Moscow’s response to Romper Stomper.
2,751 words
Part 5 of 7 (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4)
Translated by Ondrej Mann
The first film in which “neo-fascists” entered the new millennium—The Believer (2001, dir. Henry Bean)—actually deals mainly with the crisis of Jewish identity. Rebellious Jew Danny Balint (played by the sufficiently “Aryan-looking” Ryan Gosling) has been protesting against the senselessness of rigid dogmas in the faith of his race since childhood [1], and as a teenager he becomes a skinhead with the aim of killing his fellows, because “the modern world is sick with Judaism”: [2]
“They undermine traditional life and uproot society. They tear it from its roots. Normal people derive their spirit from the earth, the sun, the sea, the soil. That is where they draw their knowledge from. But Jews have no soil. (According to Danny, Israelis are therefore no longer Jews: “It is essentially a secular society. They don’t want Judaism because they have land.”) A true Jew is a vagabond, a nomad. He has no roots or ties, so he generalizes everything (hence universalism and globalism undermining other identities?). He can’t hammer a nail or plow a field, he can only buy and sell and invest and manipulate the market, that’s all. It sucks the life out of people rooted in the soil and transforms it into a cosmopolitan culture based on books, numbers, and ideas; that is its power. Consider the greatest Jewish minds. Marx, Freud, Einstein. What did they give us? Communism, child sexuality, and the atomic bomb. In just three centuries, these people emerged from European ghettos, tore us out of a world of order and law, and plunged us into the chaos of class struggle, irrational desires, and relativity, where the very existence of matter and the meaning of life are questioned. And why? Because the fundamental characteristic of the Jewish soul is to tear life apart until only threads remain. They want nothing but nothingness. Nothingness without end,” Danny explains with growing passion to journalists. [3]
The treatment begins with a group that, in addition to anarchically beating up Jews in the streets and kosher restaurants, also organizes attacks with explosives and sniper rifles. Soon, he joins the “intellectual fascist movement” around Curtis Zampf (Billy Zane plays him a bit like David Duke) and Lina Moebius. Long-haired Zampf, who “teaches leftists” at the university, states in a private circle: “I am for fascism, it is the only form that can satisfy us.” And Lina adds: “We say what no one else has the courage to say.” “Race is fundamental to us. Spiritual life comes from race. From blood. Without it, we are no better than Jews,” Danny emphasizes. However, when he looks again at the Scriptures—the Torah—in the synagogue where he places the bomb, the “moment of truth” arrives for him as well… An epiphany that turns into the certainty that he can never overcome his Jewishness—precisely because of his “blood.” It is a given, irrevocable. And it cannot be escaped even in death, as the final scene suggests!
“For a true Jew, immediate existence, the theory of divine justification, fanfare, the Siegfried motif, the oak tree, the creation of the self, the words ‘I am!’ will always be inaccessible,” wrote the Jew Otto Weininger (1880-1903). [4] This “holy damned man” shot himself after realizing that his ethnicity, i.e., his “biocultural” identity, was permanently insurmountable. Danny will follow in his footsteps. And, also according to Weininger, he sees the key to understanding the behavior of Jews in their sexuality. [5]
Bean’s film depicts Jews mostly in a “stereotypical” way: either as cowardly, fearful, traumatized “victims of the Holocaust” (Frankel’s circle), or as powerful (and arrogant) rulers of the media and investment banks (Manzetti, Roger Brand). Either as devout believers who almost bang their heads against the wall (characters with kippahs), or as cold-hearted (“cool”) pragmatists (Danny’s father). However, it also reflects what is clearly a very real Jewish belief when Danny explains at Zampf’s gathering:
People hate Jews. Deep down, beneath all the tolerance they’ve learned from television, they hate them. The word ‘Jew’ gives them goose bumps. It’s like when a rat runs across the floor (…) You want to kill it without even knowing why, it’s a physical reaction: Jew! And everyone feels it: Jew!
Note: Danny works as a warehouse worker (= typical job for rank-and-file skins); Curtis and Lina want to build a position in the mainstream political arena, promote works such as “Sociobiology,” “Earth First,” “The Genome Project,” invite blacks, Jews, liberals, get Chomsky, etc. [6]
You will also see: direct action by a “lone hunter” (stalking, bullying, and kicking a Jewish student); a blow to the throat that can effectively incapacitate a much stronger opponent; and a fearless approach to “niggas” on the streets.
Quote to remember: “It’s a romantic movement, and it always has been.” (Lina Moebius on fascism).
Let’s move to the other side of the globe. Sasha (21), known as Blade, found his life’s mission here in the fight against “black occupation.” Eduard, aka Abraham, persistently films him. Both are members of a “military-patriotic sports club,” or a group of “Nazi skinheads,” which meets in a basement gym and is led by “The Master,” a veteran of Chechnya. A series of amateur promotional and instructional videos and a pile of other material will one day become “Eddie’s big movie.”
Russia 88 (Россия 88 2009, dir. Pavel Bardin) is an acknowledged, Blair Witch Project-inspired Moscow response to Romper Stomper (including the appearance of the main protagonist). Only much more sociological: it asks why young people in today’s Russia are becoming “fascists” (“Sold-out power, corruption, lies. That’s what’s happening in our country. And it all affects young people. We’re drowning in a mountain of shit”) and captures their “confessions.” [7] The film shows parts of the city that are already in the hands of colorful colonizers from the south, but under the criminal “protection” of state authorities (“The lokal market is a city within a city. Security guards, cops, feds, they all profit from it”). It also suggests how militias such as the “Master’s” can easily become a tool of competition between market traders, entrepreneurs, the “black hand” of the police (“Negroes, those animals, are becoming too arrogant. Visit them!”), or various interest and political factions.
Impression > Today’s underground. Lost guard. Hopelessness. Here too (as in American History X), anger and hatred are directed at one’s own family: destruction of oneself and one’s surroundings.
Best sequence > from the training camp for “unarmed combat and shooting.” You will also see: a “patriotic action” in the subway, an intervention against a whigga (= “white negro”); the band Kolovrat will be heard.
Note: the privileged position, which again has a problem with Jewish identity (cameraman Eddie is half-Jewish on his father’s side); the “betrayal” of Sasha’s sister; that Sasha’s family is complete, even multigenerational (birthday scene); the characters of the Master and his fateful mistake. [8]
Instructions from Sasha 1: “You are a fighter. Your body is your weapon. A weapon in the war against occupation. Train every day. Find a coach. Learn boxing, learn sambo, practice close combat. (…) Kill immigrants. That’s good. That’s better than good.”
Instructions from Sasha 2. (at the Dynamo Moscow stadium): “Dear hooligans, don’t kill or hurt each other. Race and nation. That is what guides us, right-wing patriots.”
The Master speaks: “We work undercover. No Lonsdale, no bombers, no unplanned fights. Leave all that stuff here. Don’t kill anyone. Just damage their property. Break a few noses. That’s our tactical task.”
The film was clearly inspired by the “guerrilla strikes” style of Format 18 (founded by Maxim “Tesak” Martsinkevich), which allegedly neutralized up to 600 “colonizers” (an unspecified list at the end of the film lists 77 killings). [9]
Combat Girls (Kriegerin 2011, dir. David Wnendt) Marisa (20) works as a cashier in a convenience store in a small German town with a refugee center on its outskirts. She refuses to serve the “Kanaks,” knocks them off their mopeds, is an angel to her sick grandfather, a Wehrmacht veteran, drinks beer like a man, beats up “whiggas,” and dreams of having a child and a country house with her Nazi boyfriend, who is currently in prison. But then little dark-skinned Rasul, a refugee from Afghanistan, sticks to her, and that throws her off track for good…
The film spins the usual kaleidoscope of violence, sex, tattoos, hardening, and stupidity. Marisa’s boyfriend, Sandro, throws away a sort of “pseudo-NPD” brochure about the perniciousness of multiculturalism, saying that it’s “just words, words, words,” whereas he “is ready for war.” But it is precisely the fact that he “has nothing to say” that contributes to Marisa’s disillusionment after Sandro’s release from prison. [10] The second prominent female character, fifteen-year-old Svenja, mainly frightens the middle class with the idea of what kind of rabble their adolescent offspring might fall into if they don’t raise them… especially if they don’t raise them according to the “liturgy of ’68”: permissiveness, favoring the weak, etc. However, the repeated retro shot of the “problematic grandfather” who makes little Marisa march along the beach with a backpack full of sand as exercise clearly warns: Don’t raise your children to be fighters!
The year-older Skinning (Шишање 2010, dir. Stevan Filipovic) also stereotypically attributes patriotic and nationalistic sentiments mainly to backward (= retarded) individuals and their gang. These socially excluded hooligans satisfy their primitive urges without restraint in a dimly lit basement lair. Sometimes, due to immaturity, complexes, or under the influence of some kind of shock, even a “decent person” succumbs to the temptations of manipulated, declassed anti-social individuals. This time, it is a top mathematics student Novica, who, surprisingly, does not sober up quickly, but on the contrary, quickly rises to prominence in the basement, underground hierarchy. . .
Such students can then become the “worst,” according to “kosher experts.” Or the “best”? The student’s initial motivation to transform into a “barbarian” is archetypal: in front of his newly acquired community of friends, and especially in front of the beautiful and fearless Mina (played by Bojana Novakovic), the shy-looking Novica shows what lies beneath the veneer of civilization. And he is truly rewarded for it. . . accepted by the gang and by her. [11] He becomes a man.
After this first combat “coup” (the beating of a gypsy), he resigns his “bourgeois” career in the system and deals firmly with his “rainbow” professor. He breaks off his existing shallow and disrupted family and friendship ties. He refuses to be exploited by that part of the Belgrade establishment that uses patriotic and conservative rhetoric for its own power goals, but a genuine anarchist “national revolution” would be even more destructive to their “commercial” and other interests than EU control and intervention in Serbia. He forms a commando resistance from a group of uncontrolled rioters. Their plan: to kidnap the local “boss” (agenda: corruption, hookers, drugs for “dance parties”) and raid and burn down the gypsy camp with Molotov cocktails, which will definitely unsettle Relja, the current “boss,” for whom the bomber jacket was more of a weekend outfit. . .
Note: the poster for the film 300: how Mina and Relja will turn out (oh, those cadres). Will Novica finally repent?
Most realistic character: the fat inspector Milutin, “protector of law and order.”
Notes:
1. Race—here in Chamberlain’s sense as an unstable spiritual and physical “entity” that evolves or declines over time, but which can also be consciously maintained, or even cultivated. See: The Foundations of the 19th Century and others.
2. Jews as the “ferment of decomposition” of nations and states: this description of their role in “static European societies” was also intended positively by 19th-century European liberal idealists. See J. P. Stern, The Führer and the People, 1975.
3. However, the intellectuals and ideologues of “Aryanism” generally saw (and see) it differently: materialistic Jews, they claim, are—as “children of the world”—more resilient than, for example, the “metaphysically inclined, and therefore fragile” Germans. A high degree of “attachment to the earth”—to material wealth—has thus made them capable of “surviving even the greatest and most famous nations.” Compare, however, the holistic (total) conception of life in Herbert Schweiger versus the “unraveling of life” into threads among the Jews, as Danny further describes.
4. Quoted from Robert Pynsent, Questions Of Identity: Czech And Slovak Ideas Of Nationality And Personality, 1994, p. 175.
5. Danny to a sleazy New York Times reporter: “Take sexuality, for example. Did you fuck a Jewish woman? See? And what did you notice? Jewish women love giving blowjobs. And Jews are obsessed with it. Why? Because a Jew is a woman.”
It was Weininger himself who, in his work *Geschlecht und Charakter* [Sex and Character], contrasted spiritual, creative, masculine “Aryanism” with instinctual, uncreative, destructive, feminine “Jewishness,” for “the true Jew, like the woman, has no self, and therefore no value of his own.”
“Oral sex is technically perverse, isn’t it?” Danny continues, “and that’s how it is with Jews in everything. Jews control the media and banks—investment banks, not commercial ones!” he clarifies, “but the main thing is that in these areas they apply the same principles as in sex.” Because of his inadequacy, the Jew resorts to perversion and then implements and presents it as a matter of society as a whole.
Weininger: “Our age is not only the most Jewish, but also the most feminine of all…” (quoted in Brigitte Hamann, Hitlers Wien: Lehrjahre eines Diktators, 1996, p. 257). The Jew relies on “Oriental,” “Renaissance” pleasure, which is a weakness (the consumerist glow of “luxury”) that has effects on “Northerners” as devastating as alcohol has on Native Americans.
5b. In *The Believer*, Karla, the daughter of Lina Moebius, with whom Danny becomes close, is a masochist. Among other things, she “allows” him to watch her have sex with her mother’s boyfriend. Mrs. Frankel, in turn, recounts her concentration camp experience: “And when I refused to sleep with him, he had my sister Ester shot, right before my eyes. Everyone blamed me for it, so of course I did everything he wanted afterward.”
* The willing practice of fellatio was foreign to Christian-raised and chaste wives. This made the Jewish courtesans of Venice—who had long been under the strong influence of the Orient—the “queens of sensual love” as early as the late Middle Ages. From there, the reputation of their “sweet depravity” spread among the “dandies” of all Europe. Even many Czech writers from the early decades of the 20th century could not forget their Saras, Rachels, Judiths, or Adinas for a long time, at least judging by the frequency of the works they dedicated to them.
6. “We need intelligence. We need intellectuals—we’ve got enough rascals” Lina explains to Danny, urging him to become the “driving force” behind her movement. It’s a “subtle” allusion to the intellectual impotence of the “real” white “comrades.”
7. At Random Sasha: “When I got scared. There are billions of them, yellow and black bastards. They’re poor, angry, hungry. And they want to come here…”Peter: “I was forced into it. My circumstances forced me into it…”; Misha: “I believe in justice…”; Anton (the fat guy with the perpetually dumb expression): “I didn’t become this way, I was born this way.” Also interesting is the staged poll on the topic “Russia for Russians Only?”
8. A theatrical confrontation with immigrants on the bridge. Although the boys laugh at two friends dressed as knights during training, they themselves then show up dressed as “Rurik’s men.” Robert, the seducer of Sasha’s sister, was supposed to “disappear” completely unnoticed, according to the plan.
9. Let us also recall the case of the “Forest Brotherhood” from the spring of 2010, roughly a year after the premiere of Bardin’s film. A five-member (according to other sources, up to seven-member) group (the so-called Primorsky Partisans) led by former paratrooper Roman Muromtsev, a veteran of the Chechen War, killed one police officer and seriously wounded three others to avenge police corruption and abuse of power in Ussuriysk, a coastal region in the Far East. (Certainly, while Putin has managed to restore Russia’s status as a superpower, he has not restored internal order in this vast country: the Eurasian “Tatar-like Golden Horde” still reigns supreme there.)
10. When she exchanges a few simple words with Rasul, who speaks broken German, it contributes significantly to her “enlightenment” and “conversion,” at least according to the screenwriter.
11. The Iron Cross! Apparently, ever since the biker short film Scorpio Rising (1964, dir. Kenneth Anger), it has been a standard prop in gay and S&M “games played by lovers of leather, tattoos, and latex.” It is sad to realize how films like Skinning continue to spread this perverse cliché among an already confused, decent public.
15 comments
“The willing practice of fellatio was foreign to Christian-raised and chaste wives.”
I find that one hard to believe. Is there a QRD on these Czech writers with Jewish ladyfriends? In any case, the idea that the wives of Christian men in Christian Europe weren’t performing fellatio is a hard sell.
From the article: “The willing practice of fellatio was foreign to Christian-raised and chaste wives.”
Josephus Cato | May 10, 2026 at 10:31 pm
“I find that one hard to believe.”
Yeah, I’d say that is a Jewish “2nd Wave Feminist” narrative.
I think it’s on par with the notion that women started shaving their legs ─ not because of the invention of the cheap safety razor (the Gillette was patented in 1904) and dress styles started hiking upwards with materials shortages during the First World War, and then even more so with the Roaring ’20s ─ but instead because Gentile women “Flappers” just wanted to emulate what prostitutes were already doing.
A similar Feminist (sometimes missionary Christian) narrative argues that it was the impetus of horny eligible Chinese bachelors with fetishes and not ambitious upper-class mothers binding the feet of their infant girls to dubiously qualify them as Ladies of Leisure for the Royal court.
Also, I don’t know about Roman Catholics, but “Chaste Wives” has no meaning for Protestants as you cannot be unchaste with your own husband. No Hail Marys required.
Just because they aren’t talking openly about the latest Hollywood/Jewish sex gossip in the Women’s magazines before Cosmo, that does not mean that the Wives don’t know anything and don’t share notes. Regardless, let’s just say that it’s not a big stretch that “faithful wives” were never the ones spreading AIDS anyway.
On the other hand, despite the women’s Liberation and Grrrl magazines shoehorning in as much deviant sex and “lifestyle” material as possible during the later 20th century ─ not to mention the weirdly-fashionable garbage pail shtick from shock jocks like (((Howard Stern))) ─ they have nevertheless still found “Anal” to be a bit of a hard sell. No teenybopper ever wanted to be buggered by Justin Bieber.
🙂
This fascination with Jewish women has been around since the Art Nouveau period—or rather, since Symbolism and Decadence. Back then, in a society that was still formally Christian under the emperor, writers and painters used this theme to provoke “decent people.” Take a look at František Kobliha Žena. It’s not just inspired by Gustav Klimt (the same fascination with Jewish women). Open up Miloš Marten Cyklus rozkoše a smrti or Cortegiana (a prostitute from Renaissance Venice during the plague).
List all the literary works? There are plenty. Start with Josef Škvorecký’s Lvíče —Flirt with Miss Stříbrná, or Silberstein. A similar Jewish woman can also be found in Milan Kundera’s The Book of Laughter and Forgetting. Or one of the characters in the famous Kundera’s book *The Joke*? “I’m off to the movies, Sara with her suitcase to the concentration camp”—in the 1960s, among the revisionists, such images were part of the social etiquette. Since the Liblice Conference, Today, people would probably call it an urban legend.
Don’t Christian women perform oral sex? You’re from the porn generation. Back then, most people wouldn’t even have thought of such a thing. Similarly, anal sex—popularized by Albanian pimps starting in the ’90s (you surely know that their dominance in the white slave trade, once Hodža was no longer keeping them in check, eventually made its way into film: Taken 2008)—or sadomasochism! From the London salons for a few perverts from the highest circles in the late 19th century—whose scandalous exposure in the press inspired d’Annunzio—to BDSM paraphernalia in today’s TV commercials after 10 p.m.
In fact, people used to go to prostitutes, maids, and young girls even for anal sex; there always had to be a woman standing bent over. Christianity isn’t the only thing behind such chastity. The “missionary position” is a sign of humanization. When Roman or Germanic “kings” and “princesses” lived in houses where animals occupied the other half, these noble folk didn’t want to copulate like their dogs, horses, and cattle. That only happens now, when we don’t see animals every day:) And look up the bonobo chimpanzee on Wikipedia: their behavior is the desired model for resolving civil relations in the EU and the US; I think certain human rights already apply to them. A return to nature in its purest form. We just need to sort out the legal aspects of it all…
Ondrej Mann | May 13, 2026 at 11:19 am
“Don’t Christian women perform oral sex? You’re from the porn generation. […] “
I’m from the Porn Generation? LOL!
I think you are missing my point that pop culture is not really what the Jewish lens thinks that it is.
In fact, I grew up Mormon and graduated in good standing from both Brigham Young University (Idaho) and Idaho State University.
I pretty much know lots about the subject of media in the 20th century as I’m basically a historian and a licensed broadcasting engineer and have over a quarter century experience prowling an academic library.
Where I went to school, you risked disciplinary action if you got caught attending an R-rated movie. This was just before cheap video tape rentals really took off (1982) and that just couldn’t be controlled by City Hall.
Also, students were required to live in campus-approved housing and you weren’t even allowed to subscribe to HBO on cable TV (a new thing) because HBO did not cut the F-Bombs or Dennis Franz’s bare butt out of the R-rated movies. HBO is also the greedy corporate entity that pioneered satellite TV scrambling back in 1984. Not that much of it was really porn ─ or driven by porn ─ but more on that point later.
So, yes, I am old enough to remember when the Motion Picture Association of America instituted their movie rating system to make it so that “family values” could easily be divined out of the mess (some might say the sewer) of the Hollywood Babylon ecosystem.
Jack Valenti, a good old Roman Catholic and Kennedy Democrat, who was on Air Force One in Dallas in 1963 when LBJ was sworn in by a Liberal race-mixing judge, was at the forefront of the Motion Picture Association rating system helping all the good, Sunday-go-to-meetin’ Whitebread parents with all their Kosher sacraments accounted for who needed to navigate the scary seas of Sodom.
Before that you didn’t know if the cathode rays were going to beam in Gomorrah or the Mormon Tabernacle Choir.
Of course, Liberal Hollywood filmmakers, and every Lesbian director who has ever cared to comment on the subject, has nothing good to say about Jack Valenti and his based Liberal family values ─ but on the whole, I don’t think the Motion Picture Association ratings system was all that bad.
It made a mess out of X-ratings, and it later had to be tweaked again to create PG-13 after (((Steven Spielberg))) started making teenage adventure movies about Goyim being chewed up by aircraft propellers and so on (link).
I remember in 1967 that my sister was about a year old and my Mom and Dad took us kids to a drive-in movie in Albuquerque called the Jungle Book, and we learned all about the “Bare Necessities” from a talking bear (wtf). The movie was rated G for “general audiences.”
At age 6, I was mildly amused by the swarthy innocence and double-entendre filth, but I could not help to notice that my Dad was even a little bit bored by the fare. My Mom probably had her hands full with the other two kids. This was the last animated feature that Walt Disney had a personal hand in (and maybe not his best).
A few years later for another Family Night, we all went out to the show-house in late 1972 to see the G-rated movie The Swiss Family Robinson, which had already debuted over a decade earlier.
This was at one of those new movie theaters in a Tucson mall with more than one showing going on ─ and we could not help to notice that the other theaters were jam-packed with all walks of people desperately wanting to see the X-rated Marlon Brando movie Last Tango in Paris.
The “bring me some buttuh!” movie was a stinker, but it made a lot of Danegeld at the box office being an early X-rated feature.
The MPA ratings system had to be overhauled after that, but it left a lot of ambiguity going on about what is really porn where it comes to R-ratings.
My Government and World History teacher in High School was LDS and also an Idaho State Legislator who was a fierce anti-pornography crusader, and he knew very well that the first requirement is that you have to be able to define exactly what it means to be pornographic.
Otherwise people will ban junior’s eyes from seeing the Statue of David or start burning their vinyl record collections to prevent a takeover of Vanities.
Once while I was in the Army, circa 1981, I went with a friend to a R-rated movie ─ and we were expecting something rather tame, like from late night TV ─ but this in reality should have been rated a solid X. So we got an involuntary education.
They don’t really rate anything X anymore; the movie marketing system just cuts whatever naughty bits or ideas out of R-rated movies so that what remains will pass whatever standard of censorship is left. It is almost meaningless.
Not that it is any loss, but in fact, nobody is able to market an X-rated movie other than something shown at the Drag Show theater in downtown Denver where they’ve shown the ghastly Rocky Horror Picture Show every night since the 1970s. If you have never been a toast dodger, you are not missing anything that could ever be classified as High Art.
It was kind of nice at first to watch films on HBO cable that were not bowdlerized ─ but on the other hand, there really is no point with the younger generation and its fascination for vulgar language as the new default. I’m not afraid of some scorching sailor words here and there, but why is everything needing to be “Jewish potty mouth” ?
I could go on and on. But the Ryan Gosling skinhead character in Believer is exactly what Jews wished that White Nationalists were like. He’s as dumb as a box of rocks.
Thinking back though, Gosling’s character was talking about White women and oral sex, and the actual quote that I responded to was about “chaste wives.”
Well, Mormons do not believe in premarital or extramarital sex, so that is a big qualifier ─ but married women, regardless, are not exactly in the habit of talking to Hollywood Jews and “sex therapists” like Dr. Ruth about such things.
We don’t need Gloria Steinem, Gloria Allred, Larry Flynt, Hugh Heffner, nor any of the rest of the lot, to hold our lives to some weird Hollywood lifestyle standard, sexually or otherwise.
And ─ despite the due diligence of Margaret Mead and the other abominable anthropology Marxists ─ as far as the Roman vicars lecturing anybody about “the Missionary Position,” that always makes me laugh.
To borrow a joke about the Vatican and birth control that was made by the irrepressible Secretary of Agriculture Earl Butz,
“Da Poppa, he no playa da game; he no maka da rules.”
🙂
You have a remarkable understanding of the subject. Pop culture shapes the discussion and often the human imagination as well. Pop culture has a greater influence on the mainstream, less influence on Christian conservative groups, and perhaps zero influence on the Amish. If you’re more interested in the penetration of eroticism and pornography into films, I recommend the older film series Sadonacism in Film. It also covers the context of Last Tango in Paris (1972) and similar films.
I don’t know of any such QRD. Giacomo Casanova wrote about fellatio performed by Venetian Jewish prostitutes and their other inventive sexual practices in his Memoirs. If you’re interested in learning more about these Czech writers who wrote about fellatio and the sexuality of Jewish women, I can translate excerpts from their works for you and compile a list of these writers.
Great article! The movie The Believer (2001) is based on a jew that was a member of George Lincoln Rockwell’s group; he committed suicide when he was discovered. 🙃
Are you talking about that Jew, John Patler, who killed Commander George Lincoln Rockwell? I haven’t read anything like that about the movie, but it’s possible.
Negative, the individual was followed home by a fellow jew (a rabbi, I believe), whereupon he ran into an adjacent room, and shot himself, rather than suffer humiliation in front of his parents. It was reported that he also said something like, “Long live the White race!” 🙃
His name was Dan Burros.
You’re right. A biography of Burros, One More Victim, was written by A. M. Rosenthal and Arthur Gelb in 1967, and his life was the basis for the 2001 film The Believer.
Ondrej: The first film in which “neo-fascists” entered the new millennium—The Believer (2001, dir. (((Henry Bean)))—actually deals mainly with the crisis of Jewish identity. Rebellious Jew Danny Balint (played by the sufficiently “Aryan-looking” Ryan Gosling)…
—
Sounds like a typically disgusting flick. Fuck Hollywood and goy actors playing Jews.
THE BIG SHORT. Did things get any better in 2015 when the star-studded film The Big Short came out? Definitely not. Here we had Brad Pitt, Steve Carell, Christian Bale and Ryan Gosling — goys to a man — acting out the script of the book of the same name…
Source: “Vulture Capitalism, Jews — and Hollywood, Part 2” at nationalvanguard.org
I read the essay you recommended, Vulture Capitalism, Jews — and Hollywood, both parts. It’s well written. Jews and neo-Marxists have made a lot of films about neo-fascism. These people are fascinated by the subject, and through their own projections, they infuse the films with their own perversions, sick sexuality, and intoxication with power. So these films are more about their perception of the world and their repressed desires than about neo-fascism. It’s a shame that white nationalists don’t make their own films. I can imagine, for example, a film about David Duke or Louis Beam. These would be hits if such films were to enter official distribution.
Ondrej Mann: May 11, 2026 … It’s a shame that white nationalists don’t make their own films. I can imagine, for example, a film about David Duke or Louis Beam. These would be hits if such films were to enter official distribution.
—
“Official distribution”? What’s that? The standard Jewish distribution network out of Hollywood into Jew-owned theaters, with Jewish reviews and promotions? We must do better than that.
Films can bypass the Hollywood distribution system into theaters these days with live-stream on computers. and I don’t mean on Jew-owned YouTube.
Duke and Beam have interesting stories, but our people don’t need or would even be very interested in a non-fiction documentary.
Like when Dr. Pierce wrote successful fiction, The Turner Diaries, to reach people with his ideas because they were more likely to read and be entertained by fiction than by the factual non-fiction that he had been writing — a fictional film will be better, especially one based on a thoughtful story by Pierce.
A good candidate for an action-packed movie with pro-White lessons would be Pierce’s second novel, Hunter — better than The Turner Diaries, without Turner’s notoriety. It won’t require A-list celebrity actors who are paid millions of dollars to recite lines — just enough money and people with experience to pull off a professional production of Pierce’s 1989 novel.
Then, some of those who are entertained by Hunter just might be interested in his more important factual non-fiction.
Who would play protagonist Oscar Yeager? Not a sellout like Ryan Gosling.
In the past, the film The Hunter might have been to North America what The Birth of a Nation (1915) was to the KKK. But the era of great films and great directors is long gone. Today, quality films tend to appeal more to older people and art lovers. Young people are more interested in the lives of celebrities, YouTubers, and that sort of thing, or they might subscribe to anti-white Netflix just to kill boredom. I’m not really interested in actors, but Edward Norton in American History X (1998) and Nicholas Hoult in The Order (2024) did a good job. Who would you suggest as the main character in The Hunter?
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.