Thomas Buhls: “Don’t ask me the Jewish Question.”


Don’t ask me the “Jewish Question.”

"Another successful Social Solidarity action was completed yesterday, under the guide of the National People's Front, Golden Dawn's sister organization in Cyprus. The event was organized to provide relief to the families that were stricken by this crisis and were left alone to face it. The comrades, after a lot of hard work, managed to gather large quantities of food and other basic necessities to distribute to the Greek Cypriot families."  -Golden Dawn International News Room

“Another successful Social Solidarity action was completed yesterday, under the guide of the National People’s Front, Golden Dawn’s sister organization in Cyprus. The event was organized to provide relief to the families that were stricken by this crisis and were left alone to face it. The comrades, after a lot of hard work, managed to gather large quantities of food and other basic necessities to distribute to the Greek Cypriot families.” -Golden Dawn International News Room

The JQ is not a question, it’s an ultimatum. When we link

ourselves with White Nationalism a curious thing happens. Not only will you suddenly become forever stigmatized for working in the interests of White people, but you will be asked to pass a litmus test. To fail the litmus test is to be exiled into the margins of White Nationalism, and precious few are able to escape exile after suffering the accusations of phoniness.

There is not a single person who can claim ownership for the White Nationalist movement, nor speak on behalf of it in its entirety. Do not ask the JQ while secretly requiring certain answers. The White Nationalist movement is composed of a broad and disconnected spectrum of activists ranging from American Nationalism, to Orthodox Nationalism, Radical Traditionalism, and Paganism.  To name only a few.  Each group will have a different answer because each has a different methodology and desired set of goals.  To demand a singular set of answers precludes the possibility of exploring different avenues of White Nationalism.

The JQ is not a proposition either. In almost every circumstance that I’ve seen the JQ arise, it has been for the purpose of discerning whether or not an activist is good enough to “play the game.” Zealous voices, or perhaps anarchic ones like Sebastian Ronin, will not allow prominent activists to remain silent on the question without fears of subversion arising.

The right response does not magically open doors.

The right response does not earn the privilege of learning secret handshakes.

The right response does not garner positive attention from the White Nationalist community.

I find no benefit in proffering an answer to the JQ. Talking about the JQ by itself runs the risk of invoking unending and petty scorn from blowhards and zealots.

The JQ isn’t even a productive question, because it never invites a solution or a productive manner for engaging those around us.  It is literally counter productive because it invokes a defensive response. The JQ is somewhere between an accusation and an insult, and it almost always comes across as a warning shot. More than anything else it is a transaction between two parties who are trying to determine rules of engagement. Bickering over rules of engagement takes away time from talking about what really matters.

The number one concern among White Nationalists should be the “White Question.”

The Jewish people are not my concern. My loyalty is to the diaspora of White Anglo Saxon peoples, and I do not care to waste time on infighting. Do not come to me and demand an answer for the JQ unless you are prepared to first talk about the WQ.

As dedicated activists we should be pushing the WQ.

Where are your loyalties for White people?

Are you worried about becoming a Google Felon?

What are you willing to sacrifice for the movement?

Will you risk your physical health or safety to take part in a demonstration?

What skills do you have which can help the movement, and what would you like to do better?

Those are the kinds of questions we should be asking each other, but above all else we have to ask ourselves one more question.  Are we willing to teach and mentor the younger generation of White Nationalists?

The JQ is secondary to the WQ, and I will not waste my time arguing about what to do with the Jewish people until we can first talk about what we are willing to do for our own people.


  • Your post reminded me Michael O’Meara’s provocative post on this very subject:

    http://chechar.wordpress.com/2013/03/23/michael-omeara-revisited/

    • Tom

      Thanks for the link, and I really enjoyed that article. Cheers.

  • John McNeill

    Outstanding post. I hope this gets around to various corners of WN cyberspace.

  • Great post. In my mind, the only question is how we beat white liberalism, which is the cause of all problems. I’m not even sure there is a “we,” since many of us have after years of dealing with the loons quit white nationalism for paleoconservatism, which includes the idea that the only healthy nations are nationalistic.

    • Lew

      Actually, American paleoconservatism has a 100% failure record. It is a record of failure so total and complete that I’m surprised there is anyone with radical goals left willing to claim the label other than in jest.

      While WNsm has not accomplished much either, that is at least partially explained by the fact that WNsm has been systematically under attack by the American power structure for 50 years in a way paleo-conservatism has not been.

      WNsts have succeeded in this much: posing enough of theoretical threat to the status quo to draw unrelenting attacks from the people occupying the highest levels of power in this country. This number includes the ADL, SPLC, mass media, and the government itself. Jared Taylor and Amren get attacked and disrupted all the time; KMDs works are under a complete cultural blackout. These attacks show beyond all doubt that white racial consciousness is what the power structure fears most.

      Please remind us: when is the last time the ADL, SPLC or antifa broke up a lecture by Chilton Williamson or Thomas Flemming?

      The most important American paleo-con, Samuel Francis, was more white nationalist than paleo-con by the end.

      What’s “loony” about telling the truth about the JQ anyway? It seems to me it would be loony not to tell the truth as you seem to be suggesting. In effect, your recommendation is that we lie by omission. Perhaps, Brett Stevens, you are the loon.

  • There either is or there is not a Jewish problem that whites must face if we are to regain control over our destinies. That is a matter of objective fact. Evading the question is not an option, because it is pragmatically the same as the claim that there is no Jewish problem. Or it is a confession that one is simply not serious enough about white advocacy to think through the nature of the problems we have and the impediments to solving them that stand in our way.

    So Tom, setting aside considerations of personalities and what other people think to whatever exent that is possible, what do you think of the Jewish question?

    • Tom

      What do you think of the White Question?

      I very likely have no disagreement with you on the JQ, but simply dealing with one problem (and there are others, by the way) is not going to make white people change the way they fundamentally behave and view the world.

      The absence of Jews or other subversive interlopers is not going to magically fix society. The spiritual and moral development of white people is more of a concern to me.

    • Tom,

      I am glad you liked the O’Meara article linked above. Here are some of my original thoughts on the subject:

      http://chechar.wordpress.com/2013/04/02/bicausalism/

      As you can appreciate, I tend to focus more on the WQ than the JQ.

      This said, in the coming racial wars it is imperative that we handle first the subversive tribe. Why you might ask if for me the JQ is historically secondary to the WQ? The answer is that we must get the message to the masses and, presently, the tribe almost monopolizes the media.

    • Lew

      Respectfully, why is it an either or choice? It looks to me like you’re setting up a pretty blatant false alternative here.

      In my experience, people who take your position do so out of a fundamental misunderstanding: that anyone, anywhere, at any time has ever proposed focusing ONLY or primarily on the JQ as opposed to other things. No one has ever proposed this. I note that you didn’t quote the words of anyone who does.

      Can I ask what other problems do you not want anyone to ask you about?

      Immigration, multi-culturalism, low birth rates, feminism, race mixing, cultural decay and degeneracy, hostile ruling elites, capitalist and plutocratic exploitation?

      I am going to venture a guess that only JQ makes your list of issues not to ask you about. I’m prepared to eat crow if not correct.

      Best,

    • Tom

      I’m fairly outspoken on those other issues, but please don’t ask me the results of my last blood test or my waist size. I’m pretty self conscious about those things, right?

      No, but seriously, my answer to the Jewish Question is the same as my answer to the Black Question, or even the Hispanic Question. If these people do not support a white ethno-state, a country of our own, then they should be treated accordingly. Stigmatization, marginalization, and disenfranchisement. needless to say a white ethno-state would, of course, have exclusive citizenship rights.

      I’d like to say that we wouldn’t even have to worry about the JQ if white people had a country of their own, but the enemy I am most concerned about is people that look us, but don’t support us. I’ll wager that most of the problems we face today are not from an aggressive opponent, but from white people that simply don’t feel compelled to get involved.

    • Tom

      @Lew, Greg- It’s clear enough that the both of you are outspoken on the JQ, seemingly to the expense of other more worthwhile questions, including the WQ– So where do you stand? An opposition to one group of people, the Jews, does not automatically make you the champion of white people everywhere. It’d be nice to see you answer some of these questions. This is not an ultimatum, this is an Olive Branch, and I think it’d be more productive to work on those things which we do agree on; the protection and development of our own people.

      Greg, I like what you do at Counter-Currents, but aside from having a really wonderful blog, and it is nice by the way, what do you do? As I’ve mentioned in my own bit of writing here, I will not secretly require a specific set of answers on the JQ because the WN movement is composed of a variety of different activists. If we all agreed on one specific answer to the JQ, then I think we’d all be in the same club together. However, we do have our varying opinions on how any one thing in particular should be handled, and I’m of the opinion that each of us should be able to work for it in the most productive manner that we see fit. If we can all agree that we are in this movement together because of a love and reverence for the white race and a desire to further the interests of white people, why split hairs over secondary issues?

      You can reply here, or you can weigh in on the issue at your blogs. Your choice.

      Where are your loyalties for White people?
      Are you worried about becoming a Google Felon?
      What are you willing to sacrifice for the movement?
      Will you risk your physical health or safety to take part in a demonstration?
      Are you willing to teach and mentor the younger generation of White Nationalists?
      What skills do you have which can help the movement, and what would you like to do better?

  • IMHO this is the best article on the Jewish Question:

    http://chechar.wordpress.com/2012/12/30/seeing-the-forest/

    An absolute must read. Trust me…

    • Tom

      Thanks for the article, it’s a good read. Cheers.

  • Lew

    @Lew, Greg- It’s clear enough that the both of you are outspoken on the JQ, seemingly to the expense of other more worthwhile questions, including the WQ- So where do you stand?

    Tom,

    I personally don’t feel it should be pursued at the expense of other worthwhile questions.

    My position is that people can and should do both. Golden Dawn has been using this exact approach. While positively working for the betterment of their people is Golden Dawn’s main focus, they also don’t hesitate to identify all of their peoples’ various enemies. They do not shy away from identifying the Jews and Zionists as enemies of the Greek people, along with everyone else, the various capitalists, globalists, traitorous Greek elites and others.

    Some (not all) of the problems I personally perceive with not addressing the JQ include:

    – Evading the truth about a problem that we face; de facto lying by omission

    – No strategic, tactical or practical messaging benefit to not addressing it (Jews will attack anyway using the full might of their mass media)

    – Does not model what seems to be a successful approaches in Europe (Golden Dawn and Jobbik)

    I guess I’m a bit unclear on why you feel a choice is required here (if you do): focusing on what you call the WQ OR the JQ as if the questions are mutually exclusive.

    If it’s just a matter of a choice and emphasis, that you personally are choosing not to focus on the JQ in your work but don’t have a problem with people who do, then that strikes me as a reasonable position. You’re not denying that Jewish influence is a problem merely choosing not to focus on it.

    If that is your position, then I perceive an important difference between your position and the position of people like Brett Stevens who says WNsts are loons.

    In stating above that you likely agree with Greg Johnson on the JQ, you imply that you recognize the impact of the JQ on our predicament but nevertheless feel there is more to be gained to be focusing on other issues (the WQ).

    The problem is there are many people out there like this Brett Stevens individual who purport to be pro-white while denying that Jewish influence is a problem at all. So when you make an argument that discussing the JQ has no value because there are more worthwhile questions to pursue, intentionally or not, you create an opening for people who think like Stevens, people who push unhelpful ideas that run counter to white interests.

    People like Stevens, and there are many of them out there, like to seize on arguments like yours and use them to mislead people into believing that Jewish influence is not a problem at all.

  • Jon

    “White, Christian America is rotten – and we let it rot. We let our standards slide. We abandoned our race, our culture, our creed, and our collective conscience. All the blacks and Jews in the world couldn’t have done this to us. We did it to ourselves.” http://www.thinkinghousewife.com/wp/2013/08/why-jews-and-blacks-are-not-the-enemy/

    • Jon,

      That’s exactly what I believe. And the best way to prove it is simply studying the degeneracy of the Greco-Roman world, where gluttony and general degeneracy corrupted the white soul—sans Jews. History should be at the front to understand the whys of the West’s darkest hour.

      Fortunately the dollar is going to crash and that means that today’s westerners, that Pierce once compared to the Trimalchios of the times of Nero and Caligula, are going to suffer beyond their imagination.

      Game of Thrones may be silly, but there’s a line in the entire seasons that merits recounting. When Locke cuts off Jaime’s sword hand Brienne scolds Jaime that he has, at last, tasted a bit “of the real world”.

      The West is composed by millions of spoiled Jaimes who will soon taste a little of what the real world is.

      This said, I must take issue with those who say that “Jews are not the enemy”. See the Pierce article I linked above, “Seeing the forest”.

    • Lew

      Laura Wood’s work is heavily influenced by Lawrence Auster, a man who unless I’m mistaken lied to you on the JQ back in the day when you did not know any better.

      Some of the people here cheering the marginalization of the JQ, exclusively blaming whites and denying that Jewish influence is a problem at all appear to be Austerites, conservatives or both. Brett Stevens was a big supporter of Mitt Romney for president. It’s not clear how that stance squares with radical traditionalism or radical anything.

      These are “Whites-only monocausalists” in your parlance.

    • To Lew

      You may be right, but I’m trying to build bridges. That’s the whole point of “bicausalism”.

      To Austerites:

      Read Larry’s “testament” and have second thoughts:

      http://kevinmacdonaldespanol.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/larry-austers-1998-piece/

      Auster’s piece is so incriminating on Jewish influence that, if submitted, MacDonald would very well have published it either on TOO or TOQ.

    • Lew

      I disagree. I’ve had enough of this bullshit. For a couple of years now I’ve watched this theme, this FOUL suicide meme, worming its way into our discourse and gaining influence.

      I propose the opposite: perpetual war and street fighting against certain types*** of “whites-only” obsessives, JQ-deniers, conservatives, people of questionable character who recommend lying by omission and people with an AGENDA to make all strains of nationalism friendly to Jews.

      They’re the ones who keep the JQ alive. It’s them. It’s not anyone but them. They’re the reason the JQ won’t die. If they would just embrace the common sense, obvious fact that Jewish influence is at the top of list of problems, the JQ could properly recede into the background until there is a reason to discuss it.

      But no, certain people INSIST on denying the obvious, shifting an absurdly inappropriate amount of blame onto TODAY’S whites, and thereby diverting attention from TODAY’s Jews, by design. Their distortions must be answered in case any new people are reading who might mistakenly assume their information is reliable, which, invariably starts the next foray into the topic.

      So what is it about the JQ that is different in principle from any other problem? What?

      Elite Jews hate our guts. They’re working night and day for our GENOCIDE. This a problem, no? It’s not the ONLY problem, but it is A problem. This is basic.

      Nevertheless, within our discourse communities, it stands alone as the only problem that A) certain people absurdly maintain isn’t a problem at all, or B) that we shouldn’t talk about for some dubious reason or other.

      We don’t get many people coming along saying “we’re spending too much time on low white birth rates. We’re spending too much time on the need for white separation. Maybe we need to rethink universalist egalitarianism and feminism.”

      No, it’s only ONE particular problem in the universe of problems that certain people insist we ought not talk about, a demand that just happens to perfectly align with Jewish interests.

      Essentially, it’s an insistence that the various strains of nationalism percolating in America adopt a Counter-Jihad approach, but with a twist and adaptions for an American context. At a minimum, it’s an attempt to influence them in that direction.

      You saw CJ up close. You know that the Muslim problem in Europe cannot be separated from the Jewish problem. Why would it be any different here?

      I noticed Laura Wood linked to the master wordsmith and prose stylist “Robert Oculus.” He used to spread anti-WNst talking points straight from Lawrence Auster on Occidental Dissent. I argued with him once or twice. He played that bullshit taking point pretty often — whites who complain about Jews are analogous to niggers who complain about whites. That’s Auster- speak. That’s my view. Fuck him, and fuck anybody who uses his stuff. You may have forgotten how LA demeaned KMD. I haven’t.

      And what I can’t get my head around, especially, is that no WNst of any significance has ever even said Jews are the only problem, or that it should be the only or primary focus in WNst debate, education or activism. No one.

      For people who write with such confidence that there is too much Jew talk in WNsm, you would think they could find reams of quotes to prove it. Yet they never quote anybody to prove it. Never. Why not? It’s because no one has ever said it. Is there another explanation?

      In that article you linked, WLP says clear as day Jews are not the only problem.

      And speaking of WLP, look around at America. EXACTLY what WLP and George Lincoln Rockwell said would happen to America FIFTY YEARS ago HAS happened. They said it when America was 90%+ white. So what could make more sense given 50 years of vindication than abandoning their insights?

      Insane.

      ***CAVEAT

      NONE of what I said above applies to Tom, young people, people just coming out the mainstream, people whose views are in flux, basically anyone who isn’t aware of why this Jew stuff matters, or people who know about it but believe they can be more effective discussing other issues.

  • Sebastian Ernst Ronin

    Mr. Buhls, please note re “zealous, anarchic” voices: The RPN, in both Kanada and now in Amerika also, is a legally incorporated entity doing business as a political party. I happen to be the RPN (Canada) elected President. There is corporate structure, organization, and hierarchy. We do business as Ethno Nationalists, NOT as White Nationalists. So much for “anarchic.” Btw, the link you posted was written by Benjamin Noyles who chairs a Steering Committee in Britain to probe the introduction of a Renaissance Party there.

    There is not the least thing “anarchic” about our Three Pillars, Constitution, and Policy Positions. However, to appreciate such, they would firstly have to be read and, secondly, comprehended. As for “zealous”, thank you, I do take credit for that.

    • Matt Parrott

      For somebody who purports to despise and dismiss the Canadian and American governments, you certainly do put a lot of stock in and take a lot of pride in being integrated into their filing system.

  • CB33

    “No, but seriously, my answer to the Jewish Question is the same as my answer to the Black Question, or even the Hispanic Question. If these people do not support a white ethno-state, a country of our own, then they should be treated accordingly. Stigmatization, marginalization, and disenfranchisement. needless to say a white ethno-state would, of course, have exclusive citizenship rights.”

    As a Jew, a US Army, and USAF Veteran, a retired law enforcement officer, and a devout conservative – thanks for answering the “JQ”.

  • John

    “Where are your loyalties for White people?
    Are you worried about becoming a Google Felon?
    What are you willing to sacrifice for the movement?
    Will you risk your physical health or safety to take part in a demonstration?
    Are you willing to teach and mentor the younger generation of White Nationalists?
    What skills do you have which can help the movement, and what would you like to do better?”

    Glad to see someone asking the more important questions.

  • Tom, before I get around to your questions, is it your position that what I think and do matters more to white advocacy than, say, what Abe Foxman is up to, or the SPLC?

    • Tom

      I don’t follow the way you’ve worded your question, so maybe this will help us understand each other a little better. The ADL and SPLC aren’t really involved in pro-white advocacy, and I’d sooner call it anti-white defamation, but if your position on white nationalism is defined first by being in defense of white people and our own various and unique cultures, then I think we would have very little to disagree with between each other.

    • Lew

      if your position on white nationalism is defined first by being in defense of white people and our own various and unique cultures, then I think we would have very little to disagree with between each other.

      Don’t speak for GJ, but I’d be shocked if he doesn’t look at that way. I do too. In fact, everyone, I’d say, is for our people first, for making the positive case for our people first, as the top priority. Other matters must necessarily be dealt with on the road to that goal, but everyone’s main goal is what’s best for us.

      I know of no one who discusses the JQ who does not look at it this way and truly do not understand why you would think otherwise.

      It’s a misunderstanding IMO , and one I suspect originates with people who seek to marginalize the JQ by spreading the false idea that that’s all people who talk about the JQ care about.

  • Sebastian Ernst Ronin

    You, and your cohorts, risk absolutely nothing. Your commentary and supposed action is all fluff; it is irrelevant. It is make believe.

    • Matt Parrott

      Yawn.

      “Make believe” is imagining that your having filed articles of incorporation suddenly makes you a serious man. That’s the quintessence of magical thinking. How many more months are you going to trot around the fact that you filed your paperwork (after a mere three years of preparation)? How much mileage do you really expect to milk that administrative trivia for?

      TradYouth happens to be a bonafide corporation (achieved within the first few weeks of activity), too. That makes me the executive of a corporation, a big important man whose ideas have consequences. One of my consequential executive ideas is that one by one, your inner circle is growing weary of humoring your desperate and impotent little troll brigade.

    • Tom

      Seb- Isn’t there a six-pack of Geritol somewhere that’s calling your name?

  • Sebastian Ernst Ronin

    Your selection of language betrays your desperation, sweetheart. Plus, you lie like a fucking rug. Quick! Dip into the diphenhydramine bottle to make it all better.

    • Matt Parrott

      Quick! Dip into the diphenhydramine bottle to make it all better.

      Are you implying that I abuse antihistamines? Or that I’m sea sick? Or that I have allergies? You lost me.

  • Tom,

    The best argument for the impossibility of skirting the JQ is by John Tyndall: http://www.counter-currents.com/2011/01/john-tyndall-on-the-jewish-question/

    • Tom

      Thanks for the link, Greg. I enjoyed the article and found it worthwhile.

      Being called anti-Semetic, or a Nazi is the lest of my concerns as I’ve been involved with The Knights Party for some years now. It’s really no secret, and for the most part my loyalties and convictions are public knowledge.

      I simply don’t feel compelled to define my activism as being “simply” in opposition to international Jewry and Zionism. In the same way I refuse to be categorized as “just” a Klansman, or “just” a former Marine. I am many things, and I will not be known for being opposition only to Jewish supremism– because I am opposed to many more than “just” international Jewry and Zionism.

      I choose to define myself as being FIRST in defense of white people and our various unique cultures. All other considerations are secondary to me, though not without a marked significance and importance of their own.

  • Lew,

    We are curiously in agreement in one sense: while I believe that whites brought this to themselves since the late 18th century, and especially throughout the 19th when European nation after European nation empowered the subversive tribe (kind of full-blown AIDS within the white mind), what has been killing the West in the century when we were born, and in this one, is an AIDS-opportunistic infection: the Judaization of the West.

    In other words: I am only asking for a meta-perspective. Whites brought this to themselves by empowering them. But presently, yes: I agree with you that the J problem should be handled first. There’s no way out of this mess until whites completely and absolutely reclaim their media, presently owned by You Know Who.

    However, a deeper analysis of the problem (and this is academic rather than political action—food for thought for the coming ethnostate) would always pay attention on why nation after nation “emancipated” Jews following Napoleon’s lead. Something horribly wrong must have happened in the White psyche—suicidal indeed—to allow such a thing.

    • Matt Parrott

      Something horribly wrong must have happened in the White psyche—suicidal indeed—to allow such a thing.

      Your interest in psychology skews your analysis, here. It’s not about a change in psyche, it’s about a change in power dynamics. The Age of Discovery and concomitant tsunami of wealth to the peasant merchants and Jews empowered them to overwhelm the regnant elites. The merchants and Jews teamed up in an organic alliance of convenience, translating their mercantile power into power in every realm. This process is historically recorded as The Enlightenment, the French and American revolutions, the Protestant Reformation, and so on.

      An abrupt change in the White psyche from a heroic and pious people to a vapid and materialist people most certainly did occur, but only because an elite with a radically different psyche seized control.

  • Matt,

    I disagree with this interpretation of history. Economics over race policies were in full swing even before the Jews were involved. That’s why the quotations I have been reproducing in my blog from Pierce and Kemp’s books on the history of the White race are important: from the first White conquests of the Middle East and Egypt to the Greco-Roman world.

    Of such history I am familiar with what the Iberians did in the Americas. Even when the Inquisition persecuted the crypto-Jews (let alone regular Jews!) in New Spain, still, the greed for Aztec gold—White greed sans Jews—corrupted the Iberians’ psyche to the point of sanctioning continental mestization on a scale not seen ever before in history. This, for purely religious (the Counter-Reformation) and economic purposes.

    Read Bernal Díaz del Castillo’s 16th century chronicle, The True History of the Conquest of Mexico. You will notice there that Spaniards roundly fell to the spell of the One Ring—gold, according to the metaphor in Wagner’s opera—centuries before the Jews started to have any substantial influence in that society.

    • Matt Parrott

      You appear to have misread my position. Jews are merely the most organized and insidious oligarchs at the crest of the wave. The wave is colonialism. Nothing epitomizes the Mercantile Mania which swept Western Civilization better than the Latin American conquest. The priests and nobles got swept up in the gold rush, but were no match for the peasant merchant elites and Organized Jewry.

    • I stand corrected then but when I read your words (“but only because an elite with a radically different psyche seized control”) I thought you were talking of the tribe.

    • Matt Parrott

      Jews are first and primarily a priestly people. They excel at being merchants, but only in the service of their legalistic religious tradition. It’s a secondary function.

      Europe’s peasant merchants (sweepingly labeled with the fitting epithet “Freemasonry”) are the origin of the Enlightenment worldview, a worldview which is really just a merchant’s instincts projected onto philosophy and politics. Organized Jewry never sincerely adopted the Enlightenment worldview, developing the duplicitous position : “supremacism, purity, and tradition for me, egalitarianism, dissolution, and decadence for thee”.

      The Jews, because they’re a gifted and loyal tribe capable of hatching and directing inter-generational projects, have been and continue to be capable of leading the “Masonic” bull by the nose. This would be merely another case of an alien elite, like the Overseas Chinese in Malaysia, were it not for the uniquely bilious ressentiment the Jewish tradition and its adherents carry for our people and our people alone. They evidently prefer to bring the White Christian America to its knees merely because it’s White and it’s Christian, regardless of how eagerly we as a people have cravenly proven ourselves the most loyal and effective vassals in known history.

  • When asked the jewish question, reply with this White answer:

    Jews aren’t us, no matter how hard they want or try to be.

    It’s simple, factual, elitist, and just plain delicious.

  • Sebastian Ernst Ronin

    Actually not, Tom. You mistake it for a rising and real Ethno Nationalist constituency that will leave redundant Murkan White Nationalists eating our dust. Have a nice day.

    • Matt Parrott

      If American White Nationalists are pathetic, then that would make you doubly pathetic. Your entire shtick consists of being a thorn in our side and a honey trap for our less sober and sensible cohorts.

"Another successful Social Solidarity action was completed yesterday, under the guide of the National People's Front, Golden Dawn's sister organization in Cyprus. The event was organized to provide relief to the families that were stricken by this crisis and were left alone to face it. The comrades, after a lot of hard work, managed to gather large quantities of food and other basic necessities to distribute to the Greek Cypriot families."  -Golden Dawn International News Room

By: Thomas Buhls



%d bloggers like this: