web analytics

Tag: Jewish Question (JQ)

Categories
Antiochus IV Epiphanes Tom Sunic

On Judaised Americans

My last posts on the Greco-Roman wars against the Jews (here and here) made me wonder… Just compare how pre-Christian Europeans handled the Jewish problem with how, in modern America, the red carpet was rolled out for the Jews since the 19th century in line with the dominant Judeo-Christian, liberal ideology.

As Tom Sunic explained in the very first chapter of Homo Americanus, in the US not a single politician will ever admit that America is a theocratic system with a peculiar political theology. Think of how Donald Trump recently became the first sitting American president to visit Jerusalem’s Western Wall!

If Aryans ever wish to re-establish their own racial sovereignty, they must identify their foe: Judeo-Christian ethics, which pervades even the white nationalist movement. One example will suffice. Greg Johnson has been working on a White Nationalist Manifesto for some time. When he finally publishes and advertises it through the forums, will it contain his “Old Right” bashing favouring an effete Neo-Christian “New Right”?

Whatever the impact of the forthcoming White Nationalist Manifesto among American racists, many of whom are Christians, the US owes its very existence to the Jews. The 17th century reverence for the Old Testament by those naïve, starry-eyed colonisers who imagined a “City on the Hill” comes to mind. “Very early on America’s founding fathers, pioneers, and politicians identified themselves as Jews who had come to the new American Canaan from the pestilence of Europe,” writes Sunic.

After another post on the Jewish-Roman wars, the following Saturdays I’ll be adding passages from Deschner’s Criminal History of Christianity describing how the Early Church dealt with the Jews. Despite their rabid anti-Semitism, early theologians did not push for those pagan attempts to solve the Jewish problem once and for all.

Certainly, unlike the US, in anti-Semitic Christendom the Jews were not revered, but they were tolerated. Those early theologians that I’ll be quoting on Saturdays are similar to the white nationalists of today: much barking but no bites. This is why, unlike National Socialism, white nationalism won’t ever work. Whites must transvalue “New Right” values back to “Old Right” values!

Antiochus’ war (167-164 BCE)

“He ordered his soldiers to cut down without mercy those whom they met and to slay those who took refuge in their houses. There was a massacre of young and old, a killing of women and children, a slaughter of virgins and infants. In the space of three days, eighty thousand were lost, forty thousand meeting a violent death, and the same number being sold into slavery.” —2 Maccabees, 5:11–14.

The siege of Jerusalem (63 BCE)

Jews were massacred by invading Romans. The event marked the end of Jewish independence.

The Samaritan Revolt (36 CE)

The Samaritans rebelled against the Romans. The rebels were ruthlessly massacred by order of the Roman Procurator.

The First Jewish-Roman War (66-73 CE)

Jews were massacred by Romans throughout the war; 97,000 enslaved. It was the first of three major Jewish revolts against the Romans. It resulted in the destruction of the Holy Temple and a devastating depopulation of the Jewish population as the massacre wiped out a large percentage of their population. (Again, compare Titus’ deeds with what Donald Trump did a couple of months ago in what remains of that temple.)

Bar Kokhba revolt (132-136 CE)

Decisive Roman victory. The Romans enslaved many Jews of Judaea, massacred many Jews, suppressed Jewish religious and political authority, banned Jews from Jerusalem, and renamed and merged Judaea into the Syrian Palestine province. The war meant another devastating depopulation of the Jewish population.

If white nationalists, so overwhelmed by Judeo-Christian ethics, are not committing ethnic suicide how do you explain that they are not celebrating such victories?

Categories
Esau's Tears (book) Miscegenation

Lightning revisited

Seven years ago, when the West’s Darkest Hour was not hosted by WordPress but by Blogspot I wrote “A Lightning in the Middle of the Night!” It was a milestone in my awakening on the Jewish question.

If you are familiar with that article, you’ll know that before my awakeing my “Austeresque” masthead on Blogspot contained a sentence inspired in Auster, who became distressed after the lightning struck me.

The “lightning” post resulted in that Edward (“Ned”) May, the editor of GoV (penname: Baron Bodissey), interrupted publication of my Return of Quetzalcoatl. Furthermore, a half-Jew who used to contribute to May’s blog under the deceiving name of Takuan Seiyo became hysterical (see the comments section of my piece at Blogspot).

The challenge of that essay (“If by March I don’t get a convincing rebuttal of the Bullard statement by my visitors…”) also marked my realization that apologists of Jewry simply don’t respond when challenged with a most serious accusation (Jews “are never over-represented in organisations or movements that represent the interests of the ethnic majority, only those that weaken that majority ”). Last year Ned May authored a short piece, “The Jewish Counterjihad” for his GoV, which contains this sentence:

In response to those who lament the over-representation of Jews in far left Multicultural organizations, I frequently point out the massive over-representation of Jews in the Counterjihad. On both sides of the Atlantic, but especially here in the USA, some of the staunchest and most dedicated activists resisting Islamization are Jews, in numbers far greater than their proportion in the general population.

Does this respond to my February 2010 challenge? Hardly. May’s argument has many holes.

First, the “West” is a euphemism for the white race. The counter-jihad movement is unrelated to the preservation of the white race, and therefore of the West. There cannot be a Western culture if all whites commit thoroughgoing mestization in the same way that, due to an almost complete mestization, New Spain died in this continent as an extension of Spain to become “Mexico.”

Second, if I remember correctly, in 2009 May once told me in one of the threaded comments of his blog that since he had a coloured member in his family I should be sensitive about posting my racist views there. More than once, in those old conversations with May’s wife, Ceara Sullivan, she boasted about her black neighbours that she hoped will greatly thrive in life. “Western preservation” for this very Christian couple could mean preserving Christianity versus Islam even if that means that their country will become brown.

Third, the Jews concerned about the advance of Islam in Europe are concerned about their tribe (e.g., the fate of Jews in Malmo, Sweden), not about the preservation of the Aryan race there or of Anglo-Saxons in America. Who among those Jews that May considers “staunchest activists” would accept the 14 words? Before our sacred words, wouldn’t they cringe like vampires facing a crucifix?

Fourth, take a note about the book Esau’s Tears that Bullard mentions above. When I tried to discuss with May after he expelled me from publishing in his site, I took heed of an advice by Fjordman: that only Jews or half-Jews would be able to criticize Jews objectively. I played their little game and called their attention to Esau’s Tears, an academic work published by Cambridge University and authored by the Jew Albert Lindemann. The book, that I have read, elicited good reviews from Jews and it demonstrates that the Jewish problem is not an Aryan hallucination, as Takuan Seiyo claimed in the comments section of my lighting article.

In 2010 I received no reasonable response from May, Fjordman, Seiyo, Auster and even Conservative Swede about approaching the JP according to their rules (only Jews should criticize Jews, etc). They simply ignored Esau’s Tears!

In conclusion, Jews are never overrepresented in organizations that advocate Aryan preservation. In the specific case of counter-jihad it is full of Jews, half-Jews and self-bamboozled gentiles trying to get you stuck just there. Their memes are Don’t cross the psychological Rubicon! Don’t reach the other side and realize that all’s about racial consciousness!

For instance, in the comments section of “The Jewish Counterjihad” May commented: “It’s the same error (or syndrome) as blaming all Jews for what Jewish lefties do.” But the point is that even if not all Muslims in Europe are jihadists, Muslims in general should be deported from Europe.

Exactly the same can be said about the other Semites living in the West.

For the visitor of this site who has not crossed the psychological Rubicon, or cannot get a copy of Lindemann’s book, I recommend William Pierce’s “Seeing the Forest.”

Categories
Deranged altruism Liberalism Richard Wagner

JP in a single article!

Divided for publication at The Occidental Observer in three parts this Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, Andrew Joyce has published a magnificent article explaining the Jewish Problem under the title: “The Jewish Question: Suggested Readings with Commentary.”

I would like to quote a few passages from Joyce’s piece; the first one about Richard Wagner:

When Europeans found themselves caught up in a drive to ‘emancipate’ the Jews, it wasn’t as a result of careful analysis of the possible positive or negative consequences of such an action. Rather, those involved were merely “champions of abstract principle.” Liberalism, argues Wagner, is “not a very lucid mental sport.” Liberalism relies on emotion and feelings, rather than rationality and facts. Europeans had been duped into fighting for the ‘freedom’ of a people “without knowledge of that people itself, nay, with a dislike of any genuine contact with it. … Our eagerness to level up the rights of Jews was far more stimulated by a general idea, than by any real sympathy.” Of course, the same argument might be made today in relation to the ‘refugee’ craze. Liberals are merely in love with the idea of helping migrants, rather than this being something they are genuinely emotional about. Liberalism, as Wagner rightly perceived, is the political expression of selfish emotionality. Aside from his musings on Liberalism, Wagner’s comments on Jews in culture are so profound and extensive that they cannot be adequately covered here. It simply remains to be said that Jewry in Music is an essential text, worthy of careful study.

This quote from Houston Stewart Chamberlain makes him look like a Cassandra!:

The end result of this [Judaization of the West] process will be apocalyptic: “If that were to go on for a few centuries, there would be in Europe only one single people of pure race, that of the Jews, all the rest would be a herd of pseudo-Hebraic mestizos, a people beyond all doubt degenerate physically, mentally and morally.”

About Kevin MacDonald, and contrary to popular opinion among white nationalist circles, Joyce says: “I can state with some confidence that Separation and Its Discontents has no equal.” (Curiously, in 2012 I wrote that Separation was my favorite of MacDonald’s trilogy.)

Although Joyce’s focuses on the Jewish Problem, he also hints to what I have been calling the Aryan Problem: a suicidal out-group altruism combined with bourgoise compliance among whites:

Fichte complained about “sugar-sweet words about toleration and human rights and civic rights,” which act only to facilitate the removal or downgrading of the rights of natives…

In particular, [Bauer] argued against the idea that ‘rights’ are innate, writing that they instead come with certain requirements and responsibilities…

Marr is also worth reading because of his focus on the inertia of the masses in the face of rising Jewish influence. For example, he finds it remarkable that Jews have been able to conquer entire national systems without violent revolution but instead “through the compliance of the people.”

I strongly recommend visitors of this site to send the links to Joyce’s article, divided in three parts (here, here and here), to those normies who know nothing about the Jewish Problem: it is a fascinating reading.

Categories
Holocaust Videos

Holocaust, the ultimate taboo

See Swedish Henrik Palmgren’s intelligent interview in English of another Swede, Ingrid Carlqvist, on Red Ice TV.

It is magnificent!: a perfect link you can send to your friends who are not red-pilled about the Jewish Question.

After the first hour of the interview, Ingrid, who recently has lost many of her friends in Sweden, starts to raise elemental questions about the ultimate taboo in the West today:

“Scandal in Sweden When Ingrid Questions the Unquestionable”

On Stefan Molyneux✡

Stefan Molyneux, who’s six years my junior, is a Canadian YouTube blogger. He usually speaks on topics including politics, right-libertarianism and some consider him the smartest exponent of the Alt-Lite.

In this video Molyneux says Jews are hated because they are intelligent. This is exactly what I believed when I was unawakened about the Jewish Question. Before 2010 I believed that they were overrepresented in all the fields because they were smart. But that was a mistake on my part. Presently I hate Jews because they are never over-represented in organizations or movements that represent the interests of the Aryan majority, only in those that weaken that majority.

Molyneux is not an idiot. He is not like me before I became acquainted with the writings of wise anti-Semites. Molyneux is actually tricking us by confusing apples with oranges; intelligence with subversion. For example, high IQ Asians living in the West never say, as Talmudists do, “the best of the Goyim must be destroyed”, etc. That’s why Asians are not hated.

Molyneux presumes that his worldview is based on facts, and sound arguments based on such facts. If that’s true, why hasn’t he discussed Kevin MacDonald’s work in any of his thousands of videos? MacDonald and those who publish in The Occidental Observer have demonstrated without reasonable doubt that the statement I put above in italics is true.

So Molyneux misleadingly presents himself to the public as a philosopher who bases his views on facts. The reason why he will never face the facts about Jewry is that he has Jewish blood. Molyneux himself has stated that his mother was born “in Berlin in 1937 to a pretty Jewish clan.” Such genetic traits explain Molyneux’s superb command of language, a command that hypnotizes unwary YouTube gentiles.

I write this entry because it has recently bothered me that Molyneux cites an anecdote: that in the early 1940s it was said that there is no need to sing victory while the Nazis still were in power. Molyneux has iterated that old anecdote several times in various videos. But the straw that broke the glass of my patience was his latest video, in which he talks about the fall of Bill O’Reilly. Molyneux quoted a line of Inglourious Basterds as if the anti-German diatribe was hilarious…

Let’s be clear: the exponents of the Alt-Lite are not our friends, especially those who have recent Jewish ancestry. Alex Linder sums up in a few words what a genuine pro-white movement must be: “No jews, just right”. The recent events in the family of Donald Trump show that Linder is right.

Categories
Friedrich Nietzsche Literature St Francis

William Gayley Simpson

(1892-1991)

Last year a friend recommended me the great work of William Gayley Simpson, Which Way Western Man? that can be read online. Simpson lived 99 years and wrote that huge work, of 775 pages, throughout most of his life.

I have read some chapters of Which Way Western Man? and was impressed that, before the internet age, Simpson managed to move from an altruistic Christianity to a stance in which he defended Hitler. I will not read the whole book. It is a mixture of disparate writings. One of the earliest dates from 1930, the chapter dedicated to Jesus; another, his already racist view on life, of 1977.

Simpson could have become a B-type bicausalist, blaming Christianity even more than Jewry, since after his Franciscan stage he became a fanatical reader of Nietzsche. For example, on page 18 of Which Way he says about his Franciscan venture: “It was full of Christian pity. It is no less than a crime against life when the superior is sacrificed to the inferior… the kind of thing the great scholar and musical authority Schweitzer did for years in the jungles of Africa”.

This seems to vindicate what I have said about Albert Schweitzer. In another confession, hundreds of pages later (on page 499), we see how Simpson’s Christianity was involved in what Nietzsche calls the inversion of values:

In fairness to myself and to my reader, I must remind him that I approached this question, forty years ago, very definitely from the equalitarian side. In my student days, and for the nine years of my Franciscan venture that followed, with a belief in “universal love” and an outlook on life very like that of St. Francis of Assisi, I quite ignored race, and discounted it. Wherever I went, in our South as in our North, in the Orient as in my own country and among my own kind, I met men as I found them, and valued them for the worth that I sensed in them as individuals, without regard to their race, their nation, their family, class, or any other feature having to do with their origin or their associations. Provided that there was health of body and mind on both sides, I even openly declared my readiness to sanction racial intermarriage.

But it was my Christian tradition and my ignorance that spoke thus.

Let’s jump other hundreds of pages forward. On page 708 Which Way contains a passage summarizing the English Revolution in a couple of paragraphs:

In the reign of Charles I, King of England from 1625 until he was beheaded in 1649, the Jews had already been outlawed from English shores for about 350 years. Driven out of Spain by Ferdinand and Isabella in 1492, many of them swarmed into Holland, where they soon made Amsterdam the financial capital of the world. Meanwhile England, without any Jews, had prospered mightily, had come to be known as “Merrie England,” had produced Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Age, and had destroyed the Spanish Armada; and by the time of Charles the First was showing signs of that expanding vitality that was to make her the greatest empire-builder in all history. This caused the Dutch Jews to lust for readmission to English soil, inasmuch as no animal makes so desirable a host for parasites as one that is healthy and growing. Cromwell came into a collision with the king that developed into a civil war.

He required money and all things needful for his army. The Jews agreed to be the suppliers on condition that, should he come out on top, he would have the ban against them lifted. In a few years the king’s head rolled, and Jews, mostly from Holland, swarmed in. Within two generations, they became the dominant financial power in the land and, as we have already seen, the Bank “of England” was set up, which, with its acknowledged privilege of enjoying “the interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing,” became the model for all the central banking systems with which the Western world was gradually saddled.

On pages 755-6 Simpson responds to a liberal in such way that he should be cited today:

The very men of whom you have been at such pains to make mock, even in our universities —Gobineau, Chamberlain, Spengler, Madison Grant, Lothrop Stoddard, H.F.K. Guenther—yes, and Adolf Hitler and Lincoln Rockwell, too— we will gather up from the scrap heap where you have thrown them and done your best to bury them, and we will wash them clean that they may be seen in a true light for what they were, and will set them up before us as our exemplars, our teachers, our heroes and our inspirers.

Although Simpson never surpassed his bicausalism type-A, it is worth reading, in 762, how he portrays the Jew:

But in any case, so long as we retain control over our own society, we must establish it as our undeviating and relentless aim to make and to keep our people homogeneous. The Jews, of course, to their last gasp, will resort to their utmost cunning and marshall all their strength to bring any such effort to naught. For they know full well, as already observed more than once, that it has been only by maintaining an attitude of abhorrence toward all mixing with aliens that they have survived the centuries and have come to be the power in the world that they are today. And they are no less aware that the only means by which they can keep a creature of our size in leading strings to them is to get us to swallow the poison that they themselves keep so far away from, until we become a race of enfeebled, fawning, mixed-breed curs.

In that same page Simpson even vindicates nordicism: a taboo subject for the white nationalists of today:

Also, with homogeneity as our goal, we must sternly shut our doors against all immigrants who are not White. Indeed, in my own judgment, we should be wise to reject even those White people who do not stem from the countries of northwestern Europe.

It is a disgrace that books like this one, published in 1978, have not been reedited, translated and found in the bookstores of the West.

On Greggy’s review of Rogue One

Editor’s note: Irmin Vinson, the author of an important book on Hitler, has commented on the latest Star Wars film, recently reviewed by Richard Spencer and Greg Johnson (here and here). Italicized sentences come from Johnson himself. Vinson wrote:
 

On Spencer! On Johnson! My inclination is to vote for neither, and to avoid watching the movie as well. Sorry to sound obnoxious, but it seems bizarre to me that two grown men, both of whom read great books and can spell big words correctly, are babbling away about a children’s movie, a worthless piece of pop entertainment that was deliberately conceived as an attempt to multiracialize a revered film franchise.

We know that racial hostility toward us has shaped both of the new Star Wars films. That should be enough to keep white nationalists far away from them. Even when they were innocuous politically, Star Wars movies were never worth the trouble of learned analysis. The only justification for watching this particular movie would be to analyze its racial politics and to encourage others to stay away from any movie theater screening it.

If I had to vote, I would choose Spencer, since he eventually gets around to the real political purpose of this latest piece of anti-white propaganda. I figured it out without actually seeing it, which wasn’t difficult. As a Radix reader pointed out over at YouTube, if anyone desperately needs to watch this film, it will eventually be available on a torrent. Hold your breath for a while, and then get it for free. Think of your theft as a minor act of rebellion against people who hate us.

In short, casting non-whites in Star Wars is not the same as putting them in stories like King Arthur or Robin Hood.

In both cases the multiracial casting would be an attempt to remove us from, or marginalize us within, our own popular culture.

Many people have sentimental feelings about the original Star Wars movies. I don’t myself, but many people do. Today those old movies seem far too white in the eyes of liberal multiracialists and Jews. Hence the multiracial casting. If we are so weak that we tolerate being removed from our own popular culture, then they are more than willing to do it to us. It is part of their deliberate campaign to immerse us in a popular culture that embraces and promotes the demographic changes currently underway throughout the West. We could end their propaganda simply by refusing to pay for it, but they’re confident that we won’t.

The creators of the new Star Wars movies are hoping that twenty years from now young viewers from 2016 will have the same sentimental feelings about non-white Star War characters that older viewers today have about Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia. They do not want white film heroes for our future; they want non-white heroes. Unfortunately they have, at the moment, the media power to make their wishes a reality.

I can’t see any reason to be pleased by a film that carries so sinister a purpose. If the film is good, then its qualities are bad for us and good for all those who favor the destruction of the West. It would be great if Rogue One turns out to be a box-office disaster. I’m crossing my fingers.

Go see the film. Then come back and apologize for this obnoxious sperging.

Why should he waste his money paying a Jewish studio for the privilege of watching a multiracialist children’s movie? We’re not talking about Touch of Evil here; the movie under review can be nothing more than a high-tech, CGI-intensive version of an old Flash Gordon serial, with Asians and Negroes playing roles previously assigned to Europeans.

A postscript to

“A lightning in the middle of the night!”

When in late 2009 and early 2010 I contributed to Baron Bodissey’s Gates of Vienna (GoV) I was a philo-Semite. Then I awoke to the real world and distanced myself from Bodissey, after I realised that he was unwilling to discuss the Jewish Question.

It seems that Bodissey still does not allow legit commentariat at GoV. See for example “What Gates of Vienna wouldn’t publish” that appeared in Diversity Macht Frei in November 2015. I’ve just discovered that article.

In the GoV thread Dymphna, Bodissey’s wife, replied to another critic thus: “Jews are over-represented in music, the arts, science, etc. Shall we view the Nobel Prizes for science with suspicion since Ashkenazi Jews abound there?” Once more, she forgot the very crux of the Jewish problem. As I quoted and commented in February 2010 in “A lightning in the middle of the night!”:
 

______ 卐 ______

 
Take note that GoV is a philo-Semitic blogsite, with a big Star of David in its main page stating “We Support Israel.” Below I quote a comment from the 2009 exchange at GoV. Avery Bullard said:

As I have often pointed out, socialism is by and large a disease of the intellectuals, and Jews are over-represented among intellectuals, due to a high native intelligence and a tradition of giving their children as much education as possible. Jews were also over-represented amongst musicians, physicists, and capitalist entrepreneurs.

But they are never over-represented in organisations or movements that represent the interests of the ethnic majority, only those that weaken that majority [the lightning!]. That is why they’ve been expelled from so many very different countries over so many centuries. Yet with the possible exception of Albert Lindemann (Esau’s Tears) they never want to know the reasons why they’ve been so disliked in order to prevent more tragedies in the future. Instead they dismiss all anti-Semitism as scapegoating. In other words: are Jews more responsible for communism, based on their proportional representation amongst the intelligentsia, than any other intellectuals? If they are over-represented in the intelligentsia then they had disproportionate influence in the direction the intelligentsia took. Many Russian intellectuals were Slavo-philes. Before Jews could access the most important U.S. universities the old WASP intelligentsia in the U.S. was much more traditionalist.

Bullard’s comment in the words I italicized above was the lightning that changed my worldview: from philo-Semitism to anti-Semitism in a single stroke!

______ 卐 ______

 
As I have said, I wrote about my “Damascene conversion” more than six years ago. Nowadays I feel I’m light-years ahead from the Counter-Jihad movement.

For those who doubt that Jews “are never over-represented in organisations or movements that represent the interests of the ethnic majority, only those that weaken that majority,” read Kevin MacDonald’s trilogy.

Categories
Miscegenation

On Russia

The following is a comment by Jeff on The Occidental Observer:
 
There is a huge misconception about Russia among some. Where I live—in Germany—Putin is fully supported by the “Linke” communists, the Green party and the Social Democrats.

Eastern Europeans are 100% pro-Nato because they are scared to hell of Russia—they have been invaded and massacred too oft to forget the hell they went through.

Russian imperialism, like American imperialism, Christianity, Islam, is a mighty engine of miscegenation, an engine that has been chugging away since the Middle Ages.

Like the First Rome and the Second Rome, the Third Rome is not a nation, it’s a machine that liquidates every nation it captures. Russian imperialism is not an alternative to globalisation, but just another form of it. Russia is not the future of the White race, but one of its graveyards.

Real nationalists should sympathize first and foremost with all captive and oppressed peoples who wish to free themselves of that machine and its master, Putin.

The traditional enforcers of Russian imperialism have been the cossacks. There are 10 millions of them in Russia, they are the true Khazars.

I’m not even starting on Putin now, a gangster dressed up as a head of state. Russian media, like in North Korea or Cuba, is totally controlled by the dictator in charge.

By the way, where do you get your information about Russia? Russia is hell!

_____________

Admin’s note: The Russophile commenters at The Occidental Observer, where Jeff posted the above comment, are bashing Jeff but none has responded to his main criticism: Russia has been a melting pot machine for centuries. We priests of the 14 words should hate the Third Rome as much as we hate miscegenating Imperial Rome and the Second Rome, Constantinople: another sanctuary city for the mudbloods.

Jeff commented the above on July 8, 2016. Yesterday he added the following in another TOO thread:

_____________

The main problem in Russia are not the Jews: it’s the primitive, corrupt Russians themselves, and they have been a constant threat to European civilisation since 1241, the time the Russian empire was born with the Mongol invasion of the Golden Horde.

Unlike Europe, Russia, scientifically, spiritually and socially hardly progressed. They never had a Renaissance. The first Russian university was founded only 200 years ago; serfdom, officially abolished in 1880. Last but not least communism was born in Russia because Russians love collectivism and despotism.

Communism is far more than a state of mind; cultural and genetic factors play a big role too. With its long tradition of despotism and serfdom Russia has been a fertile ground for messianic ideologies.

Sovietism and Judaism are alive and well in today’s Russia. It’s a widespread delusion among Western (cuck?) nationalists that Russia is free of Jewish influence. At every opportunity Putin pays homage to the official holocaust narrative promulgated by the Jews. On many occasions he said that the holocaust was the most abominable atrocity in history, and that the Red Army put an end to this horror.

Since the cult of victory in World War 2 and the glorification of the past are the main pillars of national identity in modern Russia, this implies that Russian identity is not only unopposed to Jewish interests, but on the contrary, is directly in line with them. Among a dozen countries where holocaust denial is criminalised, it’s Germany, Israel and Russia that apply the harshest punishment.

Guess where is the biggest, most beautiful holocaust museum on earth? In Moscow! Meanwhile the Ukrainian Holodomor is totally ignored by the Kremlin.

_____________

I left the following comment at The Occidental Observer:

You’re right Jeff! Where the hell do these White Nationalists get their information?

Ever since I read The Gulag Archipelago I noticed that almost no commenter of WN forums has read it. The overwhelming majority of WNsts have an extremely naïve view of Russia and its history, including 20th century history. Nationalists are so starved of leaders that they idealize, like children, those nations (or pseudonations—Russia has been a melting pot for centuries) that still show a hint of patriotism, or independence from the decadent West.

I am no longer discussing with WNsts. They are unwilling to see reality as it is, especially history. Even the best mind that in recent times American WN has produced, Michael O’Meara, idealized Putin in some of his last articles before his intellectual retirement.

_____________

Update: On August 3, Adunaii commented on the Addenda of this site:

It’s true that Russians have their fair share of schizophrenia. They did not renounce the heritage of the USSR, even though the Soviet ideology was against any spark of nationalism thus rendering the modern Russian state half-illegitimate.

But the biggest part of Russian psyche is without a doubt anti-NS. Simply because their biggest war was against the Third Reich, which was the war of extermination.

How can you reason with them? To save the White race, both the USA and Russia should be demolished as historical entities.

Categories
Videos

AmRen 2016 keynote address

https://youtu.be/XRJE2gRtD1A

Best conference by Taylor to date, but in the Q & A section he still cannot see the forest!