web analytics
Civil war Ethnic cleansing Homosexuality Newspeak Pseudoscience Tacitus

A question for Johnson

In my article on “ethnosuicidal nationalists” I mentioned several aspects of white nationalism that seem to me indistinguishable from the anti-white zeitgeist of the present West. But I did not include homosexuality because only a faction of white nationalists preaches this lifestyle as a normal thing that we must accept.

Recently, some of The Right Stuff renegades posted podcasts denouncing what they consider a cancer to extirpate from the white nationalist movement: what they call a homosexual “mafia” within the movement (listen here).

Most of their discussion centres on Greg Johnson, the editor of the webzine and small house Counter Currents Publishing.

Last year, white nationalist Lana, host of Red Ice TV, interviewed Johnson in “Straight But Not Narrow Nationalism: Gays, Women & The Manosphere.” The way Lana introduces the subject of homosexuality seems to make us assume that we are facing a typical liberal woman. Lana swallows the pseudo-scientific propaganda that homosexuality is genetic, and that therefore the poor homosexuals have no choice but to act in accordance with their genetic programming.

Worse still, Lana uses the Newspeak term “gay” throughout her interview: a word that when I was a child it meant “cheerful.” (I will never forget how Christopher Plummer used the word gay when referring in The Sound of Music to the Vienna of the early 20th century: a film I saw in an elegant theatre.) The homo community appropriated that word so that, for purposes of euphony, their degenerate lifestyles would sound pretty to the public.

But what I wanted to focus on is the defence that Johnson made in that interview with Lana. This seems to be his main argument: “[Paraphrasing us] ‘Destroy the Jews and the non-whites and the homosexuals.’ Wait a second here. The homosexual category is not entirely a group of people that are enemies of white people… I sort of regard it as some form of bizarre and stupid fixation that a lot of people have… on the far right.” Then he added that non-Christians are more tolerant of homos.

The “tolerant” actually is the nihilistic liberal of the present West, not the pagan of the Ancient World who abhorred homosexual behaviour to the extent of punishing it with death. I mean the ancient Germans, as Tacitus portrays them (the pederasty of the Greco-Roman world is a separate issue that I have discussed extensively on this site: a practice that has nothing to do with any colour of their little LGBT flag).

Where lies the great dishonesty of Johnson is in the following. I, for example, consider myself fairly tolerant of homos if we take as a parameter the capital punishment applied by the ancient Germanics. My general attitude consists in, say, not focusing on the lifestyle of the writer—for example Oscar Wilde or Gore Vidal—but in their literary work. It is only if a Wilde insolently crosses the line by suing the father of his lover, when the system defends itself. Similarly, I found nauseating the photo of a macho lover that Vidal published in his autobiography.

But I don’t condemn the closet homos. The difference between my stance and The Right Stuff with dishonest Johnson, is that he does not want to see that the phobia that some nationalists are showing is due to the fact that already out of the closet, now the mafia wants to normalise homosexuality!

Johnson does not seem to recognize that tolerant people like me exist for heaps, even to his racial right. As a commenter of The Occidental Observer told James O’Meara, Johnson’s favourite homo author on his webzine, Do not shove your orifices into our noses and we leave you alone. But through their essays the “mafia” won’t stop pushing agendas to the confused teenagers who read or listen them.

Johnson’s normalising of homosexuality dates back many years before Lana’s interview. Only last year he published “Gay Panic on the Alt Right,” and three years earlier he dared to endorse the so-called homosexual marriage in “The Gay Marriage Controversy.” Even fifteen years ago, under a pseudonym, Johnson dared to publish “Homosexuality and White Nationalism: Two Arguments for Tolerance” in a forum of extremely tough racists. (Years later Johnson recognized that he was the author of that article—see here—: an article he even translated into French under the title “Homosexualité et Nationalisme Blanc.”)

These articles are not an isolated phenomenon. Johnson and the “mafia” are reluctant to see that if their group returned to the closet, we would leave them alone. But that’s not gonna happen, and nothing seems more aberrant to me that, in some Alt Right conferences, one of these open homos is allowed to address the young.
General order number four

A few years ago Johnson went to visit the racist and critic of homosexuality Harold Covington to the northwest of the US. Covington told me that Johnson had the audacity to give him a book authored by him which includes one of the essays mentioned above. Johnson has been a fan of the Covington novels about creating a white republic within what is now US territory. However, in his plans to found a new nation, Covington proposes to remove from the liberated territory the unhealthy elements of the new republic, what he calls General Order Number Four:

No Jew or other non-white person, no homosexual, and no white person engaged in interracial sexual activity shall reside within the boundaries of the Northwest American Republic, or within any area of NVA operations. NVA field commanders shall deal with violators of this General Order at their discretion…

To contextualize this order see: here. NVA stands for Northwest Volunteer Army, an army originally formed by a group of guerrillas that snatch a piece of territory from the degenerate US. In his novels, when civil warfare erupts in the American Northwest, to throw out those homosexuals who flaunt their lifestyles, Covington depicts fighters who furtively introduce bombs in so-called “gay bars.”

Several years ago Johnson did not let me comment on his webzine. I asked him something like this: When the holy racial wars start, your homo friend J.D., who lives in the Northwest—the epicentre of racial wars in Covington’s scenario—might find himself in the wrong bar. Will you stand by the freedom fighters or the forces of ZOG if the NVA boys blow your buddy up?

16 replies on “A question for Johnson”

I am reminded of the book written by Bob Drury and Tom Clavin, “The Heart of Everything That Is”, where Red Cloud names the transsexuals as ‘Winkte’ who lived ostracized and apart from the people. I respect the tribes non-Christian approach to the anomaly.

I’ve made my opinion on this subject known here before. I try to be practical, because there are some simple facts about homosexuality:

1) There is always a small percentage of men that are homosexual, regardless of how repressive the surrounding society is against them. If simple repression is the solution, then why do homosexuals manifest in even the most homo-repressive societies such as Islam?

2) Our race faces many evils, including Jews and Christianity and Big Business, that threaten our destruction and/or continued and worsening enslavement. Why make enemies of that 2% or 3% of our men who are homo. Why make them enemies needlessly?

3) That head-of-the-SA, Ernst Rohm, was homo. Apparently, Hitler knew he was homo, but only turned against Rohm after Rohm was in a coup-attempt against Hitler. Thus, Hitler saw value in Rohm despite Rohm being homo.

I don’t pick fights with closet homos. But when Greg’s pal says publicly—:

“Yeah, I’ve been a top for years. I basically fuck men like they are women—but I’m glad that they’re not. I’m banging this jacked rich liberal right now. Probably the best piece of ass I’ve ever had”

—and then is invited by Alt Right to address a fairly young audience as a keynote speaker, they have crossed the line. If the guy goes back to his closet, we’ll leave him alone.

Remember what Guillaume Faye has said (whose knowledge of the classics is enough for him to see that classical pederasty and the “gay” world are totally different animals): in the West’s darkest hour we need more than morality. We need hypermorality: the Nietzschean ethics of difficult times.

>We need hypermorality

Instead of morals, we need a new belief system that replaces the mostly-false trash that is Christianity, but acknowledges that we are not just physical matter, and that we have an existence apart from the physical body.

At least I’m trying to be fair and balanced. Unlike these renegades of The Right Stuff and The Daily Stormer (even in the first comment above!) I don’t want to kill homos. I even disagree with Covington that they should be committed in a psychiatric ward (you know what I think about psychiatry). I’m only asking them to behave, something that Johnson et al won’t do. For instance, Greg has published today still another article by James O’Meara, who loves to post pics of transvestites in the “About Me” page of his blog.

As far as I know Rohm was not trying to normalise his proclivities in Nazi Germany (as some homos did during the Weimar Republic). Rohm was not crossing the line. Someone like Johnson on the other hand would never have been accepted in Germany’s publishing presses.


I completely agree with your diagnosis of the homosexual problem. There should be no room for the neoliberal, out-of-the-closet homosexuality of Counter-Currents in National Socialism.

At the same time, the most virulent anti-homosexuals on the right today like Matt Heimbach’s Traditionalist Workers Party and a good deal of figures in The Right Stuff podcast network are also pro or openly Christian. I doubt we are going to go anywhere as a race until we treat all forms of Christianity and neo-Christian axiology as a plague as abhorrent and conducive to White Genocide as neoliberal homosexuality.

Cesar- I would recommend to you (and any like Kurt who make claims about homosexuality being ‘natural’ in that it continues to occur even when attempts are made to suppress it) Gregory Cochran’s article on the likely cause of male homosexuality.

It kills the reproductive value of those afflicted with it. Enough that no ‘gay uncle’ nonsense could make up for the loss to the reproductive fitness of the uncle.

Identical twins are generally not similarly affected. The claims about the last children of big families being prone to it as part of some hormonal changes in the womb don’t hold out.

What does make sense, is something similar to toxoplasmosis causing mice to be more vulnerable to predation by cats. There is some sort of disease or complex of diseases out there that causes this particular sexual perversion. It isn’t necessarily only carried by faggots, and it probably isn’t even primarily transmitted when they rape kids.

I hope that in a future Nazi state we can find what causes this, vaccinate against it, and laugh our asses off as whatever remaining African and Arab populations instead react by killing all the people they think are queer instead of addressing the disease that is the cause.

As for female homosexuality- well, who knows what causes that. It’s probably societal degeneracy. Regardless of the cause, ‘lesbianism’ doesn’t have any effect on the population of a healthy society.

It is pathetic that even anti-homosexualists use the Newspeak word “gay” as if it was a neutral synonym of homosexuality, as Marcus Cicero did today through his article on Occidental Dissent, “Celibate Catholics Gone Wild: Vatican Police Bust Drug-Fueled Gay Orgy Inside Papal Official’s Home”.

These anti-homosexualists ignore that language is rhetorical, and that if during the late Roman Empire you disagree with, say, Christianity, you must start by not using the enemy’s language (“pagan”, “heretic”, etc).

Exactly the same can be said today regarding Judeo-liberal vocabulary. Don’t use enemy language such as “women liberation”, “gay issues”, etc.

See a 2012 page on Newspeak in this site:


Comments are closed.