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

Old July 4th, 2019 #1
Freddy Ford
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 104
Freddy Ford
Default Kevin MacDonald's "strategy"

Let's remember what Andrew Joyce wrote on the Occidental Observer website ("Reflections on the History of the Jewish Hoax"):

"Jews are a powerful, protected, and very privileged elite---and they always have been. Their appeal to victimhood status would be laughable but for the fact it is one of the key strategies behind our decline."

The Jews hide their aggression and tyranny by pretending to be helpless, innocent victims.

"The Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you."

Their most powerful tool for brainwashing Whites into believing that they are innocent victims is the Holohoax.

Debunking an obscure tale of a Russian pogrom of which nobody has heard doesn't do much good at all. Obviously, what is essential is the eradication of the Holohoax lie.

However, some leaders of the struggle for White survival in America, including Kevin MacDonald, refuse to tackle that topic. Since they are protected by the first amendment, they don't have the excuse that people in Europe have: the threat of imprisonment.

They pretend that they are "deeply concerned" about the "existential threat" to European man, but then they querulously whine, "I'm not a Holocaust denier!"

They do nothing to prevent our children from being psychologically raped by being taught that the Holohoax is an irrefutable historical fact.

If they truly believe that we are facing extinction, then why don't they stop whining, "I'm not a Holocaust denier!" Why don't they attempt to destroy the Jews' most powerful weapon, the Holohoax?

Is Kevin MacDonald a traitor?

Imagine a playground full of children who are laughing and playing. You see a man leaning on a hoe and watching them.

Then you and the man see a black mamba (imported and released by ZOG to increase "diversity") slithering through the grass toward the children. You tell the man, "Use your hoe to kill the snake!"

He refuses and whines, "I don't want to be accused of being a mamba-thwarter!"

Now which of these is your attitude toward the man?

1. You want to give him a generous donation.
2. You want to use an axe-handle on him.
Old July 10th, 2019 #2
Sean Gruber
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
Sean Gruber

AFAIK KMac has never seriously counter-signaled hollowhoax truth.

KMac is an academic who has one area of expertise: psychology. Asking him to write a book exposing the hollowhoax is like asking a plumber to fix a computer. He's no leader. He's only a sympathetic intellectual with nothing to add to the mountain of hollowhoax truth literature that already exists.

That said... I don't like the implication in his work that jews

a. really have been victimized by Whites (debatable--who punched first?)
and b. their behavior is defensive, shaped by their fear of us (or any non-jewish majority). Why not "shaped by the demands of their aggressive nature" instead?

The upshot of KMac's approach (esp in CoC) is that jews are victims who are overreacting. But what if they're really the enemies of the human race, as many long traditions say they are? I guess that view would not comport with KMac's Christianity; he would probably say it is "uncharitable." So we see how religious commitments can rule out some intellectual approaches to a subject a priori.
No jews, just right

Less talk, more action

Last edited by Sean Gruber; July 10th, 2019 at 05:39 PM. Reason: rephrasing
Old July 10th, 2019 #3
Sean Gruber
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,465
Sean Gruber

It's an ontological question for evol psych: are developed traits principally defensive or offensive? Does a tiger have claws to protect itself from predation, or to rip apart its prey? Do jews push open borders to feel safe, or to destroy a racial competitor? Both, but why the emphasis on defensiveness?

Is an animal's primary concern to not be eaten, or to eat? Both are necessary, but an animal could avoid being eaten and yet still die because it found no food. It seems to me that food comes first: you can't defend yourself well if you're starving. So the claws or whatever traits, are there first of all and most importantly, to aggress against prey and knock off competitors. Defensive uses come into play mostly in that activity.

Think of a hockey game. The goal of suiting up is not to stand around and avoid injuries. You suit up and play, in order to score goals. As part of that, you may need your gear to protect you from rough play.

My view is that developed traits are primarily offensive or positive, not defensive or negative. What jews do isn't centered around protecting themselves. It's to gain resources and power. Nor are resources and power primarily a means of self-protection, but are fuel for further resource- and power-acquisition. Negative uses of developed traits are corollaries of their positive uses.

The emphasis depends on what you see as the primary stratum of survival: predation or self-protection? Which of those two things is the leader and which is the follower? Does the man succeed who goes out there and fights for what he wants--or the man who insulates himself trying to make sure that no bad stuff can happen to him? Since jews have been very successful, I would say their aggression is the key to their nature, not their defensiveness or alleged fear of "persecution."
No jews, just right

Less talk, more action

Last edited by Sean Gruber; July 10th, 2019 at 06:16 PM. Reason: corrections, addition

holocaust, holohoax, kevin macdonald


Display Modes

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:37 AM.
Page generated in 0.10881 seconds.