21 words / 5:58
Counter-Currents presents a new video of Greg Johnson’s essay “Honorable Defeatists,” about why White Nationalists love to engage in self-defeating behavior.
* * *
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.
- Third, Paywall members have the ability to edit their comments.
- Fourth, Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
16 comments
I love these articles in video form. Please keep up the good work.
Beautifully done, and the message is inarguable.
Will do. The next one will be “Restoring White Homelands.”
I definitely agree with @Doug. This is fantastic work, there are so many good articles here (also from other authors, especially classics, such as for example G. Faye, and generally all the other great names of the Radical Right), which should be made into films. It makes so much easier for us to visualise certain things and to remember them. And we need plenty of wisdom and motivation to confront the surrounding darkness.
We need to get content like this uploaded and spread around Twitter and Tiktok. I know they censor but the videos still get around.
Go ahead. Spread it around.
Well, I can’t argue with the point being made at all, but I also think part of the blame for that comes from within the movement itself. What I mean is, many (not all, but many) of us are big on identifying problems and issues in the culture and in society, but not so big on offering potential solutions. We’re like doctors who provide a perfect diagnosis but don’t have a treatment plan. I realize that’s a broad statement and, to be honest, I am guilty of it myself at times. Solutions seem in short supply in a country that has found a way to practice censorship without meeting the legal definition of censorship.
I’m not sure that I understand the point of this piece either. This is not meant as an accusation, but is this yet another Optics Debate or what?
I’ve been critical of Movement “optics” for about forty years now, ever since somebody decided it was a good look to respresent us as people with tatts and shaved heads that doubled either for overweight bikers hoisting warm suds at Sturgis or an “Aryan” prison gang from Hollywood central casting.
I don’t know who was responsible, but that this became the White Nationalist “uniform” was not a good call.
I’m never in favor of disparaging the White Working Class (see the 1867 Thomas Nast cartoon from Reconstruction when Whites were disfranchised and at the mercy of Carpetbaggers and Scalawags) but the Working Class should not be inappropriately fetishized either.
And I intensely dislike the Grug-brained mentality of “Propaganda of the Deed.” Let the smart people do the heavy thinking, okay. Otherwise that is how things like the idiotic 1984 assassination of the @ßhole Jew Denver radio commentator Alan Berg happen. I used to listen to him on the radio as far away as Idaho but that was not the way to deal with his views, caustic or otherwise.
I remember when David Duke decided that in order to make a serious political effort there was no way to escape the “ig-ner-unt White trash” optics (for lack of a better word) of the KKK in the 1970s, and he decided to wear a suit and show catty journalists that he could actually twirl pasta with a fork. Duke gained some electoral success and is a familiar name still.
From my school days I never agreed with their Protestant fundamentalism, but I respected their race-realism and had many fine debates and discussions with some old guard Klansmen in the days before the Internet when people actually sent letters to each other via inscrutable longhand. You could tell the ones who were not Federal informants because they did not advocate for violence.
I learned a great deal about things from people who were in the trenches; for example, what George Lincoln Rockwell was trying to do, and his theories about “legal psychological and political warfare.” He learned the hard way how Kosher Conservatism was bound to fail.
If I remember correctly, Rockwell’s 87 storm troopers were the only ones from the Right who actually showed up to protest Doctah King’s March on Washington sixty years ago. He jokingly said that they failed to stop the good peaceful Communists because they were missing a single Spartan at Thermopylae.
Rockwell was moving away from a Hollywood “Illinois Nazis” parody when he was assassinated in 1967. But notably, as late as the 1970s, even those with unpopular political views were not subject to Hate speech laws or codes. There were no taboo subjects of historical inquiry. That is nominally true even today but it must be vigilantly fought for.
In 1913, even President Wilson lauded the Klansman film Birth of a Nation. Along with Triumph of the Will, it is one of the greatest films ever made, although I might stop short of putting Mr. Lincoln into the beatified camp as the second George Washington, even if he was slain for his sins by a fanatic.
I argued a long time ago, when you could still buy Confederate flags in the Atlanta airport, that if Holocaust Denial got successfully banned in the USA, then “double-plus-ungood” Whites from the War Between the States (like my ancestors) would be the next “Little Eichmanns” on the chopping block.
Already, many of my colleagues sign all their professional correspondence with a line at the end begging the Injuns for forgiveness for taking their land “upon which we sit.” My Pioneer ancestors would be deeply ashamed of me if I ever did so.
Anyway, I don’t see what we are virtue-signaling against here. I have little personal regard for the super-Libertarian legacy (where all State power is bad including our own) that thinks that Bernie Bro Zoomers are a very fertile constituency for anything beyond getting edgy podcast subscriptions.
Every new generation thinks that they have all the answers and thinks that none of this was ever thought of before.
I could make a defensive historical case for each iteration of the KKK, but that would be mainly of academic interest, and maybe not of critical importance for modern WN.
However, I do strongly feel that IF the so-called Jewish Question is an issue at all for White Nationalism, THEN the Holocaust onslaught has to be intelligently addressed ─ especially by intelligent and qualified persons ─ and certainly independently of any Jewish fundraising.
🙂
https://www.rodoh.us/rodoh2020/img1/misc/tnast1867.jpg
It’s not such a problem. The original cultural Marxists did a remarkable job of criticizing society to death without having to make any proposals on what would work better.
As kgb assets they didn’t want to improve the society, they wanted to destroy it.
Are the WNs of this moment something different? Criticizing to the death and nothing else. Uhh, I forgot, other than give Eastern Europe to the poor little Russia. Because LGBTQ and globohomo. Good one.
I dare not to ask about the ethnicity of these cultural marxists. Certainly there were only a bunch of crazy lefties, there wasn’t any hidden racial agenda behind it.
I am scared less by a little infighting, I am scared by the lack of integrity of the debaters. What saddens and discourages are the cheap innuendos, the blatant lies, or reheating old kgb cooked gruel and selling it as cutting edge political analysis.
‘Better to be honorable loser than to be dishonorable winner’ (Codreanu).
If the jewish narrative of unique suffering in WW2 is a peripheral issue then why has so much legislative, litigative and rhetorical effort gone into defending it?
It is clearly something that they don’t want discussed. Should we politely defer to their wishes?
I’ve just watched it. Generally speaking: I agree with Greg, not always but mostly. But: when it comes to reasons for such behaviors: I think that most important are two: 1. General lack of knowledge & experience, and: 2. Even if we realise that we do something wrong, then it’s still easier for us to go the old wrong path, then to pick new one. Habits – also, if not especially, bad ones – are a powerful force.
*than to pick new one.
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.