22 December, 2009

Interesting point about jews-the-problem

Posted by alex in Alex Linder, jews, jews jewing jewily at 1:40 am | Permanent Link

For some time this had troubled me below the level of conscious thought, then finally it crystallized. Perhaps you can think of another example, I can’t. Here’s the observation, concealed in questions:

Is there any problem but jews where there are so many people who leap to tell you that it can’t be addressed directly, but must be handled through a time-taking series of steps? You have to come to knowledge of the jews through “gateways,” we are told. It makes sense to teach people about race apart from jews, we are told. You can’t just leap to the jewish explanation, we are told.

I literally cannot think of another instance, case, or example where someone pretends that the solution to the problem is… not to discuss it.

It is clear to me that the very idea of discussing the jewish problem has itself been jewed.

  • 95 Responses to “Interesting point about jews-the-problem”

    1. Kuda Bux Says:

      Twin Oaks is part of The Federation of Egalitarian Communities.
      See video “Join the Communist Party”:


    2. hdumpty Says:

      I’m certainly always open to correction, but it seems to me that the very interesting theoretical discussions above and elsewhere on this site would serve some practical purpose only if whites were already back in power.

      In our present circumstance, isn’t the main necessity to present to other whites the many truths that are kept from them, and to present those truths to them over and over and over until those truths become as much a part of their mental furniture as the collapsing chairs of the MSM are?

      For the last two years I’ve been posting at knoxnews.com, and in spite of their bannings and other maneuvers, I’ve always found a way to keep my words up there.

      What might have been accomplished there if some of the brain power evident on this site had been honing its skills along with me there?

      Instead, I was struggling alone against the monitoring staff, except for a few occasional excellent local posters there. (And now I’m about burnt out from the solitary effort).

      “You have to come to knowledge of the jews through ‘gateways,’ we are told.”

      From the context, I assume Alex is referring to the “Amren kiddie pool,” to the adult pool route.

      That can be a long route! What’s wrong with the Israel route, and other routes?

      A fair number of mainstream figures have spoken now on Israel’s power over U.S. policy , which gives us an opening. For two years I’ve been posting at knox various versions of the long post quoting some of those figures that I copied above, and I’ve been pleased to see that recently there have finally been other posts on the site that mention Israel’s power.

      There are also posters at knox who seem to acknowledge Jewish ownership of much of media. I sometimes use usernames “Who_owns_media,” “Who_owns_finance,” and “Who_owns_government,” depending on the post.

      The obvious heavy role of Jews in media, and even in finance, is fairly obvious. If other posters reply, “So what?”, one can ask them why they think they’ve heard so little from their media of what the prominent figures I quoted say about Israel’s power over our gov’t.

      Etc. etc….the openings are there, but one has to get out in the mainstream and learn where they are….and it helps if one not only identifies with “the white race” but also with its members, so that you can form friendly relations with the posters who will disagree with you or even abhor you initially, and perhaps forever. I’ve come to have pleasant sparring relations even with the latter.

      That’s my take, for whatever it’s worth.

    3. hdumpty Says:

      Alex writes:

      “People don’t believe the jews’ bs”

      I think the great majority of people believe without the slightest doubt all the Holocaust® bs (even those who are sick of hearing it), and that belief merges into the belief, also held by the great majority, that the Jewish race has been the quintessential INNOCENT victim throughout history (and therefor by implication, presently as well).

      And that last belief suffers not at all by any personal experience its holder may have with ACTUAL Jews they KNOW as manipulators, etc.!

      And I’ve been most unpleasantly surprised in my posting at Knoxville to discover how even the sturdiest redneck posters there are now all about “fair play”…they oppose affirmative action, and any sort of special treatment, not out of any racial consciousness at all, but just because they feel it’s not “fair play.”

      Possibly I’m being naive about their true feeling, but after two years of colloquy with them, I don’t think so.

      I agree about fear as holding many of us back…I remain anonymous because I know I lack the strength you apparently have to take the heat.

      But I do think the internet is a resource that can slowly affect the terms of discourse, if we will only use it.

    4. Adam Says:

      alex Says:

      Whenever powerful interests become committed to a particular worldview, they have a desire to suppress other, competing worldviews.

      That’s an entirely different thing, just conventional suppression. I’m talking about people who see the same problems we do, but advise NOT teaching people the whole full truth in one explanation. That is unprecedented.

      I don’t see a significant difference. The key is, changing worldviews is a big step for most people, especially if there are powerful interests that are resisting that change. Mere ideas (such as Holocaust denial or other minor heresies) may be suppressed without much consequence or trouble, but changing a whole worldview affects one’s relation to everything in the world. In the case of Galileo, changing from the geocentric theory to the heliocentric theory meant that man was no longer at the center of the universe. In a significant sense, it dethroned the existing order; it diminished the Church and man’s place in relation to God. That made the heliocentric theory a real threat, for reasons quite unconnected to its scientific truth or falsity. Likewise with your attempting to replace the “evil-white-man-centric” worldview with the “evil-Jew-centric” worldview. If allowed, it would affect everything and have far reaching ramifications for the existing order. It directly threatens the elites.

      Galileo had his supporters. The telescopes he manufactured clearly showed the inconsistencies of the geocentric view. In direct contradiction to the geocentric view, they showed that Jupiter had moons orbiting it, and also showed phases of Venus that were difficult to explain without the heliocentric view being true. One can easily imagine some of these supporters trying to reason with him, “Look, Galileo, you know and I know that the Earth revolves around the Sun, but you can’t just come right out and say that — that would be heresy! First we need some time to prepare, time to reason with the Vatican and show them that when the Bible seems to say that the Earth is immovable, that e.g., “the Lord set it on its foundations and it can never be moved” (Psalms 104:5), and similar passages, that it isn’t to be taken literally. Then, after perhaps only a few years, we’ll be able to bring them around. We’ll also show them some of the good things that your telescopes can do so they won’t be able to just dismiss them as the Devil’s work! Meanwhile, stop it with the Earth goes around the Sun rhetoric. People are beginning to talk! They’re saying you’re against God! That you’re tool of the Devil yourself!”

      In spite of the fact that the suppression was successful — he was imprisoned and forced to recant — Galileo’s view still prevailed because the nascent modern technological system was able to deliver the goods in a way the Church was not. Not just the telescope, but all the trends of Renaissance innovation on the run up to the Industrial Revolution supported it. Unlike faith and prayer, the white man’s invention of technology and the scientific method — applied, systematized technique — were a way of getting the same result every time. It seemed to be a clear improvement over the time-honored methods of the Church, which was basically no more than a form of magic. It prevailed because it succeeded in giving people MORE. It was a more efficient means of satisfying man’s desires.

      The moral would seem to be that you will prevail when you can do something similar. Can you deliver MORE to the people who side with you? You may say that you will deliver racial survival, but as it happens, they don’t value that very much. They care much more about their own personal fortunes, as the global technological system expands, they see that not valuing it brings them MORE. Further, they see that siding with your “evil-Jew-centric” theory will bring them only a host of cares: ostracism, loss of status, possible unemployment, possible divorce and family breakup, even possible imprisonment. That being the case, they have no motive to change.

    5. Norsk Says:

      I feel that the main problem is the fact that our women seem to fit right in with the touchy feely love everyone communism mantra. They are also being taught in our schools to compete and win over our young men. Just look around. How many women do you see in positions of authority?

      Meanwhile our young men are being denied college and sent to the middle east to be killed. our enemy come right out and tell us that it’s better to kill us over there instead of over here where they (our enemy) might be in danger.

    6. hdumpty Says:

      Adam writes to Alex:

      “Can you deliver MORE to the people who side with you?”

      If billions of dollars weren’t being spent on warring for Israel in the Middle East, “more” could be delivered to people in the form of reduced taxes or less debt for their offspring.

      Israel’s control of our policy in the Mid East is a weak point that can be attacked, because prominent mainstream figures that ordinary people will give some credence to have referred to it and can be quoted, as I gave examples of above.

      Persons with Alex’s strength could teach it publicly, and the rest of us fraidy-cats could keep posting it over and over at some chosen website.

      It seems to me we should be discussing concrete steps that can be taken. Alex put forth a very interesting idea in his radio interview with Jim Giles recently (is there a thread on that interview here? Navigation of this site is impenetrable to me), that relates to his post above 25 December, 2009 at 12:00 am.

      I’d like to discuss that post, but I’ll wait until I get responses, if any, to what I’ve already put out in posts above.

    7. Adam Says:

      hdumpty Says:

      Adam writes to Alex:

      “Can you deliver MORE to the people who side with you?”

      If billions of dollars weren’t being spent on warring for Israel in the Middle East, “more” could be delivered to people in the form of reduced taxes or less debt for their offspring.

      That’s certainly true that it could be, but I suspect that such a reward is too uncertain, and not enough to compensate for the risk. There’s nothing to guarantee that any savings would not just be squandered on niggers, or some other nonsense.

      By MORE I mean concrete things that provide an immediate reward to the individual, that will move someone in the direction of the new worldview without necessarily immediately abandoning the old worldview. An increased amount of material things, fame, money, reputation, etc. would fill that bill. The scientific worldview exemplified by the heliocentric theory triumphed over the geocentric worldview supported by the Church with its numerous rewards — employment, high status, money and creature comforts — primarily because the science of which it was a part also had immediate benefits that were perceived to bring its believers MORE. Nevertheless, this abandoning of the old worldview took place slowly. Fully two centuries elapsed between Galileo’s condemnation for heresy and the Church’s finally dropping all opposition to the heliocentric theory.

      Once a worldview becomes entrenched, it is difficult to dislodge. There are a lot of benefits that get distributed or withheld according to whether one accepts it or not. The beneficiaries of a worldview fight like demons (or Jews!) to hold onto it, and in science at least, the new worldview doesn’t fully triumph until the old guard has died off.

    8. Norsk Says:

      I’m telling you guys!!! You keep talking about symptoms, but the only way we can solve the problem is to turn our women in the right direction. Right now women are following the Jew mantra of “EVERYONE IS THE SAME” and “DIVERSITY IS OUR STRENGTH”. There is this woman that threatened to shoot me because i told her that BHO was just another puppet. I don’t know the answer other than to keep preaching the truth. Many people reject it but once in awhile you snag a truth seeker.

    9. Norsk Says:


    10. hdumpty Says:


      So what do you think WNs as activists should presently do?

    11. hdumpty Says:

      Adam (or anyone):

      Also, did you listen to Gile’s interview with Alex, and if so, what do you think of Alex’s main suggestion during the interview.

      Another question: Do you think the rally in Knoxville a couple of years ago, in particular Alex’s words, were effective…if so, why; if not, why not, and what changes would you suggest for possible future rallies (aside from us all growing big ones and showing up ourselves)?

    12. hdumpty Says:

      That makes 3 questions.

    13. hdumpty Says:

      Oh, BTW, Merry Christmas to everyone!

    14. Norsk Says:

      The rally is good but did not get much coverage. We need to keep talking about everything. Get the word out. Strive to tell the truth. Have something to back up what you are talking about. All the people that have a hand in destroying us always make mistakes. Point it out right away before they have time to cover up their mistakes.

    15. Norsk Says:

      They are relentless so we have to be relentless. Be very carefull what you say though.

    16. Norsk Says:

      Another thing that helps is to learn to be a cameleon. Blending in with different types of people. You have to make them feel comfortable before they will listen to you.

    17. Hugh Lincoln Says:

      “Whites will only follow real, physical, in-the-streets leaders, and there are precisely none of those available at this time.”

      So the process of writing, speaking, and changing white minds is worth nothing? Anyone who’s engaged in that – under pen names (like Jack Handey? or whatever the name used for the “beanbag right” essays) – should shuffle away? Kevin MacDonald’s a target of an attempt to get him FIRED from his job by the SPLC through a month-like stakeout by Heidi Beirich — as well as faculty attack — but he’s “put nothing on the line”?

      This is just crazy. The record says otherwise. You want Kevin MacDonald to jump over a police barrier and get arrested? Is that the best use of his talents? If you march in the street and nobody knows what you’re marching about, you look like a clown.

      You’re putting yourself in a position where nobody knows exactly how to please you — “let’s see, I’d like to meet the Alex Linder standard of bravery, but I can’t quite figure out what the fuck that is… it looks like I need to put “Death to the Jews” on a T-shirt and march with a bullhorn shouting the same thing. But I’ll be damned if that just doesn’t seem… you know… like me.”

      But upon reflection, there’s nothing very “manly” about going slack on how to be a white activist and letting Alex Linder write the script for you. You may just create an army of determined white activists despite yourself.

    18. hdumpty Says:

      Norsk Says:

      “The rally is good but did not get much coverage.”

      I assume we’re both speaking of the rally in Knoxville, and I think I disagree that that rally was good (I’m not sure, and I’m putting my ideas out to hopefully be commented on. Though I imagine…I hope…this is old, old territory for everyone here except myself).

      My only exposure to Alex has been reading his piece on women in the WN movement (tremendous fun to read, and probably has some truth in it), his interview recently by Jim Giles, and youtube clips of his words at the Knoxville rally.

      As a writer and interviewee, I find him wonderfully engaging and extremely likable, but I thought he was a terrible speaker at Knoxville. I think he could be an excellent speaker, if he were of a mind, and of a temperament, to present his arguments in a way that would draw his audience to attend to his words instead of be repelled by them.

      An almost immediate reference to “Big Jew” doesn’t exactly warm the crowd up for what follows. His strongest point as a crowd catcher was IMO his reference to the innocence that radiates from the boyfriend/girlfriend pictures of Chris and Channon (I’ve posted at knoxnews on that crime for two years, and never thought of working off of that point, but I surely will now…those pictures of Chris and Channon occupy a large place in the mind of everyone in Knoxville)…I wish Alex had led with that, and framed it with words and tone of voice that drew his audience to him (if he has the feeling for the audience that would allow that to be natural…it’s hard to hold our views and not develop almost unnoticed an adversarial feeling toward the very persons we hope to draw to us).

      The innocence radiating from those pictures could lead naturally to discussion of the innocence white behavior exhibits in so many other ways, and finally to how that innocence is maintained by the media…”Who owns media? Who owns media? I don’t have to tell you; you know what answer you’re expecting from me. And that’s the RIGHT answer.

      Your response to that answer is, ‘So what?’ Please let me tell you ‘so what’: So you won’t learn what organizations have been principally responsible for so many of the changes in this country that you detest. So…”(etc. etc. Alex can write all this about 10 times better than I can)

      I admire tremendously Alex’s getting out there, and my impressions of the effect of the rally are based on the almost universal repugnance to it expressed by posters on the knoxnews forum…but they may be a skewed sample.

    19. hdumpty Says:

      Norsk Says:
      25 December, 2009 at 1:14 pm

      “Another thing that helps is to learn to be a cameleon. Blending in with different types of people. You have to make them feel comfortable before they will listen to you.”

      The main way to make them feel comfortable is to allow yourself, if you have it in you, to LIKE them.

      WNs who identify with the “white race” but don’t much care for the members of that race aren’t going to get very far I think, unless they have tremendous charisma.

    20. hdumpty Says:

      To Hugh Lincoln 25 December, 2009 at 1:34 pm:

      I agree with your post. But I also think that the call Linder made on Giles’ program for persons who will get out and be public as he has been, provided they have a realistic sense of what is helpful and not helpful in each public situation they introduce themselves into, is immensely needed.

      My mind is open, but I believe Alex isn’t seeing that he himself could much improve the realism of his view of what is effective in which situation, and he might then be more likely to attract others to join him in being more public.

      Alex’ criticism on Giles’ show of MacDonald turning toward Sam Francis is beyond my knowledge and understanding, but as far as being public about Jewish power, I don’t see how MacDonald can be faulted.

      In fact, I believe that in one point in the interview, Alex said that (despite his criticisms of MacDonald) he thought MacDonald was also doing useful work in many ways.

      Alex’ extemporaneous and natural nature is part of what makes him attractive, but it can also cause confusion when one utterance seems to contradict another!

    21. Alex Linder Says:

      I don’t see a significant difference.

      You don’t see a difference? Wipe your glasses.

      One is people who want to hide the cause of a problem. The other is people who claim, like us, they want to solve a problem, but insist, against the VNN position, that we must solve the problem by never ever discussing its true cause, until fifteen hurdles have been jumped over first. In practice, what they advocate is NEVER addressing the jew taproot of every other symptom-weed. That is what I’m saying, and it is certainly without parallel in any other sector. And that makes sense – the jews try to control the opposition, and just as they set up front groups pretending to be for whites but actually for defending jews (AmRen being the perfect example), their liars work hard to persuade those WITHIN the ranks of WN that discussing jews is futile, or not the best way, or some other reason. This can easily be seen on any blog that discusses the jewish problem.

    22. Alex Linder Says:

      What’s wrong with KM and the TOQ approach is that they can’t keep a principled line. They mix WN with conservatism. They do this because they are unable to separate personal feelings from political principles.

    23. Alex Linder Says:

      TOQ is willing to plagiarize me, to use ideas first enunciated and developed by VNN, but never credit us. By contrast, they fawn over any conservative who will pay attention to them, even if the attention is negative, as in John Derbyshire’s review of KM’s work. This shows they are, no matter what they think they are, conservatives. They fawn before status and money. I will use KM’s phrase, and twist. Kevin MacDonald is not a white nationalist, he is an implicit conservative. And that goes for the entire TOQ crew. The many of the who are former VNN writers should know better.

      The right way to go is to attack the conservatives, not suck up to them. WN should focus on polarizing the public in order to gain stature.

      KM will diss VNN in public, but suck up to Buchanan. That shows you his character and his political acumen. He thinks by buddying up to the rich conservatives he’ll get better reviews and somehow become more influential. It doesn’t work that way, though. TOQ is drowning whatever talent/money it draws in the pit toilet of professional conservatism. Those are the facts of the matter. TOQ = WN coopted by neocon foundation money.

    24. Norsk Says:

      The key is explaining your point clearly so people with an IQ of 100 and above will understand what you are talking about.

      hdumpty says:
      at 3:02 pm

      “the main way to make them feel comfortable is to allow yourself, if you have it in you, to like them.”

      You don’t get it. You don’t need to like them.You need to learn to control your emotions. You act like they’re your friends. That’s how the Jews do it. When i come apon someone that is running on dangerous political views (and have no clue of the danger) I feel them out. If they are not perceptive of the danger i move on. Don’t waist time on the sheeple.

      “WN’s who identify with the “white race” but don’t much care for the members of that race aren’t going to get very far i think, unless they have tremendous charisma.”

      Dont let your emotions get in the way. It’s hard not to. The bottom line is, What are we fighting for and who are we fighting for? A true white Nationalist fights for the 14 words. If you don’t beleave in the 14 words your not a white nationalist.

    25. Alex Linder Says:

      So the process of writing, speaking, and changing white minds is worth nothing?

      It’s worth less than you think it is. What Whites need is leadership. TOQ doesn’t offer that.

      Even within the field of ideas, TOQ has undermined our cause by publicly dissing real WN like me and VNN, and sucking up to professional conservatives who shit on it. That’s weak and perceived to be weak. The top of TOQ is Regnery, and he is nothing but a neocon-bilge spreader. You guys sold out too easy.

      WN should not be mixing with conswervatives, it should separating and spitting on conservatives. Lumping them with the other liberals as tools of the jew. KM and the rest can’t do this because they are too weak. They are incapable of maintaining a party line. My objection is not to TOQ writing its cute little essays, it’s to their pretending they want to change the world while their behavior shows they are rank conservatives – grovelers before money and status. Kevin MacDonald doesn’t have the balls to spit on Derbyshire, but that is what is objectively called for. And that’s just one example.

    26. Alex Linder Says:

      The crux of the matter is whether we treat conservatives as friends or enemies. I say we treat them as enemies and attack them. KM and crew treat them as friends, and tolerate attacks on themselves.

      TOQ is conservative, no matter what it labels itself. It cannot produce the change we need, it’s men don’t have the right mentality. Read the NS material at calvin.edu. Study the mentality and actions of successful revolutionaries in circumstances somewhat like our own.

      NS didn’t try to influence the elite, as TOQ does. They tried and succeeded, in forming a new elite. That is what we should emulate. Not trying to get a favorable mention by Buchanan, KM’s wet dream, but by getting rid of Buchanan and the rest of the anti-White Zoggies.

    27. Alex Linder Says:

      There’s a woman down in StL whose white daughter was beat up by a nigger. The school has a tape of it. The school board won’t release it. Who does the woman turn to for help? TOQ.

      That’s the problem. TOQ wants to change the world – it says. But it wants to do this without getting its hands dirty.

      All I’m saying is that TOQ ought to admit that it is just another conservative outlet. TOQ is kibitzers, not leaders.

    28. Kuda Bux Says:

      “I don’t see how MacDonald can be faulted.”

      He won’t mention the fed or fractional reserve.

      He only focuses on the important stuff.

    29. Tim McGreen Says:

      We’ll see what everyone is made of once the shit hits the proverbial fan. Who knows, maybe a few Republikahn Kwanservatives or liberal limp-wrists will surprise everyone and become great fighters against the Empire, while many of the tough-talkin’ Keyboard Kommandos here on this site run for the hills. It will be interesting to find out.

    30. Norsk Says:

      The Kwan has been intensively conditioned for Tolerance. Obama’s change will help to bring a change of mind when the Tolerance becomes unbearable. I have no idea when this will happen. But things are getting more unbearable as the days go by. What change will BHO inflict on us in the next three years?

    31. Dave Says:

      I think that placing every last Jew in Israel would be an excellent solution. We could enforce the borders/stop the expansion. Take every ounce of European technology out of they’re hands and force them to deal with the palestinians and other neighboring Arabs.

      Without the ability to travel to and manipulate other lands they would surely start a civil war and destroy each other. That or be destroyed by the Arabs. put in there own place,and on a level playing field,they would not stand much of a chance!They would surely be destroyed.

      I have shed blood for my race in the past. Even still I do not think I could kill children. I know the old saying is very true. The children of the enemy grow up to be the enemy! Sepperation and strict border enforcement are key! The Jews are the only culprits responsible for the mixing of the races.This needs to be dealt with.I believe that the most effective way is to evict them.Once this is achieved,everything else will fall into place!

      Where I do stand a little firmer is here. Violate the borders,executed on site. Jews found meddling in non jew affairs,executed on site.

      This of course is all a fantasy scenario,for now.

    32. Dave Says:

      Ive been reading TOQ’s articles and comments and you are right Alex. They are pussies.What else can be said. Yes let me argue with my neighbor,if I use superior logic,surely he will see it my way and join my struggle. Oh wait a minute,that doesnt fucking work! Show me one leader that led through rational arguments. The masses cannot and will not be swayed that way. You must angry up the blood!

    33. Kuda Bux Says:

      Common Sense was a bestseller.

    34. hdumpty Says:

      Alex…thanks for the reading tip, which I’ll take, as well as catch-up reading of TOQ, etc.

      My understanding already is that Herr H’s early successes in increasing his party from the handful it started as were due to his studied and practiced abilities as an orator.

      In that regard, I’m hoping to get some discussion from you about your speech in Knoxville, unless that topic has been beaten to death in the past so much that you’re totally sick of it.

      My impression has been, honestly, that the speech was ineffective, for the reasons I touched on in my post above yesterday at 2:55 pm.

      But now that I understand at least slightly better what kind of persons you’re trying to attract, maybe I’m mistaken.

      So I’m wondering, has anyone who watched your speech there contacted you and said, man, that was great, you named “Big Jew” right away, etc. etc., and your way of doing things is the way for me.

      Or do you have other reasons to think that your words there brought anyone to your cause?

      As I explained in my post above, my criticism isn’t directed at the content of that speech, but at what seems to me an insouciant attitude on your part toward organizing and expressing your content in a way to draw listeners to it. That aspect of speechifying was of course something Herr H paid a LOT of attention to!

      But maybe you are aiming just for people who already have the main understandings and who need galvanizing to action (of some sort)….if that’s the case, I’m wondering if you have reason to believe that your manner of presenting your case in Knoxville did indeed have the effect you desired on some such people.

    35. Kuda Bux Says:

      I heard that A was not scheduled to speak in Knoxville. It perhaps was quite impromptu.

    36. hdumpty Says:

      Adam…as analysis, I’ve really enjoyed your posts on technology and find them extremely insightful.

      But I can’t imagine any group of leaders or any large group of people being willing to turn its back on technology. Checking that no potential enemy was secretly redeveloping technology would itself require more and more sophisticated technology.

      And do you want whites to give up technology before, or after, we restore our position? Perhaps after would be better, don’t you think?

      Which is my wry way of saying that I don’t see how your discussion of giving up technology has any more bearing on how to move forward from our present circumstances than a discussion of the desirability of whites establishing ourselves in space colonies (I wish I could live to see that great adventure) would have.

    37. hdumpty Says:

      Kuda Bux…my probably incorrect impression was that the whole shindig was mainly organized by Alex. But I do seem to vaguely recall now his saying in that speech that he hadn’t planned to speak…I’m not certain.

      I don’t think that rally won any hearts and minds in Knoxville, in fact my impression is strongly the opposite. But if its purpose was to win bodies and hearts of a few whose minds were already won, I’d like to hear some evidence of success of that, or of any other good results from that rally.

    38. hdumpty Says:

      Kuda Bux Says:

      “Common Sense was a bestseller.”

      Good point. And I’ll read that too.

    39. Kuda Bux Says:

      Common Sense

      By Thomas Paine

      PERHAPS the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not yet sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favor; a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defence of custom. But tumult soon subsides. Time makes more converts than reason.

      As a long and violent abuse of power is generally the means of calling the right of it in question, (and in matters too which might never have been thought of, had not the sufferers been aggravated into the inquiry,) and as the king of England hath undertaken in his own right, to support the parliament in what he calls theirs, and as the good people of this country are grievously oppressed by the combination, they have an undoubted privilege to inquire into the pretensions of both, and equally to reject the usurpations of either.

      In the following sheets, the author hath studiously avoided every thing which is personal among ourselves. Compliments as well as censure to individuals make no part thereof. The wise and the worthy need not the triumph of a pamphlet; and those whose sentiments are injudicious or unfriendly, will cease of themselves, unless too much pains is bestowed upon their conversion.

      The cause of America is, in a great measure, the cause of all mankind. Many circumstances have, and will arise, which are not local, but universal, and through which the principles of all lovers of mankind are affected, and in the event of which, their affections are interested. The laying a country desolate with fire and sword, declaring war against the natural rights of all mankind, and extirpating the defenders thereof from the face of the earth, is the concern of every man to whom nature hath given the power of feeling; of which class, regardless of party censure, is


      Philadelphia, Feb. 14, 1776.

      >>>That sinking feeling from the last paragraph. . . .universal, not local. . .the cause of all mankind. . .lovers of mankind. . .
      natural rights of all mankind

      natural rights of kikery and niggerhood? blend that with christian universalism and you get ??

      I confess to not reading this until now.


    40. Tim McGreen Says:

      Tom Paine was Jew-wise, no doubt about it. He rightly accused the Jews of “blackening” the history of every country they inhabited. When Paine refered to “all mankind” he was doubtless referring to all White men first and foremost. Why would he have cared about the political well-being of the Turk, the Negro or the Chinaman? He surely must have realized that such people are incapable of creating civilized, democratic states.

    41. Kuda Bux Says:

      Probably true. But the naturalization act of 1791 did not say the country was open to “all humanity” or “free persons.” It says FREE WHITE PERSONS. “All humanity” is/was way too ambiguous, and subject to possible misinterpretation.

      I recall reading how early settlers tried great society type programs in order to make the injuns industrious.

    42. alex Says:

      Re Knoxville, I was arrested at my rally. I spoke, impromptu, at the second rally.

      The effect of my or any speech is limited because the cops are allowed by the court to lock the speakers too far away from the public for any real reaction and interaction. That was my purpose in walking down the street at the first rally, to get in front of the public and the antis where they could hear me. But that’s illegal, per cops and court. Until this obstacle is got around, public speaking is largely irrelevant.

    43. New America Says:

      One, time to clear up a misunderstanding about Christianity and “loving they neighbor as they self.”

      This is simply an example of why the more advanced books of Christianity – the Gospels, which, with the Book of Revelation, are the Books of Christianity.

      The Two Laws are:

      1. Love God – first, foremost, forever.

      2. Love Thy Neighbor As They Self.

      This simply means to love your neighbor as God loves you; that is to say, enough to correct him when he is wrong, and, if need be, let him experience the karma of punishment for willfully choosing to do evil.

      Don’t love your neighbor MORE than your self, and don’t love your neighbor MORE than God loves you.

      Simple as that.

      If your neighbor willfully chooses to go against God, then you have choices to make, and the best of these choices is to do what God would want you to do, and not be a victim.

      Simple as that.

      Two, time to clear up a misunderstanding about Harold Covington, and the Northwest Republic Analytical Initiative.

      Let’s be clear about this:

      Covington succeeds where all others failed, as he sees the Solution to all of our Racial Problems being well within our hands.

      Ironically, in this, he is quite consistent with Terrible Tommy Metzger, who does not blame carrion for what they do, but blame us for allowing the System to fall apart to the point that the carrion eaters proliferate.

      Three, Covington uses the phrase that really punches through a lot of resistance from our Racial Kinsmen to accepting a Positive Theory of Race, and that phrase is this:


      THAT phrase – a White Homeland – really seems to punch through a lot of intellectual resistance, and I think the reason is seen in our past practices:

      What is Suburbia but a series of White Homelands?

      “Disconnected White Archipelagoes?”

      And THERE is Pierce’s “White Zions,” in all but Racial Name.

      Well, we see how well THAT has worked.

      So, there is my special Christmas Gift to one and all, Latter-Day Mithraist Metzger, Racial Savant Harold Covington, and all in between.

      We Let This Happen To Us, And We Can Do SOMETHING About It.

      What you choose to do is up to you.

      The rest of us are about the intergenerational work of building a Nation, a White Homeland, where none may make afraid.

      Thanks to Socrates, and Linder, for allowing me the space to discuss Harold Covington’s Ideas, which I maintain are the last, best hope for our Nation.

      The Purpose Of Judaism is The Genocide of the White Race.

      We Have A Duty To Our Racial Destiny.

      Covington’s Call – a White Homeland, for OUR Posterity, in a Northwest Republic – remains the Highest and Best Hope for OUR Posterity.

      Take Control Of The Destiny That Is Rightfully Yours.</blockquote cite=""

    44. Tim McGreen Says:

      Never mind the Reverend Billy Sol Hargus, Weird Harry Covington is God’s Other Son.

    45. Dan Smyth Says:

      The root emotional cause of White defense of Jewry lies in the parallel between Jesus dying on the cross and Jews dying in the Holocaust. In both of these events the focus is on the personal identification with the one suffering abuse. This mentality is emotionally imprinted on the White psyche as meaning “whoever is killed is the good guy until proven otherwise”. Hence, Jews are good people because they were victims during World War 2. This framework remains in tact since the vast majority of Whites don’t study the Jewish involvement in Communism in the first place.