Counter-Currents
1,879 words
Conspiratorialism and traditional distrust in elites has shaped American history since its initial conception beginning with the Anglo-Republicanism of the 17th century and its conspiratorial views of Charles I and James II, to the Boston Tea Party British colonists who saw the Stamp Act and the Townshend duties as part of a larger conspiracy to destroy their liberties. British moderates of the 18th century were also convinced that they themselves had fallen victim to a grand conspiracy spun out by British radicals to break away from the Crown. Both the British and American sides were equally entrenched in a paranoid mindset and conspiratorial environment. Similarly, contemporary America is obsessed with conspiracies of secret handshakes, evil bankers, population reduction, eugenics, death camps, lone shooters, the assassinations of JFK and RFK, the World Trade Center attacks, the anthrax mailings, fake birth certificates, weather manipulation, and so forth. These conspiracies come specifically from an ever expanding patriot movement that has exploded in the last eleven years.
Infowars.com is the center of the “information war” blasting out the same kind of conspiracies and anti-elitist rhetoric that fueled American political movements from the colonial period. The founder of the website, Alex Jones, is listed by Wikipedia as a “minor celebrity” in Austin, Texas. Alexa’s internet traffic system ranks Infowars.com as the 453th most visited website in the US—ranking just behind major national corporate networks such as the National Broadcasting Company (NBC.com). A staggering position, the Alex Jones movement is by far the most popular radical tendency in the United States boasting millions of monthly visitors while LewRockwell.com (the most popular “libertarian” website) remains in the neighborhood of hundreds of thousands. Infowars.com and her sister site PrisonPlanet.com receive more traffic than all the major white nationalist, libertarian and anarchist websites combined (including RonPaul.com and TheDailyPaul.com) while maintaining a 71.2% US audience.
In addition to the website, Jones has become one of the most successful horror filmmakers of our time, flooding the Tubes with terrifying documentaries of a traitorous elite steering the world towards a ‘Global Stasi Borg State.’ Tens of millions of people have seen these documentaries to find they are staying up all night surfing the web, reading articles and beginning a quest for “the truth.” In addition to the documentaries and website, Jones’ nationally syndicated radio program “The Alex Jones Show” is smashing talk radio, having made the TALKERS “Heavy Hundred” list for 2011. According to the Rolling Stone, Jones has attracted “a bigger audience online than Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck combined — and his conspiracy-laced rants make the two hosts sound like tea-sipping NPR hosts on Zoloft.”
One might assume Jones’ intellectual quality could never be taken seriously, but the Infowars movement seemingly selects its own trusted intellectual-heroes who can be heard regularly or weekly on the Alex Jones Show including Ron Paul, Paul Craig Roberts, Gerald Celente, Bruce Fein, and the recently deceased Bob Chapman. Jones has made inroads with Congressman, Senators, governors and other government officials, and has accumulated whistle-blowers and dedicated patriots at various levels of government who feel it is their patriotic duty to alert Alex Jones when something seems suspicious. This mass paranoid following has helped Jones break major stories as a journalist to become a frequently cited source at the ever popular DrudgeReport.com. Jones has further established ties and allies in the entertainment industry having a wide variety of well known celebrities and entertainers on his program.
While white nationalists are sleeping, Alex Jones and his megaphone are waking up white conservatives from the Republican Party en masse. For the last ten years, Infowars has been fiercely consolidating the white demographic of church going white conservatives or decent working class and middle class whites. The problem for white nationalists is that once white Protestants for instance disconnect ideologically and culturally from their secular, Jewish or Catholic cosmopolitan leaders, they’re more susceptible to defect to a later phase of their cultural heritage and political tradition—the American tradition. Americans believe in American history, that is, “our ancestors” honorably fought against the same conspiratorial tyranny that the patriot movement is facing today. The general impression that elite crime is heinously widespread and responsible for most of America’s problems resonates well with post-racial whites who become disillusioned with the ruling class and their neocon intellectual leadership. In this respect, white nationalists should not assume European Americans will have “nowhere to go” when the Republican Party perishes.
The Alex Jones worldview attracts every strain of the radical right without favoring any particular strain over the others. Jones appeals to racially conscious whites by “exposing” mass immigration as a conspiracy to “even out” the United States to prepare Americans for world government. He is able to attack racism by non-whites without embracing or degenerating into white racism. He attracts white libertarians by rejecting the military banking complex, the police state, the welfare state, and the regulatory state, while appealing to white constitutionalists by depicting the elite as a gang of criminal thugs whose global agenda requires the destruction of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. He appeals to white survivalists, doomsters and firearms enthusiasts by perpetuating an ongoing drift towards a total state of tyranny consisting of gun seizures, death camps, and government murder fests. He appeals to military and ex-military personnel by submerging himself in a world of constant false flag attacks, government testing, and secret military take-over plans. He appeals to the religious right by connecting their leadership to the “devils of the New World Order”—offering defectors and “awakened” Christians a monstrously new perspective of evil. He is also heading up the radical health movement by attacking Big Pharma and leading the charge in break through news on GMO seeds, vaccinations, water fluoridation, chemical trails, and other classic conspiracies of “poisoning the people.”
What we are witnessing is the reemergence of the paranoid style of thinking during the time of the American Revolution. The conspiracy audience is the true grassroots of the American radical right, and Jones has built the foundation for a populist radicalism that goes beyond the narrowly focused fetish-libertarianism of the Lew Rockwell variety to offer a fast-growing, future right wing populism that is non racial and conspiratorial, much like the ministerial conspiracies that spawned this nation in the first place. The American resistance rejects the culture wars, as well as both the Democratic and Republican parties, postulating a “beyond left/right” worldview, and claiming to have popularized the term “left-right paradigm” in the United States.
The Anglo Conspiratorium demonstrates the impossibility white nationalists face in returning European Americans to a mindset prior to civic nationalism and the paranoid thinking of the American social experiment. The white nationalist strategy, as of now, is none; to become impoverished, that is, to wait until whites become so underprivileged that a deathly obviousness and general empathy among European Americans increases the scale of racial solidarity among whites. If white nationalists wish to see their stock rise, the movement is going to need a new strategic paradigm in order to develop itself in the shadow of the Zeitgeist, especially if it plans to draw from these ranks, much less compete. The US white nationalist movement is not going to magically auto-vacuum the white demographic without positioning itself to do so.
Keith Preston and Craig FitzGerald are the only two individuals who have attempted to reconcile white nationalism with political ideas relevant to this country. At the intellectual level, Keith has shown the ways in which white nationalism, anarchism and secession will begin bending towards one another in a triangular relationship against liberal society. For white nationalists, Preston posits white culture as an identity, anarchism as a political philosophy, and secession as a means to an end. Such would not only attract young European Americans from the patriot movement but also lost white youth searching for something “cool” and “radical” who eventually turn towards leftism. Keith has done a service for the New Right by turning disillusioned leftists away from the hoi polloi and into the realm of authentic radicalism. Once people discover national anarchism they discover the New Right/Alternative Right in its entirety, and they become sympathetic to white nationalists.
At the activist level, national anarchist Craig FitzGerald has established inroads with We Are Change NYC—a chapter of the youth brand of the Alex Jones movement founded by youngster journalist Luke Rudkowski who frequently appears on the Alex Jones Show. The We Are Change movement runs a popular Youtube channel with millions of views, receives large donations from the general public, and has become nefariously known to ambush public officials with bright lights, rolling cameras and anti-elitist drama. FitzGerald has been involved with We Are Change since the spring of 2008, working very closely with Luke Rudkowski and others. Soon after, FitzGerald came into contact with Troy Southgate and Andrew Yeoman, and began recruiting for the National Anarchist Tribal Alliance within We Are Change. The First NATA meeting was actually held after a WACNYC meeting as a direct outgrowth of the original movement. From there WACNYC continued to play a role in the development of NATA helping to get the movement off the ground showing solidarity at protests and demonstrations, and cooperating in food drives, clothing drives, and film screenings. We Are Change NY ultimately became a platform for birthing and promoting the National Anarchist Tribal Alliance of New York—one of the strongest National Anarchist chapters in the United States.
As a result of Craig’s activism, chapters of WAC in other states have become sympathetic to national anarchists and have even attempted to launch their own national anarchist groups, i.e. the North Texas NA faction. The Preston-FitzGerald model of a high-end WN anarchist elite and ground level national anarchist body embedded in the American Resistance is the best way to reach the youth. For example, Alexa’s audience demographics for AttacktheSystem.com (relative to the general internet population) show that 18-24 year olds are over represented at Attack the System (anarchist site) while visitors between the ages of 25 and 34 are under represented, and visitors between the ages of 35 and 44 are greatly under represented. On the other hand, nearly half of Counter-Currents visitors are located in Sweden, and visitors between the ages of 25 and 34 are under represented, while those over the age of 55 are over represented. AlternativeRight is also receiving most of its traffic from outside of the United States with visitors between the ages of 25 and 34 being under represented, and those over the age of 55 being greatly over represented.
The anti-NWO view of the system is somewhat similar to ours at ATS, the only major differences can be found in the movement’s solutions which amount to financial reform and restoration of the US Constitution. The challenge for a white nationalist elite would be to chip away at the Resistance to pull sectors of the patriot movement to cross the line into genuine radicalism/extremism by endorsing anarchism and secessionism. Whites are turning against the system in unprecedented numbers and the best way to engage younger whites is to meet them at their level. The question is this: how will white nationalists adapt? What strategies will emerge? Will they remain in the backdrop of things, or will they begin to function as a serious political force that knows how to play the game?
Source: http://attackthesystem.com/2012/11/18/25057/
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
44 comments
Alex Jones must be smarter than he looks. Does anyone know how in the world he managed to perform an end run around the media gatekeepers, going from the obscurity of public access television to possession of an internet mini-empire?
I have not seen this question addressed anywhere in pro-White circles. This seems a curious omission, given that if we understood his methods, our side might imitate them and accomplish a similar feat. It would represent a major breakthrough for us.
He is very clearly a handler of some kind.
The guys at prothink.org routinely call him to talk about Jews, and he will hang up on them immediately.
Again, what seems of paramount importance is not what Alex Jones thinks, or claims to think, about 9/11 or the Jews or Bohemian Grove or anything else. Instead, we need to find out how he began with nothing but a megaphone and yet managed to establish a major media presence. Could we not learn from his example?
Kudzu Bob in blockquote:
I think it is important to look at what he discusses, and see how he effectively co-opts ANYTHING that is out of the Mainstream. That is his real technique; he’s sort of the Art Bell of political and economic commentary. He is the “None Of The Above” choice, and his followers get tonight’s Entertainment, leading to, well, nowhere.
Which is kind of The Plan, it seems to me.
No, he hit hard with GCN, which, if memory serves, has a history of dealing with conspiracy types such as the Militias. He then expanded that into all it was worth, by looking at the age where people felt alienated and ineffective, and channeling that into proof that they were the victims of Grand Conspiracies.
His media focus went all-Internet, all of the time, when it became obvious that the other media choices of Movement Past – our own newspapers, our own radio stations, our own television stations – were seen as the massive capital sinks they truly were.
WHAT THEY DID was done better, faster, and much cheaper with the Internet. Print media bankruptcies are a matter of record, and the wave of the future. Radio? In five years, the twoers will be used for scrap metal. Television? Seen the quality of an IPhone using LTE?
GCN’s Ted Anderson is a brilliant media businessman. Jomnes is simply lightning in a jar for him.
What can we do to learn from this?
Outside of contributing to counter-currents, each and every month, we can also get the word out about the podcasts of Whitaker’s guy, Horus the Avenger, at Whiterabitradio.net. Remember, the audience we face – the average America – has been dumbed down to the point that they are aliterate, and focused on pictures with words they can hear as a communication medium.
One, turn Horus into something that can run on the TUNEIN phone app.
Two, use the model of the Khan Academy to explain our philosophy, and make our points, in an easy to understand format. Pictures, and words that support them.
That’s for starters.
If memory serves, Jones was with GCN (Genesis Communications Network), and then RBN (Republic Broadcast Network), and now, GCN. GCN is VERY successful, thanks in large part to Ted Jones, who runs the organization as a business par excellence.
Peter Shank nailed the truth about the “911 ‘Truth’ Movement” when he noted that they are like the game of “Clue” on the issue of 911, and, it seems, so many other things.
The “911 ‘Truth’ Movement” answers all manner of technical minutiae about 911, and is like the game of “Clue” in that they tell you everything about the murder weapon – it was a gun, of x caliber, made by x, cartridge made by x, everything but on thing – WHO pulled the trigger?
The “911 ‘Truth’ Movement” mentions all manner of “truth” about 911, but never mentions Israel.
All of these conspiracy theories are simply allowing puppies to chase their tales, with only one or two asking what do all of these conspiracies have at their heart – if they are effective, Jews – and of they aren’t, then they do not look at the Jewish linkage at all, or even consider it.
Why can’t we “accomplish a similar feat?” Simple. We, if at all possible, go right for the truth. No market in that. People want to be entertained. Look at how successful Dr. David Duke has been on the Internet, compared to Jones. Why do you think that is?
Ignorance, and being entertained to ineffectiveness, is par for the course.
Ignorance is free – the entertainment is paid for by The Owners to keep you occupied.
Knowledge is expensive, particularly the price of Wisdom, which is the repeated shattering of your Illusions.
Speaking of value for the money, now would be an excellent time to contribute to counter-currents.
Truth and entertainment need not be in opposition to one another, any more than do nutrition and taste.
Alex Jones and others succeed because of chutzpah or shamelessness. Leave aside all the good you think he does, or his ‘war on msm’ and just google/YT ‘Alex Jones cries on air’. Yeah maybe he is making young white males angry and that can be harnessed but he’s also negro-fying them first – making them susceptible to ‘cult of personality’.
Fourmyle of Ceres,
Your statement that “The “911 ‘Truth’ Movement” mentions all manner of “truth” about 911, but never mentions Israel.” Is a complete misconception on your part. AJ talks about Israels involvement less than the good folks at American Free Press. But this no way implies that the 911 truth movement as a whole doesn’t mention Israel. Now this might rumple a few feathers, the reason why I think Jones is more successful than most patriot and white nationalist pundits is because he is not a white nationalist nor does he constantly talk about Zionist power. Another reasons for his success might be based on the fact that GCN is heavily Christian Zionist connected.
Craig Fitzgerald in blockquote:
No, it’s a pretty accurate conception on my part. I have an old Jones radio clip where he says, “Folks, I’ve done the research, and Israel could not have done it.” I suspect he only changed his tune, in a very small part and only on the most remote of margins, because it is simply too obvious to anyone else that this was a Jewish production, with Israeli participation.
Note that, even now, Jones – Jewish father, Jewish wife, if memory serves – stays far away from seeing this as an outworking of Judaism – he never mentions all of the American Jews who were involved in this.
So, a few mentions of Israeli involvement on the margin of all of his talking, and he is back to “the New World Order, neo-Nazi eugenics, projects,” and all of the other soft, false paths his followers feel comfortable walking down.
I guess he was silent on what the logic response to us for an Israeli attack on American soil is.
“Mention,” in soft whispers, and always absent is the question of an appropriate response.
No, he is successful because he is an entertainer, who, it seems, serves his masters well.
Essentially, at the end of the day, it would seem Jones gets his followers worked up, excited, anxious, and yet never offers them a constructive solution. This, ultimately, has them as tired out a puppies chasing their tails.
In the end, they are neutralized, and demoralized.
How very….
Piercian.
Learning the facts about 9/11 was like a lightning bolt for me. Especially seeing the collapse of Building 7, being able to watch it over and over again on Youtube, until it finally sinks in and you can finally grasp the enormity of what has happened. Having already been aware of the jewish/neocon role in fomenting the Iraq war, I could no longer escape the inference that we are in a lot of trouble as a people.
The political and media powers that teach us and rule us cannot be trusted. “News sources” that I once trusted, like the CBC and PBS, now appear to me to be nothing more than fronts for lies, hypocrisy and murder. Utterly malevolent.
While watching one of Jones’s videos one day, I found myself asking “who does he work for”. Then I realized I had achieved what I call “conspiracy gnosis. There is a lot of nonsense and misdirection mixed in.The heavily promoted “leaders” of 911 truth like Dylan Avery who made the ridiculous Loose Change movie, are often Jews, and their efforts seem calculated to discredit the movement. So I naturally gravitated towards TOO and counter currents even though from an editorial point of view they seem somewhat standoffish towards “911 truth”, they talk forthrightly about the racial and cultural aspects of our predicament. This is truly the heart of the problem. In order to discover the truth about what ails us we often have to look where artificial taboos and blind spots would prevent us. Eventually these Alex Jones fans will have to look there too.
I think that as nationalists, cultural and racial problems should be at the core of our message, but that the anomalies of 911 etc can also be discussed in a matter of fact way without distracting from this. Outright disavowals of 911 scepticism may be off putting to some of our potential allies and converts. Yet the same is true of the kind of fanaticism and irrationality often shown by “truthers”.
I hope countercurrents radio and the Voice of Reason can one day overtake Alex Jones. (He has the benefit of corporate radio station backing though.) The personality and intellectual content are certainly there in spades.
As to national anarchism, my impression of it is that it provides a promising and very rational framework for political action, but lacks the kind of galvanizing symbols, rituals and myths that have been the traditional mainstay of far right political movements. Is this a fair ascessment?
Interesting article. However, my comment is about a fringe subject. I was suprised by the statement that “On the other hand, nearly half of Counter-Currents visitors are located in Sweden”. Being from Sweden my self and having a fairly good overview of the swedish nationalistic webpages and forums, this seems strange, since I don’t see that many references to CC, even though I of course try my best to promote CC myself. A plausible explanation for the internet traffic coming from Sweden can be that there is a internet hub, connecting internet traffic from Russia and the Baltics, located in Stockholm, Sweden. The company Teliasonera International Carrier provides this hub. In an article, http://www.idg.se/2.1085/1.168493 , it is said that 80% of the russian internet traffic passes through Sweden.
Alex Jones slogan may as well be:
“Blame everything but Israel”
Alex Jones: “Israel fingerprints all over 9/11”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSGgguP9cHI
“The King David Hotel Bombing, the Lavon Affair, on and on and on, Israel admits in Haaretz and Jeru Post that they have fake al qaeda groups that stage events every time there’s about to be a peace deal”
Same video: “We know that there were hijackers that were living in homes paid for by Israel intel. We know fox news even reported that hundreds of Israeli spies were arrested in and around 9/11. I’ve interviewed the sheriff who picked up the dancing Israelis who had later turned out WERE Mossad. And we do know the moving company was a Mossad front. We do know they were video taping it.” -Alex Jones
Same video: “Take Adam Gadahn the grandson of the ADL former head, up there putting up fake Al Queda videos. That is clearly an Israeli production with Adam Gadahn. So I’m all about exposing things. But I’ve found that British staged terrorism, US staged terrorism–you’re saying Israel said hey let’s piggy back on it. But for me its more than just piggy backing. These governments, at every level, were involved in shepherding this operation.” -Alex Jones
Take a look at this interview with Dr. Steve Pieczenik (2012) on Benghazi, Israel, 9/11, ‘neo-con Jews,’ a ‘split US intelligence agency,’ the men behind Romney, Netanyahu, AIPAC, and ‘using the holocaust as a way to create the machinery to mobilize guilt and anxiety over the world.’ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjNEelKLl9U The interview is quite good. Pieczenik has been slamming Jewish Zionism on the Alex Jones Show for the last ten years.
In my opinion, Alex Jones has almost nothing worthy of attention, and it is a serious mistake to look at him as a model for how to manage things. The fact that he makes compromises, as someone else had pointed out, is only a fraction of the issue with Jones; being a freak obsessed with any and every conspiracy you hear makes you sound insane to most normal people, regardless of what the author (Jacob) tries to argue.
Concerning David Duke, although he has not been entirely unhelpful, he also is not a model for the right approach for the conversion of the masses. Frankly speaking, Duke – and many other authors I have seen – use weak arguments and shaky foundations both for racialism (e.g. a large focus on unimportant or unreliable things like IQ variations) and for a critique of the Jews. If you wanted to put a focus on Jews, only Kevin MacDonald’s approach actually sounds reasonable, and I do not think that anyone who is anti-Jewish can be successful with another approach.
The only ideological pproach which can initiate a large-scale conversion of the white population is one which is well-thought out and which has solid intellectual foundations; something which is seriously lacking among most who call themselves white nationalists. We need to use the works and ideas of European New Right thinkers like Tomislav Sunic, Alain de Benoist, Pierre Krebs, Guillaume Faye, Robert Steuckers, Armin Mohler, Dominique Venner, etc. (as well as older intellectuals such as Julius Evola, Ludwig Clauss, Othmar Spann, etc.) and successfully convey them to the masses. Of course, in some cases this will also require some simplified expositions of them.
However, what is clear here is that the thought of these people is much more rigorous and deep than, say, that of David Duke, and therefore much more reliable and lasting. Only on such a rigorous and trustworthy intellectual basis can we defeat liberalism and egalitarianism intellectually. The New Right in Europe, especially in France, Germany, and Russia, has really had a deep impact on their local right-wing groups and people. In contrast, in America we still see many people espousing poorly thought out or downright repulsive ideas like capitalism. I have the impression that American white nationalism for some reason has a blend of ideas and attitudes that makes it both unattractive to the youth and also unreasonable for any critically-thinking white American. This is not to say that every white nationalist is ineffective or has bad ideas, which would be untrue, but it is hardly any wonder that what is called white nationalism has not achieved any real success.
Finally, we have R.J. Jacob’s insistence on using “radical” ideas such as anarchism to appeal to the youth. First of all, anarchism in any form is completely unrealistic and is unlikely to achieve mass support, even among the youth. Secondly, we hardly have to rely on anarchism to be appealing, even to the youth. A firm but reasonable “radical right” or “revolutionary conservative” stance such as that taken by many New Right intellectuals (such as those I have mentioned previously) is not only sufficient, but also preferable.
“In contrast, in America we still see many people espousing poorly thought out or downright repulsive ideas like capitalism. ”
Pro-capitalist classical liberals and libertarians have been intellectually hegemonic on the American Right since such a thing could ever been said to exist. The various strains of the postwar American Right were shaped by the thoughts of Hayek, Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman and Rothbard. The at least implicitly anti-capitalist wing of American conservatism (Kirk, Weaver, Chambers) was often praised but never taken seriously. No doubt a lot of that has to do with the US being born as a liberal/commercial republic dedicated to the “pursuit of happiness.”
The alliance between Fr. Coughlin and Huey Long might have produced something interesting, but Long was conveniently assassinated a few months after the alliance was formed.
Another comment, I noticed that the author Jacob refers quite a bit to American history as an example. For example, he stated that “Americans believe in American history, that is, ‘our ancestors’ honorably fought against the same conspiratorial tyranny that the patriot movement is facing today.” Aside from the fact that it is an exaggeration to say that the American revolution was initiated largely by a belief in conspiracy and paranoia, it is important to note that the constant need to believe that their ancestors were doing only positive things is a serious problem with many Americans.
In my opinion, what American racial nationalists need to do is initiate a break with the American past, something comparable to what the French and Russian Revolutions accomplished (although with different ideologies). Of course, there are still many things in American history that could be looked upon positively, but the historical roots of European-Americans need to be grounded in the broader European history rather than in American history, which is honestly more a series of dissapointments and corruptions than something admirable. I think even the author, Jacob, could understand this, considering that he intends to advocate something as extremely revolutionary as anarchism (even though I disagree with him on that). And it is certainly not impossible, since we already have examples of it in history.
Alexander Zaitchik, who wrote that piece on Alex Jones for Rolling Stone, frequently works for the SPLC. http://www.splcenter.org/blog/?s=Alexander+Zaitchik+&submit=
The gestalt of the Rolling Stone piece was “look at this Alex Jones guy. He seems pretty nice, but he’s a little nuts.” Compare this to how they treat Peter Brimelow, Jared Taylor, Pat Buchanan, or even Rush Limbaugh.
The establishment does not fear crazy people. Jones is a legitimate nutjob. He goes beyond silliness about birthers and 9-11 Truth (both of which are stupid, by the way) to weather control, thinking the bilderbergers eat gold foiled babies (no I’m not joking) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnIMdXVXimY
David Icke, the conspiracy theorist who believes that all the elites are secretly Lizard People (and who Alex Jones seems to think might be true http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gx0jQAh0aaw ) was once almost deported from Canada because they assumed that when he talked about reptiles, he must have been using a code word for Jews. When they realized he actually meant Reptiles, he was fine.
That’s how the system works: Being crazy is OK, being hateful is not.
Jones is just crazy.
Yes, all this distrust in the system is good. Yes, Jones has a huge following, and we should try to tap into it. But his ideas are a complete dead end.
Less than a year ago I did a blog at The Occidental Observer on Alex Jones, writing quite favorably about him. See http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/04/whats-up-with-alex-jones/
I knew there would be disagreement about my views, but I did not expect the near universal dismissal of Jones that we had from readers.
I’ve continued to listen to Jones and I’m still in favor of him. To be sure, he is weak to nonexistent on the Jewish problem, but why do I constantly decode him to be talking about the Jews? And let’s face it, he would be bankrupted, enmeshed in scandals, or, like Breitbart, the unfortunate victim of an early heart attack if he did talk openly about Zionism or the Jews.
If we’re smart, we can work with what he’s done and create a powerful “slingshot” effect and get Jones’ followers to eventually look at the goldarn elephant defacating in the room.
I will not count Jones out yet.
I agree that the Jones phenomenon is not entirely bad, although he does say a lot of things that may cause a rational person to dismiss all evidence of false fag attacks, conspiritorial manipulation etc. Many of the “truthers” that I have met are nonrational cultists that could not be of much value politically. I do want to point out however that this type of truther movement is not confined to this flamboyant populist patriot type represented by Jones. It is really across the board demographically. The recent “engineers for 911 truth documentary that was aired on a pbs station has a very sober professional and rational cast to it, utterly different from the wild rantings of the more plebian Jones character.
The issue isn’t that he’s “weak on the jews” The point is that Jones promotes completely insane ideas.
The fact that if he said something about Jews or Race, he would be off the air, but he can talk about bilderberg groups eating babies, the government manipulating weather to create Hurricane Sandy etc. with no repricussions says what is wrong with our society.
You can promote any idea no matter how stupid and crazy it is, unless it is truly politically incorrect.
Most enlightening essay and commentaries. Daniel Constantin hit a truth when he wrote that the historical roots of European-Americans need to be grounded in the broader European history rather than in American history, a sentiment that Andrew Fraser would agree with. On p.210 of The WASP Question Fraser wrote that even before the Mayflower set sail religion in Europe had changed its nature, that in the late Renaissance we began to conceive of religion as a universal impulse. Christianity was well advanced on moving towards religion as a set of beliefs. Religion was moving from being a virtue towards being a set of propositions. The Protestant Reformation further confined religion to the realm of the soul while the body was handed over to the state. And as Guillaume Faye pointed out in Archeofuturism The Roman Catholic Church committed suicide with its Vatican Two (The Second Vatican Council, 1962).
Further study needs to be done on how Christianity became a proposition religion along the lines of America becoming a proposition nation. Only then can the NANR properly consolidate the white demographic of church going white conservatives or decent working class and middle class whites.
And in the spirit of Fourmyle of Ceres now would be an excellent time to contribute to counter-currents.
I don’t know the basis of the claim that nearly half of our visitors come from Sweden, but it is false. Sweden is, however, consistently in our top ten countries, but only around 5% of our visits come from there. This is based on our actual server traffic logs. So this article is off by a factor of 10.
There is much to learn from Alex Jones, the Tea Party, the libertarians, etc. But they still are not our friends. They share different principles and different goals. I am always astonished by White Nationalists who are willing to climb on board a vehicle that is going in the wrong direction, because they would rather “do something,” i.e., be taken for a ride — as opposed to the hard, slow, patient work of building our own vehicle that will actually take us where we want to go.
Regarding going after younger demographics: I am not sure we should care about that, for the simple reason that not all groups grow through recruiting the young. People at the symphony and opera always remark at all the gray heads and the need of reaching out to younger audiences. But the fact is that the audience replenishes itself steadily as people grow into it. I think that White Nationalism works the same way.
It requires a great deal of maturity and intellectual work to become a White Nationalist. With very few exceptions, that work cannot be finished while one is young. Of course the internet has been speeding up people’s education, and there are definitely many more young people coming into this cause. But they are responding to the existing message, and that is to their credit.
Of course I am all for people trying new things. But I am going to persist with Counter-Currents’ basic formula and work to refine it.
Greg, one thing about ENR philosophy that I think is correct is that America is a completely separate culture and civilization from Europe even if its a derivitive in many ways. Interestingly, I think north American new righters are actually more European culturally and intellectually even if many of them are Americans by birth and citizenship. That said, as the demographic change continues and whites become just another minority I don’t see how WNs would be any different from any of the leftist identity politics groups with their own subcultures and idiosyncracies (like the Nation of Islam and Afro-centrics).
I think the same is true for the religious right. As Christian conservatives shrink in proportion to the rest of the population the evangelicals will become just another weirdo American religious subculture like the Scientologists, Mormons, and Amish.
As for the anarchist thing, the idea is to set up front organizations and outreach initiatives to gain distant support from young Americans. This would allow WNs to marginalize their critics and deflect charges of “fascism” and all that. I think I was quite clear in my article about the specific need for a new “strategic paradigm,” not a compromise of “principles and values.”
“Regarding going after younger demographics, I am not sure we should care about that, for the simple reason that not all groups grow through recruiting the young. People at the symphony and opera always remark at all the gray heads and the need of reaching out to younger audiences. But the fact is that the audience replenishes itself steadily as people grow into it. I think that White Nationalism works the same way.”
With all due respect, that’s why the New Right (especially American) will never be more than a fetish for a small minority of effete intellectuals (just like the symphony and the opera).
1. The New Right as I see it is about creating a new people: white people who have a future, as opposed to the rest of them who don’t. I don’t think that most whites in North America or anywhere else have a future, given their existing mentality. And pandering to that mentality simply makes no sense.
2. National Anarchism, like anarchism in general, makes no sense to me. It does not strike me as a political philosophy, but as an evasion of political philosophy and political commitments. Not that such considerations will stop anyone. I figured it was just about creating cover for various sorts of poseurs. “Fascism” is a term I will happily own and redefine to suit myself. So is “socialist.” So is “National Socialist.” But I would never call myself an anarchist.
3. The reason I am suspicious of all forms of “mainstreaming” (and you are just proposing another version) is that I am not sure where it is coming from. The dominant source of mainstreaming is lack of mental and moral emancipation from the system, the deep-dyed assumption that it is not all that bad, not yet, and that a clever guy who deploys the perfectly calibrated campaign of pandering is only a few chess moves from victory. Once one is convinced of that view, the natural conclusion is to sidle up to the masses and lie like hell. That’s how one gets a Hunter Wallace. I need to know that “mainstreamers” are not basing their views on such delusional assumptions.
The alternative view, namely the truth, is too terrifying for most people to contemplate, namely that the enemy has the existing system completely locked up and that there is no way to game this system to victory. Most people fear public speaking more than death. EVEN IF THEY ARE TELLING THE PUBLIC WHAT THEY WANT TO HEAR. Thus the fear of telling the public what they don’t want to hear, of breaking the fundamental metapolitical taboos, must be even greater. I need to know that “mainstreamers” are not merely proposing half-measures and losing strategies out of fear. (The even worse possibility is that they are merely controlled opposition.)
If I think that a person who has mentally and morally emancipated himself from the herd and dedicated himself to the highest good (the welfare of the world, which entails the survival and upward development of the white race), really has the right to do anything, including political activities that would be contemptible and delusional if undertaken by lesser men.
4. The issue is not the size, average age, or relative butchness of a particular group. The issue is whether it manages to become powerful and influential. I have seen up close the utter buffoonery and catastrophic consequences of WN leaders who pander to the young and macho. I call it jock-sniffing. It pretty much destroyed the National Alliance and the Charles Martel Society.
Its interesting that you see my anarchism, secessionism, tribalism, and youth appeal as a “mainstream losing strategy of fear.” That’s pretty much how I view your NR proposal to milk the state for security. Again, the way I see it, *if* your ideas of “white protectionism” were to become a viable political interest group it would certainly look more like the standard array or mainstream identity politics groups we see in the mainstream culture: black rights, gay rights, women’s rights, animal rights, men’s rights, (enter white rights). That’s just how politics is done in modern American society and in modern political culture when a “new people” emerges. You’re basically going after your spot in the Liberal Victim Hierachy.
No, we’re not “going after [a] spot in the liberal victim hierarchy,” as if we are simply asking for a place at the table of multiculturalism. We want to replace the entire system with a white ethnostate.
Whatever you stand for in this article, and it is not clear — anarchism, conspiracy, and an earlier form of American civic nationalism do not seem a coherence package to me — it does not get us where we want to go: the white ethnostate. The trouble with the earlier stages of America is that they gave rise to what exists today. Furthermore, people today who are looking back to earlier forms of the American system — like the Tea Party, for instance — are careful to eviscerate the old republic of any shred of sensible racial attitudes in favor of colorblind universalism and classical liberalism, i.e., just older versions of what is destroying us.
The only way to fight for our race is . . . to fight for our race, explicitly, and to aim at a racially defined nationalism. Nothing less will be sufficient to save us.
“With all due respect, that’s why the New Right (especially American) will never be more than a fetish for a small minority of effete intellectuals (just like the symphony and the opera).”
I really should comment here, that whenever someone makes generalizations like these about the New Right as a whole – failing to take into account the various groups, people, and their differing operations and receptions – you know that person does not fully understand the New Right. Greg Johnson’s opinion on the matter of appealing to the youth is hardly what the entire New Right agrees upon. There is no unanimous declaration among people who can be called “New Right” from America to France to Germany to Russia that appealing to the youth is not important (and I might note that for a genuine New Right, appealing to the youth does not mean doing immature things like the National Alliance, which Greg rightly dismisses as buffoonery). The assumption that there is is kind of of ridiculous.
And insulting the entire New Right as a “fetish for effete intellectuals” is even more ridiculous. The New Right in Europe is a movement which has contributed a lot to changing people’s worldviews; which is something that really cannot be said about the kind of thoughtlessness that has been dominating most other groups in the Right for much of the post-war era. I cannot be more tired of seeing people literally defend intellectual incompetence.
I’m advocating a kind of pan secessionist earthquake against the central state. And I think we should try to appeal to all whites including the immensely popular quasi-secessionist conspiracy movement.
Again, youre not going to “replace the entire system” with a white ethnostate. This is sheer fantasy. When the demographic changes and whites become just another minority your cause will be no different from any other minority identity politics groups in America. Its unfortunately and strategically hindering that you can not see this.
You are thinking short term, and we are thinking long term.
For the short term, the more mischief the merrier is my philosophy. So pan secessionist movements sound great. I called for something like that in our Post-Election Round Table. https://counter-currents.com/2012/11/post-election-round-table/ Such a phenomenon might help break up the United States, and that is a good thing. But it would still leave us rather far from the salvation of our race.
But it is very important to manage personnel, resources, and expectations. White Nationalism is a very small movement, and we need to zealously guard our resources from being bled off by non-WN political activity that is closer to the mainstream and does not aim at our goal of an explicitly white ethnostate. Our people need to be constantly reminded of that goal and warned away from expecting anything like that from non-WN activity, no matter how salutary it might be in speeding the breakup of America.
And yes, we are going to replace the existing system with an ethnostate or ethnostates. If I did not believe that, I would not be doing this. If I am wrong, that is more than just a “strategic hindrance.”
I’m aware of what you perceive as a feasible long term goal. From what I can tell, you follow the ENR position that political and cultural change only happens once a new paradigm has first taken root in the intellectual arena which was lifted from Gramsci. Your beliefs seem to be a synthesis of the ENR and American-style WN and I’ve noticed you are very careful to distinguish your own views from those of right-wing populists and the like. What you seem to envision is a high brow, intellectual, racialist counter culture that eventually achieves intellectual hegemony in cultural institutions and whose ideas then trickle down to the white masses.
Unfortunately, it’s much more probable that we end up with a white rights movement. Notice there’s not a whole lot of discussion of activism or strategy in WN circles. Sure, you’ve briefly mentioned secession but not in any way that’s strategically viable or makes any practical sense. And I don’t think you intend to. I think one of the reasons the ENR has never been able to extend its influence outside dissident intellectual circles in Europe is because its high brow intellectuals have no conception of practical politics. They’ve never been able to agree among themselves or work out any practical plan of what a ENR society would actually look like (form of government, economic system, legal definition of rights and responsibilities, foreign policy, handling inter-white irreconcilable cultural conflicts,etc.) or how any of it would actually be achieved or implemented. In other words, all the stuff that actually matters beyond the level of a small group of intellectuals aiming to develop a counter-culture through art, literature, and philosophy has been ignored. It’s the same way with conspiracy types, the libertarians, and most anarchists of course, which is why most of Keiths work has been about addressing these questions. We certainly don’t have it all figured it out. Just like you, we’re trying to piece things together. But we know the tradition of secession resonates well with Americans, and we know pan-secession would enable a number of white republics or white socialist states. Conspiracy theorists can have their UFO tents. And anarchists can have all their varying hyphenated communities as well. Aristotle noted that the great cities of classical civilization possessed over 150 different constitutions among them. Why not aim to break up the central state and scatter about the continent?
Ultiamtely, I dont think whites have much of a future in modern American political culture. To my mind, the only way forward is to agitate for secession and to prepare to set a practical example for whites.
Strategy and tactics presuppose a clear vision of what is to be accomplished. That comes first. When the vision is clear, the rest will take care of itself.
Quote Jacob: “I think one of the reasons the ENR has never been able to extend its influence outside dissident intellectual circles in Europe is because its high brow intellectuals have no conception of practical politics. They’ve never been able to agree among themselves or work out any practical plan of what a ENR society would actually look like (form of government, economic system, legal definition of rights and responsibilities, foreign policy, handling inter-white irreconcilable cultural conflicts,etc.) or how any of it would actually be achieved or implemented.”
This recent comment indicates your complete ignorance about the actual situation of the European New Right (ENR) or even what the ENR actually comprises. First of all, ENR intellectuals have actually proposed programs for political, economic, diplomatic, social, and other policies; we can see this quite clearly in the works of major ENR intellectuals like Michael O’Meara, Guillaume Faye, Alain de Benoist, Pierre Vial, Armin Mohler, Gerd-Klaus Kaltenbrunner, and so on. Either you are ignoring this, or you are simply completely oblivious to it.
As for why they have never “been able to agree among themselves,” well that’s because despite the fact that we refer to them by a single name, ENR, they are not really a single group or movement. The term “New Right” is very broad and general and describes a number of groups and people across different nations, all which share certain basic aims, attitudes, and beliefs, but which have still have some disagreements (which is only natural, considering the multitude of people of various origins we are talking about here).
As for their influence, they have actually had a very powerful influence both in their local nations’ political organizations and more recently even internationally. In France, for example, the Front National party has absorbed ideas from the intellectuals of the organization GRECE; similar things have happened in Germany and increasingly in other European nations. If you read Michael O’Meara’s book “New Culture, New Right,” you would have known this (not that O’Meara’s book has no imperfections itself). So much for the ridiculously ill-informed theory that the ENR has no influence outside of small intellectual circles.
All I see from you is an attempt to dismiss all efforts at intellectual development in the modern Right as unimportant. History shows that political establishments always begin as ideas or worldviews, and only after successfully converting the masses do they translate into politics. The fact is that we need to establish a sound, up-to-date, and unshakeable theoretical or intellectual base for the Right (arguably, this has already been accomplished very well by the ENR by now; it only remains to be fully disseminated), and then to use this to convert the population. As I stressed previously, only when we actually have good and well-thought out ideas will we convince others and thus ensure victory. Unfortunately many people on the Right have been and in many places still are uneducated, ignorant, or just plainly unintelligent, and therefore incapable of converting others or accomplishing much; the ENR aimed to change this and in fact already has changed the situation in certain parts of Europe.
All I see you doing, Jacob, is advocating that people on the Right remain a collection of uneducated fools who scorn the very concept of actually using rigorous thought to establish any appropriate intellectual background to their worldview. You want people to be concerned only with pure action, and actual thinking be damned. So, after all this intellectual progress that we’ve been making or have been trying to make, you simply want to reduce us to a bunch of apes screaming anarchist slogans or the like.
From the bottom of my heart I thank you for starting this website. It’s always interesting.
In connection with the counter currents formula, I just read over the “about” section of the website and I noticed that it focuses entirely on traditionalism. As someone who is first a traditionalist and only secondarily a nationalist, I do not disagree with this. This is what I think differentiates counter currents from all the rest; it’s metapolitical point of view. Without reference to the outmoded concepts of destiny and the sacred there can be no valid or inspiring reason for nationalism. In the absence of that, white nationalism is just people complaining about rising property taxes and having “lower IQ” people around. Bourgeois and contemptible.
I do think it is unhealthy to look for political models in Alex Jones or in any other phenomena in the profane world. The authentic far right is strictly sui generis. Instead of getting on bullhorns and screaming our guts out like everyone else, how about taking the time to create something truly beautiful, something like a sacred festival.
The truthers have provided an invaluable service in getting a lot of facts and information to a lot of people. But that is not what true right wing politics is about, in my opinion. Neither is the mere preservation of the white race. Preserved for what is the question. Not, hopefully to be preserved as more fresh meat for the current system. Everything we do must be for the sake of something higher; in traditionalist terms we must point back towards the origin.
Trying to have popular appeal is problematic, because, look at the things today that have popular appeal! We would like to see that overturned. If something can be done once to a high standard it can serve as a beacon, and then be replicated.
Alexa.com shows Counter-Currents.com as having 33% of visitors from Sweden. Perhaps when the article was written the number was higher and they used that data.
Well that seems to constitute proof that Alexa is a worthless source.
Greg! Sometimes you scare me! Are you aware that in your short rebuttal defending Counter-Currents you mentioned work FIVE times? Thankfully, Mike has my meager monthly contribution on auto-pilot so no work on my behalf is required – whew! Keep up the good work chaps and just for the record I think Counter-Currents is top drawer.
Formyle of Ceres,
I have been involved with the “truth” movement since 2007 and with WAC since 08. It is true that some in the movement may not mention Zionism, Jewish supremacism, the Talmud, or the Holohoax (including Jones for the most part), but many others including myself, Victor Thorn, Michael Collins Piper, and others have consistently covered these issues. Its seems you are just broad brushing the 911 truth movement as all blind AJ-followers, who only rarely or quietly mention Israel and Judaism. Myself and many others have mixed feelings about Jones personally and professionally but the fact remains that if white nationalists and anarchists would emulate Jones’ tact and popular appeal they may have more success influencing young middle class white Americans.
Craig FitzGerald in blockquote:
To what avail? Linder said it best: “They are on the board, ten for ten.” They are, and we aren’t even on the field.
Let me ask a basic question: Why is your team so ineffective? Second question, if they were effective, how would we know? Respectfully, puppies chasing tails are still puppies, and they never even catch their tails.
No, I am “broad brushing the 911 truth movement” as what they are, a handful of people who discuss everything but who did it, and what to do about it. Some of you have done a wonderful job. It does not seem to have any effect whatsoever on public policy, and practice.
This lack of focus leads to ineffectiveness. If they had hit on the lack of anything hitting WTC 7, they could open many useful opportunities for further education. Instead, all manner of fools talked of all manner of things, including the idea that planes did not hit the buildins at all; it was all done with holograms. Do you see how ths tolerance of ineptitude undermines your “Movement?”
One simple message, consistently repeated: “PULL WTC 7.com Get the whole story.” Good sticker and flyer, that.
Jones goes all over the place, and nothing really gets done. Why this is so is left as en exercise for the student.
In the meantime, we seem to be lateraling the football a lot, and not noticing we are losing ground. A simple and direct focus on what we went to happen might better serve all of us.
Counter-currents is unique in that they understand aiming for the support of the ineffective wastes your time, and makes them angry.
If your ideas of Jones’s “tact” is him ranting into a bullhorn microphone. then I might say you have confused “tact” with entertainment. A prime failure of “Movement Past,” that, on a par with “streetwalking” and flyering.
As for the “popular appeal” of Alex Jones, again, this is not the place for “popular appeal.” Look at the results of the last national election, if your concern is popular appeal.
This lack of “popular appeal” supplies ll the more reason to contribute to counter-currents regularly.
Today, being the beginning of a new month, would be fine.
I’ve said before that there should be a 24h streaming network of broadcasts, podcasts etc based around white interests/alternative news. Media legitimacy is the key aspect in people thinking it’s ‘ok’ to express certain thoughts. Admittedly, I don’t know the costs involved… but having several WN factions donate should cover it.
The closest thing right now is Oracle where a few of the hosts speak openly of Jewish power (with no good jew/bad jew interference). Preferably, this ‘white’ station would be called something like Hyperborean Radio so as to provide the largest possible tent and avoid the usual marginalization (although obviously, there would be a wide range of views within).
The No.1 aim being to awaken Pan-European (white) racial pride.
I personally enjoy listening to Jones for the entertainment value. He is much more fun to listen to than Rush Limbaugh, Dennis Miller, and Sean Hannity (though I do like to listen to Rush’s show when Mark Steyn is guest hosting). The only other radio host I have found that is as entertaining to listen to is Michael Savage (though Jewish, the SPLC routinely denounces him as anti-Semitic and he has been barred from Britain for his violations of the PC religion). I figure that talk radio is not worth anything more then pure entertainment value.
To figure out what to do we shouldn’t try to dream up a strategy on our own. We should look to history were we were faced by the identical enemy and predicament and how they were defeated by our race.
We should also look to what Father Coughlin and Huey Long accomplished in America and try to understand how they did it, not try inside our own lesser brains to laboriously figure out what to do.
Probably more important than the example of Coughlin and Long is that of their contemporary in Europe.
Now I can get to why I agree with Greg and Fourmyle. We shouldn’t try to gain broad appeal by watering down white nationalism. The European contemporary of Coughlin and Long said that any movement that wants to achieve truly revolutionary change must not try to appeal to the existing mindset of the broad masses. It must stay true to its radical message and spread it far enough to attract a core of like-minded revolutionary spirits.
Then as the movement grows stronger it should actually STOP recruiting for a period. That is apparently to keep the weaker minded new comers from over whelming the revolutionary spirit by their inherent timidity and numbers. Mean while the propaganda must remain radical to attract radical people.
Timid souls will join a radical movement once it gains a certain size and credibility. Size is credibility.
That is the dangerous time. That is when recruitment must stop. Apparently that is to give time for the old guard revolutionaries to acculturate the newer more timid souls to the revolutionary spirit.
And if you look at the history of that particular European movement that was contemporary to Coughlin and Long, that is exactly what happened. It grew massively but in several fits and starts, punctuated by time outs of two or three years.
I must emphasize this. We shouldn’t try to figure out what to do in our own lesser brains.
I must emphasize this. We shouldn’t try to figure out what to do in our own lesser brains.
That is a common psychological failure of white nationalist, because by definition we are independent thinkers. We want to do it our way. We want to think it up on our own little lonesome.
Instead we must look to successful nationalist movements of our racial past. For Pete’s sake when faced with a mathematical problem I didn’t try to invent calculus on my own from scratch.
I studied the text handed down from Isaac Newton.
We’ve had our racial nationalist Newton. Study his methods. And if you MUST exercise your mind, exercise it in trying to understand WHY he was right.
Regarding “the masses” and “mass support,” here’s my two cents’ worth of commentary towards a grammar of activism:
When we refer to “mass support,” we should be quite clear as to how we define mass support and our actual and desired relationship with it. We need to properly define and redefine our terms in order to conduct a productive discussion. We need to be clear as to how we intend to get support, how we intend to use support, and how we measure support.
“Mass” and “support” can mean many things. In this context, mass is relative and support can take various forms.
“Mass support” often seems to be defined — particularly by mainstreamers — in terms of the simulacra of parliamentary institutions or public opinion. If we think about mass support in these terms, we grant our enemies a permanent veto against us, and we will never break the chains that shackle our people.
We need to secure support in the measure needed for cultural and political effectiveness. We must today define this measure of support and this effectiveness in relation to a strategy of cultural and political insurgency. We need to think and act realistically and constructively. We need to identify and work upon entry points, leverage points, and choke points. We need to build up a revolutionary infrastructure, to work in many environments, and to work in many discursive spaces. We need to think realistically about our objectives, our audiences, our culture and institutions, our strategies and tactics, our tools and techniques, and our heuristics and measures. We need to engage in a long, laborious process of legitimation (for ourselves and our cause) and delegitimation (of our enemies and their cause).
Instead of seeking or scorning mass support today, we should work at amassing and leveraging support today. Instead of indulging in mainstreaming or sectarianism, we should focus on reaching those audiences or publics which are receptive to our message and which we can reach. We should develop our ideas, our media, and our skill at communicating our ideas so that we can effectively engage our target audiences. And we should do this at many levels, so that everyone on our side has work appropriate to their talents, resources, and opportunities. We need to put work within the view and the reach of everyone on our side.
We should concentrate our efforts on the milieu rather than the mass.
Marijuana plus anarchy equal a large bit of success adding a few wild movie stars and musicians helps pull the public strings.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
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.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment