1,641 Words
Here is a tricky hypothetical dilemma which might not sit well with the American Dissident Right. But it may tell us a lot about ourselves.
If we had to choose between complete remigration from the United States or from Western Europe—with nothing in between—what would it be? What is dearer to our hearts?
Since I live in a part of the United States which is still majority white, it would seem that I should prefer the former option. Currently, my neighbors and I enjoy not having to worry about our homes and cars being broken into while we sleep. We don’t have to worry about territorial encroachment by foreign born, military-aged men. And we don’t have to worry about our daughters getting raped or pimped as they ride their bikes to school. Where I live, we cherish the peace and security that still exists with legacy America.
Nice, right? And with Donald Trump and MAGA actually taking the fight to the Left now—with closed borders and mass deportations and many other tacitly and not-so-tacitly pro-white measures—why would I want to sacrifice all this progress for the sake of a place I have been to only once decades ago? Why would I want to sacrifice what I have for the sake of a continent which has yet to realize what a disease liberalism has turned out to be? For example, in September 2024 in Sweden, a Eritrean refugee sexually assaulted a 16-year-old Swedish girl and was arrested and sentenced for three years. Yet he wasn’t deported because the justice system in Sweden did not deem his crime to be serious enough.
This is a depressingly commonplace event in Western Europe. When a non-white commits a heinous crime of some sort, he is more or less coddled by the authorities—whereas when a white person merely says something out of line, they go straight to prison. Also in 2024, a young German woman took a weekend tour in the joint for saying mean things online about a migrant gang rapist—someone who had actually been found guilty of gang rape. Ironically, the migrant himself had served no jail time at all for the crime because he was a minor. So in Germany the punishment for wrongspeak can be worse than the punishment for rape. In England in 2024, a black city councilor announced in public that he wished to slit the throats of Right-wing activists who were protesting a triple homicide of schoolgirls by a black teenager. Last summer this councilor was acquitted of inciting violent disorder. Meanwhile, an English woman was handed a 31-month prison sentence for calling for mass deportations after that very same attack and for saying she wouldn’t be bothered if someone set fire to migrant hotels.
Last December, British prime minister Keir Starmer professed his delight when welcoming back one Alaa Abd El-Fattah to the United Kingdom after a prison stay in Egypt. This Mr. El-Fattah had become notorious on Twitter for calling for the “random shooting of white males,” and “genocide against all white people” among other atrocities. He also once promised whites that Muslims would “take over your town and rape ur women,” while calling himself a terrorist.
Check it out for yourself here and here.
What we are seeing are clear examples of how liberalism just doesn’t work anymore—at least not for white people. And the reason is because liberals have long ago abandoned the quaint notions of meritocracy, universalism, and equality under the law that would have given John Locke or John Stuart Mill the warm and fuzzies. They have instead embraced all forms of anti-white, anti-heteronormative, anti-Christian, and anti-traditional identity politics and taken on the bigotry and tribalism that goes along with them. And when conservatives adopt the exact same attitude, but in favor of whites, they’re criminalized.
You can buy Francis Parker Yockey’s The Enemy of Europe here.
Put bluntly, twenty-first century liberalism adheres to two standards. This means it really has no standards at all. Not only this, it has long since phased out of the worthlessness stage and has entered the realm of pure malignancy. Things are getting worse because of liberalism, and the European ruling classes don’t seem to realize this yet. They still plug along with the same hypocritical ideology which came into vogue in the 1970s. It was just as vicious then as it is now, but then, unlike now, it wasn’t bolstered by millions of black and brown immigrants who would vote for taxpayer-funded sex change operations and mandatory gay bars next to every daycare center if it meant the downfall of their suicidally generous pale-skinned hosts.
Would it be fair to say that Western Europe is doomed? Sometimes it certainly seems so. And if so, then let’s not waste our time trying to save it. Conservative, Right-wing, and otherwise anti-liberal whites should focus on remigration in the United States, where there is still hope, and then worry about Europe.
Every time I begin to think this way, however, I get misty eyed. I start chewing on the corn pone, as it were, while I deteriorate into a sentimental bore. I get the feelz about Europe, you see. My ancestors are currently resting in various spots all across the place, or they are part of the soil. How could I not feel attached to it? Europe is the birthplace of modern civilization. It witnessed the genesis of science twice, once with the ancient Greeks and once again during the Renaissance. I certainly do not need to expound upon all the irreplaceable contributions Europeans have given the world. Ricardo Duchesne does a much better job of it than I could anyway.
So there is a big part of me which would sacrifice America to the babel of interracialism if it meant cleansing Europe of it. America, for one, is bigger than any single European country west of Russia. So it can absorb more people and be more generous with its spaces. It’s much harder to run out of places to run to in America. It’s vastness also allows me the hope that one day whites can break away and form their own ethnostate. There’s certainly room for it. Further, whites are not indigenous to the North American continent as they are to Europe. I know from a political standpoint that means nothing. At the same time however even the staunchest pro-white racialist must admit that American Indians belong in North America. They are not going anywhere; nor should they. The same goes with most blacks, unfortunately. Yes, we owe nothing to Somalis who emigrated to the United States in 2012 and contribute to the massive fraud in places like Minnesota. These people should be deported forthwith. But blacks descended from the 400,000-odd African slaves who were dragged across the Atlantic centuries ago against their will do have a right to live in North America—if you believe humans have inherent rights at all.
Basically, whites have always had to deal with other races in North America. Not so in Europe. Has anyone actually counted the number of non-whites today who had ancestors living in Europe before World War I? I’d be willing to bet that number is less than two hundred thousand. Probably a lot less. This means that Europe is the homeland of whites in a way that North America never could be. It breaks my heart to see it being tainted by foreigners who have no respect for Western civilization regardless of their IQ. I feel worse about that than I do about New York City having a foreign-born Muslim communist as its mayor. I can’t help it.
I have one personal anecdote to explain why I feel this way. When I was in England decades ago, I was on a bus in the countryside listening to a conversation between an Englishman and a tourist. They were discussing local landmarks, and the Englishman casually mentioned how a nearby edifice was “only 400 years old.” That struck me as odd because very, very rarely will an American ever describe anything in America as being “only 400 years old.” You would probably have to be an archeologist on a dig in New Mexico to have such a cavalier attitude about still-standing man-made structures. This Englishman, obviously, embodied his own history. He identified with it. He was England, in a way that a Bangladeshi computer programmer renting an apartment in Manchester never could be.
This is a beautiful thing. It is something worth fighting for. But if Europe refuses to fight for itself, it’s difficult for those of us across the pond to take up the cause. This is why I am so overjoyed about Rupert Lowe and his Restore Britain Party. This is the first sign I have seen of elite Britons realizing what’s at stake. Either Britain retains its white supermajority or it doesn’t remain Britain, in which case it becomes something far inferior. It’s that simple. Britain, like all other Western European countries, is experiencing a demographic invasion. And just as with a military invasion, it could eventually succumb to it. This is the future Rupert Lowe wishes to avoid when he says that millions must leave or be deported from his country.
A question then arises: would I still wish for millions of non-white refugees if their ultimate destination were my country the United States? This is the tricky hypothetical dilemma I mentioned earlier. Which is dearer to our hearts: the land of our diaspora which is by definition multiracial or our ancestral homeland which isn’t? And my answer to this is: If such a population transfer from any Western European country meant that the white native majority in that country would remain above 95% in perpetuity and that no government could legally change that—ever—then I would be sorely tempted to say yes.
39 comments
“If we had to choose between complete remigration from the United States or from Western Europe—with nothing in between—what would it be?”
I would choose total remigration for America.
First, this is a trick question unless we get a White nationalist state, because if we get remigration but continued antiwhite rule we’ll just get flooded with non-Whites all over again. So choosing a White and pro-White America means choosing an end to the American Zionist Occupation Government, an end to the main source of antiwhite cultural poison throughout the world, and an end to the taxing of Whites to subside the Jewish State and its crimes and genocides. Wouldn’t that be nice?
Second, I love America. Not as much as I love certain parts of Europe, but Europe is very divided.
Third, I can imagine Western and Central Europe being saved, if America becomes a good influence rather than a bad one, and if Russia sticks to what Putin said about ethnic Russians being the nation-forming people of the Russian state, who can never be replaced. (This is a thing no American president says about White Americans.) With a good influence from America and a reasonable influence from the East, I can imagine Greg Johnson’s slow cleanse working for Western and Central Europe. I can imagine a peaceful and thorough reconquista for Europe. I can imagine us getting America back, and eventually Europe too, and a better environment for Whites throughout the world.
If America is lost to the brown tide I cannot imagine what external force would save it.
I do not trust the Europeans to attempt the task. First, they are too prone to thinking in a radically wrong way, in terms of Europeans versus non-Europeans, instead of (as they should) pro-Whites versus antiwhites. Second, they are too fond of organizing in small states and killing each other. It’s bad and it’s distracting.
It’s hard to imagine White people in White nations such as New Zealand and Australia turning things around with antiwhites continuing to treat them as enemies because they are White and with Europeans treating them as enemies because they are not Europeans. But I can imagine a White Nationalist and cleansed America as a new sort of light on the hill, setting a good example and inspiring us all.
So America first, literally, if I had my wish.
Both are necessary and possible. There is no such thing as choosing one or the other, THE WEST in its entirety needs to undergo extensive remigration or there will be no lasting change. No “sanctuary nations” must be allowed to exist in the Occident. This is ancient stuff, an old topic. Our struggle is the same everywhere because we all bow under the same system/regime/masters who hate us and wish to destroy our peoples. A sanctuary for them means they have a place to regroup and continue the fight against the rest of us. Because we must fight their influence everywhere, we are international nationalists. Our problems are not with our fellow white nations but with their illegitimate anti-Western governments. Any time there is talk of America vs Europe or choosing sides or turning against our fellow white Westerners, it’s our masters trying to sow obvious division.
Putin said about ethnic Russians being the nation-forming people of the Russian state
Thousands of Indians, Pakistanis, Bengalis and other South Asians are imported into Russia.
That is bad.
Of course that is bad. It is wrong to consider Putin as an “anti-globalist.” He is globalist, but of another globalism, not of Jewish-Anglosaxon one, but of the Chinese-Asian globalism. He is not a Russian nationalist and he never was. Neither he is a defender of the White race.
Thank you very much for these true words. This simple message of truth must be spread everywhere. The useful idiots in the West, who parrot Kremlin’s dirty lies, inadvertently become combatants in this war against European identity. Any support to the Putinist Neo-Bolshevik state automatically places anyone in the enemy camp. There must be zero tolerance for those who decided (for any reason) to support the Neo-Bolshevik war against Europe.
I really do not understand how it is possible that those delusions last so long. Maybe it would be understandable 20 years ago, but now, when everybody knows the results of Pu’s unending rule?
This is an artificial choice, and not a productive thought experiment. I often hear Europeans making a similar point, throwing America under the bus almost as a burnt offering intended to save Europe by conceding some lost ground: well America is a proposition nation after all and our nation is indigenous therefore… Nice performance, Francois, but we need each other and pointing out differences (however accurate) between Europe and America isn’t helping.
It sounds like they need some education. The USA was a de facto White ethnostate until the 1965 Immigration Act. There were non-Whites before that, but living on White terms mostly in their own living spaces, and we weren’t inviting in more. The “proposition nation” stuff, of course, is hogwash invented to justify the hijacking of our country by globalism.
Europe. It is our origin and the fountainhead of our identity as Europe’s children. Together we are Europa Magna but the continent is Europa Mater. Without those lands and peoples (and I would include all of Europe, not just the western part) we are orphans.
Also, North America is big enough for us to carve out a White ethnostate after the collapse of the USA, which is only some hundreds of years old. No such thing is possible in Europe without the mother continent and her cultures being so weakened as to be left on life support. Unsustainable.
We have always had to cope with racial conflicts here. But to imagine Notre Dame as a mosque or a biracial English king…..that is utter defeat.
I recognize that people dislike the question. But even uncomfortable dichotomies can be illuminating.
Yes. What I said in my first paragraph.
What I found was that my attitude is a mirror image of antiwhite attitudes and it should be.
When we give antiwhites anything they always want more. Every compromise is the thin edge of the wedge.
For us, any opportunity to save any Whites anywhere has to be a step towards saving all Whites everywhere.
We can push for things in a certain order if it seems tactically or strategically necessary, but writing each other off contradicts the idea of White nationalism.
We are White nationalists and not just American nationalists or English nationalists or whatever because we will not see a border and say, “let the Whites on the other side of this line be damned; I don’t care.”
Great article! I don’t see why we can’t cleanse Western Europe, and America. After all, we are White people, and certainly smart enough, capable enough to do it. 🙃
Agreed. When we have unity of purpose, we can accomplish wonders.
The problem is that those non-White migrants were and are brought in Europe by White and European politicians, elected by majority of their voters, also of mostly White European men and women. No one forced these European politicians at gunpoint to import migrants.
A few thoughts here. The question is theoretical, though in practical terms a false dichotomy. Namely, a reawakened America can help Europe, and vice versa. We’re already doing that, a little bit at least.
Other than that, the globalist governments of Western Europe are remarkably unpopular. We might not see that, since they’ve become rather totalitarian. Their governments opted to weld the safety valve of dissent shut through aggressive censorship and two-tier policing. The UK, France, and probably Germany are powderkegs beneath the surface, and regime change is becoming quite probable.
As for the USA, if I had my say in the matter, I’d also leave the American Indians as they are. Ideally, it would be best to retake Liberia and resettle Blacks there. If that turns out to be unfeasible, then Black supermajority areas here (parts of the Deep South and perhaps some ‘hoods as city states) could coalesce into West Wakanda and transition to independence or at least commonwealth status.
The problem is the anti-Americanism in Europe means that Europe would not likely come to America’s aid in finishing the job. The anti-Europeanism in the USA means that the US would likely not come to the aid of Europe. But *were* America to cease to be supportive of mass immigration and become an engine for driving nons *out* of the White World, it would take the pressure off Europe to conform to the US in this (as well as so many things).
I’d vote for America to make the first move and then export the same pro-White morality to Europe.
In the end, though, a White Nationalism that is ‘all for all’ isn’t going to make the grade.
Should we just forgive and FORGET Dresden?
No, we should not.
The Japanese commemorate the bombing of Hiroshima every August 6th and this ceremony gets plenty of publicity. Of course, the Germans were all national socialists and so they deserved to be fried, right? Here’s what google told me:
How has the public commemoration of the Dresden bombing evolved over the years? The public commemoration of the Dresden bombing has evolved into a contested event, with far-right groups using it to promote false equivalencies about wartime suffering, while mainstream elements advocate for silent commemoration or avoidance of the topic. The anniversary has become a chaotic public laboratory for memory culture, reflecting debates about victimhood, complicity, and national identity.
Hot damn. They never stop.
Stronza: March 30, 2026 No, we should not [forgive and forget Dresden]. Here’s what google told me:
How has the public commemoration of the Dresden bombing evolved over the years? The public commemoration of the Dresden bombing has evolved into a contested event, with far-right groups using it to promote false equivalencies about wartime suffering...
—
I don’t know who Google Jews are calling “far right groups,” but we in the National Alliance (that is not far-right, nor even right-wing) remember and honor our scores of thousands of murdered German cousins — estimates between 135,000 to 300,000 — by American and British pilots, every year, rather than celebrate silly Valentine’s Day: “Dresden: A Real Holocaust” at nationalvanguard.org
THE NIGHT OF February 13th, and February 14th, Valentine’s Day, mark an ominous anniversary in the history of Western Civilization. For beginning on the night of February 13th, 1945, occurred the destruction of Dresden.
On the eve of Valentine’s Day, 1945, World War II in Europe was nearly over. For all practical purposes Germany was already defeated. Italy, and Germany’s other European allies, had fallen by the wayside. The Red Army was rushing to occupy vast areas of what had been Germany in the East, while the allies of the Soviets, the British and Americans, were bombing what was left of Germany’s defenses and food and transportation infrastructure into nonexistence.
And what was Dresden? Most of you have probably heard of Dresden China, and that delicately executed and meticulously detailed porcelain is really a perfect symbol for that city. For centuries Dresden had been a center of art and culture, and refined leisure and recreation. She was a city of art museums and theatres, circuses and sports stadia, a town of ancient half-timbered buildings looking for all the world like those of medieval England, with venerable churches and centuries-old cathedrals gracing her skyline. She was a city of artists and craftsmen, of actors and dancers, of tourists and the merchants and hotels that served them. Above all, what Dresden was, was defined during the war by what she was not. She had no significant military or industrial installations. Because of this, Dresden had become, above all other things that she was, a city of children, of women, of refugees, and of the injured and maimed who were recovering from their wounds in her many hospitals.
These women and children, these wounded soldiers, these infirm and elderly people, these refugees fleeing from the brutal onslaught of the Communist armies to the East, had come to Dresden because it was commonly believed at the time that Dresden would not be attacked. Its lack of strategic or military or industrial significance, and the well-known presence of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilian refugees and even Allied prisoners of war, seemed to guarantee safety to the city. Surely, it was thought, not even the most powerful and determined enemy would be so depraved and sadistic, and so wasteful of that enemy’s own resources, to attack such a city. But the people of Dresden, who were happily attending the cinema or eating dinner at home or watching the show-horses in the circus on that fateful night were wrong, wrong, wrong. And their leaders were also wrong, for the city was virtually open and undefended and only minimal civil defense preparations had been made.
Dresden’s population had almost doubled in the months before the attack, mainly as a result of the influx of refugees from the Eastern Front, most of them women and young children. According to British historian David Irving, the briefings given to the British bomber squadrons before the attack on Dresden were curiously different. In one, the soldiers were told that their target was the railway center of Dresden. In another, they were told that the target was a poison-gas factory. In yet another, they were told that the target was a marshalling-grounds for troops in the city. Another was told that the target was a major arsenal. These were all lies.
The only marshalling-grounds for what few troops were in the area were located well outside the city. The arsenal had burned down in 1916. There were factories for toothpaste and baby-powder in Dresden, but none for poison gas. There were, in fact, no fewer than eighteen railway stations in Dresden, but only one was hit by the bombing, and that was barely touched and in fact was operating again just three days later.
According to copious documentation unearthed by David Irving from the archives of the American and British governments, the point of the attack was in fact to inflict the maximum loss of life on the civilian population and particularly to kill as many refugees as possible who were fleeing from the Red Army. In achieving these goals it was highly successful. It was thus planned and executed by those at the very highest levels of the British and American governments, who to attain their purposes even lied to their own soldiers and citizens, who to this day have never been told the full story by their leaders.
Never forgive, never forget. Read the rest of this shameful, real holocaust tale at the link.
The chief of Soviet General Staff General Antonov asked Anglo-American allies to bomb Dresden as an important railroad knot.
Antifa demonstrated there with banners “Bomber Harris, do it again”.
And what does Dresden have to do with White solidarity today? Dresden was the jews’ idea. Whites were just dupes. No matter how you feel about it (and I find it a terrible catastrophe for Whites), what does clinging to what was done in the past help White Dresden in the present?
Hamburger Today: March 31, 2026 And what does Dresden have to do with White solidarity today? … what does clinging to what was done in the past help White Dresden in the present?
—
White Dresden in the present?
You are a genuine wimp, Wimpy. You probably equate the seven murdered gangsters in the so-called “Valentine’s Day massacre” with the possible hundreds of thousands of innocent Germans murdered by the Allies in the Valentine’s Day Dresden holocaust.
“More died in Dresden than died in the well-known attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. More destruction befell Dresden in one day than was inflicted on the whole of Britain during the entire war. And yet you haven’t been told.
I urge every one of you to read The Destruction of Dresden by David Irving. I assure you, after reading Irving’s book, you will never take seriously the Establishment’s version of what happened in that war again.”
Your comments are a series of non-sequiturs. You’re arguing against positions I didn’t take. My point was – and is – that carrying grudges between Whites from the past is doing Whites no good in the present. I’m not arguing that the bombing of Dresden was a good thing or even that we should ignore the facts. My position is simple: How does grousing about Dresden – or any other White-on-White violence from the past – help Whites today in Dresden or anywhere else?
I agree with Spencer. It would be terrible to completely lose what Europeans have built in North America, and it would be terrible to lose control of North America’s natural resources. But ultimately I find it unthinkable to lose Europe.
Yes, we owe nothing to Somalis who emigrated to the United States in 2012 and contribute to the massive fraud in places like Minnesota. These people should be deported forthwith. But blacks descended from the 400,000-odd African slaves who were dragged across the Atlantic centuries ago against their will do have a right to live in North America—if you believe humans have inherent rights at all.
Just as a sidenote, The Confederacy was an illusion of White Sovereignty if 78% of all slaveholders were Jews, supplied by North African Jews, and financed by Yankee Jews. I have no sympathy for that government whatsoever. The North and Lincoln were in their complete rights to quash it and cease the flow of more Africans to the USA, and to Hell with any sentiment to the contrary.
Moreover, Lincoln wanted to practically deport Blacks, emancipiated slaves, back to Africa. It should happen under human conditions, the resettlers should be given money and another support for their life back in Africa.
Viktor Schmidt: March 31, 2026 The chief of Soviet General Staff General Antonov asked Anglo-American allies to bomb Dresden as an important railroad knot.
—
The war was practically over.
So why didn’t “our” Bolshevik Allies murder the German refugees that were fleeing their Red Army themselves?
Because they both were enemies of continental Europe, and so since the 18th century.
Wolf Stoner’s article The Hierarchy of Nations is interesting and relevant to this subject:
https://whitebiocentrism.com/viewtopic.php?p=42009#p42009
Thank you, Viktor.
Viktor Schmidt: April 1, 2026 Wolf Stoner’s article The Hierarchy of Nations is interesting and relevant to this subject:
https://whitebiocentrism.com/viewtopic.php?p=42009#p42009
—
And obviously true to intelligent people.
The Hierarchy of Nations
People of conservative views and nationalists generally agree with the idea of natural hierarchy. They accept the obvious fact that all living creatures are different and that any attempt to equalize their differences brings only harm.
The problem is that the mental illness of equality has spread far and wide in the last centuries; and even those people, who seemingly disagree with Marxism, in some peculiar way, are afflicted by it as well.
The obvious statement that all people are different could hardly evoke any disagreement. The fact that different people have different sets of abilities and characters is widely accepted as well. But at some point, when we start to discuss various groups of people and their characteristics, the detrimental consequences of Marxist infection come to the fore. The more detailed and precise this discussion becomes the more opposition it evokes. When we transfer the same natural principle of inequality into international relations and especially into interracial differences, the whole hell goes loose with screams about “Nazism” and calls to ban everything and jail everyone who dared to raise the issue.
The mainstream public that for many decades was nurtured on Marxist ideas is programmed for such a reaction; it is obliged to profess race-blindness and rejection of ethnic identity. The public mentality isn’t much different of what it was in Middle Ages Christian Europe. Those who disagree with official holy dogmas are designated as heretics and marked for annihilation (the only difference is that at present the annihilation happens primarily in informational and economic fields).
But even the people with nationalist views are not fully immune from the pernicious effects of equality-mania.
The laws of Nature are universal and immutable. Nothing and no one could be exempt from their application. The inequality principle permeates everything. Nothing is the same and nothing is equal. This axiom entails multiple practical applications in social relationships….
Hamburger Today, responds to my question: “White Dresden in the present?” April 10, 2026 Your comments are a series of non-sequiturs. You’re arguing against positions I didn’t take. My point was – and is – that carrying grudges between Whites from the past is doing Whites no good in the present. I’m not arguing that the bombing of Dresden was a good thing or even that we should ignore the facts. My position is simple: How does grousing about Dresden – or any other White-on-White violence from the past – help Whites today in Dresden or anywhere else?
—
Wimpy, if you were raised in the city of Dresden, you might commemorate what the Allies did to your city 81 years ago.
I had to look up your word “grousing,” and am pretty sure White residents in Dresden today don’t “complain as if with a whine (Merriam-Webster)” about the unnecessary murder of scores of thousands of German refugees in their city on Valentine’s Day 1945.
If you don’t mind, each year we will commemorate those deaths at the hands of victorious Allies: “Annual Commemoration – Dresden: A Real Holocaust” at nationalvanguard.org
BTW, “the phrase non sequitur means “it does not follow” in Latin. Although the term was originally used in the context of philosophy to denote poor logic, nowadays it is used more broadly for any kind of statement that seems to come out of the blue… Non sequiturs may serve as transitions to change the subject or mood, or they can signify that a character is not paying attention.”
Save your accusation of using a non sequitur for someone else, Wimp — someone who cares about your “poor logic.”
History matters. Sometimes it matters more than anything else. Dresden bombing isn’t only a historic issue. The same with all other allied crimes. Because the whole modern anti-White globalist system is based on false historical narrative about WW2.
Yet one aspect of the WW2 is the ethnic cleansing of Germans in Eastern Prussia and other eastern provinces of Germany. 2 million killed and 12 million expelled from their places of residence. It matters. It must never be forgotten. We have no right to forget or forgive it. Those crimes must be avenged; regardless of how much time passes. I don’t buy the liberal lie about exclusive personal responsibility, which postulates that only individuals could be held accountable for particular crimes. It never works this way. Humans evolved differently. The collective responsibility is an inseparable part of history. It will always be this way. All people belong to particular communities and societies. They enjoy both fruits of victories and burdens of defeats. No individual can live detached from the wider community.
The societies that played the main role in destroying traditional Europe 81 years ago must pay the price in kind; with interest.
The mainstream blockheads in Russia, America and Britain still continue to celebrate their victory against White race; they still assert that they “defeated Evil” and “saved the world”. I have zero tolerance to this scum. The whites who voluntarily reject their racial identity and accept alien narratives must not be reckoned as “our people”. It is good for nothing cattle. I don’t see any future for them. I don’t want any future where they would be present. There must be no place for this scum in our New World. The White people must learn to be fanatically intolerant. I have no desire to forgive anyone; neither personal enemies, nor the enemies of my racial identity.
Dresden will be avenged; the ethnic cleansing of East Prussia must be repaid in kind. Yes, the actual perpetrators have died but there are multiple descendants of those monsters; they enjoy good lives boosted by the crimes of their grandfathers. Is it just and acceptable? I don’t think so. The Christian ideas about “forgiveness” are the poison that destroyed White race. The purified and resurrected White race must base its morality on fanatical adherence to its identity and uncompromising vengeance against its enemies. It is the only way to survive and succeed; both on the individual level and as a community.
Thank you for your powerful message, Wolf. It is truth that pro-White activists need.
Wolf Stoner: April 11, 2026 History matters. Sometimes it matters more than anything else. Dresden bombing isn’t only a historic issue… one aspect of the WW2 is the ethnic cleansing of Germans in Eastern Prussia and other eastern provinces of Germany. 2 million killed and 12 million expelled from their places of residence. It matters. It must never be forgotten. We have no right to forget or forgive it. Those crimes must be avenged; regardless of how much time passes..
The societies that played the main role in destroying traditional Europe 81 years ago must pay the price in kind; with interest.
The mainstream blockheads in Russia, America and Britain still continue to celebrate their victory against White race; they still assert that they “defeated Evil” and “saved the world”. I have zero tolerance to this scum. The whites who voluntarily reject their racial identity and accept alien narratives must not be reckoned as “our people”. It is good for nothing cattle. I don’t see any future for them. I don’t want any future where they would be present. There must be no place for this scum in our New World. The White people must learn to be fanatically intolerant. I have no desire to forgive anyone; neither personal enemies, nor the enemies of my racial identity.
Dresden will be avenged; the ethnic cleansing of East Prussia must be repaid in kind. Yes, the actual perpetrators have died but there are multiple descendants of those monsters; they enjoy good lives boosted by the crimes of their grandfathers. Is it just and acceptable? I don’t think so. The Christian ideas about “forgiveness” are the poison that destroyed White race. The purified and resurrected White race must base its morality on fanatical adherence to its identity and uncompromising vengeance against its enemies.
There was also ethnic cleansing of “Soviet” Germans, who lived since 18th century in Russia (not only on the Volga), and in Southern Ukraine, and also in the Caucasus. They all were deport to Qazaqstan Steppe under unhuman conditions, and this was much worse, comparing with the fate of American Japanese, which also were deported to internment camps.
Hamburger Today: April 10, 2026… My position is simple: How does grousing about Dresden – or any other White-on-White violence from the past – help Whites today in Dresden or anywhere else?
—
You tell me, Wimpy. You should know a thing or two about payback.
I just say, payback is Hell, and is a dish best served cold.
While I’ve got your attention, I’m curious: why did you pick a name like Hamburger Today to comment here on Counter-Currents? I would think if you style yourself after a cartoon character, it would be someone like Captain America, not Wimpy. WikiJews tell us who that popular cartoon character from the 1930’s actually was:
J. Wellington Wimpy, generally referred to as Wimpy, is a character in the comic strip Popeye [the Sailorman] and in the Popeye cartoons based upon the strip. Wimpy debuted in the strip in 1931 and was one of the dominant characters… Wimpy is Popeye’s friend, and he plays the role of a self-centered foil to Popeye.
Wimpy is a soft-spoken romantic, intelligent and educated, a lazy coward, a miser, and a glutton. He is a scam artist, and frequently bereft of either cash or lodging (due to both his lethargy and voracious appetite)… His best-known catchphrase started in 1931 as, “Cook me up a hamburger. I’ll pay you Tuesday.” In March 1932, this then became the famous “I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today”.
Besides mooching hamburgers, he also picks up discarded cigars. Popeye often tries to reform Wimpy’s character, but Wimpy never reforms. Hamburgers are Wimpy’s all-time favorite food, and he is usually seen carrying or eating one or more at a time… However, he is usually too cheap or bankrupt to pay for them on his own.
Hamburger Today: How does grousing about Dresden – or any other White-on-White violence from the past – help Whites today in Dresden or anywhere else?
—
Good question, Wimp. Is Dresden worth commemorating, or not? I side with those who commemorate the “largest single terror event in history,” even if it was carried out by Americans and Brits against our German cousins in the so-called “good war.”
Would you “minimize or cover up the Dresden holocaust” as do those in the “Jewish power structure?”
See some more recent history:
“Germany: National Socialists Attacked by Antifa in Dresden” at nationalvanguard.org
POLICE IN THE eastern German city of Dresden say six National Socialists on their way home from a rally commemorating the holocaust of Dresden by Allied bombers in World War 2 were attacked by a horde of masked assailants believed to be leftist extremists.
The dpa news agency reported Monday two of the nationalists were beaten so badly they needed hospital treatment.
The six patriots, aged between 27 and 35, were attacked by about 15 “antifa” assailants on their way back to their cars after a rally of about 500 National Socialists Saturday.
The demonstration was being held in advance of the anniversary of the Allied firebombing holocaust of Dresden on Feb. 13-14, 1945. Hundreds of thousands of White people died in the bombing. The Jewish power structure, which covertly supports the “antifa” thugs, minimizes or covers up the Allied atrocity, which killed more people than any single terror event in history.
Consider the double standard by Jews for who must not forget atrocities — they — and who should: goyim.
The phrase “Never Forgive” is often associated with the Holocaust and serves as a reminder of the atrocities committed against the Jewish people. It is a call to remember the pain and suffering endured by those who were victims of the Holocaust and to
prevent such atrocities from happening again. The phrase “Never Forget” is
used to emphasize the importance of remembering the Holocaust and to encourage empathy and action against hate and oppression. Both phrases are integral to Jewish identity.
I do not know about Americans, but as far as I know, the Brits have begged Saxons for excuse, and helped (with both money and work) to renovate destroyed buildings in Dresden.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.