Counter-Currents
1,632 words
Did you know that whites invented homosexuality, transgenderism, rape, lesbianism, feminism, and all other forms of perversion? Neither did I, but my eyes have been opened by the insightful new documentary film Buck Breaking, produced by Tariq Nasheed. It’s the story of how white supremacy sexually objectifies the black man to break his masculine spirit and dominate him. You’ll hear people on twitter dot com claim that it is essentially softcore racial humiliation porn for a small niche of black nationalists, but don’t believe the white supremacist lies. The secret history of black kings being broken down by the white supremacist system is laid bare in this film.
The title comes from the practice of “buck breaking,” the act of breaking the will of a male slave so he will become obedient. This also serves the purpose of breaking the will of the entire slave community, since the human submission reflex is strongly influenced by seeing the group alpha being dominated by outsiders. Nothing engenders a slavish disposition quite as well as seeing your chieftain begging for mercy. While historically, this practice involved inflicting violence or the threats of violence on the buck, the film takes the premise that bucks were publicly sodomized as a means of humiliating them and runs with it, spinning a yarn about white sexual perversion and predation against blacks for the purpose of emasculation.
Now, I’m not going to go into the historicity of the film, mostly because I’m not interested in whether or not historic buck breaking involved sodomy — or, as the film even more outrageously claims, rape of the buck’s children. Judging from the facts of human sociobiology, yes, it stands to reason that sodomizing a captured slave would put him in the slave mindset, and yes, if such an act is made public, it would not only exacerbate the sodomized slave’s humiliation and objectification, but also have a chilling effect over the other slaves to see their strongest and toughest made into a woman.
Whether this thing happened or not, however, is less important to what we need to discuss.
The central premise of the film is that in the post-slavery era, the white supremacist regime continues with the vicious practice of buck breaking, but not only through sodomizing black males (which is mostly accomplished by incarcerating them, where sodomy takes place), but also by feminizing them, spreading homosexuality, queerness, and effeminacy among them, and by driving a wedge between black men and black women by promoting feminism and the strahng, independant black whaman. Oprah is singled out as a dangerous influence on black females, convincing them that black masculinity is toxic and urging them to abandon black men and marriage and to value their vainglorious independence instead. Gloria Steinem, who is called white in this film, is explicitly named as a CIA asset promoting black feminism to destroy black families. In all, homosexuality, queerness, pedophilia, and other deviancies are portrayed as not only uniquely white and inextricably linked to whiteness (apparently, we get it from living in an ice world), but the entirety of white civilization is seen as whites inflicting these perversions upon the world.
The film further alleges that the methods of feminization of the black male include promotion of marijuana and heroin use, usage of soy in food (pioneered in prisons, whose purpose is to contain and re-wire black masculinity into queerness), promotion of female-headed households — which a prominent black PhD claims lead directly to “bitch-ass niggas” — and repetitive, violent music also known as rap. The white supremacist system uses these methods to break black men because it fears black masculinity. The obvious reason why the system fears black masculinity is that black men are, by any measure, far more masculine than the white man, and that the white man, who is always half-a-queer himself, is resentful of their power and potency.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s It’s Okay to Be White here.
I keep saying “film,” but this feels more like a YouTube video. It features a series of black talking heads discussing these various subjects interspersed with images of the horrible crimes of white supremacy, leading the aforementioned Twitter trolls to joke that this is gay racial humiliation porn. Sometimes the film feels like a harangue; sometimes it feels like a campfire story from the bad timeline year 2103, where diversity has eradicated whites and we survive only as boogeymen that the remnants of humanity use to scare each other.
We’re also reminded that outside of the usual coterie of gangsta-ass niggas and ratchet ghetto hoes, there’s an entire world of black nationalists, Nation of Islam practitioners, and skintellectuals out there, some of whom seem to have goals that are parallel to our own. American blacks truly are a diverse people.
But why should this film be important to us as nationalists and dissidents? The obvious answer is that it will cause a rift in the enemy’s ranks, inflaming already-existing tensions between black men on one hand and black women, LGBTs, and white feminist females on the other.
First, let me dispel your one-struggle fantasies. Black men will not join us on a crusade against degeneracy, nor are black nationalists likely to join us in a peaceful racial divorce. While Buck Breaking ends on a note that seems to encourage black parallelism and limited black separatism, it’s good to keep in mind that Tariq Nasheed and his crew are most definitely part of the black talented tenth and are likely projecting their own willingness and ability to forge an independent black society onto the African-American community at large. Something similar is probably going on over here as well; as white nationalists, we may be part of a minority that projects its own will to separation onto the majority of white people.
I’m sorry to burst your bubble, but white and black will not join against a common enemy. This hope comes from the dominant morality. Even though we are evil white supreemist racists, we still crave social proof and moral approval from black people and other nonwhites. We seek out the social proof of the mystical Woke Hotep black nationalist who wants a black ethnostate away from the whites, or the based Roof Korean who shoots rioters and doesn’t afraid of anything, or the Castizo Futurist who will provide the necessary vitality to revive the American Empire, or even the Redpilled Jew who’ll turn against the iniquities of his people, if only to save his skin from an inevitable backlash. Individuals such as these exist, certainly, but they’ll never be a significant social force.
Secondly, if you’re reading some sort of male, heterosexual Blexit into this, sorry, you’re wrong again. Black men are simply not going to walk away from the sweetheart deal they’ve gotten from globohomo. On the pro side, they can steal, rape, kill, and riot with impunity. Crime is in the process of being made legal for blacks, insofar as it targets whites who can be deemed racist ex post facto.
On the minus side, they have to suffer the iniquity of black women being what they are, but this is nothing they aren’t used to. The predominant social organizational mode of West Africans (and American blacks are West Africans) is matrilocal, with women and children living together (tha projecs) and the males living separately in hunter-warrior lodges (gangs), only meeting the females for sex. Globohomo has allowed blacks to recreate their ancestral environment with a bonus: a white population too scared of being deemed racist to defend themselves to prey on. They’re never walking away from that plantation.
What’s likely to happen, however, is that this film will empower black men in power struggles within the bioleninist coalition. It will allow them to shut up objections from white feminists and white LGBTs with claims of buck breaking, a form of white racism that seeks to queer black masculinity and deem it just as toxic as white masculinity. In other words, this film has the power to chip this contingent of whites away from black ascendancy and hurl it into the white supremacist darkness.
White women had a close call with the Karen thing last year. Now white gays must contend with the rise of black power. Power is an all-or-nothing thing — it cannot be shared. Pretty soon, there will be a black-gay dispute, and my money will be on the blacks winning it. Homosexuality’s flirtations with fascism in the past seem to be very damning evidence against white homosexuals objecting to predictable black male misbehavior.
I won’t expect many of the white feminists and homosexuals who are thus sidelined to join our cause. They’re likelier to end up as the disgraced communists who were shouting “long live Stalin” as they were executed under Stalin. But in any case, some of them might develop a newfound dislike of blacks which can perhaps be nourished into white-positive sentiment. And of course, a black pogrom against white gays will cut into globohomo’s recruiting pool, which is already at its logistical narrows.
So, I hope you join me in welcoming Tariq Nasheed’s Buck Breaking not only as an amusing example of just far black delusion can go, but also as a ticking time bomb liable to blast a large wedge in the enemy’s ranks.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
45 comments
Homosexuality’s flirtations with fascism in the past seem to be very damning evidence against white homosexuals objecting to predictable black male misbehavior.
If I’m not mistaken, Tariq had already decried gays as nazis in one of his twitter tirades. Overall, the only significant thing coming from his another cinematic abortion are the buck-breaking memes it spawned across the web. Laughing at the most closeted race (with strong competition from arabs) on earth is always a nice patime.
Given how demographics are changing, black delusions of grandeur can make a small dent in the bioleninist coalition, but in the long term, hispanics are well on their way to show our ebonic friends their place in the hierarchy. David Cole has been writing about it on Takimag for some time now.
When I was a young man, long ago, I admired the athletic prowess and the cool physicality and snappy word plays of Black men. When I finally filled in the picture, much later, I did an attitudinal 180.
What strikes me about Blacks now is their utter lack of honor. Self-regard aplenty, self-respect, nope. All the swagger and bragging just makes them poster children for the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
This “fake it till you make it” mindset is a cornerstone of rap music.
Not to stroke my ego, but as an early 20 year old I could already discern most of the intricacies and tendencies of the black male and their culture. Which is that they are extremely materialistic, exhibitionist, crabs in the barrel mentality, maternalist with heavy servility towards religion, in particular Christianity. I grew up living close to them which helps in my analyzation. When looking at conservative white masculinity, or even yet, Traditional White Masculinity, we are on another level.
Interesting. So black men are just like the black casting of the character of Judas in Jesus Christ Superstar. Betrays Jesus because Mary the ThoT washed Jesus feet with perfume!
Imagine being a black nationalist and making an entire documentary about how big white men colonized your people and butt rape all your men lmao, how could you possibly think that was a win ?
Tariq is definitely hiding something.
Yeah exactly. It’s a sort of wishful thing or projection, like that entire movie Roots.
I have come to see Blacks as the eternal teenagers infesting Parent America. They scream that they hate us because we have ruined their lives yet refuse to leave home and then demand $20 and the car keys. As I said, a race without honor or self-respect.
Brilliant
I always remember the time Jared Taylor was speaking at an all black gathering, presumably a Nation of Islam event.
Mr. Taylor remarked and I’m paraphrasing “ on your own you can go off and build Wakanda”.
And his audience burst out laughing.
That was hilarious. What made it even funnier was how he put it; expressing his desire to see them live their best life, he added, for emphasis, “I want to see you people build Wakanda.” 😅
“Without honor.”
Yep.
Imagine being a black nationalist and making an entire documentary about how big white men colonized your people and butt rape all your men lmao, how could you possibly think that was a win ?
Being a woman, I’m sure I’m the only one who is going to be willing to say this out loud, but that’s pretty much exactly how black people have been winning for several generations now.
Outrage is a powerful motivator.
Yeah really, who on earth would want to do that? It reminds me of the movie Get Out I saw recently, in which whites conspire to steal “black bodies” and make sex slaves of them. Blacks so want to think whites desire them sexually, but nothing could be further from the truth. (On average.)
Delusional, like the now widespread accusation that we envious whites are unable to resist ‘touching’ the oil and chemical imbued coiffures that black womenfolk desport.
To paraphrase Will Graham in Manhunter, I’ve seen this film before! Or rather, read it. For although this film may be a strange fantasy of Mr. Nasheed, it reminds me an awful lot of Lanz von Liebelfels’ Theozoology, or to give it its full title, Theozoology, or The Science of the Sodomite Apelings and the Divine Electron (An introduction to the most ancient and modern philosophy and a justification of the monarchy and the nobility), which I reviewed here: https://counter-currents.com/2020/08/beast-men-and-blm-lanz-von-liebelfels-prophetic-visions/. Lanz, who arguably influenced the Little Corporal through his journal Ostara, basically believed that ancient civilizations (all White) had devoted most of their time to the breeding of “love pygmies” for deviant sex. Alas, in Lanz’ version, this is mostly the women, so the results are various subhuman races (Africans, Jews, etc.) as well as a poisoning of the Aryan DNA, resulting in the loss of our original magical (“electrical”) powers. Our people could fly, and we wuz kangz.
Like everything else, they ripped it off from us!
Some detail from my review:
Lanz’s basic idea, pursued relentlessly through everything from Babylonian bas reliefs to cryptozoological fossils to modern theories of electricity and biochemistry, is simple to the point of monomania. “The Godman endowed with magical divine powers” is the Aryan of the North; to the South and East belong the “ancient beastly creatures (non-Aryans).” The Godmen had numerous psychic powers, mostly electrical, which are now dormant in modern, degenerative man. This Fall of Man was occasioned by the lust for sexual intercourse with the beastly creatures, resulting in the various non-Aryan races, the most clever of which are the Jews.
Like many today, Lanz believed the Bible had a code, which he was able to crack. Various apparently ordinary words were code words; “stones” were apes, “crucifixion” was Sodomitical rape, etc. “Race and spirit are inseparable,” and thus the Bible is actually the history of Aryan miscegenation, a warning against it, and a prophecy that the return of the Golden Age can occur, but only through strict eugenic practices (and genocide of the ape-human hybrids, of course). Christ’s life is an allegory of this process; he represents “the Heroic-Aryan Godman crucified upon the lower animal nature of the world awaiting resurrection.”
As with the works of so many scientific outsiders, this bald summary cannot account for the fascination (to use Sontag’s word) exerted over readers from prewar Vienna (Lanz claimed a circulation of around 100,000!) to today; that can only be accounted for by Lanz’s writings themselves, where a truly unique voice rings out. Here’s perhaps my favorite passage from Theozoology, which I quoted in several essays and reviews:
The one-time Paradisiacal fields are completely exploited and plundered like a wheat-field in which a thievish horde of apes has taken up residence. Our bodies are infected with a mange which despite every kind of soap remains udumu-ized, pagutu-ized and baziat-ized [that is, acquired the DNA of various ancient beast men]. Never has human life been as miserable as it is today — despite all its technical advancements. Devilish human beasts oppress us from above, slaughtering millions of people in unconscionably murderous wars conducted for the enrichment of their personal money-bags. Savage human beasts undermine the pillars of culture from below. . . . What do you want with Hell in the Beyond?! Isn’t the one we are living in now, and in which we are now burning, terrible enough?
If memory serves right, whites are supposed to be some weird mutants created by a renegade, ancient black sorcerer (named Yacoob), according to KANGZ historiosophy. We lack the wonder-element of melanin in order to commune with the Universe (midichlorians n’ shiet) and this is one of the chief reasons for our evil ways.
Btw, creating pale-skinned super-humans through mutations of magical origins reminded me of our “Wiedźmin” (The Witcher) fantasy series by Andrzej Sapkowski. Even polish fantasy had managed to anticipate one of the core tenets of KANGZ ideology.
I always thought of the Yacub story as basically a color-shift of the episode in Lord of the Rings where Saruman The White (!!!) creates the Uruk-Hai, a brutish, subservient and bloodthirsty race of orcs.
Well, since orcs in Mordor forces served the modern industry and were reputed to be crafty and skilled with mechanical devices, there can be an analogy to be made.
“[b]ut the entirety of white civilization is seen as whites inflicting these perversions upon the world.”
Which is worse: Ignorance or arrogance? Or, just an all around lack of self awareness?
I know others have said that blacks are filled with shame, living among whites and in white cultures. But I don’t know about that anymore. My opinion is changing after the past year and a half. In addition to an excess of self esteem, I think they lack shame. They just don’t live by our western standards, and it’s clear they don’t care to. In Los Angeles, I knew (and worked with) blacks who just laugh at our values. Maybe devout Christian blacks are more observant of white cultural mores, but they still march to the beat of their own drums. A healthy shame isn’t part of their picture. I don’t think they are rebelling against it. I think we are seeing the true colors.
Tariq Nasheed is a delusional jackass. That’s all I have to say about him and his 10%’r kind. This documentary sounds absurd and perverse.
“This also serves the purpose of breaking the will of the entire slave community, since the human submission reflex is strongly influenced by seeing the group alpha being dominated by outsiders.”
Such was the case of White Normy America being forced watching Honorable Police Officer Derek Chauvin convicted of “murder” while wearing a surgical mask in kangaroo court on trial for his life. Demoralizing TV theatre conjured up by the demonic left under orders from communist China. I want my country back.
The movie is just more anti-white slander. I’ve read plenty of literature about antebellum slavery, and this is the first time this narrative has popped up. If it were the real deal, it would’ve been so lurid (back in its time most especially) that it would’ve been a popular subject of anti-slavery writings. I agree with Scott Johnson and DarkPlato; it’s just homoerotic psychological projection.
What’s likely to happen, however, is that this film will empower black men in power struggles within the bioleninist coalition. It will allow them to shut up objections from white feminists and white LGBTs with claims of buck breaking, a form of white racism that seeks to queer black masculinity and deem it just as toxic as white masculinity.
There is no “bioleninist coalition.” Every leftist (and mainstream “conservative”) organization must pay obeisance to the anti-white, pro-diversity agenda.
The environment only matters to the extent that POC are threatened by it. Housing and education prices are issues of concern only because they impede social mobility for “communities of color.” To the extent anyone is allowed to notice or care about crime, it’s the same story: low-income minority neighborhoods “disproportionately affected.”
Why would anyone expect women’s rights organizations to be any different? There is no reason to expect that, of course.
On the minus side, they have to suffer the iniquity of black women being what they are, but this is nothing they aren’t used to.
I suppose I should be grateful that Mr. Jeelvy I attacking someone else for a change, but I can’t help but chuckle at the idea that black people’s problems are caused by…black women.
I understand that your MO is to defend women at all costs, which is occasionally advantageous whenever someone is being misogynistic for no real reason, but this is simply disingenuous at best and subversive at worst.
There is no “bioleninist coalition.” Every leftist (and mainstream “conservative”) organization must pay obeisance to the anti-white, pro-diversity agenda.
How does that not validate Jeelvy’s very basic premise of what the coalition looks like? He makes no claims about specific ideology, simply that you stand a better chance of whipping up rock solid loyalty if you fill your orgs with the permanently aggrieved. He has presented a compelling case for such a thing if not necessarily existing than being a decent descriptor of other observable social phenomena. All you have is a dismissal of it.
The environment only matters to the extent that POC are threatened by it. Housing and education prices are issues of concern only because they impede social mobility for “communities of color.”
This is plainly wrong for two reasons. Housing and education costs are still something discussed as affecting all social groups even in the batshit crazy US because they’re fundamentally unavoidable for people across the lower class irrespective of ethnicity. There are obviously going to be inequities, like with section 8 or in grants, but pretending we only talk about minorities in those contexts is just a strange assertion. Also, pretending you don’t notice how often women come up in these conversations as minorities in these conversations is just absurd. You are either professing ignorance or ignoring data, neither of which are arguments.
Why would anyone expect women’s rights organizations to be any different? There is no reason to expect that, of course.
You’ve never seen a gaggle of white feminists pump bilge into discourse before? I envy you.
I suppose I should be grateful that Mr. Jeelvy I attacking someone else for a change, but I can’t help but chuckle at the idea that black people’s problems are caused by…black women.
A stray wind could knock this straw man off his post.
He has presented a compelling case for such a thing
Where?
How does that not validate Jeelvy’s very basic premise of what the coalition looks like?
A coalition is, by definition, a grassroots phenomenon involving large constituencies coming together to form a governing political majority. That is not what the Left is. The Left is a top-down permanent revolution that keeps its constituent parts in line with (((the power of the purse))).
You’ve never seen a gaggle of white feminists pump bilge into discourse before? I envy you.
Assuming for the moment these these “gaggles of white feminists” are in fact White, their influence stems not from grassroots support, of which they have virtually none, but rather boosting in the mainstream media.
Housing and education costs are still something discussed as affecting all social groups
That’s true, but they are not discussed as affecting all social groups equally. Minority victimization is the currency of the realm. If you want to get published, request a grant, or even get a good grade on your term paper, you have to say the right things. Jeelvy’s obsession with feminism fails to take account of these incentives, though of course it’s not just him.
Also, pretending you don’t notice how often women come up in these conversations as minorities in these conversations is just absurd.
What is absurd is your belief that White women count as “minorities.” We do not. The elites hate us almost as much as they hate you, if not moreso, because they view us as unreliable and unwilling to vote as we “should.”
Wouldn’t homosexual rape have been used as Unionist propaganda or earlier by Wilberforce in the UK parliamentary hearings on banning the Atlantic slave trade? The stRiki-Eiking aspect of Anglo Saxon patterns of enslavement in this context was the basic absence of this sort of abuse. The Anglo wanted to make money not love. Is there some evidence of a queer old Levantine Merchant buggering the blacks he was buying and selling?
I realized a long time ago that black men were effeminate, in appearance they are like women, because they have large goggle eyes, bulbous lips, and vague, roundish, bovine faces, which requires additional concentration on the viewer to bring into focus. Emotionally, they are prone to outbursts, and tantrums, holding on to lifetime resentments, real, or imagined– just like a petulant female. Black men do not practice “delayed gratification,” nor do they have the self-discipline displayed by the higher races–just like a woman. Black men have never created a civilization–just like a woman. I have observed that in relationships involving black males, and white females, there is feeding off of the emotions of the black, on the part of the white female, along with a display of masochism. The core of the black male, and white female relationship is that she gets a lifetime girlfriend with a cock.
Black men do not practice “delayed gratification,” nor do they have the self-discipline displayed by the higher races–just like a woman.
Interesting. We have no self-discipline, but are beating you out in medical school admissions. What does that say about your intelligence relative to ours?
What does it say about the medical profession?
Medicine has always been full of charlatans. In some periods even the field itself is charlatanic.
“Charlatanic.” I like that.
What does it say about the medical profession?
Why don’t you tell me? Let me guess. A sob story about affirmative action or something?
https://medschoolinsiders.com/pre-med/surprising-med-school-stats/
Had a hand in the MRI team.
You know, I’m a feminist at heart and don’t agree with your post, but I have to admit, don’t blacks and women behave similarly in the road as drivers? They are both bad drivers. They both use the car as an attempt to bully other people, ie not letting you in during traffic, etc. they both give you a really hard time if you make an error…whereas white men are typically laid back and respectful. It’s as though the car is their chance to be on equal footing with white males and they really get a kick out of rubbing it in!
There are certain subtle differences in their behavior too. Blacks like to bully you out of the fast lane by tailgating with bright lights all the time, whereas white women seldom do that.
They are both bad drivers.
The statistics tell another story. I would think that the best indication of who is a “bad driver” is who is most likely to kill someone behind the wheel of a car. Men are twice as likely to do that. Women are slightly more likely to cause minor traffic accidents, but I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if that isn’t explained by the fact that women are more likely to have the distraction of numerous children in the car.
https://www.vox.com/2015/5/23/8645479/crash-driving-safety-men-women
Has it ever occurred to you that you’re just imagining this?
They both use the car as an attempt to bully other people, ie not letting you in during traffic, etc. they both give you a really hard time if you make an error…whereas white men are typically laid back and respectful. It’s as though the car is their chance to be on equal footing with white males and they really get a kick out of rubbing it in!
Has it ever occurred to you that you’re just imagining this?
A great deal of driving is outsourced by women to men. Several women I know have drink driving records and suspended licences too. Very few men in my circles have lost licences. Could just be the types I know but anecdotally the guy in relationships drives and the women who do often have history of suspended licences.
…but anecdotally…
Yes I know. Your sort only likes facts and statistics that go your way. I’ve been dealing with it for years now.
Stereotypes? How can a commenter transform a thread about masochistic black homoerotic fantasists into a bullshit narcissistic debate about women driver? That’s how I guess. Well played there stereotypical pseudo-female avatar!
I lived in Los Angeles for 30 years and drove all over the state. I don’t think most (white) women are really bad drivers. Men are much more aggressive on the road. I don’t say this to kick up dirt between the sexes (not at all). But I will concede that we gals, unfortunately, are the worst back seat drivers. It’s an art and a skill to reign that impulse in. Some of us do reign it in and some of don’t. I’m sure it was the same with the horse and buggy. Some things don’t change.
Whenever I see a white Nissan or a white Mercedes careening in and out of traffic or going through a red light (sometimes just cruising through a red light), I think to myself, “I’ll bet the driver is black, and he or she is probably high on marijuana, too.”
I mean to say, the black drivers in L.A. are reckless and arrogant. Like nothing could ever happen to them (this over 30 years of observation, not just the past five or six years of social mayhem). They really just don’t care.
You know, in the past, I would never have made such sweeping generalizations about anyone. But with blacks, they really are walking stereotypes, and I don’t just mean the ones from the hood. They are obsessed with their sexuality, their hair, and their blackness. They are exhausting to be around.
I wasn’t the first person to notice the effeminacy of black men; I built my generalizations on the observations of (((Otto Weininger,))) who wrote “Sex And Character,” a philosophical tome about women in general. Otto Weininger went on to commit suicide, which Adolf Hitler said, was brought on by his realization that the jewish race was feminine. A good book with many worthwhile insights, I recommend it.
That “r” in Quinr should have been a “t.”
This is very old crap. Being an old mofo I remember Leroi Jones AKA Amiri Baraka saying, “all white men are raised to be faggots.” And of course Nasheed copied a lot of this horseshit out Eldrudge Cleever’s ‘Muh Soul on Ice’.
I encountered an individual on Gab who claimed to be ‘bisexual’ and a ‘white nationalist’ and was bragging about how a lesbian couple of their acquaintance were better White Nationalists than straight couples because they were pumping out babies (not exactly clear how, though).
This may be a sign of the shape of things to come. Some LGBTQLMNOP may try to parley their White racial basis into the movement rather than face the night alone.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall 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
Edit your comment