Counter-Currents
2,119 words
Here we go again. It happens now with depressing regularity: a white man who is alarmed at white ethnic displacement goes to a place of worship used by non-whites and starts shooting.
- On Sunday, January 29, 2017, a 27-year-old white man, Alexandre Bissonnette, entered the Islamic Cultural Center in Quebec City, Canada, killed six Muslims gathered for prayer, and injured eight more.
- On Wednesday, June 17, 2015, a 21-year-old white man, Dylann Storm Roof, entered the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina, killed nine blacks gathered for Bible study, and injured three more.
- On Sunday, August 5, 2012, a 40-year-old white man, Wade Michael Page, a racist skinhead, opened fire at a Sikh temple near Milwaukee, killing six worshipers and wounding three others. He then shot and killed himself.
And now it has happened again:
- On Saturday, October 27, 2018, a 46-year-old white man, Robert Bowers, was arrested for entering the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, killing eleven people and wounding six others, including four police officers.
Because these shootings all follow the same basic pattern, I have created a boilerplate article responding to them:
- “Understanding the Quebec Mosque Massacre“
- “Understanding the Charleston Church Massacre“
- “Understanding the Sikh Temple Massacre“
The basic argument is always the same. I just need to change a few of the particulars.
As a white person, I look down upon the criminals among us. I do not reflexively defend and glorify them. This was a terrible act: immoral, illegal, and politically damaging to white interests. I hope Bowers receives a fair trial and just punishment, but that seems unlikely given the racially charged atmosphere in America today.
We obviously don’t know all the facts yet, but apparently the killings were racially motivated. Bowers believed that the organized Jewish community is promoting white genocide through anti-white cultural and political warfare, including replacement immigration. In his last posting on the social media platform Gab, Bowers referred to the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS):
The Jewish reaction to Bowers’ spree is highly instructive. For instance, Peter Beinart writes in The Forward:
It happened on Parshat Vayera. The worst anti-Semitic attack in American history occurred while Jews around the world were reading the Torah portion that tells the story of Lot, an immigrant.
Lot moves to Sodom, and prospers there. The Midrash says he becomes a judge. His daughters intermarry with the locals. Then one day, while sitting at the gates of the city, the assimilating immigrant sees two strangers approach. He asks them to “spend the night and bathe your feet”— the Midrash says he learned to welcome strangers from his uncle Abraham, the first Jew. Lot “prepares them a feast.”
But in Sodom, the natives hate strangers. “Where are the men who came to you tonight?” they demand. “Bring them out to us.” Lot tries to protect his guests. “I beg you friends,” he implores, “do not commit such a wrong.” For the men of Sodom, however, this just underscores Lot’s foreignness. He hasn’t really assimilated; he isn’t one of them. He’s a threat. “The fellow came here an immigrant and already acts the ruler,” they declare. “Now we will deal worse with you than with them.”
Why did Robert Bowers murder eleven people yesterday at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh? We’re unlikely to ever fully grasp his motives. But he was enraged, it appears, by the fact that synagogues were participating in a program run by the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society that dedicated special Shabbat services to the plight of refugees. “HIAS likes to bring invaders in that kill our people. I can’t sit by and watch my people get slaughtered. Screw your optics, I’m going in,” Bowers wrote hours before his attack. In another post, he declared, “Open you Eyes! It’s the filthy EVIL jews Bringing the Filthy EVIL Muslims into the Country!!”
Obviously, America is not Sodom. But Bowers tried to harm Jews, at least in part, for the same reason the men of that ancient city tried to harm Lot: Because Jews were welcoming strangers. Instead of assimilating into a culture suffused with anti-immigrant hatred, HIAS — which was founded to help Jewish immigrants to the United States —now assists immigrants and refugees from across the world.
. . . For Jews, the lesson of yesterday’s massacre is very simple and very old: Protecting the strangers among us is not charity. It is self-defense. Every time Jews defend the right of American Muslims to follow sharia, we protect our right to follow halacha. Every time Jews reject politicians who demonize Latinos we make it less likely that those politicians will demonize us. “Hate them, not us” is a losing strategy because once empowered, bigots widen their targets. For people who define America as a white Christian nation, Jews will never be white enough.
Robert Bowers accused Jews of “bringing” Muslims and refugees to the United States. To him and all the other white nationalists Trump has emboldened, our answer should be: Damn right. We will demand a humane policy for people seeking refuge in the United States and defend those immigrants — no matter their race or faith — who are already here.
Will do so not only because we were once strangers but because we know that, at some level, like Lot, we always will be. Rather than seeking a separate peace with Trumpism, we will look for allies among the despised and abused. And in that way, we will defend not only Jewish ethics, but Jewish lives.
There you have it. This is basically a confession that confirms everything Kevin MacDonald has been saying for years: the organized Jewish community is promoting multiculturalism and non-white immigration because Jews are perpetual outsiders who fear and hate white Americans even more than Muslims. The Pittsburgh Synagogue massacre is yet one more reminder that the truth about Jews and white dispossession is so terrible that it drives some unstable people over the edge. But there’s a vast moral and logical gulf between these terrible facts and saying “Screw your optics, I’m going in.”
I am sure many more facts will come to light in the coming months and at Bowers’ trial. But still, I can say three things with confidence.
First, this could not have happened in a homogeneously white society. It could not have happened if the Tree of Life Synagogue were located in Israel, for instance. I have no desire to absolve Robert Bowers, much less blame his victims. But he would not be a killer, and they would not be dead, if America were not a multicultural society, and if Jews had not taken a leading role in promoting multiculturalism and non-white immigration.
When different peoples are forced to live together in the same system, frictions are inevitable. These frictions give rise to misunderstandings, distrust, alienation, and long-simmering resentments, which flare up into hatred, violence, and social upheaval. Bowers’ actions are predictable consequences of multiculturalism. Thus the New Right stands for the principle of racial divorce. It is time for whites and non-whites to go our separate ways and pursue our own destinies. We stand for the creation of separate racially homogeneous societies, through the peaceful and humane process of redrawing borders and shifting populations.
In the case of recent immigrant populations, the best solution is for them to return to their homelands. I also think that is the best solution for groups like Jews, Japanese, and Chinese who have been in America for a long time but still maintain strong ties to their homelands. In the case of indigenous peoples and some older immigrant populations (including the descendants of African slaves), territorial partition would seem to be in order.
Second, we should resist dismissing Bowers with the all-too-easy claim that he was “crazy.” Yes, Bowers did something evil and stupid. But Bowers’ underlying motive — fear of white race replacement — is not irrational or insane. It is a healthy reaction to objective facts. All white people have innate ethnocentric tendencies, wired deep in our brains. We love our own and we fear strangers. As diversity increases, all of us will bear increased psychic costs, even those who pursue wealth and status by selling out their own people in favor of foreigners.
Bowers and people like him may be nothing more than canaries in a coal mine: the first to sense the presence of a threat to the survival of us all. Bowers may have just been abnormally sensitive to the terrible psychic consequences of losing control of our society to aliens: stress, alienation, anger, hatred, rage, etc. This heightened sensitivity might also go along with a whole suite of other abnormal traits. But we dismiss people like Bowers at our own risk. For in the end, all of us will feel the same effects — unless we heed the warning signs and turn back the rising tide of color.
Third, Bowers’ “solution” to his rage and alienation — killing innocent people — just makes the racial situation worse rather than better. We will surely learn a lot more about Bowers’ ideas and affiliations in the coming months. But based on what we know now, we can say that his actions certainly resemble those of racially-motivated spree killers like Dylann Roof, Anders Behring Breivik, Wade Michael Page, and Frazier Glenn Miller, all of whom are products of what I call “Old Right” thinking.
By the “Old Right,” I mean classical Fascism and National Socialism and their contemporary imitators who believe that White Nationalism can be advanced through such means as one party-politics, terrorism, totalitarianism, imperialism, and genocide. Today’s Old Right scene is rife with fantasies of race war, lone wolf attacks on non-whites, and heroic last stands that end in a hail of police bullets. Intelligent and honorable people have emerged from this milieu. But there have been more than a few spree-killers as well.
This kind of violence is worse than a crime. It is a mistake. It does nothing to advance our cause and much to set us back.
Given that reason, science, and history are all on our side, and the greatest apparatus of coercion and brainwashing in human history is on the enemy’s side, doesn’t it make sense to attack the enemy at his weakest point rather than at his strongest? This is why the North American New Right pursues White Nationalism through intellectual and cultural means: we critique the hegemony of anti-white ideas and seek to establish a counter-hegemony of pro-white ideas.
Only a fool picks a battle he cannot win, and we cannot win with violence. Fortunately, we don’t have to. The Left lost the Cold War but won the peace through the establishment of intellectual and cultural hegemony. We can beat them the same way.
Furthermore, the only form of violence that even has a chance to be productive in halting multiculturalism and non-white immigration would target the people responsible for these policies, not random innocents.
Moreover, killing innocent people (at a place of worship!) has entirely predictable results. First, such violence creates sympathy for the victims. (Even I feel sympathy for them, and I would send them all to Israel tomorrow if I had the power.) Second, it plays into the establishment narrative of evil, crazy, intolerant whites whose First and Second Amendment rights must be taken away.
So Bowers’ choice of targets was superficial and frankly stupid. Was he even thinking about the greater good of our people? Or was he merely indulging in blind, self-destructive spite? And how exactly does praising repugnant killers help White Nationalists establish ourselves as representatives of the long-term best interests of our people?
I wish I could erect a wall between myself and the kind of unstable, undisciplined people who go on killing sprees, but you can’t change the world from a bunker. Thus responsible white advocates need to adopt the next best course of action: (1) we must be alert to the signs of mental instability and inclinations toward violence and rigorously screen out such people, (2) we need draw clear, unambiguous intellectual lines between New Right and Old Right approaches, and (3) if anyone talks about committing such acts in our circles, we need to be the ones to call the police.
Did anyone who read Bowers’ “Screw your optics, I’m going in” post do anything at all to stop him? Of course not.
Too bad. If the deplatforming of Twitter’s rival Gab on this flimsy pretext is any indication, I am afraid “optics” is going to be screwing us for quite some time because of this attack.
The goal is to persuade our people that White Nationalism is the solution to ethnic conflict not the cause of it. Spree killers and the people who high-five them are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
50 comments
Funny, he left out the part where Lot offers up his virgin daughters to be gang-raped. Too soon after Kavanaugh?
I doubt that part is in the Midrash, which is wildly different from th account in Genesis. It’s also curious that they’re claiming Lot is a Jew because Lot’s incestuous relationships with his two daughters birthed the Moabites and the Ammonites, who the Jews slaughtered on the way back into the Promised Land.
That is a recurring theme in the O.T. : hostile neighboring peoples are actually descendants of members of the Jewish people itself who got estranged from the main Jewish group. Thus the Arabs are descendants of Ismael, who was the son of Abraham and his concubine Hagar, whom he expelled. The Edomites are the descendants of Esau, brother of Jacob to whom he lost his birthright. The Moabites and Ammonites are the descendants an incestuous relationship between Lot and his daughters. This is the way the O.T. tries to “explain” hostility between the Jews and their neighbors : as the result of family feuds. The reason the O.T. chooses such an “explanation” is that the Jews were closely related to their neighbors in the first place.
He also leaves out the part where the men of Sodom want to have sex with the strangers. It’s called sodomy for a reason….
Great article. I agree on all points.
Regarding the quoted Jewish opinion piece:
“Obviously, America is not Sodom.”
[citation needed]
Why is the trope that “violence never solves anything” always trotted out right after events like this, in particular by those who advocated extreme and murderous violence against Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as in places like Europe, Asia, etc? Well, I know the answer, because what these same people are really saying is that “violence by private citizens never solves anything” but that violence by your own government does. What’s more (so the government might say) we don’t have to answer to anyone when we use violence and kill people, or face criminal charges because you the citizen can’t do a damn thing to stop us.
So yes, the government makes clear, violence, when practiced by us, is “good”, but violence practiced by citizens like Robert Bowers is automatically “bad”. Never mind that citizens of the British Colonies living here in North America broke numerous government laws when it engaged in illegal revolutionary activities against the legally-sanctioned powers of the British Crown but, “hey, that was okay!”
As I see it, violence is “not okay” until it’s “okay” – and that decision is always made by the victor.
Why is the trope that “violence never solves anything” always trotted out right after events like this
He didn’t say that violence never solves anything. He said that acts of violence against defenseless civilians will discredit and disempower the cause that motivated the violence.
That should be obvious. Normal whites find terrorism and murder disturbing, as we should. A good cause looks bad if someone who supports it kills Jews at a synagogue, after announcing his plan on an alt-right forum.
It’s true that Jews don’t find the slaughter of enemies disturbing, as long as they are doing the killing and non-Jews are the victims; news from Israel teaches us that fact almost daily. But we’re not Jews, so we must be guided by civilized moral rules.
As I see it, violence is “not okay” until it’s “okay” – and that decision is always made by the victor.
That’s likely true. But since we are a long distance away from becoming victors, it’s not worth thinking about.
In any case, we are not going to win any victories by shooting Jews at synagogues and blacks at churches.
After we’ve won, we can all sit about and decide whether Robert Bowers is a hero or a criminal. I’ll vote for the latter.
“That should be obvious. Normal whites find terrorism and murder disturbing, as we should. A good cause looks bad if someone who supports it kills Jews at a synagogue, after announcing his plan on an alt-right forum.”
“Normal whites” (many of them) had no problem with the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II (or the firebombing of Dresden, Germany) in which women and children and the elderly were indiscriminately burned alive with atomic fire. But the counter-argument goes: “Well, they gave “comfort and solace” to the Japanese fighting man so they had to die too.” Maybe. But then, that same argument could be applied to killing Jews in a synagogue as well, since it was revealed that their Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society has been proactive in pumping America chock-full of non-whites, and they freely admit it. So a good case could be made that these Jews (with the exception of the children) were not “innocent” of what Robert Bowers accused them of. And no, I’m not advocating taking illegal actions of this sort; I merely state them as a thought-exercise as a means to shed light on the incident.
I cannot work up any outrage, or indignation for what Robert Bowers did–if he in fact did it. If it ever comes up as a conversation piece, I will simply imply that it is just another (((government))) “psy-op” designed to promote gun control legislation. But, this is something that we are going to have to deal with more, and more in the future. Just think how bad it is going to get as we approach the tipping point?
While I have no proof whatsoever to substantiate this…my gut feeling is the following:
Bowers was likely someone who legitimately hated Jews, but who was mentally unstable and taken advantage of by deep state provocateurs. Now thanks to him the forces aligned against us have license to push for more censorship, to malign Trump, to push for more gun control, to attack any form of Whites taking their own side as somehow evil, etc. The fact that it happened RIGHT before midterms and RIGHT after the Kavanaugh thing didn’t pan out well for the Left, and also RIGHT after the fake bomb thing didn’t quite evoke the outrage that the Left wanted, further convinces me that this was no mere coincidence. I think conspiratorial thinking is usually dumb or unproductive…but c’mon. It’s one thing after another the last few weeks.
I’ve become numb about this stuff. Because:
1. Our people are too-often victims of non-white violence, which is itself denied and obscured.
2. Too many Jews absolutely encourage this violence and the obfuscation of the facts involved and demonize those trying to bring it to light.
3. These events are consistently seized upon and abused by the system, our enemies, and their servants to hurt us. Frankly I get the impression they would be delighted with even more deaths if it gave them more currency to ban more stuff. I honestly believe that.
4. It doesn’t matter what we say anymore. We can condemn these actions, condemn violence, feel for victims and it won’t make a bit of difference to how they treat us in the future.
My main concern therefore is the fallout and the attacks on our platforms. How much damage has occurred ? Gab is down and that’s bad for those who use it. I was just reading on Z-Man’s blog, in a separate assault – even Molyneux has come under attack recently and came close to being kicked from youtube.
And Alex Jones was deplatformed off of everywhere recently. Hardly two violent extremists.
Our enemies look at these as golden opportunities to attack white media again.
Anything which might stimulate whites to question the mainstream propaganda given to them, to reconsider the status quo is hateful and dangerous speech, a ‘threat to democracy’ and ‘our values’ and needs to be curtailed. They will go on a shrieking campaign against whatever we have left and I’m wondering where this is all going.
I would like to see some pushback by tech companies but I don’t see it right now. Only the big players can do something, and they are not on our side.
Supposedly, he posted that message on Gab like 5 minutes before he went on the shooting spree. No one who saw it could have known where the guy lived, what his intentions were or where he was “going in.”
Even if by some miracle someone had put it all together, the police wouldn’t have responded in time. None of this, of course, will ever be acknowledged in the official narrative.
Would the cops even have gone looking for him given his reported words? Did he show criminal intent?
Probably not. That’s a good point. But the next time something like this happens, the specific circumstances will be different, and Greg is 1000% right that WE need to be the one’s calling the cops, when we come across serious, actionable threats.
I would hope that unstable, and wicked people would regard the movement, its organization, its online forums, as dangerous places to plan or advertise terror attacks.
Anyway, one can report a crime or criminal plot anonymously.
Re: Peter Beinart.
Robert Bowers accused Jews of “bringing” Muslims and refugees to the United States. To him and all the other white nationalists Trump has emboldened, our answer should be: Damn right.
I know it’s boring hearing endlessly about Jewish hypocrisy, but…
Beinart is a supporter of the Jewish state in Palestine. He has written and spoken about how Israeli violence risks alienating young American Jews from the Zionist project. Regular killing and maiming of brown people by the IDF makes Israel look bad, and Beinart is worried about that. But he has no objection to an ethnostate for Jews. He only wishes that Israel could improve its optics.
He has a strong objection, on the other hand, to white Americans who oppose non-white immigration. He believes that Jews should work hard to import more non-whites, even at the risk of angering members of the white majority. He is proud of the work his fellow Jews have already done, and he would be disappointed if they stopped.
He doesn’t see any contradiction here, because he doesn’t think we have the same right to cultural survival and self-determination that he claims for his own people in the Middle East. Jews are a special folk, and a special folk operates under different moral rules. Ignoring obvious contradictions is one of their racial prerogatives.
As I have suggested elsewhere, I don’t think Jews like Beinart are entirely dishonest. I suspect that many of them genuinely cannot see beyond their own intense ethnocentrism. They exhibit a weird combination of child-like innocence and ruthlessly self-interested activism.
Jewish Hypocrisy
https://counter-currents.com/2016/01/jewish-hypocrisy-an-idle-speculation
”They exhibit a weird combination of child-like innocence and ruthlessly self-interested activism.”
I’ve noticed that as well. When debating a Zionist woman online, I posted footage of a Israelis providing medical aid to Syrian rebels, likely Al Nusra or ISIS. She said that Israel was doing it for humanitarian purposes!
The double think of Judaism make INGSOC members look like amateurs.
Peter Beinhart in his own words:
https://forward.com/opinion/393831/you-dont-need-jewish-values-to-denounce-israels-treatment-of-asylum-seekers/
Israel is at present about 75% Jewish, significantly less when you exclude the 100,000s of Russians with partial or no Jewish ancestry who arrived in the chaos of the early 90s. It doesn’t take a genius to realise that the levels of immigration Beinhart advocates would make Jews a minority in Israel within our lifetimes. Doubtless, he would still claim to support the idea of Israel as a ‘Jewish state’ with a Jewish minority, separation of Judaism and state, and realing from the the irrevocable spiritual blow of deporting of 500,000 Jews currently resident in Judea and Samaria to create the ethnically pure Palestinian State Beinhart advocates. It would still be Jewish because of its flag or its declaration of independence or whatever.
There are plenty of Jews who have a double standard of some degree or another. I’d wager most of the elderly conservative Jews who were just murdered fall into this category, but this is an overused meme and is basically inaccurate when applied to the kind of Jews you should be most concerned about.
this is an overused meme and is basically inaccurate…
It is entirely accurate, and in my opinion it cannot be used often enough.
If diversity is such a remarkable source of cultural strength, as American Jews so often tell us, Israeli Jews have an abundance of this valuable resource close at hand.
Jews would become a minority in Israel almost overnight if the Jewish state abided by international law. The Palestinians ethnically cleansed and ejected from their homes in 1948, along with their many descendants strewn around the Middle East, have a legal Right of Return. Palestinians have been demanding that they be allowed to return to their homes for the past seventy years, and successive Israeli governments have rejected their demands, with the support of American Jews.
If these Palestinians were Jews wanting to live in Israel, they would be welcomed. Because they are not Jews, they are prevented from returning. Sometimes they’re shot when they attempt it, as we saw in the recent Gaza border protests.
Beinart and other liberal Jews may occasionally talk about allowing handfuls of Sudanese refugees to live in Israel; but few (if any) of them urge that the Israeli government allow all exiled Palestinians to return home, because they want a Jewish Israel with a strong Jewish majority.
If these liberal Jews were consistent in their antiracism, they would support a one-state solution to the Palestinian problem.
They don’t. And since they don’t, we can fairly call them hypocrites.
On this subject, the difference between a right-wing Jew and a left-wing Jew is merely heated quibbling about the size of their preferred Jewish state and how much apartheid they’re willing to tolerate within it.
Like most white nationalists, I have no objection to a Jewish state. It would be nice if Jews felt the same way about Western nations. But since they hate us so much, they won’t ever reciprocate.
Curt Doolittle frequently talks about using violence, specifically a civil war, to solve our current problems. Do you think we should be concerned?
Cute
I am not a player in this game, just an observer. Question: If the issue is whites against everyone else what about the dissection of whites into their various ethic origins? I was made from Italian and German parents, both immigrants. My father was dark skinned and my mother a blue-eyed blond. I favor her more than him but brother was the opposite in both temperament and appearance. So, what are the boundaries that describe white? Are they just Anglo-white from the English settlers? Is it defined by national origin? If so, which of the many immigrant populations from Europe are included or excluded and who makes that decision?? There seems to a lot of gray area here that makes drawing a red line very difficult…maybe impossible.
Welcome to Counter-Currents. Read around a bit. I am sure you will satisfy your curiosity.
White people are all the people said to possess “white privilege” minus Jews.
No one has any problem figuring out who or what a white person is when it comes to blaming someone for their problems. Everyone could tell whether or not Brett Kavanaugh was a white male. There’s no “grey area” about that. There is very clearly a “red line” when it comes to who does and does not have “white privilege” so why don’t we just use that same red line to determine who is and who is not white.
There seems to a lot of gray area here that makes drawing a red line very difficult.
It’s actually very easy. German + Italian = White.
If you are a person of European descent, then you’re white.
How has the left gotten away with horrendous terror and mass-murder since the French Revolution? How has it avoided a total collapse of credibility after Stalin, Mao, Pol-pot and the murder of millions? How can it persist following the violence of terrorist groups such as Red army faction, Red Brigades, Revolutionary Cells, Viet Cong, FARC, Shining Path and Sandanistas?
Read again: through the left’s establishment of intellectual and cultural hegemony. We have no such thing. When the Left decides the tone of the debate and steers public opinion through its cultural domination, it’s plain to see how “their side” can “get away with” tyranny and vigilante murder and ours cannot. (And even then it’s debateable, the RAF was persecuted, the Soviet Union’s crimes internationally recognized – many of these people did not get away with anything. I’m sure you’re speaking from a 32 year old millennial college grad in women’s studies perspective that finds the Marxist crimes excusable or less severe as those of National Socialism.)
Either way, not being able to get away with a crime, you wonder if maybe that’s a good thing, not for our power, but for our souls. Who would desire to get away with murder?
I’m laughing at my 32-years-old women’s studies graduate description. As far as I know, no-one paid for the crimes of the Soviet Union. RAF supporters enjoyed careers in public life even though the active terrorist members went to jail. Their fans held vigils outside the prison and made documentaries.
Israel is big enough for the world’s Jewish population. It is far less densely populated than, say, the Netherlands.
By the way, this will be your last comment here. I do not provide a platform for people to spit in my face by accusing me of bad faith.
Population density of the Netherlands is 415,8 km2. Population density of Israel is 405 km2. Since more than half of all Jews live in the Diaspora, Israel’s population density would more than double if all Jews would be forced to live there. Israel would become one big city, a kind of Jewish Singapore, but Jews have been a typical urban people since the days of Hellenist Alexandria when Jews occupied 2 of that city’s 5 districts.
Israel wants Jewish immigrants and doesn’t mind if Jewish immigration is “encouraged” by anti-Semitic incidents (if not too bloody).
Jews will be just fine in their homeland.
Begin here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321318694_Jewish_Involvement_in_Shaping_US_Immigration_Policy
Mosque, church, Sikh temple, synagogue… I know this is morbid, but I’m predicting a Buddhist temple gets the next shooting. I’m not saying there’s a conspiracy to send false-flag attacks to all non-White religious organizations, but it doesn’t seem random to me. Not that there’s much we could do even if we had evidence of a common factor linking the shooters together.
There is no evidence that any of these were false flag attacks. I think that automatically yapping about false flags is the mark of stupidity.
I don’t want you to think I’m “yapping”. My intention was to show that I was not implying a specific motive, since I can never be sure when somebody will say “so you’re saying that…” I was trying to head such nonsense off at the pass. My mistake was trying to make sense of senseless violence. You have my apologies for cluttering up the comments with morbid observations.
“… racially-motivated spree killers … I mean classical Fascism and National Socialism and their contemporary imitators who believe that White Nationalism can be advanced through such means as one party-politics, terrorism, totalitarianism, imperialism, and genocide.”
Here we go again. With depressing regularity: fascism ~ spree killers ~ imperialism ~ genocide.
The pariahs trying desperately to find more despicable pariahs to look down to.
“Lord, I thank thee that I am not like these other men…”
This will be your last comment here.
Greg, it seems that American Jewish opposition to Trump and his immigration policies is consistent with their criticism of Israel’s ethnic policies, particularly relating to African migrants, the Palestinians and Israel’s recent nation state law. That opposition is explained in the nyt piece below. Would you care to elaborate? I would appreciate your response.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/29/world/middleeast/pittsburgh-killings-jewish-rifts.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage
The Pittsburgh Massacre
Paul Jay joins Ben Norton for a live Q&A
https://therealnews.com/stories/live-qa-the-pittsburgh-massacre-and-growing-fascism
Interesting discussion from the leftist side.
That was really interesting. They left off saying that attracting working-class whites, whose communities and families are being devistated by opioids, to the left was key to stopping what they kept calling “fascism”. And that they were going to have “find a way to talk them” – so a new media project, but basically no concrete ideas as of yet, no theory as to why the white working class hasn’t already embraced the left (at least not in this discussion).
And all the while insisting on a backwards version of the interwar narrative, where fascism develops inexorably from capitalism, and only something like “full communism” can stop it.
Our side tends to think of the left as merely “afraid” of our ideas, but what if, some among them, honestly see them, as unreal, strange and ahistoric as we see there’s?
Thanks for posting the link
Good comment.
There was a time, not that long ago – when socialism in our countries was by – of – and for – working class whites. The question of how to talk to ‘them’ wouldn’t have made sense; it’d be us speaking to ourselves.
In Australia, white nationalism and socialism went hand in hand for most of our short history. Figures like William Lane, Inky Stephenson, Mary Gilmore, Henry Lawson, Jack Lang and many more right up until the early 1970’s fought capitalism and coloured mass immigration as two sides of the same coin. Which they still are, in my opinion.
As to the question of why the white working class hasn’t embraced the (modern) left, it seems pretty clear that this is down to two things, (1) we’re repelled by the social and cultural programs the left has adopted over the last 40 years or so, given these seem to paint us as the enemy and (2) with a few honourable exceptions, most on the left have become so economically illiterate they can no longer describe a practical alternative to capitalism. Socialists of the past could understand and describe economics in language a lay audience could relate to. Frank Anstey – an early influence of mine – was one such.
Anyone of ‘the left’ who even hints -slightly – at a reversal of these trends (eg Corbyn, Sanders) is simultaneously portrayed as a dangerous radical by the establishment media and loved by a good proportion of the white working classes.
You can read Frank Anstey’s book ‘Kingdom of Shylock’ online and for free here, if you’re interested..
http://home.alphalink.com.au/~radnat/anstey's%20kingdom%20of%20shylock.html
.
The West is under ideological occupation. The leftist narrative defines the heterosexual white male as the ultimate oppressor and villain of history. This perspective is disseminated through media, the educational establishment, and government propaganda. This is precisely why the left can literally get away with murder and not have its reputation stained. It’s like the Holy War concept of old — if you are on God’s side, then any killing done in his name is a moral good. Like Catholics killing Muslims in the Crusades, or the Hebrews slaughtering the Canaanites. So ho hum, twiddle your thumbs, if a black man kills a white man out of racial animosity; the latter somehow deserved it, even if he appeared to be “innocent” (you know, white privilege, and all that). The black man was “really” the victim because he belongs to an oppressed group.
Well to hell with all that. Somehow we as a people have got to collectively break out of this ideological trap we find ourselves in. I completely and utterly condemn what Bowers did. I agree with Greg Johnson that it only hurts, not helps, the white cause. No group of people should be defined by their hatred of any other group, only by their love for their own. I believe the evidence has been gathered and the verdict is in: Multiculturalism is an utter failure, and not just a benign failure but one that is actually destructive — to whites, yes, but also to all people. This is the approach we need to take when talking to family, friends, and strangers — it’s not about hate, it’s about the desire to ensure freedom and civil rights for all people. Self-governed ethnic states is the way to go.
This article is great.
Jewish activity supporting mass immigration is the same as murder. That is precisely the function of this activity.
When whites are in minority the doors to all white countries will be permanently open and that will be the real beginning of a mass murder. Mass murder of us, our people, our children, our parents, our wifes and husbands. This has already once happened in Russia, it is already happening in South Africa. The more non-whites in white countries, the closer is the day of genocide. They will manipulate again a “revolution”, this time it will not be “proletariat”, it will be the oh so poor “coloureds” and “minorities” against “racists” (whites). Same method as was in bolshevik Russia, same guys, same action. It will be easy, there is never enough money etc. for the “pressed, poor blacks” etc.
Nobody will give us credit for “behaving”, they will laugh at us. If we wait, only slaves will be saved, those that freely give themselves and their families to the masters.
If whites “behave”, they lose.
Our enemy feels no mercy, they will happily watch us being slaughtered.
Still, shooting people at a synagogue does not help the cause, agreed.
Although I found Sloterdijk’s “Rage & Time” a disappointing read, aside from the introductory chapter, his notion of “rage banking” as distinct from the blind expenditure of rage is here relevant.
“From the perspective of the rage bankers, the actions of local anger agencies are blind expenditures that almost never produce any appropriate return because the anarchic acting out of the forces of rage regularly provokes the intervention of security forces, which can easily neutralize individual eruptions of hatred and local revolt . . . . Vengeful acts of expression mean nothing more than a narcissistic expenditure of energy. The professional revolutionary, who is working as an employee of the bank of rage, does not express individual tensions, he follows a plan . . . . The world revolutionary must unfailingly plan against spontaneous feelings; he must tenaciously dismiss his first reactions . . . . The more that local outrage is in the right, the more it is wrong when seen from a global perspective. If one aims for the transformation of everything, one needs to curb the impatience of individual vengeful parties. It is much more necessary to commit all factions waiting to explode to staying calm and prepared (In-Form-Bleiben) until the day of mature rage arrives.”
The White Nationalist movement may not aim at the kind of bloody & wrathful revolution which Sloterdijk seeks to analyze in psycho-economic terms, but surely we must work on the stringing-and-tightening of the “thymotic” bow of our people rather than shoot feckless arrows, or worse yet, invite boomerang effects
“Too bad. If the deplatforming of Twitter’s rival Gab on this flimsy pretext is any indication, I am afraid “optics” is going to be screwing us for quite some time because of this attack.”
I am less than concerned about Gab being de-platformed. Hell, that might be doing the movement a favor. from what I can see it has turned into an echo chamber of a cesspool, and if a psycho like bowers doesn’t get the outreach he needs to help save him from his own insanity, then a replacement is necessary. I understand the frustration with the double standard, but if that double standard forces us to become more disciplined, than we are better off for it.
Dr. Johnson:
As you have pointed out in your History of the Alt-Right and about Dickie Spencer in particular the bowel Movement is de-centralized in which everyone does his own thang. It is a Network of bowel-Movement Chieftains with sundry tards each following their self-chosen leader. Some of them are outed as ZOGbots — like TraitorGlenn Miller — who show up in 2004 on some jewboy’s Virtual Colostomy Bag NNF until sick and about to croak off arrange to go to shoot three mongrels in the parking lot of some Old Kike’s Home then “surrender” as arranged in order to have a show trial as a “White Nationalist.” Paradoxically once jailed since April 2014 this drunken homosexual Lumbee Melungeon has lived longer than when it was free-range ZOGtard because its ailing liver and lungs caught a break from drunkenness and smoking while in jail.
Understanding this latest event means that what must be understood is that unlike TraitorGlenn Miller and James Vonn Brunn, none of these “Lone Tard” shooters are known to the bowel Movement. They literally cum from out of the clear blue sky and then all there is left is looking at theys’ social media accounts for “clues” to what are essentially clueless white kids and grown-ups who are so out on the margins that no one can see that this “loser” got a gun or two and went out shooting with an eye to maximizing the non-white body count. What is un-nerving to ZOG is that there are millions more whiggers on the margins out there with guns and a suicidal fixtion awaiting a triggering event common to the ZOGland. .
I greatly doubt that Robert Bowers ever bothered to read Counter-Currents. Daily $permer no doubt. $tormdrain or Linder’s Virtual Colostomy Bag NNF / TGMNNF as well.
So what we have are white losers on the margins who one day snap and rather than gun down gang-bangers or police who will shoot back they go to some negro church or jew synagogue and they gun down elderly negroes or jews. Do they have any escape plan or view of what to do once the police show up and don’t kill them? No. They get in their cars and flee while identitfied like Dylann Roof then surrender, or like Robert Bowers shoot it out with the police and wound four then “negotiate” a surrender, for a trial on federal hate-crime (as opposed to state) charges. They will sit in the jail while jew public pretenders work on defending them by saying that they were insane. Dylann Roof fired his public pretenders, should have listened to my advice to ask for another year’s delay for being his own lawyer, then not pled guilty to state charges.
Robert Bowers can and should delay his trial by letting his jew public pretenders pose and preen for the next year and a half, then fire them and take another year or so to prepare for trial as his own public pretender, then pull a Giles Corey by refusing to make a plea to federal haet-crimes charges. They want a shoah trial, give them a shoah trial. I’ll be sure to send Bowers a Christmas card like I did Dylann Roof.
What I find amazing is the rush by bowel Movement “leaders” to apologise or explain for Flyover-Country whiggers who are at the end of theys’ ropes and decide to go out shooting and choose the elderly non-white racial enemies in order to rack up a respectable body count. What Dylann Roof and Robert Bowers did and why they did it seems pretty clear to me., I’m certainly not going to join the rush to condemn or bemoan the inevitable. If as I propose that the Mighty Evil Empire is going to collapse in Civil War 2 and be replaced by Ten Thousand Warlords ruling over 10-20 million ex-whiggers surviving in the former ZOGland then far be it for me to whine about the warlords’ pre-collapse revolutionary gun-men literally jumping said gun before The 10K Warlords ratify and legitimize the new governing arrangements.
This alleged shooting took place over two weeks ago. It has been already foreshadowed by other mass shootings by other desperate nuts not affiliated with the bowel Movement.
Gab was taken down by ZOG’s tech corporations for a week. That same week these tech giants led a stock market decline. Now Gab is back but is censoring anyone and everyone who made Gab interesting. The bowel Movement continues as before.
I’ve compared the bowel Movement to pig farming before. Every pig farmer feeds different slop to his particular pigs. You and I can get along because there is no overlap in which pigs eat our own brand of slop in different troughs thousands of miles apart.
My point is that it is violence against non-whites by whites which makes news because if there is an outbreak of white violence then our jew and semitic-whigger masters always expect that it might grow into Civil War 2 if not firmly stamped out. They expect a pogram leading to a Whigger Revolution which will lead to a collapse which means that the non-whites are exterminated or driven out and theys’ own heads are on pikes. And sooner or later this will indeed happen. Things will spiral out of control and there will be a catastrophobic collapse which will take out everything leading to a New Dark Age like has happened numerous times before.
You have far different followers and you feed them far different slop than I feed mine. I think I understand Dylann Roof and Robert Bowers better than you do, and I find no need to apologise for their straighforward violent behavior. Time will tell as to who was more correct.
Hail Victory !!!
Pastor Martin Lindstedt
Church of Jesus Christ Christian / Aryan Nations of Missouri
What Bowers did doesn’t hurt the white cause. It hurts the IMAGE of the white cause. But there is no possibility for the white cause to have a good image under the rule of the anti-white Ziogarchy.
So fretting over what Bowers did is a waste of time. In fact, it’s worse than that. No neutral or hostile person will believe that we’re being sincere. Claiming innocence just makes you look more guilty.
Optics and image are something of an obsession in our movement. We need to get over that. The white cause can only appeal to those whites who already support it. We can’t convince other whites. Only their personal experiences can convince them and then lead them to us. All we have to do is be there for them.
Shit happens. That’s the attitude of society when blacks kill whites or Jews kill Palestinians. Why shouldn’t it be our attitude?
It brings to mind the old saying, “Never complain, never explain.” Society doesn’t deserve our apologies for what white people do in response to the anti-white culture that we live in.
I understand some of us (those seen as our representatives) have to pretend to be concerned in order to function in this world as things stand now. But let’s not fool ourselves in the process.
Hurting the image of the white cause DOES hurt the white cause. We need more people on our side. Nobody but marginal freaks want to join the movement of Bowers, Heimbach, and Screaming Richard Spencer.
Sure it is not possible to have a good image with a hostile press, but we can do things to have better images, and we can certainly not give our enemies gifts like Bowers did.
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