assist in the protection and extension of human rights through organization and informed mobilization.

Judeo-liberal “human rights” rhetoric doesn’t get much more blatantly anti-White than this. What’s more, this is plainly driven by a deep and overriding concern for the best interests of jews.

Self-righteous anti-Whites like Zeskind regularly remind us that jews aren’t White. Jews think of and portray themselves as innocent victims with Whites as their evil victimizers. They aren’t us, and they aren’t interested in sharing a “civil society” with us. In their minds we have a duty to provide them a “civil society”, abandoning or subordinating our own best interests while they freely pursue theirs.

Brother Nathanael Kapner Gives me the Creeps


To pick just one example, in Can White America Survive? Kapner cites “prominent White identity leaders” Peter Brimelow, Kevin MacDonald, Jared Taylor, James Edwards, and Harold Covington without demonizing them. Hallelujah. Then he tacks on this conclusion:

American jewry with its anti-Christian position now rules over America’s multi-racial fragmentation. Only a return to historic Christianity that could unite our nation with one common language and one common faith and where jewry is granted no special status or privileges can save America from ruin and a very possible next civil war.

Kapner is not praising the “prominent White identity leaders” he cited, he’s criticizing them. None of them (excluding perhaps Edwards) express a strong Christian identity or advocate “a return to historic Christianity”.

Though Kapner is critical of jewish rule he still wishes to secure a future for America that includes them. His America is an oxymoronic multi-racial nation, which he imagines can somehow rally around a single religion and language regardless of underlying racial differences.

Kapner reminds me of Lawrence Auster. Jew converts to Christianity; criticizes jewish rule (or the symptoms of it in Auster’s case); advocates in favor of a return to the traditional, to some point in the past where jews were free to operate and prosper without being so obviously noxious and destructive; and, in the end, blames Whites for not keeping house well enough.

People like this may seem to serve White interests by criticizing jews, but ultimately they are inimical to White identity and separation from jews. They aren’t us.

Fjordman Fallout

Chechar calls my attention to Unser Abschied von Fjordman (Our Departure from Fjordman) at As der Schwerter (Ace of Swords).

Mein Deutsch ist schlecht, and the Google Translate version is not much better, but the gist I get is that the efforts Chechar and I have made to engage Fjordman, part of a more general challenge to counter-jihadists to face the facts of jewish influence, has borne fruit in Germany.

The bloggers at Ace of Swords – Deep Roots, Osimandia, and Kairos (Cairo) – recently moved their blog from fjordman.wordpress.com to schwertasblog.wordpress.com, in part because visitors were sometimes confused about whether they were Fjordman, and in part because Fjordman requested it, apparently because he didn’t like that they had indeed chosen to face the facts about the jews.

While all three of these bloggers credit Fjordman with helping to awaken them, they all specifically cite the incident discussed in White Nationalism and the Counter-Jihad for causing them to reevalute their opinion of the counter-jihad. They have actually made the move I was hoping Fjordman would. They have rejected the deracinated counter-jihad and embraced ethno-racial nationalism.

Their Departure from Fjordman post concludes with an unequivocal White nationalist sentiment:

Europe belongs to Europeans. Not the Jews, not Muslims, the Europeans. (And, by the way, Germany is the Germans. Not the French, not the Americans, the Germans.)

For some reason the Google Translate version of the whole page reverts to German right at the point where the comments get interesting. Translating comments piecemeal we find signs that the AoS bloggers have come very quickly up to speed. Here are some samples.

Comment 19, by Osimandia:

It is very important to recognize that it is not “the Englishman” and “French” and “Americans” are driving the adverse developments. Instead, there are Judaised British, French and Americans. And I can not even make a whole lot Judaised German, commonly referred to as “poilitisch correct”.

Among the species of this sort of people are stubborn and deluded “serious critic of Islam,” the hufescharrend wait to finally be recognized as a subspecies accepted – which in my soon to be the case.

Comment 20, by Pit:

Yep:
politically correct = Semitic correctly.

I’ve even made it clear that “politically correct” means serving certain interests, promoting. Namely: Jewish interests.

Always in our understanding, Jews are an ethnic competitors. This competitor has defined its Jewish ethnic interests to general interests: so it is now: politically correct. Indeed, but it must read: correctly Semitic. So the whole agenda that we all have equal rights, whether orignial people relative or any intruder … all the same, no matter if the people belonging to or not, is this view of Jewish ethnicity, because they want to live in other peoples as a minority, but just how much influence and rights to their ancestral people (which is possible only if the incumbent People’s delegitimized and his identity is dissolved in).

We speak of: ETHNIC CORRECT. And since there was just one: Germanic correctly.
And we should all, the entire public life, align it, what is GERMANISCH-CORRECT! For these are OUR interests.

Comment 26, by Pit:

McDonald’s position is immediately obvious to me: Jews are a rival ethnic group. They live in our white Gesellschften, but work only for their own benefit (to § 130s: “Is it good for the Jews” is the default position). From this approach follows pretty much everything else.

Comment 58, by Deep Roots:

Judaism is indeed the main enemy in this struggle for the survival of the white peoples, and to the realize this, one need only imagine what would happen if tomorrow would start all the white peoples, the Jews from their positions of power in the West remove and expel them from their countries.

Fjordman, Baron Bodissey and other long-time semitically-correct true believers may indeed be a lost cause. But here we have a reminder that there are other people – good and honest people – who are initially attracted to the counter-jihad by natural, patriotic instincts. Many are simply lurking and listening, more or less literally misguided. With help, if necessary, some of them can and will come to see the counter-jihad for what it is – a crypto-jewish movement, concerned mainly with serving jewish interests. Seeing this frees them to take the next logical and emotional step: directing their concerns toward serving the interests of their own kind rather than others.

O’Meara: The Anti-Semites Are Our Misfortune

Michael O’Meara sums up his latest essay, White Nationalism is Not Anti-Semitism, with this telling comment:

The anti-Semites, though, are totally out of control and need a wake-up call; I think their ignorance, reductionism, and resentment are a disgrace to everything associated with nationalism. Without them we may be fewer (for a while), but we will certainly be better — and better able to convince others that we’re not just a bunch of Jew-obsessed crackpots.

William Buckley, Lawrence Auster, Peder Jensen (Fjordman), Guy White, and Ian Jobling have made similar calls in similar terms.

O’Meara projects his own ignorance, reductionism, and resentment onto the objects of his frustration. And who wouldn’t be frustrated with the low, hateful group of losers he imagines; so obscure and crazy that he cannot name even one, and yet so critically important that he feels compelled to confront and vanquish them.

For my part I try to stay focused on real people who wield real power. If so many of them were eskimos or serving eskimo interests then naturally their regime (and O’Meara) would be scapegoating eskimo-obsessed crackpots. C’est la guerre.