Counter-Currents
Kevin Alfred Strom
2,416 words
Who Said It: Elon Musk, Voltaire, or Kevin Alfred Strom?
To learn that Nazis don’t rule over you, all you have to do is say bad things about Nazis. Nothing bad will happen to you.
Last weekend, Twitter CEO Elon Musk found himself swirling in another maelstrom of online fart-rage after he retweeted a meme falsely attributing the following statement to French Enlightenment philosopher Voltaire:
To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.
The meme included an image of a giant hand crushing a huddled group of people. The image allegedly originated from an anti-child labor cartoon from the 1910s. Underneath the image was the phrase “We need to rise up against children with leukemia.” As far as I can tell, Musk was attempting to make some kind of joke about how children with leukemia are unreasonably powerful.
The leukemia angle was immediately ignored. Instead, it took approximately one metric jiffy for people to make it all about Jews.
For starters, there is no evidence that Voltaire ever said anything remotely like the “true rulers” quote that has been perennially attributed to him, just like he never said, “I disapprove of what you say, but I defend to the death your right to say it.”
In 2022, Thomas Massie, a Republican Congressman from Kentucky, was widely scolded and subjected to the humiliating ritual of scornful public fact-checking for tweeting the same image that Musk tweeted last weekend.
In 2019, actor John Cusack had tweeted the same image, but with the embellishment of a blue Star of David on the sleeve of the giant hand that’s coming down from the sky to squash the hapless crowd, along with the phrases “Follow the money” above the picture and “Isn’t it obvious?” under it. At first, Cusack defended the tweet, claiming he was merely criticizing Israeli atrocities against Palestinians. Then he blamed a “bot” for posting it, and then, when that alibi wasn’t working, he claimed he’d “mistakenly retweeted an alt-right account,” adding:
It’s clear that even if it was Israel’s flag & even if you don’t have [an] anti-Semitic bone in your body, it is still an anti-Semitic cartoon. Because it deploys anti Jewish stereotypes. . . . I [retweeted] and quickly deleted an image that’s harmful to both Jewish and Palestinian friends, and for that I’m sorry.
What are these “anti-Semitic bones” of which he speaks? Where do they come from, and how do people wind up with them in their bodies? Even more disturbingly, who’s putting them there?
Suggesting that Jews aren’t really powerful, that they don’t rule over anybody, and that everyone is free to criticize them with impunity, Australian Senator Cory Bernardi was forced through the social-media meat grinder in 2015 for again attributing the quote to Voltaire. Unlike Cusack, Bernardi made no mention of Jews or Israel, but this didn’t spare him from having to endure a pro-Jewish struggle session.
So if Voltaire wasn’t the source of the original quote, and if the original quote didn’t mention Jews anyway, why does anyone who requotes it get accused of anti-Semitism, besides the quite uncomfortable and bitterly ironic fact that these continual moral panics surrounding the quote only serve to reinforce the idea that you’re not allowed to criticize Jews?
It’s because the passage on which the original quote is based came from Kevin Alfred Strom, a member of William Luther Pierce’s iteration of the National Alliance and a founder of National Vanguard, which was based in what has become the notoriously Nazi-unfriendly town of Charlottesville, Virginia. The relevant passage, which I’ve highlighted in bold, was part of Strom’s “American Dissident Voices” radio broadcast from August 14, 1993 titled “All America Must Know the Terror That is Upon Us”:
To determine the true rulers of any society, all you must do is ask yourself this question: Who is it that I am not permitted to criticize? We all know who it is that we are not permitted to criticize. We all know who it is that it is a sin to criticize. Sodomy is no longer a sin in America. Treason, and burning and spitting and urinating on the American flag is no longer a sin in America. Gross desecration of Catholic or Protestant religious symbols is no longer a sin in America. Cop-killing is no longer a sin in America — it is celebrated in rap “music.” The degradation of beautiful young girls in disgusting pornography is no longer a sin in America. The killing by the multiple millions of the next generation in the womb is no longer a sin in America. But anti-semitism is the ultimate sin in America. But as things get worse and worse, we are losing our fear of this silly word. We all know who it is that controls the wealth of our nation through their exchanges and counting-houses in New York. We all know who it is that has deformed the minds of two generations of Americans with their television programs.
Thirty years later, the indefatigable Strom is still plugging away at his American Dissident Voices broadcast and is the media director of a revived National Alliance.
You can buy Jim Goad’s The Redneck Manifesto here.
Nearly all of the mainstream media fact-checking outlets who correctly attribute the misattributed Voltaire quote to a paraphrase of Strom’s original passage wasted no time referring to Strom as a “neo-Nazi” and a “Holocaust denier.”
Since Hitler’s Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei ceased to exist after 1945, and since I am an obsessive nitpicker regarding factual matters, I’m unsure what is meant when any post-1945 figure is referred to as a “neo-Nazi” or simply a “Nazi,” but as far as I can tell, it means “someone who suggests you’re allowed to criticize Jews.”
The same goes for the blunt term “Holocaust denier,” which in modern parlance always seems to mean someone who makes sweeping statements such as “it never happened.” I’ve never run across someone who says that Hitler loved Jews, that Hitler’s policies were Jew-friendly, or that the Nazis didn’t kill any Jews during the Second World War. At most, these “Holocaust deniers” may allege that fewer than six million Jews died during the war. They may question the methods used to kill them, such as whether they were killed in gas chambers. Or even if they’re willing to say that exactly six million Jews were killed, and all of them were killed in gas chambers, they might say that these ideas are being used to silence and punish any criticism of one Jew, all Jews, or even the idea that the people who now call themselves Jews are not the blood descendants of the ancient Hebrews. Or even if you say something as benign as “Hey, wait a minute — it wasn’t only Jews who died in the Second World War,” you run the risk of being called a “Holocaust denier.” Thus, since I’ve never encountered anyone who seriously says “Nothing bad happened to Jews in the Second World War,” I feel compelled to deny the existence of “Holocaust denial” as the term is currently constructed.
But once you are slandered as a “Holocaust denier,” it appears obvious that not only are people allowed to criticize you, they’re allowed and even encouraged to deny your basic humanity or even your right to exist.
Being called a “Holocaust denier” or a “Nazi” these days is akin to being called a “child molester.” And this brings us to that other thing about Kevin Alfred Strom. The first line in Wikipedia’s page on National Vanguard reads as follows:
National Vanguard is an American white nationalist, neo-Nazi organization based in Charlottesville, Virginia, founded in 2005 by convicted sex offender Kevin Alfred Strom and former members of the National Alliance.
Wikipedia’s bio of Strom mentions that he’s a neo-Nazi in the first paragraph and shows the judiciousness and elegant sense of restraint to wait until the second paragraph before it notes:
In April 2008, Strom was sentenced to 23 months in prison for possession of child pornography.
A neo-Nazi and a pedophile? He must be the worst person who ever lived!
Now, I shouldn’t have to explain that under the current cultural rules, one risks the appearance of being an apologist for both the ritual murder of Jews and for child pornography merely by suggesting there may be more to the story, but I feel compelled to explain that’s exactly what the current cultural rules are. And although I’ve never claimed to be a mind-reader, my guts tell me that most people are aware of the fact that this is how the rules are, that you are not permitted to criticize certain groups or historical narratives without facing social and personal devastation, and that all of this adds up to the uncomfortable fact that whether or not Kevin Alfred Strom is a neo-Nazi or a pedophile whose skeleton is composed entirely of anti-Semitic and child-molesting bones, it seems foolish both to dispute the accuracy of his notorious statement and to publicly state that his notorious statement seems accurate. That’s exactly how poisonous and insane the current climate is. The fact that so many online commenters choose to remain anonymous is a tacit admission that the current climate is, without question, poisonously insane.
On Strom’s personal website, he does a deep dive into the “more to the story” angle regarding his criminal conviction. He states that Judge Norman Moon — who was also the judge who lowered the civil judgments against the defendants in the Sines v. Kessler case regarding 2017’s ill-fated Unite the Right rally — dismissed other charges against Strom of child enticement and witness tampering without even having to hear a word from Strom’s defense. He goes into extensive detail documenting how his ex-wife — whom he’d recorded demonstrating what he calls “violent and threatening behavior” — was sleeping with a member of the federal “Joint Terrorism Task Force” that initially seized the computer on which the offending images were said to have been found. He links to his statement to the court that he gave during his plea bargain that stipulated the only thing to which he was pleading guilty was inadvertently downloading, and then immediately deleting, the images. I very strongly suggest you read all three links in this paragraph before commenting below. Either Strom is an exceedingly brilliant liar, or he makes a very strong case in his defense.
I’ve never interacted with Kevin Alfred Strom. All I’d ever known about him before this past week was that he was a member of Pierce’s National Alliance and the author of that quote which is perennially misattributed to Voltaire and which will now probably be misattributed to Elon Musk for the next 100 years.
A few months ago, when I wrote about El Salvador’s president rounding up suspected gang members and imprisoning them during blind trials, a lot of commenters cheered this phenomenon but seemed to miss my point that the suspected — not confirmed, merely accused and convicted in private — gangsters were being crammed into tiny cages not on substantial murder charges, but of vague allegations of “terrorism.”
As our doddering Chief Executive recently told a graduating class at a historically black college, he and his Justice Department think that “the most dangerous terrorist threat to our homeland is white supremacy.”
I had thought it was a comedian who said, “A jury is 12 people who are too stupid to get out of jury duty,” but according to a single anonymous source on Reddit, it was National Basketball Association player Charles Barkley’s attorney, so don’t quote me on that. But consider the truth in that saying, regardless of whoever said it. Also consider how negatively charged the modern atmosphere is toward alleged “white supremacists.” No matter your personal feelings about Kevin Alfred Strom’s statements, criminal record, or physiognomy, it seems that the primary factor in his lifelong blacklisting is that he dared to criticize people who he seemed to feel ruled over him.
Also consider that one day — perhaps not in the distant future — you may be dragged into court on what you think are absolutely fraudulent “terrorism” charges merely for comments you anonymously made online. You may also face a jury completely composed of illiterate morons who judge things not based on the facts in the case, but on how you look — and to them, your clean suit and crisp, well-oiled haircut may make you look like a “Nazi” to them.
Of course, other things happened last week. Among them was the reemergence of a 2020 video clip where the former CEO of Chick-fil-A — a fast-food chain that was formerly a conservative darling due to the fact that it had once taken a stance against gay marriage — is shown shining a black rapper’s tennis shoes and stating that white Americans should approach blacks with a “sense of humility, a sense of shame, [and] a sense of embarrassment.”
Last week, The Telegraph also revealed that Cambridge University’s Department of Anglo-Saxon, Norse, and Celtic (ASNC), in its rush to foist an “anti-racist” narrative upon its gullible student body, now actively “seeks to dismantle the basis of myths of nationalism — that there ever was a ‘British’, ‘English’, ‘Scottish’, ‘Welsh’ or ‘Irish’ people with a coherent and ancient ethnic identity — by showing students just how constructed and contingent these identities are and always have been.”
In Germany, “chaotic court scenes” erupted and “protestors clashed with police” after members of an “anti-fascist” group received prison sentences for violent attacks on suspected “neo-Nazis” between 2019 and 2020. It may mark the largest German prosecution of anti-Nazi violence since the legal takedown of the so-called Baader-Meinhof Gang of the 1970s through the 1990s.
Also, Muslims are starting to gain a foothold in Japan, and one of them was caught on camera defacing a Shinto shrine.
But, since I’m permitted to calls ’em as I sees ’em, I spent most of this week’s column focusing on Elon Musk, Voltaire, Kevin Alfred Strom, and the possible ramifications that misinformation and moral hysteria may one day have upon my readers.
* * *
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.
29 comments
Strom is of course correct: those who rule do not tolerate criticism. It really is an observation worthy of Voltaire. And whoever attributed it to Voltaire was a master troll long before trolling was cool.
Greg, forgive me for being slightly off-topic, but what happened to that outstanding article that Counter-Currents posted about a week ago called “Destroy the Fake Right?”
It was literally the best article I’ve ever seen here, and it literally disappeared overnight after it was posted!
if there’s any way you can upload it again, I would be super grateful! I want to share it with a lot of people I know
The author wanted it removed.
Perhaps it started with George Lincoln Rockwell who mentored Dr. Pierce who in turn mentored Strom. Rockwell touches on this topic at 17:35
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ikjbUVEdyM
Interesting back story to Strom. Pete Townsend from The Who downloaded under age porn or images a few years ago and his defence was he was writing up a piece about it. He seemed to get away with it and it all blew over. Townsend is I believe one of the tribe.
Townsend is as English as they come. He got away with it because he’s a celebrity.
Britain’s Chosen are particularly hard to identify compared to America’s, as virtually none of them retained their kooky surnames and they have been aggressively intermarrying with the English aristocracy for over a century. I would dare say that England is the most ethnically Jewish country in Europe, and its become impossible to tell a dreary lopsided Englishman from a dreary lopsided 6th generation Hebrew mischling.
The most ethnically jewish country in Europe would be Spain where it’s estimated that around 20% of the population have some jewish blood. I’m not an anglophile but there’s been almost no mixing between the english and jews.
What you say may be true. But aren’t the Spanish Jews Sephardic rather than Ashkenazi and isn’t that quite a difference?
Many Spaniards supposedly have about 20% Sephardic ancestry, but they don’t buy wholesale, don’t get belligerent, don’t use black people as pawns, and don’t whine about and/or deconstruct the hell out of Spanish society. Spaniards are not good with money and they eat a lot of pork. So much for their 20% Sephardic ancestry.
Maybe it would help dissipate calls of antiSemitism if it was understood that Christians and Muslims are controlled opposition enablers of a one world order run out of Jerusalem because they inherited their one God worship from the Jews who cobbled together various ideas as they separated themselves from Sumeria and then were taught Kabbalah when they were turned into bureaucrats by King Cyrus of Babylon so he wouldn’t have to fight them?
I understand that this would upset people and disrupt the Patriot movement but it would make it clear we’re not just focusing on people who identify as Jewish.
We’re talking about Zionism which is as much a British Christian thing as a Jewish thing. We’re talking about confronting fans of Trump who deny he is putting Israel first.
We need to confront Alex Jones for hiring people like Adam King, who openly claims to be a super spy who has worked for the IDS.
I don’t hate Jews or anyone. However, I do know that you can watch videos where these Kabbalah rabbis claim that Christianity is a successful controlled opposition conspiracy where even non Jews see Jesus as the King of the Jews they see as their savior.
These people claim they are God’s chosen people. That they are sent from another dimension to save Earth from us.
Holocaust is a Jewish idea as part of their tradition of animal sacrifice.
The Nazis and the Zionists worked hand in hand to create Israel.
The Jews declared war on Germany for daring to have their own economy based on their control of labor and business via the state.
We’re already labelled terrorists for defending our right to exist outside this cult so we should be more pro-active and move toward some kind of tribal alternative worldwide and stand with Africans as they are the last to be modernized yet their land is rich in material wealth and the race is on to dominate them by the larger national forces.
While all this info seems to .ean this is all more hopeless as I’m now conflicting with Christians and Muslims along with Jews but it has always been a few who lead many. I do think Jews like Barbara Spectre are correct when they say they will be hated for asserting their Jewish supremacist view that they are the only people qualified to rule.
I do agree that they are the most successful at ruling with deceit and that we are just as evil for being such sheeple so easily mislead.
This is a myth that many ultra-Conservatives, Libertarians, Trad Caths, Orthodox Christians, and some anti-White Leftists (who see Israelis as White colonialist oppressors) repeat endlessly.
The Nazis encouraged Jewish emigration from Germany until the sea lanes became closed during the war; they did not work hand-in-hand to create Israel.
After Hitler became Chancellor, Jews were defined by German law as someone having more than three Jewish grandparents ─ or two Jewish grandparents and practicing Judaism (or Communism) or being married to a Jew.
The Nuremberg Laws from 1933-35 removed Jews from professional positions of influence like professorships and the civil service where they dominated, and stripped them of German citizenship. The Nuremberg Laws also banned most mixed-marriages. German Jews were therefore German nationals but no longer full German citizens.
NS Germany did not have “GPS Citizenship” like the United States after the 1965 Hart-Celler Act, where any refugee gets full citizenship and a passport if Mom gave birth on the right side of the border.
The Nazis did not really care if Jews went to Palestine or not, but Hitler noted in Mein Kampf ─ in a crucial passage on “Zionism” in the chapter on Nation and Race, that Jews really did NOT want to go to Palestine to LIVE there, but just to establish and maintain an international staging ground with the diplomatic and political sovereignty of a nation that could coordinate their globalist mischief. Most Jews prefer to live as favored minorities inside wealthy Gentile host nations.
This is perhaps the most instructive bit on Zionism ever written.
Hitler would not have been surprised in the least that, for example, Russian Refuseniks during the Cold War left the Soviet Union for Israel and usually wound up in the United States.
Hitler was aware that most “Chalutzim” from Poland or Germany had very little appetite for “pioneering” and fighting for their own country, but would somehow end up in New York, Chicago or Hollywood, where (golly!) they would continue their anti-German agitation.
Ashkenazi Jews have historically hated Russians, Poles, and Germans in that order.
After the defeat of Poland and the fall of Paris in the early part of WWII, the Germans were now besotted with millions of even more alien Ostjuden, so there were some negotiations with Vichy to deport Jews to Madagascar, where they might have had a realistic chance to pioneer a new nation and farm their own soil ─ which was what Zionist propaganda claimed they wanted.
Jerusalem is a Holy City for the three monotheistic faiths, so giving Palestine/Israel to the Jews was always problematical at best. The imperial British actually tried to give it to both nationalistic Arabs and Jews after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire with the First World War.
But with the Axis not having control of the seas during the war, no Jewish colonization scheme to Madagascar or anywhere else was possible even if that is what Zionists wanted (which they did not). The Zionists only wanted the Holy Land, but not necessarily to live there.
Hitler therefore decided to put off the so-called Jewish Question until after the war, and to intern and press-gang as many as possible for forced-labor, since the Jews would be deemed a Fifth Column and a security threat anyway. SS police chief and wartime head of Interpol, Heinrich Himmler thought this would kill two birds with one stone, but most prisoner labor is unskilled and of dubious economic value at best. The Germans had few other options for pouring concrete and digging bombproof bunkers, such as at Nordhausen where the sick barracks were bombed by the Americans late in the war.
The fear that neutral Vichy might even have fleeting use of sea lanes was so unthinkable to Winston Churchill who wanted to punish the French for their 1940 armistice that he ordered the Royal Navy to attack the neutral French fleet berthed at Oran in French Algeria, killing about 1,300.
I majored in History at the University, and I believe I can attest that rarely do any students who study infamy in World War II ever hear about Churchill’s Attack on Mers-el-Kébir.
I think the notion that it was the Nazis that gave us Zionism or Israel is E. Michael Jones-tier nonsense.
🙂
The attack on the Vichy Navy was defensible given the war was being fought to win. The new French regime was broadly aligned with the Germans and it would have been foolhardy to leave a fleet in being so close to the Pillars of Hercules. Perhap Churchill waa encouraged by his handlers as a statement of revenge. Of course a general peace ought already to have been negotiated by that time had Europeans been in control of their own destiny.
I acknowledge that war is messy and that superpowers will always try to absorb neutrals and to undermine their sovereignty in an attempt to prevent them trading with the enemy or operating independent fleets and military bases.
Grand Admiral Erich Raeder was sentenced to Life imprisonment at the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg for his role in thwarting the First Lord of the Admiralty’s (Churchill) plans to use Norwegian airfields and mine Norwegian waters to cut Germany off from trade with Sweden and extend the Allied blockade.
Before the British could install their own air and naval bases, the Germans and their weak Kriegsmarine beat them to the punch and swept through Denmark and into Norway, thus securing German use of these areas to trade ores and foodstuffs and install bases of their own. Churchill knew from Enigma decrypts and other facts that the weak German Navy never posed any serious threat of Albion invasion, and his career as Prime Minister reflected this certitude ─ especially if the Americans ultimately came on board.
The United States was ostensibly neutral at the time the French fleet was attacked by the British at Oran, and the Germans were scrupulously avoiding contact with their ships, which were increasingly aggressive.
U-552 Skipper Erich Topp was court martialed for sinking the USS Reuben James. His defense was that he thought it was a British ship because it was escorting war convoys and depth-charging German submarines.
I recently re-read the 1947 memoirs of Air Chief Marshall Sir Arthur “Bomber” Harris. At the end of a long military career, the head of RAF Bomber Command would have preferred to go back to colonial Rhodesia rather than fight the Germans again. Harris strongly denies most of the sanguine sentiments attributed to him, and that he was only trying to find a better way to take the fight to the enemy besides the meat-grinder of trench warfare and the World War I continental blockade which (by his figures) caused 800 thousand deaths from starvation.
I agree with “Butcher” Harris that the bombing of Germany was (at least initially) “defensible,” as well as General Curtis LeMay’s bombing of Japan. General LeMay went on to create the Strategic Air Command and later became the Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, who before retiring in 1965 was a critic of the Kennedy and Johnson Administrations who wanted to escalate an “insurgent war” in Vietnam against much military advice.
To digress a little, I admire Gen. Curtis LeMay, who ran for Vice President on George Wallace’s segregationist ticket in 1968, which my parents voted for. It was the last time that a third-party ticket ever got any Electoral Votes in the United States, which will probably never happen again.
In a speech at the 1978 Airpower Symposium, General LeMay gave a very candid speech noting that had the Americans lost the war, he would have been deemed a War-Criminal. I was a Civil Air Patrol cadet officer at the time and got an early publication of the symposium. LeMay also noted that more bomb ordnance was dropped on Vietnam during the Kennedy/Johnson insurgency than was dropped in all of WWII, meaning that Airpower was misapplied and this was known from the start.
General LeMay is usually the subject of the media fearmongering narrative that the only the new “Wise Men” like Kennedy and his Texan integrationist stooge Johnson, and their Secretary of Defense Robert Strange McNamara could avoid war, especially nuclear war.
These blockade mortality figures are controversial but they don’t even count the effects of the forced rationing upon neutrals who otherwise might have traded with the Germans and their sympathizers. The British medical journal Lancet controversially estimated in 1995 that UN economic sanctions against Iraq led to an excess child mortality of over 500 thousand.
I think it is important to realize that wars are rarely “clean” and that even strategic weapons like blockades are hugely destructive to children and other living things. The Victors tend to be heroes rather than war-criminals.
I agree that if we can try to avoid double standards that a case can be made for the dastardly Royal Navy attack. However, the Vichy fleet was not in any way under Hitler’s control and really was neutral. Prior to Pearl Harbor, the U.S. Navy was not.
🙂
Argumentum ad infinitum and at the end you slip the same point in. I had to laugh. Hitler didn’t directly control the French fleet in the same way AIPAC doesn’t directly control Congress, except Hitler was a better bloke. As for calling the French neutral at this point, along with England they started the war. Nine months on they’d just capitulated, then changed leadership, now noticeably more nationalistic, less cosmopolitan, and they just thought they’d sit on ‘bar’ for a while before deciding which way to roll? Well, it was worth a try. After an ultimatum to yield the ships, refused with typical Galllic pride, the last major naval action between England and France resulted in the loss of 1300 men of our race. From a military standpoint it was the right course and unlike area bombing the casualties were not civilians. If only Britain, Germany and France could have patched things up before the Spring of 1940.
I’d say he looks more like George Costanza with a bad toupée.
It’s basically impossible to trust the government if they say they found child porn or any other misdeeds on someone’s personal computer. Too easy to fake. Bottom line is that if the feds want to get you, they will. John Gotti is the perfect example. They gave a deal to a guy who murdered 19 people to get him. Planting porn is easy.
Thanks for being open to the story of what really happened to me. I agree with your overarching theme that the Establishment uses the mob and its passions to destroy dissidents, and as a tool as they corrupt the legal system.
I’m the media director of the National Alliance now, and have been for the ten years since William White Williams and I took the National Alliance in a Piercean direction again. We’re not only publishing and broadcasting, but we’re building an intentional White community, with families clustering around a hundred-acre or so central complex. We’re small so far, but I’m proud of the fact that we’ve been solemnizing marriages and bringing new White souls into the world. (One of those marriages, in 2019, was my own.) We’re building a research library and writers’ center. It’s a good use of my life.
I wake up every day and work for a great cause. And my sixth child, third in this marriage, is set to be born next month. Life is good.
Your website dedicated to the works of the late Dr. Revilo Oliver is of value beyond any measure. I will refrain from extolling or quoting Dr. Oliver at length because I would become carried away; I will say, however, that many, many “conservatives” or “right-wingers” would be just as horrified by the truths he wrote as would be people at an ADL fund-raiser. As I do not know if your personal website is still valid as a way of contacting you, I will say that discovering the writings of Dr. Oliver has been, without exaggeration, one of the important points in my life.
..thanks for your excellent work! We are entering the last stage of the “Age of the Kali Yuga”! ..this is the storm before the calm!”
“man is a god in ruins” ..Emerson
Greg you should interview Joel Davis from Australia. He is consistently putting out intelligent content as well as being an activist in the field.
https://t.me/joeldavisx/2233
I have a special interest in Strom, since I started becoming more WN by listening to American Dissident Voices in the 1990s, and Strom was on the radio and writing as much as Pierce, and I was greatly impressed by his style. I especially recall a broadcast where he described his youth, and I thought it very strong and heartfelt. Like he said, Americans were good but very naive. His voice and passion was always a torch for me.
As for quotes, these things have to be checked, and mistaking something written by someone famous is very typical. Just have to do your homework, but used to, it was no big deal, but now there is a fanged sharpness to any kind of political discussion.
I’m glad to hear Strom is doing well, and that the terrible accusations he had to endure seem to have subsided, and I hope that reorganization of the NA will improve. It was a very good support for me, and I congratulate Strom on his family. New birth is always a victory.
I understood there was a problem years ago getting all of the works of Revilo P. Oliver saved and cataloged. Perhaps Mr. Strom can inform us if this has been accomplished.
I’m unsure what is meant when any post-1945 figure is referred to as a “neo-Nazi” or simply a “Nazi,” but as far as I can tell, it means “Someone who suggests you’re not allowed to criticize Jews.”
Jim, I love your writing, but I am confused by this statement. Wouldn’t the accusation make more sense without the word “not?”
The characterization of “someone who suggests you’re not allowed to criticize Jews” could apply to the ADL, or literally just about anyone in mainstream society.
The point was that Musk and others are getting the treatment just for referencing a meme which obliquely suggests that you might not be able to criticise ‘those who rule over you’, leading by ‘logical’ inference to them ( Musk et al ) being, potentially or actually, decried as ‘Neo-Nazis’.
Jim, I love your writing, but I am confused by this statement. Wouldn’t the accusation make more sense without the word “not?”
You are correct, sir! Fixed.
“It may mark the largest German prosecution of anti-Nazi violence since the legal takedown of the so-called Baader-Meinhof Gang of the 1970s through the 1990s.”
Baader-Meinhof / RAF were anti-Nazi, but not first and foremost. They were first and formeost Marxists who wanted to destroy capitalist society by any means nessacary. They were anti-Nazi mainly in that they assoiated that with their parents’ and grandparents’ generations. If their parents had been Zoroastrians they probably would have hated that instead.
In a weird “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” the RAF were trained for urban war by PLO in the Jordan. PLO are hardcore Muslims who didn’t like that unmarried RAF men and women were sleeping together, and that the RAF were drinking alcohol, during the training. PLO are an objectivly secular organazition, but has a lot of devout Muslim members.
Anyone wanting to check out the latest Jewish “outsmart the stupid goy” theatre, check out the new streaming show Jury Duty. A couple Jewish producers and a multiethnic array of actors join forces to pull an elaborate prank on a nice-guy white male. Hard to ignore the symbolism here, especially considering the actor portraying the judge is a retired Jewish lawyer.
It’s clever and entertaining, as Jewish productions can be, but ultimately immoral because it preys on trust. I also assume they used the “Borat Trick” to shield themselves from a lawsuit: pausing the production at a critical moment to have the dupe hurriedly sign a release form, with no time allotted to read the fine print.
Just to clarify… BernardI is extremely PRO ISRAEL
https://m.facebook.com/alanjonesaustralia/videos/cory-bernardi-on-israel-folau/351931318806050/
>> Antipodean wrote:
>> “Argumentum ad infinitum and at the end you slip the same point in. I had to laugh. Hitler didn’t directly control the French fleet in the same way AIPAC doesn’t directly control Congress, except Hitler was a better bloke. […] From a military standpoint it was the right course and unlike area bombing the casualties were not civilians. If only Britain, Germany and France could have patched things up before the Spring of 1940.” <<
The fact is that Hitler could have taken all of France if he had wanted to in 1940, but he was thinking ahead diplomatically. France had never been too enthusiastic about declaring war in the first place.
The analogy of the Vichy fleet which fled to Oran being like AIPAC is absurd.
Hitler would have liked to use the Vichy fleet to bolster the weak German Navy, but at best they were unreliable. The Axis Italians could be handled a little better, as some of them were loyal, but it was still like herding cats. Field Marshal Kesselring gives credit there where credit is due.
Yes, one could say that the British High Command punishing the French fleet for the Armistice by their treacherous attack was “correct” because it guaranteed a continuation of the war ─ which the Entente had always wanted. Whether the machinations of the Entente were truly in the interests of Britain and France, however, I would question. These schemes certainly were not in the interests of the Poles.
This fresh Infamy of turning Royal Navy guns onto the rump French fleet also discouraged any possibility of multipolar negotiations. Again, Hitler could have taken all of France in 1940 if he had wanted to.
Given that the Roosevelt Administration was never anything other than a belligerent, even when the United States was neutral, any extreme hegemonic position could be taken by Albion, whose armies had just skedaddled from the Continent with nothing but their soggy boots.
Churchill probably underestimated what the costs would be for further war, but Roosevelt knew very well ─ as he wanted the USA to inherit the British Empire and one day turn the Anglosphere into Global ZOG. And this new world order would not be run out of London counting houses as Churchill probably imagined.
Fresh atrocities do tend to discourage any inconvenient peace sentiments, which is why there were full bombardments ordered on the next Christmas Day after the 1914 holiday truce.
It is possible that Hitler was thinking ahead diplomatically and was not overly enthusiastic about butchering the British on the beach ─ but I doubt such sentiments determined his stop order.
Hitler never “allowed” the BEF to escape Dunkirk ─ he just did not have the luxury to prevent it militarily, considering that the invasion Schwerpunkt already had to redirect against Paris, and senior commanders like Field Marshal von Rundstedt were adamant that the Panzer spearheads had to pause briefly at Flanders to regroup before pursuing the BEF. I won’t go into that as we have already gone into argumentum ad infinitum.
Btw, Bomber Harris argued that it is not possible to completely keep civilians safe from the effects of war and that the Germans and British largely did so by evacuatng as many as possible from the citeis to the countryside. Of course, at some point a reevaluation of strategic bombing strategy became necessary which Harris never grasped ─ always thinking that his own bloodthirsty single-mindedness would eventually achieve victory.
I strongly reject your claim that the cowardly attack on the French fleet at Oran was necessary for victory. And being unnecessary force, it skirts the boundaries of a war-crime.
🙂
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