White Nationalist questions the movement’s Sharia leadership; Neo-Nazi Chimp-out Follows
Occidental Dissent
Majority Rights
I do not mean to single the poster in question out. He’s been bashed for long enough, and I’ve been the target of internet gang-ups before myself. If Friedrich Braun is sick of being the center of discussion, then I empathize with him. The aim of my post is to prove a point. The WN movement is an Islamophile Judeo-obsessive movement in which threads that dissent from the party line on Jews receive more total comments and more negative comments than any other thread. If Friedrich had praised Catholics, the Nation of Islam, Mexicans who want to close the border, or some other group unexpectedly, then he would not have received the response that he did. On the far right, there is definitely a huge fight between “White Nationalists” who hate Jews and other right wingers who like Jews. I am convinced that the issue will never be resolved and have suffered many blows trying to debate with such people.
A Jewish blogger has responded negatively too. I don’t think this blogger is being emphatic enough. The poster in question is obviously reaching out to Jews against Neo-Nazism. Certainly he was not received positively.
A few posts ago, I made a point about pacifism. There can never be ideological peace between philosemites and antisemites. There will always be a war ideologically. As a hardcore philosemite, I have chosen my side. Perhaps Hunter Wallace is correct that trolling forces people into hardline positions, but that is reality. In real life, you have to pick a side. You can’t sit the fence and I don’t.
While Jews are a small percentage of the population, White Nationalists are a smaller percentage. If one has serious aims of destroying liberalism in America, pragmatically one does not need WNs. Not to mention philosophically they are one dimensional and can’t see anything other than issues about race and about Jews. There are a few WNs like Ian Jobling who disagree on Jews, but they are complete and total neo-liberals. They sound like Republicans with their free market policies and support of Democracy abroad. Lawrence Auster gets offended when Muhammad is correctly called a pedophile. I’m sorry Larry, but this is how you deal with Muslims. While JTF strikes under the banner of Judaism, I strike under the banner of techno-fascist atheism. My truest ally is Constantin von Hoffmeister as he is the only authoritarian who embraces Zionism as a political necessity to combat the Islamification of the world and does it in a completely secular way while collaborating with other movements against globalization. If you notice, national futurism is futuristic, and my ideology is futuristic too.
I made this post not to humiliate the poster who undoubtedly has good intentions, but to make a point about how it is futile to try to work with people have set the Jew issue in stone. The result is always that they gang up. The only way to deal with the WN movement is to face the reality of its nature and set the course forward without it.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Dissenting on the JQ with VNN-type WNs is like a white guy dropping the N-bomb at a NOI rally. Chimp-out is right.
What I find peculiar, is that given such zealous anti-Semitism, they knowingly embrace mischlings without a hesitation.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
I think Israel is a fine place for who those who wanna play at being Jewish, but the nation-states of European shouldn’t worry about Israel and should be totally independent of the issue. The Jewish question if any really shouldn’t exist as Jews don’t really exist. I dunno why you care about what WN’s think, but whatever.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
My essay clearly instructs people to ignore the WNs if they disagree about Jews. Just let the WNs blather on about Jews and abandon them.
November 25th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
I do find it interesting that they embrace Jews who attack others Jews like Fred Scooby.
November 25th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
Race realism makes more sense than WNism.
November 25th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
Philo-Semitic National Futurists, White Nationalists and everything in-bewteen should read Les Espérances Planétariennes, Levallois: Éds. Baskerville, 2005 by Herve Ryssen in French, or the critique of same by Michael O’meara and a recent interview with Ryssen, “The Religious Origins of Globalism” by Greg Johnson Ph.d, here: http://www.toqonline.com/
Well meaning Gentiles who believe Jews have ever really cared about the Anglo-European and American societies they’ve been living in for the last 300 years aren’t completely educated. The history of Jewish perfidy in exile and at home in their ethno-state in Israel is not just “VNN blather.” The more that’s revealed the more pessimistic one’s world view becomes in the 21st century. This knowledge is a curse.
November 25th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
“As a hardcore philosemite, I have chosen my side.”
The reason you are a philosemite is that you are partially Jewish, am I right?
November 26th, 2009 at 1:08 am
You are half right. You are correct that I have some Russian Jewish blood, and you are correct that I defend Jews against WNs. There is something larger at work here than naked self-interest. I’m a philosemite because I realize that Islam (along with democratic capitalism) is the absolute biggest threat the world faces, because I have studied anthropology on my own time and am convinced that the WNs don’t understand it, and because I think Hilter was a screwup.
But I’m not supportive of everything Jews are currently doing politically, even though I have major plans to incorporate Jews into my scheme to destroy liberalism and its twin sisters, capitalism and religion.
Jews may be responsible for Christianity, Judaism and Islam (by proxy) but now Jews are doing more to destroy religion than Arabs. The jew of today is an ally for technocracy, even if the Talmudic Jew is a potential enemy.
November 26th, 2009 at 1:19 am
You’ve got to give me credit. I’m not a Fred Scrooby and I’ve come out and admitted my ancestry. I deserve some points for honesty. I’m being totally honest when I say that Jews and other civilized Infidels need to get their shit together or else Islamification and negrofication is a certain threat.
November 26th, 2009 at 1:20 am
Reality check, White Nationalists are irrational, conspiratorial dumbasses who are deathly afraid of their own shadow and inadequacy, and can’t explain the world as it is so they blame Jews. “Race realists” are still dumbasses because they think their is some inherent good in being part of some “race”, which is an extremely arbitrary title anyway. The idea that one’s ability is measured by a collection and ratio of genetic markers is simply insane, and totally unscientific. Islamophobes are just another side of the coin, since a large portion of Muslims are Muslims in name only, just like a large portion of Christians.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/demographics.asp
To say that Islam is a “threat” to the globe is simply ludicrous. For one thing, most of the wars going on in the Middle East are related to, if not caused by, the imperialist meddling of secular capitalist countries, specifically non-Muslim countries. Also one might think that overpopulation and global warming might present a slightly bigger threat to the world than a religion.
There is no intelligent paranoia.
November 26th, 2009 at 1:28 am
Global warming has recently been disproven.
Plus, as technocrats, Constantin and I support technology over nature.
November 26th, 2009 at 1:38 am
Aslan, both you and Besoshvili defend Muslims.
But you defend them arguing that its just paranoia, whereas Besoshvili argues that Muslims are extreme and enjoys them more because of it. So you are arguing that Muslims are moderates and going against the hardcore ones, whereas Besoshvili is all about the hardcore ones.
What diverse viewpoints you Marxist Leninist have. My viewpoint is that the whole world should eventually be atheistic, scientific, racially conscious and people should focus their collective energy into nation states. Man should overcome nature. Hitler wanted man to submit to nature, but I want man to overcome nature. I wonder how many wars and how much bloodshed it will take to reach that point.
November 26th, 2009 at 9:52 am
I am arguing that while religion in general is a reactionary institution, there is no religion which constitutes a “threat” to the world.
Racial consciousness is bullshit because “race” is bullshit. You can prove this easily by showing photographs of people who would never be considered “white”, yet fit the visual profile. If race were real, you wouldn’t need some kind of other information to spot what race someone is. You wouldn’t need their genetic information. We would have seen “Race” play a much larger role in history, when in fact we see that the term took on many different other definitions throughout history.
November 26th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
For once I agree with this author of this article. Yes Jews are not a threat to the White European Race, in principle but Islam and its followers are. Somehow I got the notion that the mass immigration of the 3 World hordes into Europa was instigated by Zionists/USA? ZOG government, to weaken a pure white united Europe! Still I have not been proven wrong or right.
November 26th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Islam is inherently multicultural, inherently imperialistic, inherently anti-nationalist and inherently retarded.
I’ll be perfectly honest when I say that I support completely destroying Islam in the middle east too. Not just in europe. I don’t care how much body count it takes. We have hydrogen bombs and they should be used on every theocracy.
And I don’t care if this offends besoshvili, daniel shays, mazdak or any other pro-muslim person here.
November 26th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
What we have to understand is that the war with Islam did not start with America’s neo-con policies, and did not start with Israel but started the day Muhammad falsified his religion and vowed to have it take over the world.
November 26th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Excellent…this is so hard core. Your online presence alone spells disaster for the whole establishment. OMg – you’re is winner this is giving me a hard-core boner.
November 26th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
Ok first off, there is no such thing as a “White European Race”. There are plenty of people in Turkey, the Middle East, and Central Asia that could easily pass for “White”. A great deal of historical Indo-Europeans are Muslims, such as the Tajiks and Iranians. And like I said, there are non-Indo-European, Turkic people who totally fit the description of “white European”, such as Tatars, Chuvash, etc. There are also the Caucasians of course, many of whom are Muslims. Then we have the Albanians and the Bosnians as well.
Now, on the next bit of retardation from our resident 16 year old editor. Yes, the war on Islam was started by imperialistic policies. It is ridiculous to speak of any “Islam vs. non-Muslim” historical war because since the early days of the Caliphate, Muslim states have fought one another and allied with non-Muslim states in the process.
The rest of your statement sounds like the rant of a socially-awkward, angsty high school student who is just one toilet-dunking away from bringing a gun to school.
November 26th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
I study anthropology a lot and agree that there is a caucasoid race. I agree that many middle easteners could pass for meds physically.
It doesn’t matter though. Europe is under invasion via immigration.
November 26th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
“The rest of your statement sounds like the rant of a socially-awkward, angsty high school student who is just one toilet-dunking away from bringing a gun to school.”
lol
November 26th, 2009 at 9:26 pm
Invasion is a military term. Europe has had its doors open to immigration for a long time, ergo it is not an invasion.
Also, in regards to “Caucasoid race”, I was not speaking of those who have a “Mediterranean” look either. I am talking about people who could easily pass for English, German, Russian, Finnish, etc.
November 26th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
Some of the Slavic Muslims probably could.
I’m not dumb enough to not consider them a spiritual threat just because they look more like me.
November 26th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
And Turks, and Tatars, and Chechens, Ignushes, Karachai, Lezgis, Avars, Tajiks, etc.
Why are they a “threat” to you? How has Islam negatively affected your life?
November 26th, 2009 at 11:07 pm
I read the koran as a senior in high school for my own entertainment and once was sympathetic. I know damn well how the koran is aggressively opposed to non-belief and other religions. And when I see events around the world, I know Islam is motivating it. It isn’t anti-imperialism. It is fundamentalism.
November 27th, 2009 at 3:58 am
I didn’t say it is “anti-imperialism”, but fundamentalism is a response to imperialism. During the era of Islamic imperialism, the states like the Ottoman Empire were far from fundamentalist based on the practices which were tolerated.
And since when does a religious text accurately depict what it’s followers do? Consider this- how many Christians belong to sects that claim to be Bible-believing? How many of these Christians claim to follow a literal interpretation of the Bible? All such Christians, as a matter of doctrine, are radically opposed to abortion, claiming it is murder and against God’s law. Many of them have this as their single issue in life. Just one problem; the Bible neither mentions, nor forbids- abortion.
November 27th, 2009 at 4:06 am
I think fundamentalism is aggravated by imperialism but there is ideological disposition.
November 27th, 2009 at 5:20 am
Aslan, would you be interested in being a publisher so you can write your own topics? Or would your association with the big bad wolf metal gear fascist make you turn that down?
November 28th, 2009 at 12:07 am
MG:”Plus, as technocrats, Constantin and I support technology over nature.”
That is not very intelligent. All technology comes from Nature, the raw materials and such. Also, technology is used mostly just to have more mastery over Nature.
If we paved over the entire world and obliterated all of Nature in the name of technology, humanity would eventually go almost entirely extinct. By degrading Nature, we make the continuance of technology impossible.
We are already deracinated from our more natural roots as it is, and it has made many modern people very miserable; it is obvious to many that as modern people have increasingly withdrawn from Nature their souls have begun to degrade as well.
Have you ever read Spengler’s MAN AND TECHNICS? It predicts that non-Whites will use White-invented technologies to overcome the White race — that is exactly what is happening nowadays, actually: http://www.archive.org/details/ManTechnics-AContributionToAPhilosophyOfLife193253
November 28th, 2009 at 12:20 am
Aslan Maskhadov – regarding racial issues, you are a very uninformed person.
November 28th, 2009 at 12:29 am
No I haven’t read the book you speak of. I’ll see what it is about.
I don’t know about you, but what makes me miserable is the state of the economy and the lack of populist leanings of the government. The solutions to those problems involve collectivism rather than naturalistic individualism.
November 28th, 2009 at 2:28 am
“I don’t know about you, but what makes me miserable is the state of the economy…”
Over-technologization has lead to massive job losses and a huge surplus of labor. Think about it: nowadays machines can do the work of dozens of people in half the time it used to take. Like a bulldozer, for instance – it used to take a couple dozen men a week to move a whole bunch of dirt, but nowadays a bulldozer can do it in 20 minutes. Or manufacturing…it is very automated now, but back in the day before rampant technology it was done by human craftspeople.
Things you need to think about.
November 28th, 2009 at 2:32 am
Yes, you ought to read Spengler’s MAN AND TECHNICS when you get a chance; it isn’t very long, just a bit over 50 pages, more like a long essay rather than an actual book.
November 28th, 2009 at 2:36 am
I agree that collectivism is preferable to fanatical individualism.
However, collectivism is not very inherent within White-Western peoples, it isn’t much in the DNA.
About the best collective strategy one can use to get people moving is religion — the masses are often willing to work together more collectively when it involves religion, God, or a ‘divine mission,’ but are much less willing to work together if it just involves politics, economics, bureaucracy, etc. As the saying goes: “Faith can move mountains.”
November 28th, 2009 at 2:51 am
You made a few points here.
I agree, but if our government actually gave a shit, I think they could do more to rectify the situation. Libertarianism combined with high technology doesn’t work. I think in the modern age, the state must be more active.
As I noted in a post I just wrote, I think what happened is before USA was competing the Soviet Union, so it had to reach out to workers. Now it isn’t so it thinks it can ignore workers. It is a very sad view of the world, that the American government has basically abandoned the average person for elites.
Thanks for the referral.
I agree with you…to an extent. By white western we are not talking about Slavs and we are not talking about Italians. I think you underestimate the extent that man can program himself. If smart people decide that they want to embrace a new idea, they can embrace it. Religion isn’t necessarily necessary but a devotion to an ideal.
November 28th, 2009 at 4:24 am
MG:”As I noted in a post I just wrote, I think what happened is before USA was competing the Soviet Union, so it had to reach out to workers. Now it isn’t so it thinks it can ignore workers. It is a very sad view of the world, that the American government has basically abandoned the average person for elites.”
Yes – watch:
November 28th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
Please Mr. Consequence, inform me.
November 28th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
I agree
December 24th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
This story of Aisha and Muhamamd is not Quranic and is based on oral traditions compiled centuries after him. In fact it is Talmudic in origin. Probably the hadith was circulated by Jewish converts to islam.
The wordings are exactly the same as the talmud where it says a man can marry a 6 year old and consummate the marriage at nine. Exact wordings.
Only the Quran speaks for islam and not some Sunni or Shia hadiths which are later manufacturings.
So it is not correct to say Muhamamd was a pedophile since this is not based on historic accounts but based on Talmudic influence in Islam. There were many Jews around Medina and Mecca as the Quran testifies.
The Pharisees justified child rape by explaining that a boy of nine years was not a “man” (See, “Judaism and Homosexuality: A Marriage Made in Hell”) Thus they exempted him from God’s Mosaic Law: “You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination” (Lev. 18:22) One passage in the Talmud gives permission for a woman who molested her young son to marry a high priest. It concludes, “All agree that the connection of a boy aged nine years and a day is a real connection; whilst that of one less than eight years is not.” 5 Because a boy under 9 is sexually immature, he can’t “throw guilt” on the active offender, morally or legally. 6
A woman could molest a young boy without questions of morality even being raised: “…the intercourse of a small boy is not regarded as a sexual act.” 7 The Talmud also says, “A male aged nine years and a day who cohabits with his deceased brother’s wife acquires her (as wife).” 8 Clearly, the Talmud teaches that a woman is permitted to marry and have sex with a nine year old boy.
Sex at Three Years and One Day
In contrast to Simeon ben Yohai’s dictum that sex with a little girl is permitted under the age of three years, the general teaching of the Talmud is that the rabbi must wait until a day after her third birthday. She could be taken in marriage simply by the act of rape.
R. Joseph said: Come and hear! A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabits with her, she becomes his. (Sanh. 55b)
A girl who is three years of age and one day may be betrothed by cohabitation. . . .(Yeb. 57b)
A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband’s brother cohabited with her she becomes his. (Sanh. 69a, 69b, also discussed in Yeb. 60b)
It was taught: R. Simeon b. Yohai stated: A proselyte who is under the age of three years and one day is permitted to marry a priest, for it is said, But all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves, and Phineas (who was priest, the footnote says) surely was with them. (Yeb. 60b)
[The Talmud says such three year and a day old girls are] . . . fit for cohabitation. . . But all women children, that have not known man by lying with him, it must be concluded that Scripture speaks of one who is fit for cohabitation. (Footnote to Yeb. 60b)
The example of Phineas, a priest, himself marrying an underage virgin of three years is considered by the Talmud as proof that such infants are “fit for cohabitation.”
The Talmud teaches that an adult woman’s molestation of a nine year old boy is “not a sexual act” and cannot “throw guilt” upon her because the little boy is not truly a “man.” 9 But they use opposite logic to sanction rape of little girls aged three years and one day: Such infants they count as “women,” sexually mature and fully responsible to comply with the requirements of marriage.
The Talmud footnotes 3 and 4 to Sanhedrin 55a clearly tell us when the rabbis considered a boy and girl sexually mature and thus ready for marriage. “At nine years a male attains sexual matureness… The sexual matureness of woman is reached at the age of three.”
http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/judaism-israel/31979-pedophilia-talmuds-dirty-secret.html