Incoming: FaceRight, Ratatosk
Posted by alex in Europe, Michael O'Meara, white nationalism at 3:45 pm | 
Permanent Link
Two responses to O’Meara’s article (posted below on this page) on Guillaume Faye and his evolving position jews. Does my nose detect the whiff of kikes getting nervous about Israel, and if not precisely selling short, preparing through tractable intermediaries such as Jew-Luvin’ Jared and the BNP’s Screwy Lewy Barnes a carveout/hideout within the only like-lookin’g race with the demographic weight to fight off Islam? Everybody needs they paint thinned… and a bolthole too!
Ratatosk is something Nordic, unreadable by me.
FaceRight is in all too familiar English.
Here’s the entry that concerns us:
From the Adirondacks
Crisis in the Far-Right
My last entry mentioned a recent interview with Guillaume Faye. In it, Faye explicitly denounced anti-semitism as “unuseful, divisive, infantile, politically inconsistent, out dated.”
Faye’s statement reflects a growing division within the “identitarian” (fundamentally, White nationalist) right over the question of anti-semitism. Following on the heels of the controversy at the American Renaissance conference earlier this year and Nick Griffin’s article criticizing anti-semitism, Faye’s comments reflect the growing belief on the part of a large part of this movement that they can and should play an actual role in the coming civilizational conflicts facing the West. Not content to sit on the sidelines awaiting the apocalypse, they are trying to establish a credible position on the far right of the mainstream political spectrum. This means, of course, a decsive break with the politics of marginality, in which anti-semitism plays a major part.
Naturally, the Trostkyites purists among them have responded with outrage. Accusations that Faye is a “crypto-jew” and the like have been the response of some and even as intelligent a thinker as Michael O’Meara has rejected Faye’s insights.
While Faye and his co-thinkers are still far from acheiving their goals, their rejection by the unreconstructed neo-Nazis of the world can only help their cause.
Note: I don’t have access to links on the AR conference or Griffin’s article, but I can get these in a week or so, if anyone cares.
As I have said before, I am no White nationalist, but I have appreciated Faye’s work. His rejection of anti-semitism is a further step in the right direction.
1 August, 2006 at 4:10 pm
From the Catskills
Infiltration in the Far Right
QUOTE:
“[the Jews] can and should play an actual role in the coming civilizational conflicts facing the West.”UNQUOTE
Boy, got THAT right! They’re the ASSAILANTS of the West.
I love these guys who proclaim, “I’m no White Nationalist!” Sorta echoes the froggies 60 years ago – “I have nothing to do with the Maquis! I don’t know anything about them.” Then after the war, EVERYBODY was with the Maquis!
1 August, 2006 at 4:41 pm
Lew Barnes and Jared Taylor deliberately ignore the jewish role in undermining all nationalist movements but their own.
1 August, 2006 at 5:42 pm
“the (Trostkyites) purists among them have responded with outrage…”
[White Nationalist]purists=Trotskyites – Oh, God, that’s precious.
Tom Metzger=Bill Kristol
Someday that very passage will be immortalized in a textbook describing “semantic inversion” as a technique of Jewish psychological warfare.
I can’t wait for the Pulitzer-winning book describing how White Nationalists precipitated the (ostensibly) failed war in Iraq.
1 August, 2006 at 7:29 pm
Just to clarify things:
My short article (which was written in Swedish, by the way) was essentially a critique of Guillaume Faye’s new pro-zionist stance.
I am in agreement with Michael O’Meara’s position on this issue, and therefore cited some of the most relevant parts of his article.
I have since heard rumours that the entire interview with Faye is a falsification. Is there anyone here that knows more about this? The French webzine France-Echo denies all connection with it.
You can read more here:
http://www.france-echos.com/actualite.php?cle=9791
1 August, 2006 at 8:01 pm
Thanks for clarifying, Ratatosk. There is much going on in Europe that we here in America simply aren’t familiar with, and of course much that isn’t in English.
1 August, 2006 at 10:10 pm
Rough translation of the ratatosk article:
The traditionalist and strongly pro-Israel blog Si vis pacem para bellum has in his recent entry called attention to an interview with the pro-European philosopher, author and ideologist Gillome Faye. In it he criticizes the anti-Zionist trends among his former colleagues in the French new right. The interview has wrongly been claimed to have been taken France-Echo, but otherwise looks authentic.
We from Ratatosk would like to point out that we generally hold Gillaume Faye in high esteem, and consider his distinct ethno-nationalist attitude to be a fresh breeze among the more intellectual branches of European resistance. However, we find it difficult to sympathize with statements like the following: In terms of first principles, what do I have to do with this war between Jews and Muslims, between Israelis and Palestinians? Who is right, who is wrong? It is not my problem, except that … yes, except that in my opinion the perpetuation and strengthening of the state of Israel is a vital priority for all Europeans. The destruction of Israel would present Islam with an open door to the conquest of the whole of Europe. In brief, I entirely support the state of Israel, while deploring the clumsiness and soft-heartedness of certain of its current rulers (contaminated by the humanitarianism of Buber). If I were in their place, I wouldn’t wait for American permission before hitting the Iranian nuclear sites.
The author Michael O’Meara, who was recently mentioned in this blog, has recently published an intelligent and balanced analysis of Faye’s recent statements. Moreover, O’Meara points out that the relation to Israel has become a watershed for pro-European movements.
The Swedish blog then quotes passages from O’Meara’s essay which I don’t have to reproduce here. It closes saying:
The message seems to be that neither pro-Zionism nor exaggerated pro-Arabism are suitable for the struggle for Europe’s survival.
1 August, 2006 at 10:30 pm
They may look for a carveout/hideout but whether they get one is highly questionable. The truth about the Kike should be reasonably well-known by now, and the mess they have created, and which Israel is going to create in her death-throws, is going to be so deep that they may be greeted by hatred unprecedented in history, save for their own pathological hatred of every other race. I don’t think Jared or Nick are going to change this.
2 August, 2006 at 1:56 pm
The Faye interview really is a hoax!
The French Novopress has contacted Faye by phone, and he has confirmed that it’s not his words. Thank the gods! Faye still rules.
http://fr.novopress.info/?p=5623
But it’s nice to see some fast communication throughout Europe and over the Atlantic. :) Maybe this was a media ploy by Faye all along, hehe.
3 August, 2006 at 1:46 am
Ratatosk:
“I have since heard rumours that the entire interview with Faye is a falsification. Is there anyone here that knows more about this? The French webzine France-Echo denies all connection with it.”
the seemingly false interview was posted on the Subversiv.com forum by a member so the owners of the website aren’t responsible for it.
Subversiv.com is owned by nutty christian zionists and they publish the BS of faux pro-european people, among them Maurice Dantec a popular writer who writes sci-fi books, who consider the cause of the jews in the Near East to be the cause of The West. They link the very unpleasant presence of the muzzies in France to their presence in the countries surrouding Israel and conclude that Israel must be defended at all costs as if it was an extension of us.
Guillaume Faye said at the AmRen conference that he doesn’t talk about jews. If he did he would get into legal troubles very fast I presume