Counter-Currents
4,166 words
Greg Johnson floated the idea of my writing an essay on Candace Owens being the Non-White Ally of 2023. I said no, because I think she is a snake. Has Candace Owens been saying good things lately? Has she been dabbling in Jewish-question territory, helping to bring some of our basic talking points to the mainstream and shifting the Overton window? I don’t deny that she has. But just because she has been doing some positive things lately does not mean that I am going to ignore a decade of cynicism, opportunism, ruthless careerism, lying, and jaw-dropping stupidity to bestow on her the official and much-coveted Trav Seal of Approval™.
Sometimes bad people do good work. I acknowledge that Richard Spencer’s debate with Sargon yielded positive results for the dissident Right. It kicked off the Internet BloodSports fad of 2018, and many pro-whites trace their red-pill journey back to that era of YouTube. But just because I concede that Richard Spencer did that one good thing does not mean that I therefore endorse Richard Spencer.
The problem with endorsing people is that you are then obligated to disavow them once they start saying and doing things that are indefensible. You can’t just quietly step away after an endorsement, because everyone is going to be nagging you by asking, “What do you think about what your boy did/said this week? Do you agree with that?” Even if you do then disavow such a person, you look like an idiot for ever having advocated for him in the first place — and the guy’s supporters are going to think you’re a traitor for changing your mind.
This is why I will not endorse Candace Owens. There is a high probability that she will say or do something extremely stupid in the future, and I don’t want to have that on my conscience when it happens. It is also my belief that she does not have any sincere convictions and is entirely a careerist in her motivations.
First, let’s address the elephant in the room: Candace Owens is black. That’s not my main issue with her, but it is also not a non-issue. Throughout the history of the dissident Right, there has occasionally been some debate as to what level of involvement non-whites should be allowed to have in the pro-white movement. What if a black guy sincerely believes in the cause of white survival and wants to help? What about mischlings? Are we going by the Nuremberg Laws? What if someone is half-white, but his work is amazing? Some hardliners might say that we must support only those who are completely white. Others might have more of a “big tent” philosophy. Others still might advocate a middle approach: non-whites can be in the audience, but not on the stage.
No one ever anticipated, however, that we would eventually be in the situation we are in now, where non-whites such as Candace Owens and Vivek Ramaswamy are the most prominent spokesmen of our talking points in the mainstream. While I generally lean pro-big tent, I find this somewhat problematic.
There is a saying which holds that “It took Nixon to go to China,” meaning that before Nixon there was no US President who was willing to give official recognition to Communist China because they were afraid that they’d be accused of being “soft on Communism.” Nixon’s anti-Communist bona fides were so unassailable, however, that he could get away with it. This is why there is probably some short-term value in having non-whites who are impervious to accusations of racism and white supremacy pushing our ideas into the mainstream. Candace Owens herself has said that she can say things that would get a white person cancelled, and she is certainly correct. But while this might be fine for the time being, it cannot be allowed to become the norm. One possible danger in this is that it can have a deradicalizing effect on whites, giving them false hope that multiculturalism is indeed workable. Thus, eventually Candace Owens, Vivek Ramaswamy, and their ilk will need to be pushed aside so that white people can start advocating for themselves.
It is my belief that Candace Owens was promoted by the GOP establishment as a deradicalizing agent. She is boomer catnip. Her job is to be a white-presenting, decent-looking-for-a-black-girl spokesman who repeats boomers’ opinions back to them. The entire point of Candace Owens’ #Blexit grift was to gaslight donors into believing that there was a lot more black support for Trump than there actually was. Jaden McNeil was at Turning Point USA when #Blexit was ongoing, and said that any black person who wanted to meet Trump could just ask TPUSA and that they would fly said black to Washington, DC to have his picture taken with Donald Trump. In 2020 there were delusional Trump cultists who were convinced that he was going to get a preposterous percentage of the black vote, and possibly win it. There are still people predicting Donald Trump will win the black vote in 2024. Candace Owens was a big part of that op.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s White Identity Politics here.
Some might say that “people can change.” Indeed, they can. And there are others such as Charlie Kirk and Matt Walsh who I think were red-pilled a while ago and were just waiting until it was safe to reveal their true power levels. I don’t begrudge them that, but with Candace Owens, it’s different. Her history is one of such naked opportunism and cynicism that no matter what she says, I still feel the need to remain on guard.
In her defense, Candace does seem to be something of a whitephile. Her parents came from the American Virgin Islands, and she grew up in an upper-middle-class gated community in Connecticut. I’ve heard that in her old social media posts, Candace talked about having some white ancestry by way of France. To borrow Tariq Nasheed’s term, Owens has no Foundation Black American ancestry, nor was she ever assimilated to that culture. She is also atypically non-ethnocentric for a black. She’s never dated a black guy in her life. Her entire romantic history since high school has been white guys, and her current husband is white. So if I am going to give Candace a thin sliver of the ol’ “benefit of the doubt,” I’ll say it is possible that Candace Owens may have some intuitive pro-white bias. She clearly prefers the company of whites to blacks. That’s fine, but knowing that makes her frequent playings of the race card seem all the more cynical, and her promotion by the GOP as an avatar for black America all the more disingenuous.
Now we are going to dive in to some Candace Owens lore. A lot of people don’t know that her story goes back a lot further than most people realize. So let’s step inside the Counter-Currents TARDIS and go back in time to where it all began.
Origin story
Candace Owens’ first brush with fame was in 2007, when she was a senior in high school. The story goes that one night, she received a series of racist prank voice messages. According to Owens, these messages included gratuitous use of racial slurs and one promise to kill her in a manner similar to how Martin Luther King was killed. The police were contacted and they were able to locate the perpetrators: a group of teenagers in a car. One teen was allegedly Candace’s ex-boyfriend, although Candace claims they were just friends of hers — one of whom was only 14. But most noteworthy is the fact that one of the kids happened to be the Governor’s son. Thus, it was a major local news story in Connecticut. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) even held a protest outside Candace’s school. The FBI was called in to confirm that Candace had not pulled off a hoax. Her family ultimately sued the school district and won $37,500 in damages.
This incident later caused some embarrassment for Candace following her 2017 conservative rebrand, as it was pure victim narrative and cancel culture. Owens would later attempt to recast the affair as a red-pilling event, saying that it was when she saw 14-year-old kids put through the meatgrinder and branded with the scarlet R which made her understand the evils of cancel culture. She would also attempt to dodge any responsibility for the affair, claiming that she had hated the attention and that the whole debacle had unfolded against her will. She claims that she had told a teacher about the hateful calls, and that the teacher then forced her to tell the Principal, who then called the police without her consent. I suppose some outside force also forced her family to sue the school district. As Owens later recalled:
If I was a Leftist or if I was a true Democrat, I would relish in victimhood. I would love that. I would say I’m black, I’m a woman, I can’t do anything, and it’s all your fault. That situation in high school would be the pinnacle of my life, but I hated it. I cowed away from it. It ate me alive, because I felt there was permanence in what was said about me.
This sentiment would seem to be at odds with her subsequent actions, when she did in fact attempt to carve out a career as a professional victim.
Social Autopsy: The doxing website
In 2016, Candace Owens set up a Kickstarter in hopes of raising $75,000 from likeminded liberals for the creation of a website called Social Autopsy, which she billed as an anti-cyberbullying website. You see, as a victim of cyberbullying herself, Owens wanted to make sure that no one else had to go through the same kind of traumatic experience. The website was to be a database of mean things that people have said about others online. If anyone saw someone engaging in “hate speech” on Facebook, for example, he could then create a profile for that person on Social Autopsy which would include their real name, location, school or place of work, as well as screenshots of the mean things they’ve said online.
Of this, Candace said:
The age of technology and social media has slowly disintegrated individual accountability, the consequences of which are devastating. We attach [people’s] words to their places of employment, and anybody in the entire world can search for them. What we are doing is figuratively lifting the masks up so nobody can hide behind, you know, Twitter handles or privatized profiles. It’s all real, and it’s all researchable. You can still say whatever you want to say on social media, but you have to be willing to stand by your words.
More alarmingly, Candace explicitly stated that you could create profiles of minors. This is of questionable legality. Thus, anyone would have been able to create a profile for a middle schooler who trolled about Hitler having done nothing wrong. This followed naturally from the premise that the site’s purpose was to prevent the kind of harassment that Owens had gone through in 2007.
Owens did not get the reaction from fellow liberals that she had anticipated. The Young Turks discussed the proposed website and thought it was a very bad idea. Owens was also approached around this time by one Zoe Quin, who was herself an anti-cyberbullying activist. Being the original bête noire of the Gamergate movement, Zoe Quin knew a thing or two about online harassment, as she had herself been harassed after her ex-boyfriend alleged that Quin’s woke video game Depression Quest received a favorable review from gaming website Kotaku because she was sleeping with the review’s author.
Quin claims that she approached Candace Owens with some concerns about Social Autopsy and pointed out the myriad ways in which her website could in fact make online harassment significantly worse. For example, SJW vigilantes could use the information they found on the site to dox people and contact their workplaces. As much as Owens would later deny that Social Autopsy was a “doxing site,” due to security holes in the website users on Kiwi Farms were able to access profiles due to security holes before the site went live. They proceeded to dox people just to prove that it could be done.
Zoe Quin was shocked by how ill-informed Owens was on the subject of cyber-harassment. Owens had never heard the term “doxing” before, nor had she heard of Gamergate. So uninformed about Gamergate was Owens that for a time, she appeared to be under the impression that Zoe Quin was the leader of Gamergate rather than its primary target. The exchanges between the two thus became more heated. As the controversy around Social Autopsy grew, Owens acquired a legion of detractors who bombarded her social media with messages of disapproval. Owens then accused Quin of orchestrating a troll campaign against her and proceeded to leak her correspondence with her. This brought Randi Lee Harper, another female game designer and Gamergate hate figure, into the fray.
Despite Owens being a liberal who had created a doxing website dedicated to fighting “hate speech,” her feud with Zoe Quin made her a darling with the Gamergate crowd, who were delighted to see a liberal black woman confirm their biases and make juicy accusations against the jezebel of game journalism. A poll on Kiwi Farms asked readers who they sided with, and Owens won with 81.3% of the vote. Gamergate grifters Milo Yiannopoulos and Mike Cernovich in turn offered Owens words of support.
Owens made one last stab at making it in the liberal sphere as a professional victim. She gave a TED Talk about online activism that came and went with little fanfare. After that, she disappeared from the Internet for nine months. When she came back, she would be a very different Candace Owens.
Red Pill Black
Candace reportedly spent the time brushing up on conservative talking points. She read books by Milo Yiannopoulos and Ann Coulter, as well as black conservatives such as Ben Carson and Thomas Sowell. She was preparing for a rebrand. On July 9, 2017, Owens debuted her new conservative persona, Red Pill Black, with a two-minute = second video entitled “Mom, Dad . . . I’m a Conservative,” a comedy sketch wherein she “came out” as a conservative to her parents (played by herself).
I’ll just put my cards on the table: I do not believe that this was a sincere conversion. I think this a case of someone who, having failed to break into the Left-wing establishment, was now pandering to Gamergaters, the only people who had hitherto given her any good press. Playing the victim didn’t work for her, but feuding with an SJW got her a lot of attention and goodwill, so she cynically and opportunistically leaned into that. Some people just want to be somebody and are not too particular as to how they get there.
Owens’ rebrand as a black conservative was enormously successful, and her subsequent rise was meteoric. After only a handful of videos, she had already landed interviews with Alex Jones, Stephen Crowder, Stephan Molyneux, and Paul Joseph Watson (who had only a year before made a video about her doxing site). In November of 2017, only four months after the first Red Pill Black video, Charlie Kirk appointed Owens as Turning Point USA’s “Director of Urban Engagement” — which is hilarious if you know anything about her distinctly un-urban upper-middle-class background.
Not everyone in the conservative YouTube sphere was so eager to welcome the newly-rebranded Owens, given that while she was then parading around as a Right-winger, she was still hellbent on getting Social Autopsy off the ground. Having been rejected by the Left, she was now attempting to fundraise off of boomer conservatives for her “anti-bullying website.” This was insane and made it hard to take her conversion seriously. It is understandable why a liberal would want to create a doxing site to stop hate speech, but surely a newly red-pilled person would understand that such a site would be weaponized against the Right far more than the Left.
Owens’ most effective critic was another black conservative who goes by the name of Tree of Logic. Tree of Logic is a former police officer who grew up in the ghettos of Washington, DC. Some on the dissident Right might remember her for her 2018 debates with David Duke and Richard Spencer, as well as the fact that she also infamously — and amusingly — worked part-time as a professional dominatrix. While Tree of Logic is a philo-Semite, she has a pretty good nose for bullshit, and has made some of the most devastating takedown videos I’ve ever seen.
Tree of Logic made two video exposés about Owens and Social Autopsy. It was a personal matter for Tree of Logic, because apparently the site had a profile on her that was going to become public after it launched. This was a security problem for her since, as an ex-police officer, it is not unheard-of for criminals released from prison to try to track down and kill the cop who had put them in jail. More videos followed from Andy Warski and No Bullshit which questioned the sincerity of Candace’s conversion as well as the madness of an alleged conservative creating a doxing site.
These exposés caused a backlash against Owens on Right-wing YouTube, and commenters made their feelings known with extreme frankness on social media. Owens would then claim that the backlash against her was being orchestrated by — wait for it — Richard Spencer (who she claimed was secretly working for the Democrats)! Her evidence for this was that Richard Spencer had tweeted out the Andy Warski and No Bullshit videos about Social Autopsy. Thus, rather than acknowledging that the backlash against her had been started by black female conservative Tree of Logic, Owens blamed it on evil White Nationalists. Owens had a habit of making up lies about her critics as well as about what their criticisms were about and where they were coming from.
Social Autopsy was set to automatically go live once the site reached 100,000 profiles. It was at 95,000 when Tree of Logic published her videos, and Owens, finally seeing the folly of the venture, at last pulled the plug on the operation. The controversy still lingered, and so Dave Rubin offered her a chance to debate the issue. But rather than debate Tree of Logic — who Owens claimed was a crackhead being paid to lie about her by shadowy figures — she chose to debate Blaire White, who had never made a video about her. Tree of Logic would have wiped the floor with her and her motives would have been harder to question, so she so chose Blaire White with the intention of using White’s trans status as a way of biasing the conservative viewing audience against her opponent. Owens spent much of the run-up to the debate, as well as the debate itself, misgendering Blaire White and referring to him as a man.
I first heard about Red Pill Black in early 2018, when she was first starting to get some serious buzz. She had started a YouTube page the year before and was already on the verge of breaking into the mainstream. She was a Right-wing YouTube success story, someone who had come from our circles and “made it,” achieving the herculean task of transitioning from the Internet into a real-world political career. And yet despite Owens’ growing popularity with normie conservatives, for whom based blacks are their personal kryptonite, no one in the YouTube community that Candace Owens came out of had anything nice to say about her or seemed particularly happy for her success. Having done the research, I have a better understanding of why this was.
But by the end of 2018, Candace Owens had become bigger than YouTube. FOX News began calling, and by April 2019, after having only been a conservative for a mere 22 months, she was testifying before Congress about white supremacy.
Weapons-grade stupidity
I’ve never followed Candace Owens all that closely, but on the occasions when she did come to my attention, it was due to her saying something eye-rollingly and sigh-inducingly stupid. One of the more famous examples was when she claimed that Hitler had been a globalist:
I actually don’t have any problems at all with the word “nationalism.” I think that the definition gets poisoned by elitists that actually want globalism. Globalism is what I don’t want. Whenever we say “nationalism,” the first thing people think about, at least in America, is Hitler. You know, [Hitler] was a National Socialist, but if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, okay, fine. The problem is that he wanted — he had dreams outside of Germany. He wanted to globalize. He wanted everybody to be German, everybody to be speaking German. Everybody to look a different way. That’s not, to me, that’s not nationalism.
You can buy Jonathan Bowden’s collection The Cultured Thug here.
From this we can see that Owens had absolutely no idea about what the terms “nationalism” and “globalism” even mean. To me it seems that she was merely playing a role and spouting a word salad of conservative buzzwords and catchphrases: “nationalist”, “globalist”, “make ____ great again.” Ben Shapiro was not wrong when he referred to Owens’ “faux sophistication.” She really does try to sound smarter than she actually is, but is attractive and charismatic enough, and a strong enough performer, that she comes off well even when she is saying complete nonsense.
I remember another occasion when Owens went to the southern border to cover a migrant caravan. She said that the migrants should be given citizenship in exchange for going on record that George Soros was funding their caravan. This strikes me as someone who at best understands conservatism intellectually, but doesn’t really feel it in their gut. I think most conservatives would rather not have the migrants become citizens than to have yet another thing to wave their fist at George Soros over.
The absolute stupidest thing I have ever heard Candace Owens say was something she said after a propaganda visit to a prison to talk to the inmates:
After visiting prison facilities last week & speaking w/ the inmates I feel passionately that they should be allowed to vote. I also feel passionately that if they could vote — they would be voting against the left. I will release footage of my interviews with them next week.
In hindsight, I think was a propaganda move to build public support for what would become Donald Trump’s First Step Act — but dear God, what a stupid thing to say.
Who remembers Hank Johnson? Johnson was a black Congressman from Georgia who became famous after a 2010 Congressional hearing during which he expressed concern that if too many American troops were sent to Guam that it might cause the entire island to tip over. He was apparently of the belief that islands are pieces of land that float on top of the water, and that if too much weight is placed on one side it will cause it to tip over, like an inflatable swimming pool raft. The incident went viral and it provided race-conscious whites with some schadenfreude, knowing that even the most elite blacks were still capable of jaw-dropping stupidity.
Now imagine if Hank Johnson had one day started naming the Jew, quoting salacious passages from the Talmud and musing on the Khazar Theory. I might then say, “Good for him.” I certainly would not stand in his way. But one thing I definitely would not do is pretend that he never said that the island of Guam would tip over if you put too many troops on it.
Likewise, I am not willing to pretend that Candace Owens never said anything as stupid as “convicted felons are natural conservatives, and if given the right to vote, would side with the party of law and order.” That is only marginally less stupid than talking about Guam tipping over.
This is why I refuse to endorse Candace Owens. If she helps to shift the Overton window, great, but I am sure that she will do that regardless of whether or not I endorse her. Who knows? Maybe she had a religious experience and her newfound j-wokeness is totally genuine. But then again, the burden of proof to be on me. She has a long history of lying, cynical opportunism, and stupidity which a priori disqualifies her from the official Trav Seal of Approval™. Maybe she can earn that seal in the future, but for the time being, I do not trust her.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate at least $10/month or $120/year.
- Donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Everyone else 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. Naturally, we do not grant permission to other websites to repost paywall content before 30 days have passed.
- Paywall member comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Paywall members have the option of editing their comments.
- Paywall members get an Badge badge on their comments.
- Paywall members can “like” comments.
- 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, please visit our redesigned Paywall page.
43 comments
My reaction to pretty much any popular or prominent figure defending or promoting white identity politics is to praise their doing so and try to encourage other celebs to follow suit. It seems less important to anguish over the question, “but can we trust this person?” How could anyone fully vouch for some celeb commentator they only know through online videos and social media? How could they be expected to? And why would it even be important to? There’s no need to feel embarrassed about having praised someone for something they did even if the person praised goes and does something terrible a week later.
And the idea that Owens is some de-radicalizing plant seems a little far-fetched. None of these people are perfect, and Owens is probably just what she seems to be: a very ambitious, proud, confident person with a bit of vicious streak. Yes, I would probably watch my back around the woman if I had to deal with her personally, but who cares? It’s good to know about prominent commentators’ histories, but there’s also a risk in obsessing unnecessarily over the drama between these personalities. Sometimes it seems like there’s a tendency to either want to go all-in for a commentator and put them on a pedestal or spend too much time on the question of whether we should see them as someone who ought to be viewed with suspicion.
So I say praise these influencers when they do explicitly pro-white things, and don’t get too caught up in the drama and personality squabbles.
But I do think this article does a great job presenting all this information about her previous ventures and explaining why some might question her sincerity.
There are very few blacks who do not end up disappointing conservatives. The standout – the one really big surprise – has been Clarence Thomas. I still recall some fear about him on the true Right 30+ years ago when he was nominated for SCOTUS. He had had some occasional musings that could be interpreted as black nationalistic, and I was one who did wonder (though there were prominent others who did so, too) whether he might be another “Souter” (ie, snake). I was not reassured by his “uppity black man off the welfare plantation” shuck & jive defense against the Anita Hill sexual harassment charade, either. But he has turned out to be an excellent Justice, better than his white colleagues.
Economists Thomas Sowell and the late Walter Williams also went through life never being exposed as phony-cons. Carol Swain is pretty good, too, though her The New White Nationalism from a couple of decades ago was definitely not pro-white. And I admit to being impressed with the truthfulness of occasional CC contributor Lipton Matthews. But the only as yet still solid (as far as I know) black political (as opposed to academic) conservatives are Trump HUD Secretary Dr. Ben Carson (who definitely exhibits some cuckish tendencies), and former Rep. Allen West. Both seem really rightwing (perhaps not as much so on race as the CC community, but did I mention that they’re black?).
So I think Candace is definitely someone for whom Travis was right to withhold his endorsement. The onus is very much on her to prove even her true conservative, let alone white allyship, bona fides.
I got into a discussion the other day with a a normie White conservative, and the central point I was trying to make to him is that no black person (or any non-white, really) in the USA has ever truly, truly succeeded at something entirely on their own — that any “success story” was something they had to use that White people started. As usual, he was taken aback, but he entertained me for a few minutes and would ask specific questions.
”What about Michael Jordan??” I said that Michael got lucky in a sport created by Whites, in a league and organization created by Whites, that was 100% white until the 1950s. Michael didn’t create a sport or organization himself.
”What about Herman Cain??” I told how Herman got racial preference in college (a college he didn’t found) got affirmative action, and ended up working “for” a business, but he didn’t start a business himself. Without thing that White people created, Herman would have had nothing.
“What about Jackie Chan??” This one got interesting, but again, Jackie had the athletic talent similar to Michael Jordan, but even Chan was dependent on a industry founded and brought to life by Whites, in a White country.
He kept spitting random people out, and I kept explaining how in every single circumstance, none of the non-whites he mentioned actually founded, built, or manifested anything 100% on their own. After a while he asked me “do you at least think a black or non-white person CAN build something entirely on their own???” I replied no, because they don’t have the forward-thinking genes that we do, along with various other reasons. The young man got increasingly agitated because he couldn’t dispute anything I said, he had a look of extreme offense in his face, and he eventually left.
It truly amazes me just how ridiculous our people still are, even after all this time and after everything that has happened in recent decades. Part of me wonders if whites might not be able to be brought out of their conditioning at all at this point.
I hope I’m wrong.
All music “they created” with White inventions. Drive-bys with White invented vehicles, and a White designed and built firearms. “Mother f**ker” being a word from White person’s language.
Thanks for this. I did not know the back story on CO. Certifiable stupidity and documented opportunism — not to be trusted.
She certainly has a knack for fooling the normie conservatives. Any thoughts on who should be non- white ally of the year? Should ther be a non- white ally?
Mike Benz, the Jew formerly known as Frame Game Radio, has done a lot of good work breaking down how the censorship regime works. Elon Musk regularly replies to his posts.
Candace Owens may very well have been the brown person of the year (IMO, Kanye was a net loss) but I think any endorsement of her needs a very long disclaimer. Calling her an “ally” implies that she is “on our side” and pursuing the same agenda and I have doubts about that. It might be more accurate to call her a co-belligerent.
She’s no Jesse Lee Peterson.
(the founder of White History Month)
It’s a preemptive disavow for me on her.
JLP is the top non-white, white ally out there. He’s bad on the JQ but has started to come around on certain aspects in recent years. He knows much more than he lets on.
I have watched his show for 4 1/2 years now and he is absolutely steadfast and ruthless in his defense of white Americans and equally ruthless in his attacks on blacks. Despite his questionable theological quirks and hesitance in wading deep into the JQ, he’s been solid enough for me to stick with him for all these years. He is undoubtedly the only non-white I could possibly watch/listen to like that.
I have my reservations of JLP as well. First, it’s my general assumption that all black preachers are some kind of con artist. Second I don’t think JLP is particularly smart nor do I think he altogether there upstairs. There have been many times when he has had people on his show and then a week later, someone will mention that person and JLP will have no idea who they are.
I don’t ultimately love or trust any non-whites, but if I HAD to give two examples of the least bad ones who seemingly understand a “few” things, I would pick Jesse Lee Peterson and Michelle Malkin
Reason being is that both of them, on more than one occasion, have given a moderate defense to the idea that Whites have a right to be the majority people in the United States, and if they aren’t, it will become “something else.” Peterson even recently said that “All of America would look like a ghetto in Baltimore” if we aren’t large and in charge. Malkin has echoed something similar one or two times.
Is either one “truly” on our side or should he ultimately trusted? No.
Jesse Lee Peterson still has elements of Larry Elder in him — the belief that if blacks stopped voting Democrat, attended genuine churches, got married before having kids, turned off the rap music, etc, they’d be almost equal to Whites. That culture is the ultimate problem over genetics. He regularly espouses the idea that during segregation, blacks were better off than they are now, and that it was the “evil Democrats” who destroyed that in the 1960s. He is also weak on the Jewish question, and has said that “Whites blaming the Jews for their problems is the same as blacks blaming Whites for their problems.”
I’ll take whatever free gifts we can get from Peterson, and I think meaningful dialogue with him is ok. He certainly didn’t become a conservative to get a white woman or any of the usual stuff. But I don’t see him helping us much in the long run.
Malkin has a White husband. And there have been a few occasions on Fox News interviews where she could have gone much further to defend Whites, but the usual fear kicked in and she caved. Again, I don’t think Malkin is overtly harmful to Whites, and she has come to our defense appropriately on more than one occasion, but like Peterson, I also don’t see her being any type of messianic figure to help us wake ourselves up and take back what is rightfully ours
Don’t get me wrong, culture has “an” effect, but it isn’t anywhere close to the ultimate reason.
Jesse Malkin is a Jew.
All fair criticisms of JLP but he’s demonstrably more pro-White and anti-black than any White or black person I have ever heard. Because he’s not a politician he has no reason to hold back and he doesn’t. He calls the civil rights movement the “worst thing” to have ever happened to black people, worse than slavery which he routinely explains the benefits (and truth) of to anyone willing to hear him out. He proclaims the greatness of America because it was “founded by White people for White people” and he excoriates blacks for destroying it and blaming whites for their problems. He says that racism doesn’t exist. He tells the truth when he says that blacks were “built for destruction” and that he’s overcome his blackness though Christianity. His founding of and public celebration of “White History Month” (July because “July just feels White”) puts him in a special category as a White advocate. He’s funny, smart and as he says, “black on the outside but White on the inside.” Amazin!
Jesse Lee Peterson is SMART?!? There are chimpanzees who are more articulate than he is. I’ve heard rumors that he peels bananas with his feet while his handlers change his diapers. I find it impossible to believe that anyone would appreciate him unironically.
Smart enough to know the truth.
And tell it.
Smart enough to sexually prey on troubled men?
Here’s my article on that documentary.
These are lies.
And I don’t believe them. Or you.
I didn’t say they were lies or true. What’s also true is that you have no way of proving they were liars. Since you’re a JLP fan, I’m at least impressed that you’re able to type.
Well you brought it up and typed out “Smart enough to sexually prey on troubled men?” thus the implication here is that you do believe this so much so that you used it as a point against Peterson in this thread. In reality it’s just lies from liars who hate the man for his conservative convictions, something I’m sure you’re familiar with as well as the fact that the burden of proof is on the accuser not on the accused. Peterson is a pro-White ally and he doesn’t routinely insult people he disagrees with. Rather he takes all their sling and arrows and shows up day after day with the truth on his side.
Talk about lowering the tone, Mr Goad. Twitter/X is where you should go to get that sort of bile out of your system.
Talk about lowering the tone
No one mentioned elevating or lowering the tone on this page until you barged in and made it an issue, you self-appointed Tone Cop.
Someone made the mistake of referring to the imbecilic sub-primate Jesse Lee Peterson as “smart,” which opened the door for a barrage of comedic barbs. I refuse to let humorless scolds get in the way of my fun. I cannot allow it. I WILL not allow it!
… Candace Owens is black. That’s not my main issue with her, but it is also not a non-issue. Throughout the history of the dissident Right, there has occasionally been some debate as to what level of involvement non-whites should be allowed to have in the pro-white movement. Some hardliners might say that we must support only those who are completely white.
Call me a hardliner or call me a purist. I’m certainly a pro-White dissident but no “Rightist.”
I don’t “support” any non-Whites, with the exclusion perhaps of Louis Farrakhan’s ant-Jew, anti-race-mixing, racial separatist NOI, and them at arm’s length.
I don’t even “support” Whites who don’t capitalize the word White when used to describe our people. How difficult is that to do? Does criticism come to those who don’t?
What we need are serious hardline White leaders who do not compromise on the need to separate from Jews, other non-Whites and from their alien influence. It’s not that difficult if one has the will and the determination.
I was spoiled by single-minded Dr William Pierce, so will never support some dingbat Black “conservative.” Exactly what is it that Ms. Owens is striving to conserve?
What goofy boomer magic do you think is happening when you capitalize the w in the word white?
k.: January 17, 2024 :
What goofy boomer magic do you think is happening when you capitalize the w in the word white?
So, criticism does come to those of us who don’t “support” those who don’t capitalize White when referring to our race. Thanks. I had a feeling I’d smoke out a critic like you, Miss k, from the outgroup that objects.
Let’s call such simple standardization passive resistance from some of us who believe the White race is worth preserving and fighting for. It’s like a secret handshake among serious White racial loyalists. We notice it.
Are you aware that Greg Johnson, the founder and editor of this fine website, uses a lowercase w? At least he did last time I checked. What an absurd hill to die on. Racial European Nationalism has never went very far largely thanks to people like you. Hopefully one day that will change.
k: Are you aware that Greg Johnson, the founder and editor of this fine website, uses a lowercase w?
—
I am.
—
Racial European Nationalism has never went (sic) very far largely thanks to people like you. Hopefully one day that will change.
—
You just sparked a flashback to the O,J. trial, probably before your time. His Jew prosecutor Marcia Clark said she hoped that the world would be free one day of police officers like Mark Fuhrman who had been audiotaped repeatedly using the word nigger.
A great piece. I feel much the same about black “conservatives” as the author does about Candace Owens. They’re not to be trusted. Blacks always turn out to be blacks.
Tony Martin (RIP), a black college professor/historian who was viciously attacked by Jews because of his work about black nationalist Marcus Garvey and his study of the role of Jews in the Atlantic Slave trade, spoke to wild applause from a white audience at a David Irving revisionist history conference many years ago. Later, I stumbled across old video of some of his speeches to his fellow Negros and they were as maliciously anti-white as anything from Obama’s preacher, Rev. Wright in Chicago. Speaking to his fellow Negros he felt free to rip off his mask and proclaim that “Race is everything.”
Nice that Candace is talking the pro-white line and opening doors for certain ideas, but she is NOT to be trusted and neither is any other black for that matter. They always side with their own kind.
Very well said! I agree with just about everything you’re saying.
I too have despised, and today have literally zero patience for, Candace Owens. To be fair though, I feel the same way about all black “conservatives.”
Here are the biggest problems with black conservatives.
1) They aren’t conservative:
Black conservatives will talk all day about urban crime and law and order, until their people start getting arrested because they’re the ones doing the crime to begin with. They don’t tell the media to knock it off with the monumentally overblown coverage of the infinitesimal number of unarmed blacks being killed by cops or by white people, and then correctly point out how they should be covering all of the black on white murders and assaults which are a super majority — and even white deaths by police shootings. They basically give a “conservative spin” on it instead of calling it out as a colossal waste of time entirely.
They also largely favor gay rights and transgender rights to an extreme level (I am not calling to ‘hate’ gays) and are very pro-immigration from any race and any continent, so long as it’s “legal.” They’re really more of a Libertarian with black nationalism in the back of their heads Ready to go at all times whenever the next Trayvon Martin happens.
2) They aren’t Pro-White, nor do they believe that Whites have the same rights as they and all colored people do:
With the teeniest, tiniest of exceptions (one or two mentions by Jesse Lee Peterson is all who comes to mind) black conservatives don’t think that Whites have a right to be the majority people in their countries, and that Whites have a right to be in charge of all government positions and to run their institutions. They think that Whites “have” to share their countries with any and all non-whites, and to do otherwise would be an act of terrorism worse than 9/11. Whites still “owe” the world in their minds, because they still resent the fact that no one else can do what we can.
3) At the end of the day, they’re just trying to get things out of Whites, and to be even closer to them:
Nearly 100% of black Republicans have a White husband or wife and biracial children, live in majority White neighborhoods, send their mixed offspring to White school districts, demand jobs from successful businesses that Whites built, and so forth. They call for permanent funding of HBCU’s (White wealth redistribution) and endlessly inflate black people’s minds that all they have to do is stop voting Democrat and in no time at all, they’ll be living in the suburbs with Whites with crime and illegitimacy rates suddenly cut by 2/3 because the racist Left no longer has control of them!
They realized in recent decades that they don’t “have” to be that black Democrat who actually has to live with his own people in his Baltimore district and risk death every day, they know that Fox News will shower a black “conservative” with TV show hosting jobs, and they know that conservatives with connections to publishers will give them book deals and speaking fees to stand in-front of White crowds and “own the racist Democrats!” Your typical loser black can be flipping Whoppers at Burger King for $12 an hour on Monday, to being offered multimillionaire celebrity status by Saturday — and all they have to do is make a tweet that they’re switching to the Republican Party and supporting Trump!
They have nothing to offer us. If and until the day a prominent black conservative publicly shouts at the top of his/her lungs that the United States can’t be any less than 85% White, that interracial marriage needs to stop, that tens of millions of 3rd worlders have to be deported, that all immigration needs to stop, that any and all quotas in ALL industries from major corporations to the entertainment industries have to stop, and that blacks can never, ever be in congress, state governors, mayors, judges, or police officers ever again….I won’t lend them one ear — and neither should anyone else
Blacks who marry whites are traitors to their race as much as whites who marry out groups. They are denying a black person a good spouse. I believe Europeans who marry Jews usually do so for promotion or privilege.
Spanish and Portuguese conquistadors often intermarried with the natives of the lands they conquered. Were they race traitors?
Yes
That’s a good question. So did French and English in the more northern territories. I would say conditionally no. They were under circumstances where mates were scarce, so their choice of native mates is more understandable. Also, racial science was less understood back then. I myself have a number of half caste ancestors, although it’s not detectable in my dna. It’s not a hard and fast rule, just a general principle.
Wow. Strong letter to follow.
Taking the word “misgendering” seriously is stupider than thinking Guam will tip over.
The things Owens said this past year as a guest on the Tucker Carlson show were rock solid.
She really seems to have genuine indignation against the anti-White left, for the very understandable reason that her husband is White.
“This is why I will not endorse Candace Owens. There is a high probability that she will say or do something extremely stupid in the future”
Or her shameful past of shaming kids for non pc behavior with her online pillory kickstarter campaign.
All this space, all these words to explain a position that should have been immediate and intuitive: Don’t vote for or advocate for non-Whites, especially negroes, for any reason, ever. We have no allies.
There is no point in supporting these people. We don’t need black cuckservatives, we need white nationalists like Greg Johnson and Jared Taylor. Rather support sites like Counter-currents and Amren, our people are there.
Bingo!
We don’t need any black, or Asian, or Muslim, or Chicano to get White people to do what we ourselves must do. Perhaps we could have entertained a possibility of non-white alliances in 1980, but these last 30-35 years have been the most damaging to whites and white countries, and now is no time to be wasting time wondering what people like Candace Owens thinks, or the likes thereof.
Counter-Currents I do think is one of the best White nationalist groups out there. I certainly don’t agree with everyone here 100% of the time, but a good 80-85% of what’s posted here by the staff themselves and the commenters I think is sound. Dr Greg Johnson is also very good at allowing people to speak their mind, even if they’re opposing something that’s being written here. You don’t get that in very many places.
American renaissance I’m iffy about. I do have some respect for Jared Taylor, and I do think he has helped with “some” understanding of demographic problems since the early-1990s, but I feel that AmRen falls short in many areas, and they may really be past their prime. A good 80% of the people who comment there are insufferable and ridiculous too. I think it’s an ok place to start for a white person who’s genuinely open to the idea that they might be wrong about colorblindness and immigration, but past a point, I encourage readers and supporters of AmRen to look elsewhere.
American renaissance I’m iffy about. I do have some respect for Jared Taylor, and I do think he has helped with “some” understanding of demographic problems since the early-1990s…
Jared deserves respect as an entry level spokesman on racial issues, but he falls miserably short on the Jew Question. His Paved With Good Intentions was good on race. I subscribed to his American Renaissance newsletter when it first came out around 1990, but soon dropped it when he announced in it that at least three Jews were invited to speak at one of his early gatherings. He was entitled to become more intelligent on the JQ after that, but his fate with serious pro-White activists was sealed later when he appeared on the popular mainstream Phil Donahue Show and was asked by the host:
DONAHUE: How are you with the Jews? Are you OK, the Jews?
TAYLOR: The Jews? The Jews are fine by me.
DONAHUE: And so Jews can live in your neighborhood and to go your cocktail party with all those good looking people?
TAYLOR: They look white to me.
My goodness, that makes Jared more than just “iffy.” It’s more like he was bona fide controlled opposition from at least that point forward.
Was Jared compromised early on? Yes. Read here about him and the racial Jew Ronald Keeva Unz who also has a Website that is popular with not-so-serious-minded Whites: https://nationalvanguard.org/2020/07/are-jared-taylor-and-ron-unz-compromised/
About Mr. Unz, to paraphrase you Ian, “We don’t need any Jew to get White people to do what we ourselves must do.”
You don’t because you were never immersed in a liberal world view. National Vanguard is a big ask for such a person to swallow. As a recent convert I found both AmRen and particularly Unz Review extremely useful in shedding the programming. I don’t look at them much now that I’m convinced of the rightness of our cause but there are those who stay around and leave bread crumbs in the comments.
I’m sure GLR wasn’t the first to write that propaganda is needed at all levels. To be honest even hearing Candace being semi-based was helpful.
Thank you. I looked up the word antipodean: “any two places or regions that are on diametrically opposite sides of the earth.” Interesting.
You’re correct that I was never immersed in liberalism (i.e., a disease of the brain). Having been raised in the segregated south I was racially conscious from a young age but knew next to nothing about Jews. My first introduction may have been in 1959 when my 6th grade class was required to read The Diary of Anne Frank. The Hollywood movie by that name came out the same year, so you might say that was an attempt to immerse me and my 100% White classmates in a liberal world view. By the time I saw a photo of the mule-faced Anne Frank compared to the attractive Millie Perkins, who played her in that movie, I had to wonder why others didn’t notice and question the contradiction. Now our people, even liberals, if they can brace themselves to swallow some truth, can find it here: Unmasking Anne Frank by Ikuo Suzuki – Cosmotheism (cosmotheistchurch.org)
There are many shortcuts to truths found on National Vanguard that save folks from going through entry level sites like AmRen, or look to a Black conservative like Ms. Owens to find them. I’m not a recent convert like you, Antipodean. I seek truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth as a man of my race.
The millionaire Jew Unz tells some truths, yes, but not the whole truth and nothing but the truth. As a man of his race he is controlled opposition, leading Whites down a dead-end path. With his deep pockets he pays his writers, something we can’t do. He gives cover to his White followers who can say, “I’m no anti-Semite; I support the Jew Ron Unz.”
Is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day part of the “liberal worldview,” or just another pack of lies like the Anne Frank hoax or the Holocaust hoax? Who among us are not ready to swallow this truth, and why?: No King Over Us 2024: Do Your Part | National Vanguard
We do love our black pets, don’t we?
If you’re black saying pro-black, anti-White sentiments, you’re one of millions.
If you’re black, can wear a suit and speak in complete sentences, and mouth anything remotely pro-White you can be a superstar with a book, TV show, and speaking tour.
God we love our black pets. But sooner or later they’ll always let us down. And why do we need caramel, mocha, and chocolate people speaking on our behalf anyway?
By the way, Travis, you shouldn’t be too hard on people who occasionally say dumb things.
CO didn’t “misgender”* Blaire White. Blair White is indeed a man. Even you called Blaire “him” in this very article!
*Stop using the term “misgender”. Stop using the language of the left. The language you use ultimately frames the way you think.
“Diversity can be tolerated so long as it does not disturb the race”
Basically as having sympathies to 3rd position policies inclusion of race mixing is not a issue by considering the above quote.
“In an interview with Tucker Carlson, she [ Candace Owens] asked why all these Jewish billionaires are cutting off their donations to universities where pro-Palestine rallies were held, but were perfectly content with those same universities promoting anti-whiteness and white genocide”
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
Lost your password?Edit your comment