Print this post Print this post

Greg Johnson Interviewed by Dennis Fetcho

48 words

On Saturday, September 8th, Dennis Fetcho, host of “Inside the Eye,” on the Oracle Broadcasting Network, interviewed Counter-Currents Editor Greg Johnson for two hours.

Topics include White Nationalism, the Jewish question, and metapolitics.

You can download the MP3 here:

Thanks Dennis, for a great opportunity!


This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , , . Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  1. don bogart
    Posted September 8, 2012 at 8:19 pm | Permalink

    You sounded stronger and more seasoned in this interview.

    “Whites are under attack,” you said.

    “Fair Housing, School Integration, Civil Rights, Voting Rights, Affirmative Action, Diversity Quotas, Open Borders Immigration Amnesty, and Obama are all weapons in the war against criminalized White privilege,” says Rev. Jed DeValleyism

    You said, “…if you got rid of that, it might be easier for people to live in the same system… we maintained White standards.”

    (White standards are called White privilege, which is the most hated substance on the globe. You’ll profit from reading Anthony Jacob’s masterful White Man, Think Again! and Saturday morning visits to Cambria Will Not Yield wordpress.)

    You are an idealist, obviously, because you hold the idea of unmolested, lived out White Genius in your mind and work to share it with other minds.

    But your idealism and anti Judeo Christian prejudice may be blinding your to the presence of Evil.

    You would probably say genocide of White Humanity is evil, but can you describe the Evil that is behind it? Your difficulty may be in rejecting the presence of anti-Evil, or righteous goodness as we would call God, the loving God that the Christians talk about and pray to.

    “If we should feel guilt for the bad things that White people have done, shouldn’t we feel pride for the great things that White people have done?”

    -if you are measuring your shortcomings in life, not having turned that gem into a Mantra that is widespread as Whitaker’s “Anti-Racism” or Thomas Jefferson’s “All Men Equal” should be at the top of your list. That brilliance should be on every White man’s lips and spread through constant repetition. It could be the beginning of our reclaiming our “proper boundaries”.

    “I don’t feel guilt for something I didn’t do.” You should dedicate yourself to helping White Humanity understand the full force, effect, and identity, and method, of those who demand that you do feel guilty for it.

    The focus should be on them every time they complain about Whiteness. Since their entire structure is based on fallacy and bigotry, they are easily outed for what they are.

    “We are told we are not allowed to take any pride in anything White people have done.” That’s because somebody has saturated the system (talk about “systemic bias”!) that forces Whites interpret favorable comments about Whiteness with the same horror as encountering the type of White who would say, “Be a man, join the Klan, Heil Hitler, 1488!”

    “Finding causes of pride in what White people have done.” = “Heil Hitler” in the White mass mind. They would no more do the former than say the latter.

    “Distinct people have a right to remain distinct,” said the caller. Liberal academics are now speaking the language of “addressing the harm caused by the dominant culture” and “from the perspective of the exploited.”

    Once Whites can be demeaned as dominant, exploiting culture, they are attacked FOR their distinctness and will not be allowed any rights except the privilege of paying taxes and watching their children receive rejection letters from Historically White Colleges and Universities.

    You said, “If you don’t have freedom of association, you don’t have freedom.” (Freedom allows and promotes White privilege, so it must be eradicated, and has been.) Donald Davidson, the “racist” Vanderbilt Southern Agrarian, said that privilege is “being left alone”.

    The only privilege we have left as Whites is the privilege of suffering Bills of Attainder the criminalized privilege we don’t have, and getting punished for it via genocidal Diversity.

    “If Jews are so interested in destroying White culture, there must be so much good value in it,” said the host- that Reality needs great treatment and expansion. Bad hates Good, so whatever Bad attacks, there must be something Good risked to loss.

    Jews believe and say they are here to bring judgement and justice, even though their entire success in the Bible was built upon deception. Christians should demand that Jews apologize for the bad example.

  2. UFASP
    Posted September 8, 2012 at 11:58 pm | Permalink

    That was an interesting curve ball he threw you about his wife and son early on but I think you handled it very well. I’ve never heard anyone have to address this issue to anyone up front like that before. And to Mr. Fetcho’s credit, he wasn’t defensive or hyper-sensitive about your response, either. You’re excellent at never coming across as crass while at the same time not backing down (such as not shying away from “white nationalist” as a legitimate label). It’s quite a tightrope.

    I think people (many white people, anyways) are actually very open to the message of white survival and it’s not hard to get people (especially white men) talking about it once you make them feel comfortable about it. The increased rate of miscegenation, in particular, white women with cocky black men, is really upsetting to many of them but they’ve suppressed their feelings with ideology and distractions and even by “finding better women” themselves. It’s just that whites have been conditioned to simply think of jackboots and cruelty towards others before they can even philosophically grasp the issue of preservation. Conquered people, indeed. Some whites I know even concede that white genocide is bad, but that trying to stop it is worse. Of course, they’re thinking in terms of a false dichotomy (or at least I hope time proves that they are).

    I think your use of “hot” and “cold” as adjectives to describe the speed and manner in which change is enacted really allows people to get over the initial guilt of even speaking about white interests because now they actually can conceive that there is a possibility for whites to work to reverse the trends in a similar way the leftists first enacted them by “marching through the institutions” decades ago; of course, the risk of this approach may instill a sense of complacency among the listener as though the situation isn’t dire and that stuff will “work itself out as it always does.” But I think the buffer or comfort zone that this approach of yours creates by far outweighs that danger. Now the uninitiated understands that it’s no longer choosing between extinction or becoming Ralph Fiennes from Schindler’s List. Ugliness and mean-spiritedness need not be the modus operandi of white interests; leave the burden of hate to the enemies. I think once the seed is able to be planted, it takes off. I think I’ve had modest success with your tactics, anyways.

    Also, that last question from that listener was a bit unfair and an all too typically white type of question. It’s what happens when a white gets so bogged down with “crypto-Jew” *this* and “Jew in disguise” *that* that they ignore that such boundless scrutiny as a means of questioning racial legitimacy is never applied by other races. The Chinese aren’t debating whether or not acting in their own racial interest is a self-refuting proposition because Mao Zedong and all his legions were Chinese themselves. The Cambodians don’t deconstruct their identity because of the Khmer Rouge nor do they even think that the question of whether or not Pol Pot is a “crypto”-whatever is even relevant with respect to whether their racial interests are legitimate or not. A blemished record is simply irrelevant; that’s how primal this stuff is. It’s amazing how far into the well some of us will reach to leave open the possibility of self-denial. Whites are truly a unique bunch.

    Good interview, though. And not to take anything away from your showing, but I really enjoyed listening to Dave from Texas as a Texan myself. He had that sort of “man’s man” baritone voice that sort of resonates with ordinary people in my neck of the woods, I think. There’s something encouraging about hearing a guy that kind of reminds me of my uncles questioning the prevailing narrative with respect to the Second European Civil War.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 9, 2012 at 9:14 am | Permalink

      Thanks for your kind words. I think we need to work out a way that allows people to envision moving from where we are now (historically, politically, and morally) to the ethnostate, and the race-war, collapse, and Day of the Rope enthusiasts just make us look like advocates of dystopia.

      • UFASP
        Posted September 9, 2012 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

        As much as I admire Pierce (he was quite a philosopher of sorts, really), his legitimate anger (or presentation) did cloud the essence of his message too much. I think this dialectical error is in the process of being corrected.

        Now, it might very well come down to some manner of physical struggle for white people. (South Africa comes to mind.) But yeah, why on Earth should we be talking about something that may be a huge hypothetical when it clouds the entire essence of the message? Maybe I am naive, but if no one is violently attacking us, the issue is perspectivism, not preparing to mow down “degenerates” with automatic weapons stored in rural outhouses. You can’t build an ethno-state with few hundred (or perhaps thousand) followers Pierce attracted.

      • don bogart
        Posted September 10, 2012 at 5:57 am | Permalink

        The Tea Party, no matter how Diverse they try to be, still has a racial anxiety over the obvious racial hatred toward White Privilge coming from the black and brown Diversity communities, especially our governments.

        We are building toward a flash point, and the best thing GJ can do now is to get some of his more pithy racial observations circulating through the Tea Party underground.

  3. me
    Posted September 9, 2012 at 4:02 am | Permalink

    It sure would be nice if someone could write a few bullet points from the interview, as not everyone can hear.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 9, 2012 at 9:10 am | Permalink

      I would be grateful if people who like to listen to interviews and take notes would send us bullet points for the hearing impaired and for people who want an overview of the contents before they commit the time to listen. This can be an “open-source” sort of process in which readers post lists and summaries, or parts of them, as comments and I amalgamate them together into the actual interview post.

      • Sandy
        Posted September 9, 2012 at 4:27 pm | Permalink

        It would not surprise me if even Counter-Currents qualified for a government grant to hire a translator for the hearing impaired.

  4. guiscard
    Posted September 9, 2012 at 4:15 am | Permalink

    Yes the curve ball was interesting. I guess there should be some standardized (sugar-coated) response to that question. It’s not just family issues but almost everyone in a city would now have some social interaction with Apu the clerk, the good Somali refugee, the Asian student, the honest browns etc.
    eg. No matter what, there will always be cross-cultural sectors in big cities/trade ports/tourist centers where ideas/peoples can interact and flourish etc

    Basically the enemy (jews etc) will exploit every possible weakness in order to demonize your position.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 9, 2012 at 8:57 am | Permalink

      I am working on an essay that addresses some of these concerns. I tried some of the ideas out in my last interview with Robert Stark.

      • Jaego Scorzne
        Posted September 10, 2012 at 1:00 am | Permalink

        William Burroughs called such places interzones. We need to ask our would be prosecutors why they want to turn our whole Nation into an interzone or market place. Always turn the tables on them as quickly as possible – they are used to our being on the defensive and they wont expect it.

        A good interview. It was hard to take all the commericals though. I’ve been spoiled now by people who do radio for the love of the issues. How incredible it would be to live in a whole culture like that. Mr Fetcho was a fine interviewer – what a switch from the Mainstream Hacks. No wonder he moved to Oman.

  5. daniel
    Posted September 9, 2012 at 7:58 am | Permalink

    Speaking of meta-politics:

    It would seem that right-wing pillory of objective merit myopically focuses on particular episodes and roles while ignoring that race is issue of qualitative pattern.

    By way of example –

    In the first hour of the most recent Political Cesspool (Saturday, September 8th)

    James Edwards proudly asserts that he and his stand for objective standards, best man for the job.

    …period, not comma, no context, no history, no circumstances?

    If a Black or Mulatto has an I.Q. of 106 and a White has an I.Q. of 105, that view is going to give the nod to the Black or Mulatto and ignore the pattern of Blacks, Mulattoes and Whites as it relates to White interests as a pattern?

    It will ignore the ebbs, flows and overt and hidden qualities of patterns?…no matter how precious overall, it is only the “objective” best at that point in time that matters?

    If a Black or Mulatto does something better, he should be able to have the women co-evolved with Whites through millennia?

    Patterns – what is it with right-wingers that they cannot get it?

    When will they see that our people who are not “the best” in all ways have all the more reason to fight by way of collectivized union and ought to have representation?

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 9, 2012 at 8:56 am | Permalink

      I think you are misusing the word “pillory.”

      • daniel
        Posted September 9, 2012 at 9:40 am | Permalink

        No, I meant pillory: as in Whites who may not be the best (and not better than some non-Whites) in a given instance would be pilloried by objective standards; rather than the overall standard being more relative to White interests – viz. to facilitate the best possible Whites for tasks particularly as they concern White interests, yes, but also to be flexible enough to allow for optimal roles for others relevant to other White interests; and allowing them to grow into their abilities, which may turn out to be surprisingly good in a fostering context.

        • Greg Johnson
          Posted September 9, 2012 at 10:35 am | Permalink

          In the sentence in question, it is “objective merit” that is being pilloried, not whites.

      • daniel
        Posted September 9, 2012 at 1:43 pm | Permalink

        Perhaps I could have said it better, but I meant to say that the notion of one supposedly having objective merit or not was the tool or vehicle of punishment, deprivation: “you are not objectively * as good at this as a non-White, therefore”…

        * tending to remove many contextual factors.

        • Greg Johnson
          Posted September 9, 2012 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

          Race-blind meritocracy is often one of the last universalistic positions occupied by people who then come over to White Nationalism. They key is to get them to realize that their race-blindness is never reciprocated by non-whites, which means that they are adopting a strategy that can only lead to their dispossession. See Mike Polignano’s “Taking Our Own Side”:

          In the midst of a race war, there can be no greater folly than impartiality, than the pious rot that “there is only one race, the human race.” Robert Frost once brilliantly described a liberal as a man who will not take his own side in a fight. In a fight to the death, such a policy is suicide.

          In every transaction between a partial man and an impartial man, the impartial man is at a disadvantage. When the impartial man has a benefit to confer, the partial man appeals to the other’s impartiality and often walks off with the prize. But when the impartial man needs something from the partial man, his appeals to impartiality fall on deaf ears. As social interactions multiply, so do the partial man’s advantages at the expense of the impartial man. (The essence of the Jewish strategy of dominance is to practice ruthless partiality while urging their victims to be free of prejudice and partiality.)

          Once the impartial man has nothing left to bargain with, once he has been reduced to powerlessness and penury, to what will he appeal to preserve his life and freedom? Impartiality? Universal notions of freedom and justice and rights? These are just pleading words unless one has the power to force others to respect them. But the impartial man has bargained all his power away. Pleading alone will not prevent him from being reduced to a slave or a corpse, and that is what we Whites will become unless we start taking our own side, and quickly.

          Here’s a passage from my essay “The ‘W” Word”:

          We whites are the race that dare not speak its name.

          Instead, we whites are supposed to pretend that we do not exist as a people, but only as adherents of the abstract “color-blind” ideology of human equality. In the name of that ideology, we have to give away our wealth and power, debase our standards, corrupt our culture and institutions, and reduce ourselves to a minority. We have to do this any time members of selfish, race-conscious groups like Jews, blacks, Mestizos, etc. demand something from us, as long as they cloak their demands in the language of equality.

          What kind of people has to surrender everything to others, upon demand? A conquered people. We whites have to behave as a conquered people in our own country. If we persist in this long enough, of course, we will physically cease to exist as a people. We will succumb to miscegenation, demographic collapse, or outright mass murder, as conquered and enslaved peoples often do.

          Obama’s white supporters want to believe that his candidacy transcends race. They hope that by electing a black man president, they will absolve themselves of the burden of spurious “white guilt” that they have accepted. They hope that electing a black president will cause blacks to stop hating them and America. They hope that an articulate, intelligent black president will finally induce blacks to set aside their sullenness, resentment, and excuse-making and actually participate in American society. And, since deep-down most liberal whites are quite uncomfortable with the majority of blacks, they hope that President Obama will be the role model who will finally get the gang-bangers, crack heads, and welfare queens to abandon the bad manners, foul language, cornrows, gold teeth, doo-rags, silly names, and criminal mayhem and become like the blacks they see in television and movie fantasies, usually played by Bill Cosby, Denzel Washington, or Morgan Freeman.

          Obama and his black supporters have no such illusions. Although Obama is half-black and half-white, he makes it clear in his books and speeches that he is obsessed with blackness and black authenticity. And the arbiters of black authenticity are not the “Oreos” white liberals celebrate, but the “inner city youths” that haunt their nightmares. An Obama administration would not be about transcending race, but about black authenticity and black empowerment. It would be the corruption, chaos, and buffoonery of the black city governments in Atlanta, New Orleans, Washington D.C., and Detroit writ large. With nukes. And “color-blind” whites will hand them the button.

          As long as whites, and only whites, are not allowed to think of ourselves as a distinct group with distinct interests, the ultimate result will be white dispossession. Imagine a card game where the whole country is the stake. Each ethnic group has a hand and a stack of chips, but only non-whites get a trump: the “race card.” No matter how huge the white pile of chips is at the beginning, as long as we play under those rules, we will eventually be left with nothing in the end.

  6. MOB
    Posted September 9, 2012 at 12:49 pm | Permalink

    I usually do take notes and will be taking them for this Greg Johnson interview as well. If no one has posted notes by the time I do it, I’ll post mine.

    Meanwhile, I’d like to request that Robert Stark’s VoR interview of James O’Meara be posted here, as I already have notes taken down for that, and I consider the interview to be an extremely important one.


  7. Lew
    Posted September 9, 2012 at 5:15 pm | Permalink

    I’m moving away from viewing non-Whites other than Jews as enemies. We have conflicting interests with them. That doesn’t necessarily make them enemies. As painful as it to read about the latest murder, rape or other travesty against Whites, it is important to remember Whites/Jews in the power structure imposed the circumstances that make it possible. Some of them are enemies, of course, but most of the essentially powerless ones on the ground are just trying to get through the day. The fight that matters is us versus other Whites/Jews. Blacks, Mexicans and the rest could be dealt with easily enough if it were not for the Whites/Jews in the power structure.
    In my day-to-day dialog IRL and outside our circles on the interwebs, I almost never criticize blacks, Latinos and other non-Whites anymore. Going after them is just a distraction when they’re not responsible for what’s happening to us.

  8. UFASP
    Posted September 9, 2012 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

    I think the “mixed race issue” is a sub-issue within the context of eugenics. A white ethno-state has to have some conception of “the greater good.” Sacrifice has to enter the equation and that sense of sacrifice could apply to anyone.

    If a respectable institution within a healthy white society told me that it would be for the greater good that my genetics not proliferate beyond a certain point or even at all, I would accept that in the interest of a “higher” white society in the long term. So likewise, your Lawrence Dennises, despite their own genius and value, would have to put their vanity aside and accept the real phenomenon of regression to the mean within nature if they wanted to reside in a future white ethno-state or perhaps seek shelter elsewhere. The long term desires of mixed people would have to be in sync with the long term goal of the ethno-state. People have to ditch the modern Christian sense of self-importance that they have. So much of much of white survival is interwoven with a sense of elitism and big thinking instead of small thinking.

    Perhaps the standards could be more lax on the port cities as well. I mean, there are mixed individuals in Japan in Tokyo and Osaka but they are not a numerous enough to be a threat to the Japanese and the racial and artistic character of their nation. At the very least, the Japanese status quo has be established without apology, I think.

  9. Posted September 11, 2012 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

    This interview has been exceptionally well received. As someone who supports preservation of “White civilization” in the face of Jewish intentions to destroy same, it is interesting to hear views and ideas of others who share similar interests.

    Personally, I view America as more of an ideal rather than an ethnic fabrication.

    I see a danger to this larger ideal of preservation if one seeks to promote an ethno-centric state within the America’s.

    Within Europe, however, it is clear that forced multiculturalism is a danger to the indigenous peoples of these lands and indeed, a total capitulation of immigration policies within N. America is proving to be advantageous to Jewish interests to the detriment of all peoples who came to America to practice in what is the ideal of the American experiment.

    • UFASP
      Posted September 11, 2012 at 11:25 pm | Permalink

      I do agree with you in a sense that America, being a proposition country, has always been a bit looser with ethnicity but it was never a “whoever wants to come here whenever” country with no ethnic backbone that the Jews tell us it was from the start. A lot of the gung-ho white nationalist types wouldn’t agree with me, but I have no problem with *some* *limited* *numbers* of ethnic minorities in America (provided that they don’t threaten the majority by a long shot). I would, of course, qualify this statement further if pressed. In Texas, for example, the mestizos are ethnically cleansing white areas (if semi-passively). With the exception of a few Mexicans who have roots that go back, I’d really like to “push” towards sending most them back as most of these people are very ethno-centric and do think of themselves as Mexicans over being American. But I wouldn’t pretend that every *single* *last* mestizo-mixed person could not possibly be a true American. Also, my grandmother, my mother, and I have all gone to the same dentist for the last fifty years– a very nice Chinese-American gentleman. It’s very hard for me to not think of him as an American. Same with an Asian relative of mine. But those people don’t typify most of the Asian population in Houston, I think. So there are broad ideas and there are individual circumstances. There’s always a tension between the two, I think. The first step is to unapologetically get the demographic ball rolling in the other direction– from white extinction to white flourishing and hegemony once again.

      So it is disingenuous to pretend that only whites are Americans. But the historical fact of America having had this small ethic minority block (10% historically) has been exploited by Jews to argue that America has no ethic core which is just disingenuous. And as this “minority” block increases, our standards do decrease because traditional white standards (which are not always achievable for certain non-white groups– namely, blacks and mestizos) are “racist.” The rural white areas, which the mainstream media brags are now only one third of the country, were two thirds of the country just twenty years ago. These losses are tragic.

      What’s really like to happen, I think, is that the country we call “America” simply won’t exist after we’ve filled and filled and filled this country up with every non-white from every corner of the Earth. The country will simply dissolve into parts. Nothing that artificial can survive if the food trains derail and the grid that powers all of the idiot boxes comes unplugged. Japan pulled together through times of difficulty. In America, you have riots, looting, and raping. Superdome shit. I just reject those ingredients and ones of a similar sort as being a part of a viable, healthy, nation; I want to live a healthy, viable nation– not some worldwide joke like we are today. No matter how much fuzzy “diversity” Eisner or Redstone throw at me, I will never see it as some inherent strength.

      Incidentally, even as an American, the thought of losing Europe is by far more distressing. That must speak to something about race on a deep level. “Minorities” over here don’t have to worry about their societies disappearing in the same way. They can go back to the motherland for a spiritual sabbatical. It’s getting more difficult for white Americans to do that with Europe even now.

  10. MOB
    Posted September 12, 2012 at 4:45 am | Permalink

    GJ: The goal of the North American New Right is to create an intellectual movement in North America analogous to and influenced by the European New Right, and that includes writers like Alain de Benoist, Guillaume Faye–mostly French writers, also some German and Italian writers. They’re trying to revive elements of what I call the Old Right, by which I mean basically fascism, in a post-war context, to show that their critique of modernity, democracy, etc. has continuing relevance and is better founded in facts and history than ever before, and that it provides solutions to a lot of the quandaries of contemporary politics. So they’re trying to expand people’s political imaginations in Europe, and we think that we have to expand our imaginations in North America as well. So that’s our goal.

    DF: According to Alexa stats, you’re reaching 264,000 worldwide, which is very healthy; you had 110,000 visits in April, over 421,000 pages, so you’re reaching a pretty strong audience.

    GJ: We have about 50,000 unique visitors every month; 50% of them come from a bookmark, as opposed to a Google search, so we have about 20,000 people who follow us regularly; not necessarily every day. We have a hardcore following, as well as a large number of people who come to us through Google searches. Google, however, in the last month, started monkeying with our search algorithms, and suddenly some of our Top 10 articles for years disappeared from the Search rankings, and that pushed our traffic down 20% in one month. However, it’s bouncing back up, and they can’t deny us getting our message out, because people want it enough to search for it and not be satisfied with what pops up on the first page of their search results.

    DF: What is your subject matter? I hear the term “White Nationalism” mentioned. If you were to give yourself a tag line, what would it be?

    GJ: We believe race and ethnicity are absolutely fundamental for understanding politics. We don’t think abstractions like capitalism, communism, free enterprise, etc. are adequate for understanding what’s really happening in politics. If you look at politics in Europe and America through a racial lens, you see a struggle between different people for dominance. In the White countries of the world — Europe and the colonies like America, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the whiter countries in South America – race is the primary factor in politics; it’s the primary factor in wars, revolutions and upheavals around the world, and specifically in the White countries, what I see happening is that White countries are under attack. Whites are under attack, through Affirmative Action, non-White immigration, and a media that denigrates White people and White values and promotes non-Whites and non-White values.

    I believe that ultimately what’s going on is that non-Whites are being used as proxies for Jews. I think Jews have engineered, in the United States and practically every other White country, the opening of the floodgates of third world non-White immigration, and they are at the forefront of combating White efforts to restrict immigration. The reason they’re doing this is that they are following a divide-and-conquer strategy; they are most powerful when they are middlemen in a disorganized, pluralistic, fractious Middle Eastern bazaar society where they know everybody and know a few words in every language and can broker deals and end up on the top.

    In homogeneous societies, however, they stick out like sore thumbs, and so wherever they show up in societies like that, they engineer diversity, because they think it’s good for them as a tool to gain power over us. And they’ve been very successful. White Nationalism looks at politics primarily in terms of racial and ethnic struggles, and looks at the Jewish Question as the key to understanding what’s going on politics in the White countries today.

    DF: What’s happening now is that only 64% of people born in England are considered White English; 35% of the people born in England now are not considered White English. I like your.concept, it’s a subtle long-term strategy of conquering a country. It’s covert, not overt.

    GJ: A lot of conquests throughout history have been slow. The Roman Empire didn’t know it was falling; they thought they were cleverly playing a game of inviting in the Germanic tribes because they would do work the Romans wouldn’t do; they also put them in their military.. It took the Roman Empire a very long time to collapse as a result of policies that were predictively ruinous, but in the short run looked like a good deal. Conquest doesn’t have to be fast.
    And genocide doesn’t have to be fast. The UN defines genocide not just as a wholesale slaughter of people, but as creating conditions that over the long run will make it impossible for a people to preserve its distinctive identity. That includes things like swamping them with immigrants, promoting miscegenation so they blend themselves out of existence, bombarding them with propaganda that makes them feel self-hatred and guilt for being who they are. Those are forms of genocide, because if they are applied long enough to any people, that people will cease to exist.
    I believe we’re not only being conquered, but exterminated or obliterated, because if we don’t get a handle on these trends, there will simply be no White people left anymore. We’ll be blended out of existence.

    DF: I agree for the most part with everything you say in this regard. I’m German-Irish, but I married a Chinese gal and we had a son who is now Chinese-American–Chinese and Anglo-Saxon. Why should people who are not of a pure ethnic White race or ethnicity care about White Nationalist ideas and interests?

    GJ: In a way, they shouldn’t, because we’re not trying to represent their interests. In a larger way, though, I think they can look at it as something that’s of interest to them in this sense: we think Nationalism is good for all peoples. We think every people should have its own place where it can live according to its own lights, develop according to its own inner genius, and have its own destiny. . As a White person I’m interested in this for my, but I recognize that this is also true for other groups, that we’re all better off if we have a place of our own.

    I don’t know how to fit in people of mixed race; throughout history large cities and commercial ports have been places where people of mixed race were born or gravitated to, We the New Right envision a world where there are places people can go to live according to their own nature. One thing I want to get away from is this very destructive White grandiosity which says it’s the White man’s burden to go out and see that everyone’ living the right way and doing the right thing – I think that’s been very bad for us in the long run. Our empires have now turned around and are colonizing us. I think everyone has a stake in nationalism; I would like to have the most cordial relations with other peoples; I don’t see any reason to hate other peoples. In my book, Confessions of a Reluctant Hater, I argue that hatred between groups is an inevitable consequence of forcing them to live together and compete in the same system, and the solution is to allow people to form their own independent state.


    DF: To get back, I think the main issue that a lot of people have is that White Nationalism sounds almost like a segregation of races; do you believe that’s a viable thing.

    GJ: Yes, most definitely. I think in the long run, that’s the best way to preserve the distinctness of different groups, racially and culturally, [NOTE RE JAMES HOMO] and also to lower the amount of unnecessary and tragic strife and conflict in the world. If you look at the end of Communism in Eastern Europe, the USSR was a multi-national, multi-ethnic empire, and when that empire fell apart, these constituent units left and formed their own countries. Where do you have strife in the Russian federation today? You have it in the Caucasus, between Muslims and Russians, the Chechens and people like that. Those people were not allowed to leave and form their own governments, and they’re fighting to this day.
    Or look at Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia fractured pretty neatly on ethnic lines; the Slovenes and the Croatians went their own way fairly quickly. There was war, however, in Bosnia, because Bosnia was a multi-ethnic area; there were Croatians, Serbs, and there were Muslims in Bosnia. The Serb minority, which was about 40% of the population, just could not see themselves being ruled in a Muslim state, and so there was civil war. Generally where you find racial and ethnic diversity, you find conflict, and the solution is to–as peacefully and orderly as possible –divide things up so that people have their own ethnostates.
    The best model for that was what happened with the amicable divorce between the Czechs and the Slovaks. Czechoslovakia was an artificial nation put together after the first World War. When it re-emerged after the second World War, it was held together by Communism. After Communism disappeared, these people said, there’s no need for us to be under the same system, and so now they’re just good neighbors.

    DF: Czechoslovakia is a great case, but this is an intellectual, amicable split. Where I see a danger, to give you some insight here in the politics of the Middle East, I’m in Amman; we have Shia, Sunni, Christian, many different ethnicities that live together in peace, and everybody enjoys everybody. The same would be said of Syrians. So what you’re talking about mirrors this neocon balkanization strategy. Aren’t you worried that you’re following a neocon strategy.if you apply it to places like here in the Middle East?

    GJ: The neocon strategy is basically divide and conquer. They have absolutely no interest in creating Kurdistan for the Kurds or a Shiite Iraq for the Shiites and a Sunni Iraq for the Sunnis. All they’re concerned with is keeping these people corralled together in the same country and getting them hating and fighting each other, because that’s to their advantage. The Israelis are afraid of strong neighbors. Iraq was a strong neighbor, but Iraq had internal tensions and problems, and once the strong the center was removed, it was child’s play for these people to get the different Iraqui groups fighting and killing one another, and once that gets started, it just takes on a life of its own.

    DF: That’s a good answer; you gave a great answer. (chuckle)

    GJ: Thank you. (a little relieved?)

    DF: A very strong answer, because some people could say, well, we’re trying to create what Greg is talking about, by balkanizing. But isn’t the real problem not so much the different ethnicities but the forced cultural diversity plan that’s coming out of the Israeli group and the Jewish groups?

    GJ: It is true that in more traditional societies–especially in the Near and Middle East where intensely ethnocentric closed groups live together– where in the past they had reached a kind of modus vivendi–they could live together comfortably; but only because they practiced a strong nationalism. They married in their own groups; lived in their own quarters and things like that. But that requires a kind of block by block nationalism. And it requires a certain amount of self-assertion and a certain amount of pride in who you are,
    The trouble with White countries today is, we can’t really live with other groups because we have been so bombarded with White guilt and self-hatred; we are so afraid of asserting our own standards, we can’t have other groups around us without coming into conflict with them, because we can’t maintain proper boundaries anymore. You’re right that part of what causes conflict is that both whites and non-whites have been bombarded with anti-white propaganda, but they don’t have any trouble asserting themselves. So what you have is steady encroachment on our standards and our boundaries, and it’s causing a great deal of psychological turmoil and upset, and eventually it causes strife. We used to have minority groups living in the United States, with White standards maintained. That would make all the difference, if we could just have that.

    Whites are being bombarded that we have to be guilty for every crime and misdemeanor of White people throughout history, and at the same time we’re told we’re not entitled to take pride in anything that White people have done, a completely contradictory notion. If we can start balancing the books, and look for causes for pride in our people, instead of causes for guilt or shame — I don’t feel guilt for things that other people do, but I do feel shame if people who look like me and talk like me or are related to me do stupid things, and that includes my extended, racial family. But I also feel a great deal of pride in the achievements of our people. I think we have a lot to be proud of as a people, we should try to maintain who we are, AND WE NEED TO BE SURE THAT WE’RE IN A POSITION TO GIVE MORE. TO THE WORLD IN THE FUTURE – in the present circumstances, though, White people bombarded with this White guilt go around with a nihilistic hangdog attitude. I think a lot of self-destructive behaviors can be attributed to this bombarding of White kids. It starts very young; it’s child abuse, when you get right down to it.

    DF: Greg, when you’re sending children at six years old to holocaust museums of tolerance with the explicit purpose of telling them how bad White people are in an indirect way but directly doing it, that’s child abuse.

    GJ: That’s definite child abuse, and that should be stopped. But why are parents not raising holy hell about this; it’s because they themselves are intimidated. They must overcome this intimidation and unwillingness to take their own side in ethnic conflicts–that’s what’s going on–an ethnic conflict between Jews and Whites. Even in countries that fought the Germans and ended the second world war, Jews believe we are more likely to be an aggressor people.

    Dave, TX: I’ve been very interested in this topic for a long time; I’ve done a lot of research as well. One thing I”ve encountered ia that people say as long as you can still vote, you’ve still got your freedom. But as long as you’re being forced to associate with people you wouldn’t normally associate with, that’s not freedom, and it’s not self-government. Forced association breeds ethnocentric behavior. Most of what we hear about the Third Reich is from Jews, and it’s biased. What they did was promote their own race but not preach hate toward others. The constant battering of Germans was to destroy Nationalism.

    GJ: If you don’t have freedom of association, you don’t have freedom.

    DF: Talk about the C-C fundraising and the Voice of Reason archive, Counter-Currents radio efforts. Your website is doing great, and so are your articles; you are a prolific writer; how many have you written? And I see that you’re getting things translated,.

    GJ: I’ve written hundreds of articles and reviews under my own name and under pens names. A lot of articles are being translated into German, French, Portuguese, Czech, Russian, Ukrainian, Swedish, Finnish. It’s really an international thing. It’s kind of ironic, because we’re focused on building a movement in North America, but because we’re translating a lot of material by European writers into English, English speaking people from those countries are translating them into their own language for posting in their own native tongues. So it’s having a good effect for the European New Right as well.

    DF: I’m not a Nationalist, but I do believe we must preserve the ethical integrity of what is the White culture. If Jews are so interested in destroying it, there must be much good value in it, because otherwise, being a culture of destruction, they wouldn’t be trying to destroy it, And we see them trying to destroy it through the world, whether it’s England, America, Canada, Germany, Australia. When we go back to the holocaust idea, I don’t believe it even happened, at least the way it’s been advertised, I saw in Thomas Dalton that in a period of just six years 1932-1939, and amidst a global depression, Germany rose from a bankrupt nation to the strongest on earth–the holocaust is a nationalist success story — rein in Jewish-controlled banks and capitalist enterprises, restore national integrity of the media, remove Jews from seats of government power, and your nation will flourish ,

    GJ: I agree with all that, but I disagree with calling that the holocaust. Most people who accept the conventional holocaust narrative believe that the holocaust started somewhere around 1942. And there’es no question that the period 1933 to 1939, basically between when Hitler took power and when the British started the second World War, is a period of great, in a way miraculous, economic and political revival. And it had to do in part with breaking Jewish power over the German economy, the German press, the German culture, and really German destiny. The Germans were very successful in that, and there are a lot of lesson to be learned about how they did that that can be applied to this day. Ellen Brown’s book Web of Debt, has interesting information on what Hitler did to produce his economic miracle, how simple it was, and how it could be replicated in countries like Greece today, if they just had the political will to do it. So there are a lot of lessons from the Third Reich that are positive lessons, not just the lessons that the mainstream media wants us to learn, which is that White people should feel guilty and we’d better not even think about separating ourselves from Jews or taking control of our own countries or destiny again, because if we do that, horrible things will happen to us. And that’s simply not true; it doesn’t follow.

    DF: The more we look into the history of 60 or 70 years ago, the more we see they did well. Do you find this?

    GJ: Most definitely. I think there’s a lot of room for historical revisionism about the Third Reich, about the causes of the war, about the consequences of the second World War; putting that all in context, it’s truly astonishing what you learn. So I’m all for going back and looking at that with fresh eyes, because here are definitely a lot of lessons to be learned.

    DF: How many are in the White Nationalist movement, Greg?

    GJ: I would say that in the United States there are probably hundreds of thousands of people who think of themselves as White Nationalists more or less without apology. That includes people who just log onto websites and read the material but don’t do anything more all the way up to people who are intensely engaged in it, activists who are meeting and researching a lot. And then there are a handful of people who are full-time White Nationalist, meaning they’re devoting their lives to that. I can think of 5 or 6 people who are doing this full time, and I’m one of them..It’s a big movement but it doesn’t have a lot of institutions that are well funded and well established yet.

    DF: So to say the least, you’re no match for Jewish organizations right now.

    GJ: Oh, no, when you look at the number of Jewish organizations and the hundreds of millions, if not billions– if they needed a billion, a few phone calls and they’d have their billion. There’s a wonderful documentary called Defamation by Yoar Shamir, and one of the things he does is go to an Anti-Defamation office (they have 14 lavishly decorated regional offices;; I think they have an 80 million dollar annual budget, and we’re told, of course, that that’s not enough to fight anti-semitism). So he says, can you give me some examples of anti-semitic incidents, and the secretary runs off a list consisting of Jews complaining that their employer isn’t giving them special treatment for their holidays. So Jews have lavishly funded organizations to deal with complaints like these, while for the huge White population, whose interests are being vitally threatened, who don’t have a future if trends continue, it’s almost impossible to scrape together a few thousand dollars to fight that. It’s something that will change, though. It’s not changing fast enough, but it will change.

    DF: The way it’s going to change is what you call “metapolitics” – laying the foundation to allow this change to happen. Your articles say Jews have done a great job with metapolitics, and any community that wants to fight Jewish power has to start focusing on it.

    GJ: Metapolitics basically means what comes before or above the political. What creates the conditions of politics. People say that politics is the art of the possible. Metapolitics would deal with what people think is possible, what’s feasible, what’s morally right in the political realm. People will not support a political agenda that is not moral or not possible. So metapolitics deals with the desirability and the feasibility of political alternatives.
    Jews have played this game very well. They’re chess players. They’re thinking many moves ahead. They think of centuries and generations unfolding their plan over long periods of time. Whites don’t think that way. We used to have elites that ruled White countries that thought in terms of thousands of years; those were the old aristocracies of Europe, the Vatican, the papacy — they could think in terms like that. Democracies don’t think that way, and just ordinary people don’t think that way.
    So we’re being outfoxed by the organized Jewish community, and they’re very careful about laying the foundation. Decades ago they realized that the idea that race is a biological concept is harmful to them. They wanted to push the idea that race is a social construct malleable through social engineering. And how did they do that? Well, they slowly prepared a putsch, basically, where they took over the academic teaching of anthropology in America, and they ran the Darwinists out. Physical anthropology was shoved aside by cultural anthropology. And now in recent decades the cultural anthropologists, basically Marxists, are trying to drive the very idea of physical anthropology out of academia altogether, They think in terms of decades and centuries, and we don’t think at all, generally.
    So metapolitics is our attempt to get into the long game strategy of laying the foundations for creating a new White political order. We need that; we need some kind of racial sovereignty – that’s why we call it White Nationalism – if we’re going to prevent our race from simply disappearing over time.

    DF: It’s not just the White Nationalists, this thing that is happening–they hate everybody–I think that’s a key point to remember. This Jewish element hates everybody. They will go after everybody; Whites just happen to be the thing that stands in their way. .

    GJ: They rule our country very effectively now; they don’t rule other countries very effectively. They realized at some point that Whites were the people to latch onto, the break-out people, when they saw us spilling out of Europe after we had defended Europe for thousands of years against Asians, Huns, Mongols, people like that. After the Europeans broke out of Europe in the 15th century and started conquering the globe, Jews hopped on our backs; we pacified the world, we gave them access to huge areas of the world that they did not previously have access to; that was a very good deal. Revilo Oliver has a nice analogy, He says Whites in the past were like the Texas longhorns; we were tough cattle, somewhat hard to tame. We were the kind of animals you needed to tame the West. But now that the West has been tamed, they want us replaced with more tractable cows, so they have tightened up cultural control and made us into a much more passive race, and they’re trying to blend us out of existence now, because they haven’t forgotten what happened in Germany.

    DF: But the German thing is more myth than anything, but they believe in this myth, and that’s the key point. Do you agree with that, or do you disagree with it?

    GJ: What the Germans really did that they will never be forgiven for is they explicitly identified Jews as being the main problem for Whites, controlling their own destiny, and they took steps to extricate themselves from Jewish power and unplugged from the international banking system. What happened during the war with cattle cars and concentration camps all came later, but the stuff they will never be forgiven for is from 1933 to 1939 which set a pattern other countries started to follow or wanted to follow. The Jews are deathly afraid of other countries following, and the thing is that the basic pattern is applicable everyplace in the world. Nationalism, unplugging from international finance, resisting globalization, promoting your own indigenous elites, things like that work for every people, and Jews feel threatened by any nationalism that is not their own. Why? because they want to move among other nations; they don’t want to live on their own; they have their own country but they don’t all live there.

    DF: They don’t want to live there. They want it there just in case. {break} We talked about how there aren’t a lot of White Nationalists, but when we look at White Power, it’s still quite substantial. The Presbyterians and the Methodists are still very strong, and their culture is a White culture; Whites aren’t going away any time soon. But I would agree with the line that with the way that Jewish political structures and their culture have taken over America. This is perhaps one of the biggest capitulations that we have seen on the historical scale. Do you have any thoughts about that?

    GJ: Well, yes, I think it’s extraordinary. Whites basically behave like a conquered people, and a conquered people has to give up whatever they have when somebody demands that they do it. We are giving up, but we don’t seem to know it. We are constantly preached at that we have these White privileges that we should feel guilty for, and yet, the reality of the situation is that . . .

    DF: The reality is that I don’t feel any White privilege, and I’m sure you don’t feel much of it either, and neither do our listeners. We don’t feel this White privilege, but.people keep telling us we have it.

    GJ: We have the privilege of backing down, of saying yessir nosir and packing up every 10 years to move to a subdivision down the highway to get away from diversity, but we always do that because of better schools and other euphemisms, We’re desperately seeking a safe and comfortable homogeneous White community for our children, so we can sleep at night without the sound of gunshots and sirens and loud music, but we dare not say what we really want; we’re the race that dare not speak its name. We can’t talk about our standards, our interests, our future, or anything like that without an apology. We can always apologize for what we are, but we can never be proud of what we are. Those are traits of a conquered race, and if you look a hundred years ago, Whites basically controlled the globe. We didn’t control Bhutan, Tibet, Japan, Ethiopia – there were a few little outposts in Asia and Africa that we did not run, but pretty much everything else was under our control. And to go from a race that basically controlled the world to a race that is losing control of its own homelands in one century has to be the greatest reversal of fortunes ever.
    But it’s not just fortune; it was engineered, and that’s what we have to understand. Our decline is being engineered by our enemies, and they’re doing a very good job of it because they know what causes the decline and fall of empires, they’ve seen these empires come and go many times; they’ve been around for a very long time, and they know where to apply pressure at the weakest point and see that multiply into civilizational collapse, which they ride to the top, and then they latch onto another civilization.. It’s an extraordinary story, and I don’t want us to follow the Hittites, the Romans, and other peoples who have disappeared. I want our people to be around in the future and continue giving our gifts to the world and to the universe at large.

    DF: What’s the status of White Nationalism in White societies like Germany, Scandinavia, Sweden right now?

    GJ: Well, it’s interesting. In Europe they don’t have the 1st Amendment, but oddly enough, they are making much better use of their limited freedom than Americans are making of their broader freedoms in America. I don’t know why that is, but it is true. They are stigmatized; spied on and suppressed in ways that we are not yet., And yet they have functioning political parties; in countries that have proportional representation they actually have people in office; and in countries like Denmark, they are influencing the direction of political debate. So I have high hopes for Europe. The reason I have high hopes for Europe is this: Scandinavia, England, France, all these countries, the people who live there are pretty much the indigenous people. I’m descended from English and Scottish people – most of my DNA is the DNA of the people who were there when the last Ice Age receded10 thousand years ago. The English are the indigenous people of England; the Swedes are the indigenous people of Sweden, and so forth – they don’t have any rivals that they need to feel guilty about displacing, whereas in the colonies, we have the Indians and the Maoris and people like that who guilt-trip us. They don’t have that weight, and they also have very strong national and regional identities that we don’t have in the colonies. So I think they have better resources for eventually saving themselves.
    I think Europe will save itself before America does, and my feeling is that the more Europe is able to save itself, the more American power will decline in the world. And so I hate to say this as someone who used to be an American patriot, but I really think the future of our race and the good of the globe in general is contingent on the decline of American power, and I am hoping that American power declines precipitously in the future.

    DF: I hate to agree with you on that, being an American ex-patriot, knowing how much America is loved around the world, and it really is — but the America that we have today is Talmudic; it’s not the Anglo-Saxon America that we had 30 or 40 years ago. It’s almost completely Talmudic now.

    GJ: They’ve managed to hollow out America. They keep the outward forms of America, but they hollow out the substance to make her something very different and very ugly..

    DF: People around the world see it, and they feel sad for America, because it is now this Jewish-run country. I believe that America is almost a Weimar. You’re going to need a Weimar type upheaval to bring America down. And that means throwing out much of Jewish influence.

    GJ: I would agree. I was in India in 2004, and I spent some time with young Brahmins in Calcutta, they were young college students, and they were showing me around. They talked to me as though I were a child about politics, and I was irritated about that, because I didn’t know where they were getting this attitude. Finally it became clear that they think all Americans are completely brainwashed about what’s going in the Middle East. When I mentioned that American foreign policy is controlled by Jews, suddenly they realized I wasn’t just another hopelessly brainwashed American idiot. So even young people around the globe are much more aware of how the world works than your average American. I think they look on us as hopelessly brainwashed, dangerously well-armed children.

    DJ: You’re right. You go around the world, and if you want to make a friend, all you have to say is how Jews run American foreign policy and people will smile at you faster than if you defend the status quo.

    GJ: One of the things I noticed in India was that wherever in Hindu society the caste system doesn’t exclude foreign born people–that would include Ashrams and things like that–wherever they’re not excluded, Jews have wormed themselves into positions of power, The Hare Krishna movement is full of Jews; Jews like to travel in Southeast Asia because it’s cheap, especially Israelis–after military service they bum around a lot.
    I used to think Indian merchants were the most formidable hagglers in the world, but an English fellow that I met told me that when he was at a hotel in Kathmandu, he saw printed right on the menu, Israelis pay half price. That wasn’t because they loved Israelis; it was because they were so sick of haggling with them over their bills, that they had a flat policy that Israelis get to pay half price. So if you can flash your Israeli passport, they’ll cut your price in half just so they don’t have to haggle with you. I thought that was an interesting story; I wanted to fly to Kathmandu just to take a photo of that.

    DF: That’s a privilege all by itself.

    GJ: “Membership has its privileges.”

    DF: I”ve seen warnings on websites, especially for Thailand, telling travelers when parties of Jews will be there, so they don’t spoil their vacations. That’s a true story. To wrap up, you’re a White Nationalist. I do have many affinities with the movement, though I certainly could not be considered one, but certainly I agree that there’s much that needs to be saved and that White civilization has given much to the world. To tie it up nicely is to recognize that the primary problem we have is this Jewish problem that is using its media and cultural assets to instill guilt, something they would never subject themselves to.

    GJ: That’s right. I remember after the Bernie Madoff scandal broke, there was a Frenchman, I think, who had invested all of his or his client’s money with Madoff, and he committed suicide. And I thought, I know one thing for sure: Bernie Madoff is not under suicide watch. Bernie Madoff feels no shame. He might be ashamed that he got caught, but he’s not in any danger of killing himself over shame for failing his clients. I think that kind of self-assertion, that selfishness, that brazenness that they call chutzpah, is one of the traits that really sets Jews apart. I don’t like counseling Whites to imitate them in any way, but I do think one of the things we have to do, because it is just a healthy animal instinct, is non-apologetic self-assertion. Animals just go around eating sleeping and being who they are; they live according to their nature. Whites have to stop apologizing for our existence. We’ve been injected with this guilt virus, though I think we have a predisposition towards it. We need to get over that. We are who we are – we are the only people who can be who we are – we have a right to exist, and damn it, we’ve given a lot to the world, we’re proud of what we’ve given to the world, and we have to insure that we don’t go out of existence.
    Jews have this ludicrous pretense that they are a light to the nations, I think that’s almost the exact opposite of the truth. I think they’re generally a force of disintegration and death in the world. Like you, I have an inclination to want to reach for metaphysical explanations for that. But that aside, I think Whites really are a light unto the world, our technology, our art, our political systems and things like that. . .

    DF: Even our metaphysical reasoning is being usurped by Jewish interests and culture.

    Caller: I want to throw out to your guest, regarding White Nationalism, I’m White, but if you go all the way back to Alexander the Great, and if we go today to Washington DC, London, the Vatican, Israel – the judges, the police, all of these people were Whites – they’re using your standard, but they’re using the ecumenical system going all the way back, legalisms to control nationalities. As a White man, how do I take responsibility for all these Whites, who I see as cryto-Jews. Our legal system is crypto-Judaism. Our political system is crypto-Judaism. The aristocracy has always used Judaism.

    GJ: A lot of these people are not thinking about the good of the race, that our race is our nation, that we have to have an organic community, and that the common good should be the standard for politics. They’re in it for their own self-interest, their own sub-group interest, and because of that, they have been easily penetrated and coopted by Jewish influence. They look White, they talk White, but they don’t function as members of our community. My view is that they have to be deposed from power, .they need to have their goodies taken away from them, and they need to be reeducated as much as possible to be made into good little White citizens. The people who have made the dollars,selling out their own countries, these people need to be disempowered, disenfranchised, dispossessed, and sent away so that they can reflect on their crimes. I’m all very pro-White, but I’ don’t have any illusions about the fact that we are ruled by an evil, rotten, mostly White elite. And the Jews could not have done what they have done to us without White traitors. There’s no question about that. I want you on board, and I want you to realize that just because it’s got White Skin doesn’t mean it has a White soul.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 12, 2012 at 10:43 am | Permalink

      Thank you! This was a lot of work, and I really appreciate it.

  11. MOB
    Posted September 12, 2012 at 4:50 am | Permalink

    Oops! I see I forgot to remove my weather comment; it was sooo funny — I laughed when it happened, and I laughed every time I thought back on it, including now. (good, clean fun …)

    I have a few comments, which I’ll make separately. All in all, another excellent interview that not only presents substantial information, but in doing so, further clarifies Greg Johnson’s thinking.

    • me
      Posted September 12, 2012 at 8:07 pm | Permalink

      My very humble thanks to you, MOB, for providing the transcript. It is very much appreciated!

  12. me
    Posted September 12, 2012 at 9:05 pm | Permalink

    Thanks to MOB’s efforts to provide the transcript, I’ve read the interview. Greg, your interview was a dynamite one! Excellent! You pretty much described the basics of our white problem pretty thoroughly. Again, a dynamite interview!

  13. me
    Posted September 13, 2012 at 5:10 am | Permalink

    Now that Greg mentioned Ellen Brown’s excellent book Web of Debt, whereas she had a chapter about Germany under Hitler. Here is a web article on the same thing:

  14. Posted September 13, 2012 at 11:57 am | Permalink

    That is so cool to take time to make a transcript. It really reads well too…

    Thanks for the effort.

  15. Posted September 14, 2012 at 5:24 am | Permalink

    I enjoyed the interview very much, its nice to hear calm and civil debate about these issues. But I would suggest rejecting the segregation label more explicitly for what we propose.

    When you spoke about multicultural society and how in the past white standards where imposed on all people in society and that prevented the modern chaos etc, I would suggest stressing or pointing out the biological fact of race. The effects of a peaceful and well functioning multicultural society is much worse than the chaos we see today from a diversity perspective, diversity is an impossibility in a multicultural society, regardless of how it functions it is a tool for cultural and racial death. The effects can only be slowed by devision within such a society witch breeds the hatred you refereed to in the show. Thus the segregation label for what we propose should be rejected.

    The diversity argument can this way be shown to be a contradiction and that someone that value diversity can not promote multicultural/racial societies.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs


    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics


    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles


    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace