Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old December 18th, 2009 #101
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hadding View Post
His criticism seemed to be more of Judaism than of Jews as biological entities. You get the same sociological anti-Judaism from H.G. Wells and some other leftists. It's very convenient for people who are themselves of Jewish extraction.
Actually, and I would think you would know this, the NS themselves were very much against spiritual jews within us all, as well as the biological entity. I have no doubt whatsoever that White is anti-jew.

Quote:
Everybody has faults that have to be overlooked sometimes, but in White's case you are talking about somebody who is compulsively dishonest and manipulative, and does whatever he has to do, says whatever he has to say, to force the center of attention onto himself. Dishonesty is the worst character flaw, and it's especially hard to overlook that in somebody who insists on dominating.
Dishonesty often works in politics, which is a very, very dirty business and cannot be otherwise because the stakes are the highest, and the "bad" stuff works. We can acknowledge that or play make-believe.

Quote:
I agree that the whole matter was ridiculous on both sides, but the dispute would have been easier to resolve if it weren't being played out as an internet drama, and of course Bill White is the King of Internet Drama. I wasn't paying enough attention to internet at the time to say that White was responsible for the way events proceeded, but it seems likely that he encouraged it.
Little can be done when men won't conduct themselves honorably. If they'd booted out Gliebe, who knows how things would have worked out? The whole thing was never in my hands to decide, so I can't worry about it. For all I know, it worked out for the best. NA's culture might well not have been reformable by anybody.

Quote:
Frank Collin took real risks too. You can suppose that he was sincere on some level too, but he was a Jewish screwball. Bill White now is saying that his activities were "satire"; I think that undermines your sincerity argument.
What he did outweighs his legally conditioned characterization of a small subset of his words.

Quote:
I think it was Fred's idea, and it was a good idea. Bill White's involvement I am pretty sure set off alarms for others.
I appreciate Fred's thinking of me. I had the right intentions. It's quite possible we could have made something of it, had it worked out that way.

Quote:
You are conceding my point, and you are saying is that to some extent it doesn't even matter if Bill White is sincere, because the tendency to generate strife is rooted in his personality.
Ok, Hadding. I'm going to give you a point. That makes it 2-1 me, or 3-1, I can't remember. The larger point that matters is that Bill's personality was not the deciding factor in all this. But my saying that is not to detract from you victory celebration. Hadding is on the board, biotches!
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #102
Hunter Wallace
Member
 
Hunter Wallace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 251
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Facepalm closing in. Here's what I see, Hunter. A young guy, who says he's not a conservative, hates conservatism, being sucked into the big professional conservative machine, funneling his time and effort to someone who picked a black running mate...all in the name of white nationalism. "It was all a game; a way of making a living" - Joe Sobran on professional conservatism.
1.) I advocate explicit White racial consciousness.
2.) I try to write something every day about the Jewish Question.
3.) I haven't moderated my message in the slightest way.
4.) I don't advocate watering down White Nationalism into paleoconservatism or libertarianism.
5.) I've only said that Buchanan is useful. He injects our memes into the mainstream. He creates a path from the mainstream to White Nationalism. I followed that path myself.

Quote:
Jews hate each other. But they present a united front against the enemy, because they know that's the only way they can win. They also know who exactly the enemy is. Our side does not.
We have a lot of bright, quarrelsome individualists on our side engaging in friendly fire. In the past, I was once one of these people, but I have tried to overcome that aspect of my personality.

Quote:
Your call for no-criticism among the Whites is premature. KM criticized me and my approach. But of course, you are ignoring that and criticizing me. From your perspective, KM was wrong to do that. From mine he was right, if he thinks I/VNN are wrong. But in fact, the VNN strategy is better than his.
I have never objected to criticism per se. Please note that I also reviewed the Kevin MacDonald and Jared Taylor interviews. I criticized both of them. Criticism plays an essential role in the system I am proposing.

The crucial difference is that I did it in a civil and reasonable way. I didn't wail into them. I didn't sling dirt and mud at them. I've earned their respect.

Quote:
Didn't I lay that out up above, in one paragraph? I did. And you didn't respond to it.
You want to create as much polarization as possible. I think you took this idea from JW Holliday/Ted Sallis. I don't have any objection to polarizing Jews and Whites. That's not the same thing as fomenting division within the WN community.

Quote:
There is no movement. Yet. There will never be one until who we are and who the enemy is, is agreed on. I have been absolutely consistent on that point for ten years. KM and you favor a hazy, undefined anyone-who-sorta-sees-the-same-problem is on our side.
This isn't true. We know where Taylor and Buchanan stand.

Quote:
That doesn't work. What is does is perpetrate the Anglo-cultural failure pattern that allowed the jews to take over in the first place. It's fundamenally Anglo-conservative. What's funny is that you don't see that
We've been over this issue several times. I pointed out to you that it was the liberal democratic capitalist system that allowed the Jews to take over. They have done nothing more than make intelligent use of their rights and liberties. You want to preserve that system. I have said that it is a serious problem.

Quote:
1) KM's approach is conservative
It is worth noting here that "naming the Jew," the White homeland, and being explicitly racial used to be your litmus test.

Quote:
2) Y'all ain't doing nothing except allowing yourself to be coopted by the professionals. You should be attacking those you are sucking up to. Like I said before, you'll probably be about my age when you finally figure this out.
I don't have any objection to criticizing Pat Buchanan. He should be criticized. That's how we convince people to move from his positions to ours.

Quote:
I know it's excitintg that you have intelligent men listening to you, and publishing your articles, but it's blinding you to the professional conservatism you're being drawn into.
When I abandon my core beliefs, as friedrich braun has done, I will grant your point. I haven't changed my message in the slightest. The merit of my work got me published at Amren.

Quote:
The entire point of our "thing" ought to be to establish a new and radical approach. Not to be coopted by professional seducers and marketers like Team Buchanan.
I'm carving out a discursive space for White Nationalism, not for paleoconservatism or libertarianism.

Quote:
Meh. You need to figure out whether you believe your Overton bs or not. If you really do, then you ought to be glad for me saying it. Perhaps you don't understand why I say it, but it's for the same reason I say anything: I believe it is correct.
See above.

Quote:
I write plenty. Speak plenty too.
You have only recently return to the VNN homepage. Perhaps our exchanges and constructive criticism has had a positive impact here.

Quote:
We don't agree on who "we" are. There can be no movement, hence, no division between it, until that is settled. MacDonald wants a nation with blacks in it, has no problem associating, praising and working with jews like Gottfried - that's nothing I am part of, or anyone around here wants, to be sure. I support KM the jew-critic, the quote-digger. I give him credit for the work in his trilogy. I don't support anybody who sucks up to PC conserva-liberals like Buchanan and the various paleocons. MacDonald sees as friends and helpmates those I see as enemies. There's no way to gloss over this difference in approach. It's not division on either of our parts, it's two very different conceptions.
A good example of vanguardist purism. There is merit to the vanguard approach, but it always trends toward creating small cults of the elect few who reject the mainstream instead of trying to influence it.

Quote:
Not toward the in-group. And the proof is that I don't allow here 1/10th of the garbage you allow in every thread on OD. You can't come here as an anonymite or child molester and accuse others of being federal agents. You can do that at OD
.

1.) Taylor, MacDonald, and Johnson are part of the in-group.
2.) See my comment about rumor and innuendo. I'm willing to cut it out provided everyone is held to the same standard.

Quote:
Who advocates murdering jewish girls? When I look around, all I see is White girls getting murdered, and jewish girls and boys putting in the policies that lead to it. I think the actions and advocacy of these jewish girls and boys merits a response. You go on being civil, though.
You're advocating the mass murder of Jewish children. Tim Wise is as pleased as punch to see you advocating such an extreme rhetorical position.

Quote:
So why complain then. I'm helping you, even if against my will, it must be to you. My position is not unthinkable to jews in relation to us, nor is it unthinkable to the tens of million of Americans who want to turn the middle east into a sheet of glass. All depends on who controls the satellite uplinks. My job is to put the idea out there, whether or not I can execute it. As I proved by posting the argument, there is no intelligent opposition to it - just a bunch of shock-adjectives.
It's a wash.

1.) You do make us look more reasonable.
2.) At the same time, you're creating hostility towards the movement as a whole, and making our job harder.


Quote:
This is cute, and really kind of funny, if it weren't for the stakes. Do you think the left isn't aware of what we'd like to do? Do you think the jews are fools?
They have been fooled. At least for now. Let's keep it that way.

Quote:
Meh. What, does one of Brown Johnson's buddies own some tv station out in the sticks?
No.

Quote:
This quaint idea that people need to be "taught" about race, where does it come from?
The opinion polls.

Quote:
If Whites need to be taught, surely niggers will do all the teaching. The only formal ed required concerns jews, which is precisely the class Jared Taylor doesn't teach, and forbids being taught. You don't have to teach 'white flight'; whites naturally move away from niggers. The reason they have to points up the real problem - they have no political leadership. That's not a problem that education and essays are going to solve.
You should read the polling data more closely.

Quote:
Would it be impolite were I to emit a small laugh? It's a good deal more than a "serious obstacle." It crushes the theory you're operating on to death.
I disagree. A limited version of what I am advocating already exists.

Quote:
Nah, not really. The kikes used one of their shabbies to shit on a jew critic. Interesting for a few moments, but nothing comes of it. The status quo is reinforced in that anybody, even a PhD with manners, who criticizes the jews, is mentally and morally defective.
1.) Derbyshire drew a lot of attention to Kevin MacDonald. I can't fault him for that.

2.) It is our job to project a different image. This is difficult when we have WNs out there confirming stereotypes.

Quote:
So go back to sleep, children. It doesn't help because the victim is unwilling to fight back. And the victim's, uh, not to say fanboys, uh, young supporters, proclaim his beshitting a great victory. Silly. The victory would be if KM took back his leg and power-booted Derbyshire in the nuts. Maybe that would teach the race-mixing Anglo cunt, who admits he's a coward, some respect. It would also win KM some fans. It would show that he really believes what he's saying, is not going to take shit from cheapjack shabbes goyim like brown Derbyshire.
This is a good example of the purism I have been talking about. It is admirable on a certain level, but hopelessly impractical. We need a few talons piercing the mainstream.

Quote:
Politics is in many ways about perception. I don't see how any outsider could interpret the KM-D review exchange as anything but confirmation of status quo. Jews on top. Anyone, even PhD, who crits them is evil.
I read the exchange at Jewcy. Derbyshire was playing softball with MacDonald. He granted many of his points. He drew a ton of attention to MacDonald and the Jewish Question. He injected all sorts of useful memes into the conservative mainstream.

Quote:
AmRen's readers, ten years into its game, are useless saps. Anyone interested in getting past Taylor's boring repetitious whining long since would have found us. Not saying the mention hurt, just saying it's not really a big deal.
In the future, I won't mention you in anything I get published at Amren. If you want to stew in purity and isolation, that's your choice.

Quote:
No. Just saying in the overall scheme it is meaningless.
Aha! A concession.

Quote:
But you're going to work through this by...writing essays and making phone calls to shadowy figures with more power than I think.
I think we can gradually breakdown the "dynamic silence" policy and get our message out in the mainstream.

Quote:
Yeah, so. I read Buchanan. It still doesn't change the power equation.
Why bother reading someone who is so obviously worthless?
__________________
Occidental Dissent

"A functioning police state needs no police."
—William Borroughs
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #103
Rounder
Senior Member
 
Rounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Missouri
Posts: 12,684
Default

Some excellent exchanges on here between Alex and Hunter. Mighty interesting reading, well worth the time.

Hunter, your natural reaction to Alex's bashing of your ideas is to take it personally and then respond with anger. But you oughta appreciate Alex taking the time, and his patience with you. He's not bashing you, just your misguided ideas. Remember that, and learn. Wise men admit when they're proven wrong and move on to even deeper, more correct, insights.
__________________
“To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize” —–Voltaire




 
Old December 18th, 2009 #104
Hunter Wallace
Member
 
Hunter Wallace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 251
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rounder View Post
Hunter, your natural reaction to Alex's bashing of your ideas is to take it personally and then respond with anger. But you oughta appreciate Alex taking the time, and his patience with you. He's not bashing you, just your misguided ideas. Remember that, and learn. Wise men admit when they're proven wrong and move on to even deeper, more correct, insights.
I haven't responded in anger. I'm actually quite bemused by these exchanges. I don't have a problem with Alex and only wish him the best. I think there is too much infighting in the movement. I also think there is a tendency of some writers to bash and pronounce anathema on those to their right. I'm not going to engage in that. It gets us nowhere.

P.S. I'm doing an interview with Jim Giles at 9:00 AM CST.
__________________
Occidental Dissent

"A functioning police state needs no police."
—William Borroughs
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #105
Hadding
Senior Member
 
Hadding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,247
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Actually, and I would think you would know this, the NS themselves were very much against spiritual jews within us all, as well as the biological entity. I have no doubt whatsoever that White is anti-jew.
So was Bobby Fischer. He was nonetheless a crazy Jew himself because of his genes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder
Dishonesty often works in politics, which is a very, very dirty business and cannot be otherwise because the stakes are the highest, and the "bad" stuff works. We can acknowledge that or play make-believe.
People exercising political power sometimes find it expedient to be dishonest, and they can get away with it if they have the propaganda machine on their side, but even for them it often ends in embarrassment when word gets out.

I think that dishonesty is generally a very bad idea for somebody with no power whose only hope is to be taken seriously by rational people. Truth and credibility are by far the most powerful weapons that we have.

Truth is also what makes us the moral people. Two of the men that I respect the most, Dr. William Pierce and Professor Robert Faurisson, both were brought to the stands that they took and the sacrifices that they made because of the traditional Western value of truth.

If we cease to revere the truth then our cause loses its idealism, as well as its persuasive force.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder
Little can be done when men won't conduct themselves honorably.
I found it strange that in your next utterance, right after advocating dishonesty, you complained about men not conducting themselves honorably. Do you understand that honor and honesty are different forms of the same Latin word? I don't believe that you can have one without the other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder
The larger point that matters is that Bill's personality was not the deciding factor in all this.
I disagree. What has happened to Bill White is a direct consequence of his manipulative attention-seeking. He calculated that creating the superficial appearance of posing a threat to Obama was a way to force maximum attention on himself, and he got it.

Last edited by Hadding; December 18th, 2009 at 07:50 AM.
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #106
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter Wallace View Post
Where I live, Whites know the truth about race, sure. Unfortunately, few White Americans live in areas that are 50% black!
Don't have to be 50% before whites start moving out, so they know.

Quote:
The opinion polls clearly show that Whites believe racial differences are environmental, not hereditary.
Really? I would be interested in seeing these polls next time you come across them. Of course, you'd have to wonder how many are simply spouting the PC line, as opposed to actually believing it.

Quote:
There is probably a taboo effect at work here, but clearly a huge percentage of Whites are really and truly racially naive. This is where Jared Taylor and HBD come in handy.
I don't see it this way. The education is needed on the jew front, because, unlike niggers, many whites might not come across them, just the problems we know they cause. Whereas with nigs and mexes, THEY are the best teachers. No other is needed, really. If teachers were needed, white flight wouldn't exist. Whites would sit there and wonder WTF was going on. whites don't do that. the dumbest whites know nigs = trouble.

Quote:
In some ways. There was a strong sentiment that Germany had been treated unfairly by the Western Allies. German nationalism was still held in high esteem in the political mainstream. These attitudes undoubtedly paved the way for Hitler.
I don't see a Hitler smacked down in the circumstances we see before us in America today following the KM influence-the-conservatives strategy. I think AH and Goebbels would see it as weak and indirect, with no hope of success.

Quote:
I've always told the same story. Buchanan's book The Death of the West hit me like a ton of bricks. It was a shock to learn that I would one day be a minority in my own country.
Even though 50% of your state is black, you found it a shock that one day you'd be a minority in your country?

Quote:
You are pro-market, anti-government, pro-individualism, anti-gay, anti-environmentalism, anti-space exploration, etc. You're a classical liberal with an authoritarian streak on race and Jews. You are indisputably a rightwinger and have said so yourself.
Reasonably fair characterization, with a couple niggles.

Quote:
I come from a leftwing background. I'm very critical of free market capitalism. I support many popular government social problems. I believe government can be a force for good. I think Americans are too individualistic; too absorbed in their own lives. I don't have a problem with homosexuals. I'm strongly pro-conservation and pro-environment. I'm strongly in favor of space exploration.
There is more difference between us than I had thought when I first read your stuff. Which is ok - I just think that your left-wingism is blinding you to certain general trends that offer "our" movement success openings far beyond KM's suck-up-to-the-conservatives/influence-the-elite strategy. Those trends are written about most pointedly by the evil libertarians at LRC. The most shocking, to me, or eye-opening things you've said that I have seen is that you don't see public schools as a fundamental tool of white oppression, as I do. Your position is more like you don't have a problem with ZOG, you just want to cut off the Z and install an A for Aryan. I think rather the whole tenor of the times is across the board govt failure, which offers big opportunities for us.

Quote:
I believe in reason, tolerance, and openmindedness. If non-Whites were eliminated from the equation, I would support "social justice." I'm also in favor of a more equitable distribution of wealth.
Yeah, we're miles apart on this. Many think like you, and many think like me. One country is not enough for both of our schools. Hence microstates. We could probably work something out on the defensive umbrella.

Interesting question to me is, why do you believe everything the ZOG-liberals do but differ on race?

Quote:
Yes, I am in favor of manners and propriety. From what I gather, you believe that Jews are winners and that we should imitate the them. In political warfare, we should be as nasty as possible.
Don't get me wrong. I believe in table manners. I once yelled in disgust at my jew friend to eat with his damn mouth closed, chomping like a horse. Jews and table manners are like niggers. They think if you don't act like a slob, you're not keeping it (commie) real. But yes, on the other stuff, I orient to what I perceive effective.

That's a bigger difference between us than it seems. I perceive you and the KM crowd as defining what they do by their own tastes or interests, when they ought to be looking at things from the other standpoint: what does the problem we face, as objectively as we can make it out, demand that we
do/say/act?

That's why I've critted Sam Francis and the career girls many times. Our thing is a crusade, not a career option.

Quote:
You forget to factor into the equation the fact that you are a rightwing individualist. It would be more accurate to describe you as a loose cannon firing at others who carry our flag.
I'm only a loose cannon if we're on the same ship. Unlike you, I define "us" very specifically and carefully. I do not lump in people with somewhat similar outlooks, or simply people I like or whose essays I like to read.

Quote:
I would say these are important and real divisions within our social movement.
No, they're political warfare terms which appear to the not-thinking-hard-enough to be objective analystical terms.

What matters is not whether you're mainstream or vanguard, which means nothing. What matters is who "we" are and what "our" goals are. And who is our enemy and why. That stuff has to be defined precisely or "we" is meaningless. What you call purism is principle. As Eric Thompson says, "Principles protect people." When you start lumping in Buchanan and Vdare and Jared Taylor, I just shake my head. There's no "we" there. Not really. Your Overton theory is causing you to see linkages and relationships and movements that flat aren't there. VNN knows what it is and who 'we' are. KM and the faileocons do not. They're a friendly collection of careerists. Not a political movement.

Quote:
MacDonald has never said that humor and emotion should be thrown overboard. He is an academic trying to reach an academic audience. He would not be opposed to others taking his ideas and using humor and emotion to reach other demographics.
You ever read GLRockwell's famous essay on propaganda? The crits he makes of the Birch Society are directly applicable to this new thing you think you're part of - it offers one-level material. Aimed at the upper middle class. What you need is multi-level propaganda, as VNN offers. The people TOQ is aimed at are not the type that produces revolution. To effect actual political change as TOQ says it wants, you have to aim at everybody, not just the smart and rich. You also have to lead by speaking and acting, in a word, <i>fighting</i>. Not me saying that, Hitler saying that. Now, Hitler was no MacDonald, but he knew something about writing AND orating and fighting and strategizing and winning. Just try to imagine Hitler talking, per Greg Johnson's old argument with me, about influencing the elite. Hitler would say, no. We NS are the new elite. And we prove it by our actions. But you are simply abdicating any responsibility to act, saying you're not fit for it. Well who do you think is? Hitler was just a soldier. What if he just said, I'm not fit for speaking and leading. The impression left, which is reinforced by behavior, is that you guys are just more Sad Sam Francises. We Whites have to gin up a force that is respected, even feared. Sucking up to conservatives, and trying to influence the people John Derbyshire fears is - pathetic? beside the point? silly? waste of time unless your goal is to make just another conservative blog? You tell me. I sure don't see how you plan to get from here to there. I don't think you guys have any firm idea what "there" is.

Quote:
That's not the issue. It is hitching the Jewish Question to eliminationism, vulgarity and crudity that he dislikes.
What have KM's taste to do with anything? He ought to be reaching out to anyone who can put his jew-facts into popular form, not avoiding them because he doesn't like how they do it. If it works, it should be used. VNN and my approach have borne themselves out. More memes are traceable to VNN than any other site or person, and if you disagree, name the person or site. PhDs just write for PhDs, unless they're really unusual. Goebbels was as PhD. He didn't act anything like the TOQ crowd. He did describe that type accurately, though. They're writing for each other, and trying to one-up each other, and prove themselves cleverer than the rest. NS, even their PhDs, were willing to put not just their names and reputations and careers on the line, but their very lives. Because that's the stakes the solution to the problem demands. But to you, and to the TOQ crowd, it's more like a video game or a career option than a life-and-death struggle.

Quote:
In other words, you are spreading unsubstantiated rumors. This is what Bill White used to do on Overthrow.com.
Except nobody has denied my charge, that Brown Johnson is a homo. I didn't say he was building a queer network inside TOQ. I said homosexuals tend to build networks of their own, so it's quite possible he is doing that. That's not at all the same thing as concocting stories out of thin air.

Quote:
1.) You seem to believe that you are the first person to realize that we need a term to describe the Jewish pathological hatred of Gentiles.
No. But, until Connelly's article appeared, I was the only one who had actually thought about the thing, and written about the thing, multiple times, in depth. He was aware of what I wrote and ignored it. He pretended that he was the first, ever to think about the subject (in depth) or call for a term. Even though loxism had been around for years before he wrote his article, he just flat ignored it. That's typical of the kind of disloyalty that we see from the TOQ crowd: sucking up to monied conservatives, running from real WN. Again, the funny thing is that you can't see, for all your leftist dislike of conservatism, you ARE a conservative - functionally. KM, and his followers at TOQ, do not act the way revolutionaries act when they want to win. KM and TOQ act exactly like every other conservative site and blog out there.

Quote:
2.) I don't understand why you are so upset. If I had coined the term, I would want it to catch on. I would be trying to get others to use it. The more it circulates the better. Isn't that the whole point?
Sure. What he should have done, if "we" are "we," is give a hat tip to me and VNN for addressing this issue in depth. Then he should have mentioned my coinage, loxism. And analyzed its merits, and either rejected it and called for a better one, or said it would do for the time being. But his type, the TOQ type, doesn't do that. I don't have a PhD, so he can safely ignore what I have written. Same thing even with Johnson and faileocon. He and his jew pal Gottfried use my term, but never nod to the person who came up with it. I don't expect Gottfried to act Aryan, as he's a jew, but I do expect Johnson to act Aryan, even though he's queer. But they don't.

The point is, there's no loyalty there. There's no Aryan behavior. There's just sucking up to the conservatives, and shitting on White nationalists. And that fundamental disloyalty is why, altho I will happily use and cite and credit TOQ writers, in the echt Aryan, noble, way, I will never view them as our own, because I think they are constitutionally incapble of both loyalty and genuine revolutionary radicalism. They're conservatives.

Quote:
Taylor probably thinks he has better things to do than to come here and get in a no holds barred verbal cage match with you.
Don't agree. I'm sure Taylor would love to take shots back at me. The problem is he has no argument, and if he talked with me, that fact would emerge in the first three seconds, and he knows it.

Jews are white.

Whites should blame themselves, not jews.

Whites can't blame jews, even tho jews are white.

Gee, I don't see a truckload of contradictions there, and I'm sure no one else does either.
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #107
Rounder
Senior Member
 
Rounder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Missouri
Posts: 12,684
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter Wallace View Post
I haven't responded in anger. I'm actually quite bemused by these exchanges. I don't have a problem with Alex and only wish him the best. I think there is too much infighting in the movement. I also think there is a tendency of some writers to bash and pronounce anathema on those to their right. I'm not going to engage in that. It gets us nowhere.

P.S. I'm doing an interview with Jim Giles at 9:00 AM CST.
Well, you did respond in anger when you booted me off Phora coupla years ago. Course, I ain't the diplomat Alex is.

I'll listen to the archived interview, if my computer cooperates. I've never heard your actual voice. Don't forget to hit on the kikes. . . heavy.
__________________
“To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize” —–Voltaire




 
Old December 18th, 2009 #108
Hunter Wallace
Member
 
Hunter Wallace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 251
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rounder View Post
Well, you did respond in anger when you booted me off Phora coupla years ago. Course, I ain't the diplomat Alex is.
That was many light years ago. I haven't been associated with The Phora since 2007.
__________________
Occidental Dissent

"A functioning police state needs no police."
—William Borroughs
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #109
Hadding
Senior Member
 
Hadding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,247
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter Wallace View Post
That was many light years ago.
The light-year of course is a measure of distance.
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #110
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter Wallace View Post
Instead of responding to Greg's substantial points, you made a personal attack. I suppose this would be consistent with your idea that civility and decency should be thrown out the window. You believe in winning, right? That involves hitting back at others with everything you got ... dirt included. Is this not your positon?
Not sure which substantial points I didn't respond to. Johnson's advocating one-level propaganda aimed at the upper-middle class. What did GLR say?

Surely we need the truth and facts and arguments -- but only to win over the officers and noncoms of our counter-revolutionary forces and then to educate and train them for intellectual combat with the well-trained forces of the enemy, not to convert the masses. To try to use the "facts and arguments" method with the masses of the people is the eternal stumbling block of the right wing. By insisting on only this method, in its pure (and dull) form, not only the right wing, but any movement of national regeneration, insures that its material is read only by itself and the few Jews whose professional job it is to study and neutralize its material.

Hitler's National Socialist movement not only did not make that stupid mistake, but brilliantly exploited every field of propaganda with inspired material, scientifically designed not only to appeal to a few stuffy professors -- but to move people, to move millions of people in the direction desired. Hitler had Julius Streicher's Der Sturmer, full of the wildest and wooliest sensationalism, designed to smash its way into the consciousness of the masses, as it did. He also had the regular party press, designed to reach and convince the great middle class. And, for the university community, he had the esoteric material of Alfred Rosenberg, Gottfried Feder, et al.


How does KM/TOQ's approach stack up against Rockwell's analysis?

Quote:
1.) Honestly, I am not really bothered by homosexuality unless it is aggressively thrown in my face. For a racialist, I am pretty tolerant.
Yes, that is clear. Bu the first question is, should his readers and coworkers and others in the WN community know about his sexual perversion - so they can draw their own conclusions? Since many don't share your tolerance. A large percentage of homosexuals are sexually interested in teenagers. I'm not saying Johnson is or isn't. I'm just alluding to what the statistics show. It would sure suck if he were, wouldn't it? Might blow up TOQ at an inopportune moment. Didn't he live out in the Bay Area once? Did he ever attend the Folsom Street Fair? I hope there were no pictures taken if he did.

Point is, homosexuality is not a light thing. There are a number of implications to allowing one not merely into a movement or organization, but into it as the hub. Bear in mind, Johnson has not admitted to his behavior. He's lying to cover it up, and gives no sign of stopping. Apparently, Greg Johnson doesn't believe, as you do, that his homosexuality is no big deal, or he wouldn't try so hard to deny it.

Come to Jesus, Greg. Your soul will feel better.

I've given you a great gift, actually. Don't refuse it. Admitting the truth only hurts once. Then it feels really, really good.

Quote:
2.) I'm assuming Greg didn't consider his sexuality relevant to writing anonymous essays for someone on the internet.
Well, that's cool. As long as it works for him. Fuck everyone else. How modern and liberal and free-choicy.

Quote:
3.) I will note that your aversion to homosexuality puts you far closer to the conservative camp. You come on strong against conservatism in your rhetoric, but in substance your actual positions are identical to theirs on any number of issues. You sound like Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on homosexuals.
You've settled me. I'm going to write a few words on varieties of conservative. I'm some kinds, you're some kinds too. For me to sound like PR or Falwell, I'd have to be shrieking about homoism being a sin. I dont care about that. I'm just not willing to dimiss the possibilities that always, ALWAYS, attend queerism - the queer is probably a chickenhawk, and very possibly a pedophile. Boy, if you think i'm radioactive for wanting to happen to jews what they want for us, you ought to see how less peope like pedophiles. There I go again, being intolerant and judgmental. Using known facts and rational generalization to envision scenarios before they happen, hence avoid them. I'm sure it's better just to don't ask and don't tell.

Quote:
To my knowledge, the APA doesn't consider homosexuality a form of mental perversion. Homosexuals are found in every known society.
It was considered so until 1973, when jews and queers contrived to get it removed from that status.

Quote:
We're trying to reach a narrow audience: intelligent, well educated, openminded middle class White professionals. These are people with money and influence. Taking a Jerry Falwell position on homosexuality is an albatross in trying to reach this demographic. It is hard enough already to reach them with our positions on race and Jews.
You're going where the money is because you want money. That makes sense. What it doesn't make is revolutionary political change. To do that you have to lead, and none of the TOQ crowd has any taste for that. The most you'll do is what the pales already do, hold conferences in hotels. Fun stuff, but nothing to do with white nationalism or serious change.

Quote:
How so? I heard you say (on the Giles show, I think) that Hal Turner probably turned over the IP addresses of VNN users to the Feds. What about the Shop White fiasco with Bill White and the credit card numbers?
It was very unfortunate stuff, and certainly not something we did not intend to happen. We were on HT's network because we got kicked off a bunch of other servers. That's what happens when you write stuff that hits center. I don't think TOQ ever has or will experience that, as they pose no threat to the System. The government isn't worried about people who are fair and reasonable and make only polite and footnoted arguments.

Quote:
Todd in FL was posting on VNN and making bombs. He was a real domestic terrorist. He attracted the attention of law enforcement agences to everyone who posts here by association. Then you have Rounder who is in the FBI domestic terrorism database.
Todd's stuff was a long time ago and had nothing to do with VNN, from which he was banned, for other reasons, years ago. You seem to believe that serious political change can be accomplished by a mix of queers, PhDs and librarians, without ever attracting the attention of jew-indoctrinated political police. You also exhibit a pronounced bias against men of action. Writers and intellectuals alone can't get the job done.

Quote:
So, you have at least four individuals associated with domestic terrorism posting on VNN Forum including two known government informants, but you are worried about Greg Johnson writing essays. Hmm, apples and oranges, itz.
I see no relation. Posters on a forum aren't forum employees. They don't set policies or control checkpoints. Editors do, and queers very often have their own undisclosed private agendas. If Johnson's homosex behavior doesn't matter, why is he still trying to conceal it? His persistence in pretending, long after his supporters have given up the game, shows you just how neurotic and worried he is. If he's this hinky under comparatively little pressure, what happens when the enemy or the authorities put the screws to him?

Quote:
And this is a strategy on your part? Who are you trying to influence? Sam Francis readers? Greg Johnson readers? These people admire Sam and Greg because of their erudition. They're not going to respond well to abusive personal attacks on champions of their issues. In fact, that is likely to have the opposite effect, and from what I can tell, it has.
I don't ever try to influence anyone. I make fun of what's stupid, and I reveal and analyze relevant facts. It has the effect I seek. It will in the case of Johnson too. Sam Francis fans are like AmRen readers - useless for all practical purposes. We need a revolution. Not the kind of folks who look up to Jared Taylor and Sam Francis.

Quote:
Intelligent and educated people like polish. They like to think of themselves as sophisticated. Hence, the constrast in their reaction to Jared Taylor and RAHOWA skinheads.
You ought to examine your obviously unconsidered assumption that the kind of change you want can be brought about by the kind of men and writing and behavior you prefer. Perhaps it has its own demands and has nothing to do with what you like or what's in your interest. Believe it or not, there's a whole school that thinks revolution takes street fighters and not just polished sophisticates. And if that's so, maybe some of the agitprop to appeal to them is worth producing. And maybe those who can produce it should be associated with, rather than dumped. VNN does a better job selling KM's ideas than he does. The last ten years proves that. By his ideas, I mean his valid ideas. We are the ones who translate his academic stylings into vernacular, which is to say useful slogans. He doesnt' understand that, but PhDs seldom do. Goebbels was truly unusual. MacDonald is the norm.

Quote:
I wrote a review of the Giles interview with Jared Taylor. I pointed out where I think he is error, but I didn't use personal attacks. Taylor's readers are far more likely to listen to that type of criticism.
Your criticism of JT is superficial because it takes his motives at face value. JT should not be criticized, he should be destroyed.

Quote:
I really try to get along with everyone. I'm probably the only person in the whole movement who has a positive view of you, Rounder, Lindstedt, and Taylor.
Of those, only one is on our side. Lindstedt is a proven liar, and would-be character assassin. And you give him free rein to attempt to destroy others at OD. That is insane. Blank tolerance is nothing good. Proven liars and character defectives must be rooted out and shunned. As I do here at VNN.

Quote:
The only people I have really feuded with are the philo-Semites like Guy White and Ian Jobling.
Those are fools not even worth noticing. Your battles with them are amusing reading, I'll grant you, but as political players they are beneath notice, as their arguments and motives don't add up.

Quote:
As Greg and others have noted, the Jews have a harmony amongst themselves. You don't see them wailing into each other. Their attacks are almost universally directed at those they perceive to be their enemies.
They are a hive, and they attack all outsiders as the enemy. Whites are instinctively more individualist. So our 'we' is more of an intellectual decision than instinctive feeling. So we must be very careful about who is us and who is not. I define "us" much more narrowly than you do.

Quote:
Not so on the American Right. This is especially true on the far right. We have individualists fighting like piranhas to be the big fish in the small pool. The best example that comes to mind is the legal feud between Willis Carto and Mark Weber that destroyed Liberty Lobby and sapped IHR of needed funds.
Jews do plenty of that themselves. Our problem is "we" don't know who "we" are because every time "we" try to define ourselves, someone else dismisses it as "purism" and calls for kumbaya kingism, Rodney not Michael. We are not in the "we" stage yet, we're in the stage where different approaches struggle for dominance. So it is appropriate that we fight, since it's not settled who's right. Or who's dominant, which is about the same thing.

Quote:
To my knowledge, EMJones and Michael Piper don't know Jared Taylor. They are not in a position to know if he is running a deep game.
Don't have to. You can infer it from the evidence.

Quote:
I want to say that Piper is an underling of Willis Carto who has been attacking Taylor for years. From what I have read of Piper and Jones, I am not all that impressed with their work.
I am. They're not WN, but their works is fantastic.

Quote:
Well, you got me here. I do believe in manners. I value custom, propriety, decency, and honesty. I try not to hit others with lowblows. If I have dirt on someone, I generally don't use it. I believe in acting like a gentleman. I don't object to you making your points, but I think you should do it in a fair way. You should have some respect for your opponents. This is Gentile respectability.
Anglo-gentile "respectability" fetish is what created the problem in the first place. It's not respectable, and never will be to that mindset, to deal with the jews their collective behavior shows they need to be dealt with. I'm not too proud to say we should stomp every last jew into a mudhole, and then piss on their corpses. I guess that makes me unclubbable. Oh noes!

Last edited by Alex Linder; December 18th, 2009 at 08:29 AM.
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #111
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter Wallace View Post
I have no objection to criticizing Buchanan, but shouldn't he be criticized in such a way that would prove most effective at winning over his sympathizers? I haven't seen any evidence that your abusive personal attacks are working.
Have you seen evidence that sucking up to them works? It's partly a matter of numbers and noise. The more people saying the same thing, the more effect it will have. Buchanan's readers are more likely to be impressed by a display of dominance over their hero -- a mocking -- than by a respectful approach. You know who the #1 figure admired by these conservative nitwits is? It's Churchill. Why? Because he slaughtered a whole bunch of people. These are mass men, they are awed by straight power and nothing else. You win them over by swagger, not by namby-pamby evidence and manners. Think also which attitude will win the respect of Buchanan? Kicking him in the nuts (pointing out his pecuniary motives) will have a far greater effect than reason and politeness. He picked a nigger for his running mate, but you, a so-called white nationalist, want to treat him respectfully. That doesn't make emotional sense. You should be joining VNN in mocking and attacking Buchanan. If anything will bring him around to our side, it is us showing not where he dserves respect, but condemning him and evne moreso ridiculing him for showing weakness. That's where you bring people around. VNN singlehandled brought PCRoberts around by that technique: shaming him into speaking at least some of the truth about jews. Treat hi mwith respect, he would have stayed the same old jew-fawning shithead he started out as. If you want to influence the readers of these conservatives, there's only one way to do it: dominate their heroes, and make that dominance undeniable. MacDonald's polite, friendly, smiling way is a guaranteed loser. Yeah, they'll give him a nod once or twice a year, as they do Jared Taylor, but it will amount to nothing. A radical group doesn't reach out to others, it rises to dominance from a field of smaller, weaker players, and becomes a star in the sky that none can deny. The correct policy toward Buchanan is to attack him and ridicule his weakness. But only if you think you're right and that you can do better and that you're in this whole hog and all the way. If you're not, then, yes, KM's way is better. Better for YOU PERSONALLY. and YOUR career. That's the Sam Francis way. I thought you wanted more than that. Are you a careerist or a crusader?

Quote:
On the contrary, most people seem to get defensive and react with hostility. It looks to me like you have only succeeded in isolating yourself from everyone else in the movement, which is a shame, because you are genuinely talented.
What movement? Who's leading this movement? Where is it moving to?

I'm not isolated from the paleoconservatives, whether at Takimag or TOQ, I have no interest in hobnobbing with other career girls because I'm not a career girl. They are what they are, VNN is what VNN is. The only thing of interest to me is whether I can regain enough physical health to lead on the activist front, which is where the real progress is to made. The only advance left on the intellectual front is on the White HS curriculum. Another 100 years of TOQ essays won't change a thing. I'm only interested in leading or following a leader. TOQ isn't offering any more leadership than Sam Francis did. It's just another gaggle of careerist essay writers. Been there, done that. Already came up with better terms and arguments and slogans than TOQ crew could in 1000 years. The cutting edge now is creating real political leadership outdoors. More online essayists, yawn. VNN is for pioneers, not settlers.

Quote:
Perhaps you are right. I consider myself a rational person. I won't hesitate to change my view in light of new evidence. If I ever find reason to believe you are right about Buchanan, I will share it with you.
Fair enough.

Quote:
Alexa generates its rating by collecting data from users who have installed their toolbar which tracks their web movements. Only 2% of internet users have Alexa. This is why my Alexa rating is all over the map while the Quantcast data (which directly measures traffic) shows little or no change.
Fair enough. But back in the day, it was the standard everybody used. I followed it very closely until Wolzek left. My point was to give you something other than siply my word that we got more readers, starting from absolute zero, than any other WN site ever has or probably will. Stormfront is higher now, but that's not really directly comparable, as it is a forum. But I havent looked at ratings in years, don't care. I see very few succint, valuable concepts that did NOT originate from VNN, no matter who doesn't link or credit us, and in any case I am long past caring about that, save for the single aspect I mention - I consider it the height of ignoble to steal from fellow Aryans, and I lose all respect for those who do.

Quote:
I disagree.
Ok, you disagree. But please don't say I have never outlined or advised a strategy. I have many times, and the above is just one of them.

Quote:
1.) We can only win through incrementalism (gradually pushing our ideas into the mainstream). The Left has exploited the Overton Window with great success.

2.) In order to push our ideas into the mainstream, we need a chain of discursive spaces that are progressively more moderate, or more radical, depending on which way you look at it.
Ok, I've commented on this in other posts. Just for my own curiosity, what's the origin of this 'discursive space'? Why do you like that term so much? What precisely do you mean by it?

Quote:
3.) We need sympathizers (cryptos) in key positions along this chain who constantly hint at a more radical position.

4.) This creates a path from the mainstream to the fringe down which sympathizers can travel. Case in point, the path I took to White Nationalism through Pat Buchanan, a mainstream political figure.
I don't think your way can work.

You're trying to infiltrate master infiltrators. I'd rather play to Aryan strengths - lead and face the wind, and make no bones about who we are
and what we represent and what change we demand.

Quote:
1.) Saddling yourself with extreme positions - for instance, exterminating the Jews - is guaranteed to backfire. The overwhelming majority of Whites will recoil in moral disgust. Within the WN movement, you have only made yourself radioactive. No one wants to be associated with someone who openly promotes genocide. You are doing nothing but isolating yourself.
Well you ought to approve if it will make your ideas more moderate by contrast. I remember the glee with which Americans back in 92 watched green tracers destroy Iraq. Americans love kiling innocent people, as long as you provide a fig leaf of justification. And of course the jews aren't innocent people.

Quote:
2.) In taking such extreme positions, you attract a lot of mentally unstable individuals, people like Todd in FL. You are inviting law enforcement agencies to get on your case. You are running the risk of going to prison. We have already seen Bill White and Hal Turner get in trouble for pushing the boundries of free speech.
Todd was banned years ago, and his bombings were years before that. But anyway, so what? The cops and spies will track anything and everything. You can stay legal and still get thrown in jail. If avoiding risk is the standard, why not stay out of the cause altogether. VNN has higher posting standards than most sites, as we don't allow anonymous troublemakers to spread lies and assassinate character. Most sites do.

Quote:
3.) Attacking Sam Francis, Greg Johnson, and Jared Taylor with smears and personal attacks hasn't won you any sympathy with their audience. Again, it has backfired. You have only succeeded in highlighting the qualities that people find admirable in them. As a strategy, it just doesn't work.
My words only bother the tepid and timid. Those aren't the ones who can bring about the change we need.

Quote:
4.) You have a record of attacking all sorts of people in the movement. This has created an enormous amount of animus towards you. Within the WN movement, you have isolated yourself. If you can't build a coalition within the racialist community itself, how do you expect to reach out to non-racialists?
If they don't meet my litmus test, they aren't WN, and definitely aren't in any community I'm part of. Kumbaya coalitions don't work in racialism or anywhere else. More people than you think appreciate my pointing out Brown Johnson's sodomitical tendencies.

Fake unity only retards real unity until there's agreement on who we are and what we want. Until that point, better to fight it out and let the best WN win.
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #112
Mike Parker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter Wallace View Post
I don't recall MacDonald making that criticism of Linder. I'm sure he would acknowledge that Alex often makes valid insights.
I'm glad I kept the clip. Please see 1:15:39: "I don't know what he's saying that I'm not saying."

To repeat, Alex says racialist politics is a zero sum game. MacDonald says Sammy and Patsy are "great Americans." Alex insists on No Jews Just Right. MacDonald talks about "Jews as allies" and praises Paul Gottfried as a "force for relative good." These are important points that are available to the educated people MacDonald is so concerned about at VNN, not TOQ or TOO. If he won't engage Alex's points because he "cringes" at some bad words, then he's stuck in his own "ordeal of civility." But I'm not sure that's the real reason.

Quote:
If we change the culture, political victories will naturally follow. If we win at the ballox box, our culture won't necessarily change.
You're still saddled with the wrong analogy. MacDonald together with Jones provides a richer model than MacDonald alone. The Jews who advocated the culture of critique opposed the dominant culture but were supported by the dominant political and economic class. Today's WN oppose and are opposed by both. Entirely different situation.

Quote:
This goes on largely behind the scenes.
Fair enough. Let's just say for the purposes of this discussion, there's no reason to believe the "elites" you're trying to persuade can be persuaded to take action by the power of intellectual argument, and for all your scientism you won't lay out any objective tests of that proposition. The "default position" based on the relevant history should be that prior white "elites" acted in their perceived short-term interests, and the few around today will do the same.
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #113
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunter Wallace View Post
Jews are vicious towards out-groups, but practice in-group altruism. In contrast, Whites often viciously fight amongst themselves, as we are seeing here.
We are viciously fighting here? You and me? Aren't we hashing out something that is absolutely essential? I think jews do exactly what we're doing, probably not in public, but that doesn't really matter as it's not in their interest to speak openly, as they are trying to fool people, whereas we are trying to teach them the cold facts of the matter and lead them out of the morass.

Quote:
1.) We believe in influencing elites: rational, intelligent, educated, sophisticated people with money and influence. We're not trying to reach mental defectives like Todd in FL or kooks like jimbo.
I get it. You want donors, not doers. You write essays. They send checks. Somehow this leads to change.

Quote:
2.) Towards this end, we believe in creating a new type of racialist and anti-Semitic discourse, one that is fact based, rational, and informed by science.
Why do you think this is new? People have made logical cases against jews for thousands of years. You can create all the discourse you want, but unless you control the tv, it's going to remain in the ghetto.

Quote:
3.) We're busily creating a real vanguard to spearhead a social movement with mainstream aspirations.
Paleocons like the Francis KM follows said the same thing for decades. The jew-controlled MSM will of course play along because you all have advanced degrees, fresh-scrubbed faces, and properly footnoted essays. And you're pretty and polite in public, eminently ready for prime time.

Quote:
In other words, we don't shoot people who carry our banner. That would be counterproductive.
What's on that banner? "We are an impressive collection of essay writers and academics who earnestly desire serious change against the interests of those owning the mass media and Congress, but because our facts are in order and we washed behind our ears and we say pretty please we fully expect you to treat us fairly and give us air time to make our case."

Quote:
For starters, we don't want to be stereotyped and dismissed as mindless haters.
If you try to reach people through the MSM, you will be. Regardless of how you dress or what you say.

Quote:
This is nonsense. We don't have any objection to using humor and emotion, but cracking jokes about genocide get us nowhere. Believe it or not, we are not all academics. We have all sorts of people reaching out to Whites in various ways.

We're trying to reach middle class people who have those pleasant, middle class morals and manners. We plan on competing with conservatives for their support. Naturally, we have to show some deference to their status concerns. That's realism on our part.
Brimelow's income's got MacDonald's nose open. That's realism on my part.

Quote:
I have to question this strategic stroke of genius: what is sowing as much division, animosity, and discord within our own ranks supposed to accomplish?
What is "our own ranks"?

Quote:
Is that really the case? Does anyone truly believe that VNN with its Tard Corral is reaching a better audience than we are?
Who is we? I'm sure people are reading TOQ, but it offers no leadership, and generates no lasting ideas. It's basically a conservative site that allows some jew criticism.

Quote:
We're willing to grant that Alex makes a lot of good points. We grant that Alex is extremely talented. Otherwise, we wouldn't bother him. Unfortunately, Alex is one of those people who is constitutionally incapable of working with others. The same individualist streak that led him out of the mainstream has isolated him within the movement. He will always be the perennial outsider.
You can't have outsiders unless there's an inside. There isn't. At most TOQ/KM has created another conservative hub, more or less the same as Vdare, most likely aimed at tapping some of the donations Vdare brings in.

No leadership is offered, just an essay now and then.

Quote:
1.) It is the right thing to do.
2.) It is a better strategy.
Heh. I'll try to remember that you're doing the "right thing" next time I visit OD and see ten or fifteen peole claiming, with no evidence, VNN is a federal front, I'm dying of ass cancer, I'm an FBI informant, and on and on and on.

Quote:
What have you won? You've set a course for the fringe.
Fringe only means something to people trying to be mainstream, and that means you and KM, and you're not. You will always be juged exactly as they judge me and VNN, that's the reality of the situation. You're just kidding yourself that it's otherwise.

Quote:
It matters a great deal if, say, a multimillionaire were leave us an endowment.
It matters to the recipient of the check's banking account, not to our cause.

Quote:
In the 1920's and 1930's, Jews were writing essays. A has to come before B.
Yeah, except they owned the print journals in which those essays were actually published. Sometimes I think you actually believe the things you say, and then I just shake my head in wonder. You really believe you, with your just-the-facts-ma'am and your Overton window are going to do what the jews did. It boggles the mind.

Quote:
You never answered my question. What happened to Dietrich? He was at VNN for years. It is my understanding that he left to start his own little project.
I have no idea where he is or what he is doing.

Quote:
Observation: Linder is trying to polarize White Nationalists with vicious smears, not Jews and Whites.
VNN is white nationalism. The stuff you're talking about is faileoconservatism.

Quote:
Looking forward to it. I've written far too much about White Nationalism and the Jewish Question lately. I plan on getting more engaged with popular culture, the political mainstream, and other movements that compete with us.

Note: I found Rusty Mason through daily blogging.
Well, good.

Quote:
I've been reading VDARE for almost eight years now. It is one of the best resources on the net. They publish Kevin MacDonald and Jared Taylor. I wish VDARE were more radical, but instead of criticizing them, I think our time is better spent creating a viable alternative.
I never read it. There's no there there. Like Michelle Malkin's nose.
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #114
Mike Parker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
Default

One more point for Hunter (or others). Speaking of emulating Jews, has anyone in the TOQ family advocated a white boycott of Jewish-controlled businesses? Economic pressure has been one of the Jews' most effective weapons, and even the mild pro-Palestinian movement pushes "BDS" against Israel. Should WN hand our money over to our enemies to fund our destruction?

If TOQ pushes such an idea, that would lead to some interesting tests. Next time MacDonald submits an essay to VDARE it should be about the Jew boycott, or at least link to it. Whether Brimelow carries it will indicate whether he's really on our side in exercising power, or just carries occasional MacDonald thought pieces to prod worried Jews into funding the Sailer-Steinlight immigration reform axis. Of course it would also test MacDonald: is he willing to impose on Brimelow that way? You, Hunter, have an in with AmRen. If they're pro-white, they should allow whites to push for white economic power. If Jared opposes white economic power, surely he should face some consequences.
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #115
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

Quote:
3.) If Alex wants to engage in practical action, why doesn't he take his own advice? I haven't seen any follow up to the Knoxville rally. What about Rounder? Why isn't he organizing street level protests in Missouri? It is one thing to say we need more real world activism. It is another to get out there and actually do it.
Fair point. The reason is purely health related.

Quote:
6.) Alex is a writer. That's his strength. Unfortunately, I don't see him writing much either. He has abandoned the VNN frontpage to Socrates. I'm running two daily blogs. I'm getting published by TOQ Online and Amren. I even find the time to post here and respond to you guys.
That's impressive and good. Keep it up. We enjoy reading your stuff.

Quote:
Essays can definitely reach people who have courage. William Pierce wrote The Turner Diaries. He inspired Tim McVeigh to blow up the federal building in Oklahoma City. He inspired Bob Mathews and The Order.
Those weren't essays but fiction!

Hitler said if you want real change, writing is a distant second to oratory. Writing is just fill-in documentation. There's no getting around real politics in the streets.

The fact is that literally nobody is offering Whites any political leadership as of December 18, 2009.
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #116
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Parker View Post
I'm glad I kept the clip. Please see 1:15:39: "I don't know what he's saying that I'm not saying."

To repeat, Alex says racialist politics is a zero sum game. MacDonald says Sammy and Patsy are "great Americans." Alex insists on No Jews Just Right. MacDonald talks about "Jews as allies" and praises Paul Gottfried as a "force for relative good." These are important points that are available to the educated people MacDonald is so concerned about at VNN, not TOQ or TOO. If he won't engage Alex's points because he "cringes" at some bad words, then he's stuck in his own "ordeal of civility." But I'm not sure that's the real reason.
Yep. KM is a paleoconservative with a minor in criticizing jews, but not disrespectfully, and certain not by excluding them from his tea parties. This policy will lead where it has always led.

What do you think is the real reason, Mike?
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #117
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

Quote:
In the future, I won't mention you in anything I get published at Amren. If you want to stew in purity and isolation, that's your choice.
This is funny, because I can tell you really mean it. It's as though you imagine 1) AmRen has some huge mass of readers; 2) they're a valuble type we seek; and 3) they haven't heard of VNN. I doubt any of those is true. AmRen's a medium-volume site. The people on it are jewish controllers, some idiots with a hush crime fetish, and ordinary conservatives. No one with a brain or drive would linger there. It took Pierce and Rockwell less than a month apiece to pierce the no-jews veil at JBS, realize the truth, and get booted out. So it is with anyone worth their salt arriving first at AmRen. If they don't have the brains to ask "why," the question you're not allowed to ask there, what good are they to our cause? I'm not saying they don't have the occasional good article or thread, it's just...meh. Same old circular, pointless collection of headlines.

Quote:
I think we can gradually breakdown the "dynamic silence" policy and get our message out in the mainstream.
You do remember that dynamic silence is just one of their techniques. I sure don't see where you're going to make serious inroads into mass media.

Quote:
Why bother reading someone who is so obviously worthless?
Who says he's worthless? I can use him for my purposes, same as with Salon liberals or any other group. He's only worthless if you take him as someone it's worthy of respeting and seeing as a 'great American' who can and will help us liberate our race. That's where he is worthless. We should treat him exactly as he treats us - steal from him anything good he comes up with while never showing him any public respect.

Last edited by Alex Linder; December 18th, 2009 at 11:41 AM.
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #118
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hadding View Post
So was Bobby Fischer. He was nonetheless a crazy Jew himself because of his genes.
I confess a soft spot for him. I just loved the way his mind shot directly to the relevant points. Zero regard for PC or diplomacy, just straight and blunt to jew-blame. Frookin' awesome, 'twas.

Quote:
People exercising political power sometimes find it expedient to be dishonest, and they can get away with it if they have the propaganda machine on their side, but even for them it often ends in embarrassment when word gets out.
Read a bio of Clinton. People in politics are pretty shameless, most of them. The perfect democratic politician can sit down at a picnic table with two people on opposite sides of an issue, and walk away with both of them thinking he's on their side. Clinton was that good. Taking a position in democratic politics HURTS people. That's why virtually all elected politicians are very skillful deceivers. Very, very few democratic politicians dare lecture people. Bobby Kennedy did, but very few others. 99.9% are attached to audience ass like natural-born remoras.

Quote:
I think that dishonesty is generally a very bad idea for somebody with no power whose only hope is to be taken seriously by rational people. Truth and credibility are by far the most powerful weapons that we have.
Alone they don't get us very far, though. Liars and murderers always seem to occupy the top positions.

Quote:
Truth is also what makes us the moral people. Two of the men that I respect the most, Dr. William Pierce and Professor Robert Faurisson, both were brought to the stands that they took and the sacrifices that they made because of the traditional Western value of truth.

If we cease to revere the truth then our cause loses its idealism, as well as its persuasive force.
Wanting to live in a White nation is a preference, not a truth.

Quote:
I found it strange that in your next utterance, right after advocating dishonesty, you complained about men not conducting themselves honorably. Do you understand that honor and honesty are different forms of the same Latin word? I don't believe that you can have one without the other.
Did I advocate dishonesty or did I observe that those in power are almost always liars, thieves and murderers? You drew the conclusion, I never stated it.

Quote:
I disagree. What has happened to Bill White is a direct consequence of his manipulative attention-seeking. He calculated that creating the superficial appearance of posing a threat to Obama was a way to force maximum attention on himself, and he got it.
You're a smart guy, Hadding, but I wouldn't have you as part of my inner circle at any cost. You would flip under pressure, because you basically see everybody in the world as morally corrupt, and yourself as pure. Thus, you think everybody else basically deserves the bad that happens to them, and with that mentality, you would turn very quickly under pressure. People don't come in good, and you're still in the childish state where that surprises and disappoints you. Your moralism even overcomes your legalism in this post. You overlook that there was absolutely nothing illegal about the magazine cover or the article itself. To your normal, lawyerball-playing self, that would be the signal point. But because your moral side wants to see Bill White punished, you turn into a puritan.

Last edited by Alex Linder; December 18th, 2009 at 12:01 PM.
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #119
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

For any who have never read this, here is the Victor Gerhard - Sam Francis exchange, from 2003. Remember that MacDonald had Francis write the foreward to his book, and is pushing his crew down the same faileocon cowpath:

http://vanguardnewsnetwork.com/v1/2005/CantSayThat.htm
 
Old December 18th, 2009 #120
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

[Here's the text]

Sam Francis - Vic Gerhard Exchange, Documenting Sammy's Great Fear


22 February 2005



VNN Reader: I had doubted what Linder said about Francis months ago on how believing one thing and saying another causes health problems. But now it makes sense. This picture from last year looks like a 77- or 87-year-old, not a 57-year-old.

To those who think Linder is too harsh, maybe you should think further. If he speaks his mind and doesn't give a damn, so much the better. After all, that's what free speech means. His example can teach as much as his content. If Francis was a coward, then so are many others (including me) and it's up to us to gain courage. Until we do, our fear should make it clear that, to put it mildly, what Linder is doing is not nearly as easy as he makes it look.

Here's an e-mail exchange between Sam Francis and Victor Gerhard from 2003.

----------

Original Link: Here.

Victor Gerhard-Sam Francis Exchanges

by Gerhard & Francis

Loaded: 4/12/2003

(Ed. Note: this is raw email, so don't hold anybody overly responsible for spelling mistakes, etc.)

Here is correspondence with Sammy. I won't put in comments, cause you don't need them, but note how he first argues that he can't get published, then next he doesn't agree with me about Jews -- which makes the first point moot, all the while ignoring the damning questions, like why he criticizes Hispanics so fiercely, but never Jews. Really, the guy is a nut. Either that or they have some dirt on him, or he is just a scared shit, I don't know. I could have ripped him a new asshole because he was 1) hysterical, and 2) illogical, but I let him off easy. Maybe someday he will do something good, I don't know. He can't write a paragraph without 3 contradictions and one twisting of his opponent's argument. I'd love to debate him and drive him into the dirt.

Vic G

[Me to Francis, responding to Moran column]

Anti-Semitism is saying or doing anything a Jew does not like; whether the statement was true, or the act perfectly justified. That is the real de finition. How can you even pretend otherwise when Jews call someone who defends Arabs (Semites) against Jewish tyranny an 'anti-Semite'?

It's great that you are pecking around the edges of the problem. I'm just not sure what more proof you need to see that Jews are directing American foreign policy; that Culture of Critique and its mind-boggling account of facts is completely true; that to rail against blacks and hispanics without mentioning Jews is like complaining about symptoms but not the disease.

Maybe this sounds cruel and racist; and yet it is true isn't it? Personally, I've read enough of your writings, heard you speak enough times, and even talked to you on occasion, so that I am convinced you recognize the Jewish problem. It would be an immense help if you could now take off the gloves and let the Jews have it. They have it coming. They are the true enemy of Middle Americans. "Oil" is not the justification for this war but a laughably transparent Jewish hedge, nor are the Christian fundamentalists to blame; if they were not supporting Israel we would barely, as before 9/11, realize they existed.

My friends are going to jail for speaking their minds; every day another one is arrested or visited by the FBI, or raided by the Terrorism Task Force. Now is the time, name the Jew, put THEM on the defensive for once. Otherwise, Middle America is doomed; its sons' dying in Central Asia, its jobs moving out of the US, its population increasingly non-White and hostile. We need you to act now; a few months from now may be too late.

Your columns could make an immense difference at this crucial moment. We are watching history, and if the Jews triumph here there may be no stopping them, ever. Goodbye White race.

Vic Gerhard
Wilmington, N.C.

************************************

[Francis back to me]

I just wrote a column on Moran in which I was fairly explicit about this matter. I have another today that is also pretty explicit about the role of neo-cons (not all Jews) in getting us into the war. What more do you want? Peter Brimelow at Vdare told me the first column probably would not be published by any newspaper in this country (we'll see; my columnn last year supporting what Billy Graham said to Nixon was not published by my three best outlets), and without my authority or knowledge he changed a key line that altered my meaning. You simply cannot go much further than I have already gone and expect to be published at all in anythng like mainstream media, and anyway, aside from the current war, I think there are other problems besides the Jewish role in stirring up blacks and pushing immigration. Both blacks and hispanics have now acquired their own racial consciousness and are not necessarily under Jewish control.

********************************

[Me back to Sammy]

I agree, you possibly could not go further and expect to be published mainstream, as of today. This is a reasonable argument for using this tactic. I feel (perhaps incorrectly but I doubt it) that the time is past for this tactic. If you did publish a column going further, USA Today would not print it, but plenty of people would read it on the ever growing alternative White media (overthrow.com, antiwar.com, Vanguard News Network, Stormfront, and many more), and it just may put the bar lower for the next guy who dares. As things look today, your tactic, which you have followed for the 15 years I have been reading you, has gotten a good but watered-down message to Middle America, but our situation is FAR worse than 15 years ago.

Much of Middle America is flying an American flag and 'supporting the troops;' reasonable if you never had another way of thinking offered to you. Your columns are scathing at the beginning and middle, but never offer a realistic answer at the end because you do not name the Jews as the prime movers in the destruction of Middle America. How can someone organize against an amorphous 'Elite'? You rarely name names, except as examples. You talk of the Frankfurt School and other groups, never saying they are almost 100% Jewish and Jewish-funded and based on Jewish tactics and ideals.

You told me you were reading 'The Culture of Critique.' How anyone can read that book and not immediately come to important conclusions based on the Jewish role in the Boasian School, the Left, the Psychoanalytic movement, the Frankfurt School, critique of gentile cultural, immigration policy and more, I do not know. Jewish power is the most important and relevant fact in America today. Yet you do not acknowledge that power. That is a derelection of duty; you are hated by the left and neo-cons regardless of what you do - but do you expect the White right, your true home, to appreciate your half-measures? You are literally a man without a nation.

Precisely how bad must the situation get before you tell the whole truth? Now, how would you have answered that question 2 years ago? Two years ago you would have agreed to open fire if the Government ever did something as tyrannical and insane as the Patriot Act(s), the mass arrests, threats of government torture, Guantanamo detention, the B-52 strikes, the complete control of the Executive Branch by Jews, if not Israeli Jews, hideous airport searches, the Department of Homeland Security, phone taps, and spies controlled by Israel. All on top of a war against 1.1 Billion Muslims that we can never win.

You are being disingenuous when you say you were tough on the Moran critics; not all neo-cons are Jews; and blacks and hispanics are not under Jewish control. You were tough on Moran by the relatively tepid standards of the paleo-cons a la the Rockford institute. Not all neo-cons are Jews, but those that are not Jewish know the score and never deviate from the editorial line DEVISED wholly by Jews. Blacks and hispanics may have thrown off a bit of the Jewish yoke, but the Jewish strategy and mindset lives on and they would have little power to intimidate Whites without Jewish judges, lawyers, financing and media pressure. You know this. As far as Brimelow, he needs a kick in the ass also.

What is it you want? To be published mainstream? To be rich? To be on TV? These I can not help you with. But if you want to save Whites and their culture, get off the fence and attack the enemy. At this point, you are actually furnishing disinformation, confusing the very public who soon will be looking for answers as the situation in their country grows worse. And hey, Sobran gets published. I gave him a thousand dollars of my money because of his honest stance; a thousand dollars I had to make in payments because I'm his poorest charter subscriber.

What more can I expect of you? I want you to finally and forever cast off the chains of Jewish fear, Jewish money, and Jewish influence. I want you to write columns that will stir the public to rise up and change this nation. Join those on the radical right who are not afraid to tell the whole truth. I am not asking you to do ANYTHING I have not done. I lost my job as an Attorney, I have friends going to jail on made up charges, I've had my phone tapped, I get the super search at every airport, but I am a FREE MAN! I also write columns - they don't get published mainstream, but thousands of people read them. You could do a hundred times better.

I realize this is a lot to ask, but screw the money and respectability. What do I want? White Power!

Victor J. Gerhard, Esq.
Wilmington, NC

*************************************

[Sammy back to me]

Well, I'm sorry I'm such a disappointment to you. The fact is that I have read the Culture of Critique, as well as the other two volumes, know MacDInald personally, and agree with much though not all of what he says. My entore body of writings over the last 20-25 years is an explanation of how I sidagree and and have a somewhat dofferent view of the world than what is frankly a monomanical obsession with an omnipotent Jew. There are reasons why neo-conservatism exists other than Jewish power, and these should be obvious to any one actually involved in politics. I was a witness to many of them. Just one, for example, is the greed and amition and shalloweness of many orthodox non-Jewish conservatives fro the "respectability" they thought Jews could give them. You and critics like you always assume that because others don't say what you demand they say, they must be afraid to say it. The fact is, as I just told you, I have just written two columns that will probably harm me more than they help me, so it is not fear on my part. Can you even imagine that maybe I don't agree with your view of the Jews, that the Jews and the Jews alone are solely responsible for everthing bad that has happened and is going on? I really don't think you can. Moreover, as I was trying to tell you indirectly, I depend on outlets like Vdrae and Rockford; if they don't publish me, I don't get piublished, and they would not publish me if I write what you want me to write (which I do not agree with anyway). Sobran does not get published outside of his own newsletter and maybe the Wanderer. The American Cisnervatuve won't publish him. Chronicles won't publish him. His syndicate dropped him. So don't tell me about things I know about more than you. It's fine to piublish on sites like VNN., but no one -- non one --reads them or takes them seriously outside a handful of people. Sure I'd like to be rich, but do you imagine I thought I would ever get rich writing what I write? I really just don't know how to explain to people like you what the real world is like, because the truth is -- take it form someone who went through graduate school, worked in a think tank, in the US Senate, and at a nationally distrubuted newspaper for 9 years -- you and your pals do not have a fucking clue.

************************************

[Me to Sammy]

Oooookay....now why will the columns harm you, why won't Vdare and Rockford publish such a column, why can't Sobran get published? Oh, and what is this war stuff on the T.V.? Come on, I wasn't rude to you, nor did I say Jews were every single problem, but that they are far, far more of the problem than recognized by your columns. (By the way, if non-Jewish neo-conservatives want the 'respectablity' they feel Jews can give them, that is not ANOTHER reason neo-cons exist, but rather the very one I stated - Jewish Power.) I don't have a CLUE? You say you agree with most of MacDonald, then when I base my arguments on him, I don't have a clue? Tell me what part of MacDonald you agree with, can you buck up and do that? Agreeing with even one chapter would put in serious question the honesty of your writing, would it not; as that agreement is never acknowledged by you in your writings. And tell me what you disagree with. I get the managerial elite argument, I've read and re-read what you have written over the years, but your very email here implies you won't get published for criticizing Jews as an ethnic group, though you HAVE criticized black's and hispanic's as ethnic groups, and then attacks me with an anger I did nothing to merit.

You are in the same bag as Jared Taylor, who in person admitted he chose not to attack Jews because he had enough of a problem attacking blacks, et al. You fit right in at American Renaissance, I'd say. For all your 'think tank' work, did you ever stand on a street with demonstrators as Jews rained bricks down on you for daring to speak out against them, as the police turned their heads? You write about Middle America, I am Middle America. I'm not sure precisely what sentence got you riled. I'd wish you'd tell me so I can use it again. Hey, if people read this exchange, who will they think has a clue, you or me? I'll wager on me.

Plus, the idea that 'no one' takes VNN seriously is ridiculous. The ever-growing numbers of people that do take it seriously are true activists, each worth 100 brandy-sniffing Chronicle's readers. People that will put their financial and physical well being on the line for the ideals you somewhat endorse. Another point, what is the ENTIRE Muslim world yelling about if not many of the same beliefs about Jews showcased on VNN? Add in much of Europe and Asia and South America, and much of the US population of blacks and hispanics, and, well, that's not really 'a handful of people' is it?

I truly do respect you and your writing had a great effect on my life. Actually, you brought me a long way to the beliefs I have. Yet you, Dr. Frankenstein, feel I don't have a clue. What is that line about the guilty man fleeing where no one pursues? Sorry, should know it, just too Middle American.

Your entire body of work does little to counter an anti-Jewish explanation of American Politics. I believe almost all you have written; yet it contradicts most of MacDonald not at all. Your writings try to explain why and how this managerial elite became so alienated and hostile to traditional America. It partially explains the alienation, but does little to explain the hostility, the outright hatred, that these elites have for people who are basically members of their family. Only a non-White group could have such hatred for Whites, and such an obsession with their destruction. Only by understanding that the most influential part of the managerial elite is Jewish can one finally understand this contradiction in your work.

Anyway, have to get back to the T.V. and see which of my friends Michael Chertoff has arrested, listen to Alan Dershowitz talk about torturing them, and hear Ari Fleisher's take on the whole thing, per Richard Pearle. One last thing; you do realize that Jews as an ethnic group are 3% of the American population? A smaller percentage than Austrian Americans? That fact has made it to you right? But since they are not omnipotent, it's just a minor fact of American politics; voila, the exception proves the rule. Well, as for our discussion, res ipsa loquitur, as we clueless say.

Vic Gerhard
Counsel, White Revolution

************************************

[Sammy to me]

I had thought that you, unlike several of the others who like to rant about my "cowardice," "treachery," "phil-Semitism," etc., had a little more sense, but appraently I was misguided. Let me try to explain once more in some detail what I am trying to tell you.

1. What you said in your last communication was insulting because it at least indirectly and perhaps directly questioned my integrity, acusing me of cowardice or ignorance or dishonesty or greed or ambition as the only plausible reaons I do not write what you want me to write as you want it written. I have to say that I have received many criticisms as a columnist but this -- from the professional (and usualy anonymous) anti-Semites -- takes the cake. No one else presumes ot tell a writer what to write or how to write, even as they insult his character and intelligence -- not religious nuts, not racial nuts, not libertarian nuts -- except maybe the Jews themselves. But leave all that aside.

2. Vdare, Rockford, etc won't publish openly anti-Semitic pieces because (a) they like most gentiles are irrationally afraid of Jewish power and (b) they also have rational concerns over Jewish power. Both have Jewish "friends" who give them money, publicity, support, etc. and they are afraid -- I believe not entirely withgoiut cause but in an exaggerated way -- of losing that. Also, like most peopole they would like to do something else besides attack Jews and sometimes there are Jews with whim they need to work in order th do those things. (Rockford just held a conference in the Middle East on a prospects for peace there; it wasnlt my idea and I don't see the point, except that some donors (non-Jewish ) gave them money to do it.) Therefore, they are veyr careful about antaginizing Jewish supporters. As you may know, they were virtually destroyed in the late 1980s by neo-con defunding because of positive remarks they made about Gore Vidal and because of their opposition to immigration. Nevertheless, they have consistently published pieces critical of Zionism, including several of my recent columns on the Iraq war and Jewish neo-con- Israeli power, and of foreign entanglements, perpetual wars, etc. Chronicles also published a review of MacDonald by Paul Gottfried which I strongly dsagree with but they allowed MacDonald to write a long response, more than the American Conservative allowed. I do not control either RI or Vdare and foten disagree withbhiw they are run, but essentially they do not attack the Jews because they are more interested in other problems.

2. Unless you really do believe that Jews are the causes of all problems, which you deny, you have to admit there are other problems. You ask what I disagree with in MacDonald. I can't really comment on the general evolutionary theory since I'm not an expert, but I have no problem with it. Nor do I have a problem with his characterization of Jews in general, though some people tell me it's less true of some Jewish groups (Sephardic) than others (Ashkenazic) or at some periods of history than at others. What I do not agree with Kevin on is that while he's right about the way Jews are, that doesn't mean they are always successful. They may have pushed open borders as a means of underminig what they saw as a hostile hist society, but that doesn't mean their efforts were the reason we have open borders opr that other groups didn't wnat open borders for their own reasons. I dealt with immigration partly when I was in the Senate and frankly the role of the Jews was not at all apparent, as it was in foreign policy, and many social issues. The main enemies of immigration control on the right are (1) libertarians and (2) Catholics; the same was true at the Wash. Times, and I knew Jews who were opposed to more immigration at both places.Libertarianism tends to be Jewish-led, but it exists as an idnependent force in its own right amoing gentiles. I recall in 1995 or 95 Bill Gates visited Sen. Alan Simpson to lobby him on H1-B visas; Simpson caved. Neither is Jewish and neither did what he did becaise of Jewish power or influence but because of business and political interests. Business interests have been the main reason we have immigrant workers pushing out American workers in meat packing, textiles, poultry processing, etc. The Jews may serve as lawyers or lobbyists for these groups but Jewish groups per se have had little to do with immigration policy in recent years.

3. I don't deny that Jews have power -- certainly in the media and cultural centers generally and in politics through funding, staffing etc. But Jews are not the ruling class in this country (at least not yet). As in many other societies they form a subelite that provides services for the ruling class (tax collecting in Poland, e.g.), but I think they have little interest in becoming theactual ruling class because they have no interest in that as loing as their interests are secured.

4. Your line about standing on street corners getting attacked by Jews is frankly childish. No I didn't. I just lost my job and my career for what I wrote about race (and I can tell you Jews appear to have had something to do with that and have certainly used it against me ever since). I'll bet Kevin MacDOnald never did either. I have a clue for you: Standing on street corners and yelling anti-Semitic slogans isn't a very effectuve way to challeneg much of anything. Hyde Park is full of characters like that. What I have tried to do -- explicitly at the Times and later as well -- has been to make explicit and serious discussion of race respectable. That means picking your shots and not saying everything you'd like to say because you know it will simply baffle or alarm many readers, but it does mean that you can tell many, many people a lot fo things they didn't know or hadn't thought about. I think I was beginning to succeed when I was fired, and that may have been the real reason I was fired. Last summer when the National Alliance had its march on the Israeli Embassy I asked a friend who was planning to attend why and what good it would do? I told him all you will accomplish is give the Post the chance to portray all of you as a bunch of Nazi goons at a time when some opinion sectors were startiung to turn on Israel. Thatls exactly what happened -- pictures of swastika flags, jack boots, etc. that understandably frighten and alienate most Americans and allow the Jews to say, "See, we told you what all those critics of Israel were like!" The idea that people like Linder and VNN accomplish much of anything outside of mutual masturbation is ludcrous. Frankly, I had never heard of Linder until he started attacking me and some people told me about it. With all due respect, I had never heard of your column until you told me you write one.

Finally, I have been gratified (one of the few gratifictaions I ever get in my profession) by being told by doxens of yuong people that I had taught them something they would not have known otherwise. No one but you and your friends have ver denounced me for being a hypocrite, a coward, a liar, a traitor, etc. I would have thiught that you would have epxressed some appreciation for what I have done, but the fact the you don't and can find only the most hateful things to say about me tells me all I need to know. As I told one of your colleagues recently, from now on I can only regard the whole bunch of you as my enemies and as enemies of the cause for which I am working.

********************************

[Me to Sammy, biting my tongue]

I have though about this a lot, and there is much more that could be said, but I don't think we are going to agree no matter what is said.

I do have to say that if your foremost cause is the continuation of the White Race, then there is no possible way we can be enemies as you described.

Though it sounds fawning, no one has structured my political awareness like you in your writings. I learned more reading your Chronicles columns, especially Revolution from the Middle, than in four years of undergraduate study.

Yours,

Vic Gerhard
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:42 AM.
Page generated in 0.51340 seconds.