← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Hugh Lincoln
Thread ID: 13945 | Posts: 213 | Started: 2004-05-29
2004-05-29 01:38 | User Profile
[url]http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?postid=63574#poststop[/url]
Gotta say all the infighting is silly. Strong people and strong organizations don't have to act like school girls and "disinvite" people. I swear. It's like some ****ers are waiting around for the following award:
"White Nationalist Awarded Congressional Medal of Honor for [I]Drawing the Line On a Guy Who Uses Racial Slurs on His Website[/I] --- ADL Applauds"
2004-05-29 02:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln][url]http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?postid=63574#poststop[/url]
Gotta say all the infighting is silly. Strong people and strong organizations don't have to act like school girls and "disinvite" people. I swear. It's like some ****ers are waiting around for the following award:
"White Nationalist Awarded Congressional Medal of Honor for [I]Drawing the Line On a Guy Who Uses Racial Slurs on His Website[/I] --- ADL Applauds"[/QUOTE]
VNN started all the crap. Now that Black and Duke want nothing to do with them they are basically crying. You make your bed you sleep in it.
2004-05-29 04:03 | User Profile
Just for the record, I have read O.D. and VNN since they started.. I do not EVER remember Linder knocking Mr. Duke, or especially his book "My Awakening" Which I gave to many people.. I say it is a mistake to turn away intelligent brave kindred.. I think I know and understand why this has happened, and each of us sees what we want, sometimes.......
2004-05-29 04:06 | User Profile
It's not as though white nationalists are [I]predisposed to working together[/I]. Those who rail loudest at the evils of Individualism are often quite stubborn and selfish themselves.
2004-05-29 04:20 | User Profile
Linder is starting to remind me of a Jew.
He seems to have alienated quite a few people who should be his best allies.
Yet he is never to blame for this development, it seems.
Sound familiar?
2004-05-29 04:46 | User Profile
Linder's mistake is he's trying to be a visible power-player, a leader. It's an admirable ambition but it's not what he does best.
His gifts are all in visible full flower on VNN. Between his now-legendary spintros, his ruthlessly-perceptive hyperlinking to news stories and his cultivating the Reader Mail page into one of the best and meatiest daily occurances in cyberspace, Linder as VNN is [I]sui generis[/I], and white people are [or should be] in his debt for it.
But Linder as WN Personality is another thing. [I]Sui generis [/I] seldom translates into [I]spokesmodel[/I], which is what all politicians and would-be politicians are today: toothpaste pitchmen in television commercials. The need to appeal to the widest possible audience dictates the requirement of inoffensiveness above nearly all other attributes. It's an arena in which [I]caustic brilliance [/I] becomes a liability.
I always thought Alex was barking up the wrong tree with his failed NA power-grab, alignment with Bill White, and these latest rally-the-troops public appearances, while not in any way [I]harmful[/I], also smack of a bid to become a more visible player in WN circles. On the other hand, I understand a writer's frustration with the limits of rhetoric and reporting. You can only go [I]so far [/I] and no further; and if you're a natural like Linder you came to the 'so-far' point a few years ago. He must feel as if he'll stagnate and regress unless he steps up to the next level. Whether or not Alex is going to make the transition depends on how he looks on the monitor holding up a tube of Crest Tartar Control.
2004-05-30 03:54 | User Profile
IR, I agree with your toothpaste assessment. It's the way of the world that the duller and smoother go higher as public figures than the bespectacled brilliants behind the keyboard. Cooperation with others requires a smoothing of the edges of the will that some folks, thank Odin, just ain't got. As you imply, qualities needed for one can actually be serious liabilities for the other. Linder probably experiences what some others on our side of things may experience on a smaller scale: a lot of energy and smarts trying to squeeze into extremely narrow spaces. Unloading frustration on an organization (NA and its media arms) that keeps you at arm's length may just be fairly fruitless if it wouldn't have been a good match to begin with. But I wouldn't call it tragic.
The Internet is a blessing for Linder, and I am hard-pressed to think of too many other people on the frickin' planet who put it to better use than this man.
[I]And, uh, my tagline there probably betrays a little bias. But it's like Peter Brimelow said. The guy can write.[/I]
2004-05-30 05:43 | User Profile
My guess, is David fully understands Linder, and the N.A. and Vincent Breeding or what ever his name is. Another guess is that David is thinking of the big picture now, and his time in prison gave him the time to sort things out in his mind.
Bottom line is this, leadership takes not only smarts, but in these times and in White Nationalism it takes real courage. We are up against the Oi TV and 95% sicko movies, and the entire anti white feminised public marxist scheull system.. I refuse to use a capital letter for marxist
2004-05-30 05:52 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Current93]While it is now considered quite gauche to use racial epithets sometimes I feel it can be most appropriate in driving home the message, here Linder uses them very powerfully indeed. Of course I will censor the offensive epithets as the many philo-semitic readers might get the vapors seeing their shock troops against the White race being referred to so disrespectfully.[/QUOTE]
Current 93, good post, and as for the CARR Brothers torture terror, it hit me in the face and fully drove home for me how feminized and N.P.R.ed p.c. most white educated men are today...
I remember fully a couple of years of ago, "Men?" that had posted on forum's and whined that no one had the right to use harsh words against the three white "MEN?" the Congoid Beast Carr brothers did in, for being defective men..
Pleaseee, Sir NO don't... Boom!................................................... Hello white men, itz coming........
2004-05-30 09:03 | User Profile
Most of the comments on here are right. Typing's not enough. Spoken words move people. We are in a bad situation, folks. You have to go to one of these rallies physically, viscerally to understand - the bad and the good. The bad is all the Aryan dogs and jew dogtrainers are set against us, and the length they go to record and render impotent. But the people are more open than fraidycons think. There are things you see in people's eyes that outweight the value of everything else, they reinforce and explain reality to you in a way the Internet cannot communicate.
We can take 'em.
"I'm not like you, Charlie Brown. I have to win sometimes."
There comes a point when losing's not good enough anymore. When telling the active guy how he, not you, ought to do it better's not good enough. At that point the conservative becomes a man - an Aryan, to be precise.
2004-05-30 13:45 | User Profile
Alex has written about his Olde Dutch heritage on VNN.
For us who are the Olde Dutch, we sort of see the 1848ers as recent immigrants from German states, and to try to make them feel at home, we sometimes indulge their immigrant ways a little too much.
I think Alex is guilty of this, he tries to hard to justify megalomaniacs and Roman Catholics produced in or by Germany.
There's also a lot of German Roman Catholic philosophy on Alex's website. The German Catholics never have gotten the Reformation, and when they become pagan, all they are doing is demonstrating their lack of knowledge of the Protestant Reformation.
The Olde Dutch were Protestants, and the hard core of the Reformation. The Olde Dutch were anti-monarchist, anti-megalomaniac, and very much Jeffersonian democrats before Jefferson.
I think Alex and VNN will improve, but, pandering to the megalomaniac Catholics who are mostly from southern Germany will not win any prizes here or abroad.
I think Alex needs to be independent and above the fray in order to proivide a source of news and independent commentary.
Also, a couple of good sentences, followed by a beatnik style stream of consciousness is getting old---it really is more of a style of the jew beat poets of the 1950's. I don't think Alex wants to emulate Ginsburg.
2004-05-30 14:02 | User Profile
That is something I can agree with: [QUOTE]Spoken words move people. We are in a bad situation, folks. [/QUOTE]
We need to fight back with action and deeds!
2004-05-30 15:06 | User Profile
Alex, against all odds, is running an excellent free news service.
The Dan Senor scoop was something I'm yet to see from any other media source. A Canadian rooted jew acting as American spokesman in Iraq. Hey, why not the great satan himself?
We should all try to send Alex at least a picture of Andrew Jackson, in support of all his good hard work.
2004-05-30 19:10 | User Profile
Well, I spent yesterday and this morning at the EURO convention. And although Kelso is a member of the anti-Christian NA, he strikes me as a decent person, and this conference has representation from many factions: the NA, revisionists, patriots like Ed Steele, the BNP, Willis Carto, Don Black, etc. Alex Linder is the only one who managed to get "uninvited."
2004-05-30 19:35 | User Profile
Well, now that I've actually read a little bit of Linder's viewpoint on that VNN thread, I think some backtracking is in order on my part -- perhaps I was little too quick to judge the guy over this disinvitation. I didn't realize Linder's disinvition was linked to some dispute with the NA, and on that VNN thread Linder speculates that people in the NA are feeding Duke lies about him. Who knows -- maybe that's true -- there is a lot about the NA that is very suspicious. I wonder if Duke knows the whole truth about the NA and that much of the criticism of Strom and Gliebe isn't coming from APs -- it's coming from former top NA people (like this guy Fred Streed, Hadding, etc.). Duke may also not realize just how virulently anti-Christian and anti-American that organization is. And if they're lying to Duke about Linder, obviously they'll lie about other things too.
2004-05-30 21:25 | User Profile
In any social, fraternal or political organization, when there is a change in leadership there are more often than not---hard feelings. That's the way the political world works.
2004-05-30 22:48 | User Profile
Sure, but I wonder if there's more at work here. At the conference, Duke came across like a man who loves the old America -- the America of our forefathers. He had a singer perform a medley of patriotic songs, including ones with blatant references to God and country. I wonder how much Duke really knows about the NA's contempt for Christianity, the religion of the West, or about Linder's anti-Christianity for that matter? Duke doesn't write anti-Christian bile, and he doesn't come across in public like he has nothing but contempt for Christians.
2004-05-30 23:21 | User Profile
I should add that the NA doesn't come across in public like they have contempt for Christianity either (at least not at this event). The public face of the NA is sharp looking men in coats and ties. In private, of course, or when they have the ability to speak their mind to a sympathetic audience, they let it all hang out without hesitation, as Fred Streed's "Dead Kike on a Stick" comment on VNN shows. You won't see that stuff on SF, because Don Black wisely has his mods filter out divisive garbage that only leads to in fighting, but Don's high standards may be having the effect of giving the NA a more respectable public face than they deserve on SF.
2004-05-31 00:38 | User Profile
Dave Duke has made more than his share of faux pas. Dave has been down the dead end of Nazi uniforms and Klan costumes.
2004-05-31 00:48 | User Profile
I would encourage anyone to listen to the net broadcast of the Duke event---Duke is excellent and demonstrates his maturity.
2004-05-31 01:12 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln][url]Gotta say all the infighting is silly. Strong people and strong organizations don't have to act like school girls and "disinvite" people.[/QUOTE]
While I do believe Mr. Linder's heart is in the right place, and perhaps there is some corner of his website that has some real value, and which I have yet to discover on my handful of infrequent trips to it. Near as I can tell, however, the man is a liability for our movement, rather than a strength. Whatever one thinks of the National Alliance, unless you believe that it is an actual Mossad false flag org or whatnot (which I doubt many serious people do), spending more time attacking the NA than the Jews (which was the case with Linder for what, like a year?) is not the way a sensible strategist would choose to allocate his time.
I've read stuff by Linder and I've checked out his forum, and it seems that all one gets from doing so is the opportunity to read a bunch of profanity-laced, grammatically incorrect ranting of minimal value. Perhaps there's more there than just that, but if so, could someone please post some of it here? I'd hate to think I was being so critical of Mr. Linder without justification. As soon as I see evidence that VNN actually churns out even a significant minority of info that's more sophisticated than just reminding its readers how much Linder (rightly) hates the Jews and Blacks, I'll be happy to apologize to him and to withdraw my criticisms of him and his site. But until then, he shouldn't be invited to ANY pro-White events, as far as I'm concerned. I believe it was Linder who accused a Sacramento-area member of the National Alliance of lying about being repeatedly shot by Mestizo gangsters during the recent revisionist conference. Needless to say, the man had the still-healing bullet wounds to prove the veracity of what occurred. If Linder wants to be treated like a friend, he should stop acting like an enemy (or a fool).
2004-05-31 03:22 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe]While I do believe Mr. Linder's heart is in the right place, and perhaps there is some corner of his website that has some real value, and which I have yet to discover on my handful of infrequent trips to it. Near as I can tell, however, the man is a liability for our movement, rather than a strength. Whatever one thinks of the National Alliance, unless you believe that it is an actual Mossad false flag org or whatnot (which I doubt many serious people do), spending more time attacking the NA than the Jews (which was the case with Linder for what, like a year?) is not the way a sensible strategist would choose to allocate his time.
I've read stuff by Linder and I've checked out his forum, and it seems that all one gets from doing so is the opportunity to read a bunch of profanity-laced, grammatically incorrect ranting of minimal value. Perhaps there's more there than just that, but if so, could someone please post some of it here? I'd hate to think I was being so critical of Mr. Linder without justification....If Linder wants to be treated like a friend, he should stop acting like an enemy (or a fool).[/QUOTE]
You have the same general impression of Linder that Tex does. Linder may have some "let off the steam" value, but I think its been a calamity for the WN movement that he has emerged into a certain vacuum within the movement (for charismatic, emotional leadership) as its unofficial leader. Of course it was no help along these lines that David Duke was in prison at this time. Some see this just as an unfortunate coincidence. Others see a little too many unfortunate coincidences at work here to be confident.
Regardless, its great to see Duke back, and already exerting the leadership necessary to make the WN a respectable movement, or at least a movement that deserves respectability. I suspect he will do a great deal more for the movement if he stays out of jail or worse. I can't help noting that on this forum suggestions of worse have already been uttered.
Ever wonder why Linder never seemed to receive such threats BTW? Maybe I'm overreacting and a litle paranoid with recent events (re Trisk). Just because you're paranoid though doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. :ph34r:
2004-05-31 03:27 | User Profile
I listened to a part of Duke's address, and he has this strange habit of pausing when I'd expect him to say some epithet, as if looking for a respectable way of saying something. Or maybe that's just how he talks. I'll listen some more later.
2004-05-31 04:51 | User Profile
[QUOTE]You won't see that stuff on SF, because Don Black wisely has his mods filter out divisive garbage that only leads to in fighting[/QUOTE]When Stormfront's moderators "filter" they are very often censoring legitimate, justified, and long-overdue criticism of the National Alliance, or the white nationalist movement in general.
Of course Stormfront doesn't want "infighting", which is just another way of saying they don't want to debate an issue they know they'd lose. Really, from their standpoint, isn't it better if they can avoid confrontation by simply SILENCING those that speak unpleasant truths?
That's how Stormfront operates. In the free marketplace of ideas, they practice communist control of people's minds. The NA isn't an honest organization either. They like to pretend they're "family oriented", even as they market vicious filth to legions of drunken skinheads. In fact, the NA has deliberately set out to CONCEAL the fact that they own Resistance Records, hoping middle class white Americans won't get a glimpse of their raunchy, filth-ridden underbelly. Really, why would the NA do this, unless they are ashamed of the garbage they pander, even as they guiltily rake in the cash?
After all is said and done, it's disheartening that the so-called white nationalist movement is rife with the same immorality as the Republican and Democrat parties, just on a much smaller scale. I've no doubt that if Gliebe were in the White House he'd be getting blow-jobs in the Oval Office just like Bill Clinton, except from ugly, tattooed skin chicks instead of White House interns.
The solution to all this is to set higher standards for our leaders, to hold them accountable for their actions, and to weed them out when they betray the trust of their supporters.
2004-05-31 08:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]Linder is starting to remind me of a Jew.
He seems to have alienated quite a few people who should be his best allies.
Yet he is never to blame for this development, it seems.
Sound familiar?[/QUOTE]
It sounds suspicious.
Maybe Linder's a plant?
2004-05-31 08:54 | User Profile
Knuckel headed B.S. Hell, some some knuckle head suggested I was Chewy etc.
Some posters appear with a great drama story about how they got phooked up and in jail or some other etc., Does mean that All of sudden they are an authority on who is a honest hard working patriot or not, etc.. I just did a Google on Steve Allen, it appears he was Chewy.. Media...
2004-05-31 13:07 | User Profile
Alex has written about his Olde Dutch ancestors, and published the stories on VNN. Of particular interest was a Linder involved in Illinois politics prior to the Civil War---a serious Democratic opponent of Lincoln.
Most of the smarter and better educated Old Dutch were Jeffersonian Democrats up until Wilson sold out to the Johnny Bulls and blodthirsty jews pushing for American entry into the "war to save democracy". Don't forget Wilson ran on a platform of "he kept us out of war". By the same token, the Zimmerman telegram and the Castle Plesae(sp) decision was suicidal on the part of German leadership (Hindenburg, Ludendorff, Zimmerman) and sealed Germany's fate because it broke the back of political opposition to American entry into WWI.
I find it funny how many of these posters on various boards don't have a clue about German history, or the history of Germans in America. Even if they sport German monikers and atvars...
2004-05-31 13:43 | User Profile
[QUOTE=General Rommel]When Stormfront's moderators "filter" they are very often censoring legitimate, justified, and long-overdue criticism of the National Alliance, or the white nationalist movement in general.
Of course Stormfront doesn't want "infighting", which is just another way of saying they don't want to debate an issue they know they'd lose. Really, from their standpoint, isn't it better if they can avoid confrontation by simply SILENCING those that speak unpleasant truths?
That's how Stormfront operates. In the free marketplace of ideas, they practice communist control of people's minds.[/QUOTE]
Good Lord, General! Stormfront doesn't own a floor at Rockafeller Plaza, despite your assertion that they "practice communist control of people's minds" in the "free marketplace of ideas." LOL I do imagine they would take such allegations as a compliment--that a lowly bulletin board is deemed so monolithically powerful by some.
2004-05-31 15:21 | User Profile
There is always the chance that specifically-aimed "disinvitations" are bound to create more attention for someone or something than simply leaving the issue alone. Wasn't David Duke asked not to come to the AR conference? THAT made for lines in mainstream stories. Though I suppose his presence would have, too. Maybe I'm not clear on the David Duke homecoming set-up (was it invitation-only?), but if it was an open invite, monitoring for Linder and then stopping him at the door seems pretty girlish. I mean, what was envisioned as the possible fallout from having Linder in the audience? Or was it less a fear of association than a personal vendetta? I'll take these in turn. The first possibility is pretty weak. It's no stamp of approval just to have someone in the audience. I mean, there were probably spies in the audience, mainstream press, etc. So what? If the white nationalist movement thinks anyone beyond the SPLC is paying attention at that level of detail, it's crazy. The second possibility is just kinda lame.
Of course, the whole issue above is beside the point of the plight of whites and what's being done about it. I've been thinking about the whole issue of disinviting people and smearing people and so on. It's gonna happen, I suppose, but the real test of your commitment to our issues is whether you'd allow that to distract you or pick up your marbles and go home. Our thing is so fragile and small, that I figure a thin-skinned type would get easily discouraged if he started to get shut out. I mean, if the whole world hates you for what you believe, and the only group that might like you because they agree on the issues hates you because of things you've said or done or people or groups you've associated with, man, well, that's a slippery dungeon wall. What, exactly, is your motivation now? Add to all of this the whole layer of who-can-trust-who, who-is-a-plant/spy/SPLC op/federal agent/federal informer/crazy person etc. and you really have a toxic mixture. You could almost see someone getting so pissed off they'd drop the whole thing and go running to Morris Dees for an exclusive out of spite. Even if they were dedicated and sincere to begin with. Issues are easy. People are impossible. I prefer the former, myself.
I figure it can get real damn lonely on the far right. Some of our types are so unfriendly, so bizarre, so prickly, so priggish and so egomaniacal (I exlcude nobody here) that it makes for more of an unseemly mess than the beginnings of a political movement.
[B]The one thing we have going for us is that we're right.[/B]
Big boys forge ahead to the next thing if they get shut out of the last thing. Sometimes it turns out to be a blessing that they were shut out of the last thing. The Lord works in mysterious ways, my ancestors liked to say.
2004-05-31 15:34 | User Profile
It is amazing how seriously the adolescents, and, the immature take these opinion boards/forums.
I think that the VNN Forum really takes away from VNN. I think Alex should scrap it and stick to news, commentary and reader mail. There are too many adolescent threads on the VNN Forum like, is this woman white, or is this man white...silly stuff and gossip.
Once again VNN can be a source of quality news and commentary, and, I would encourage any of you to send Alex a picture of Andrew Jackson.
As those of you familar with journalism know, it takes money to put out a top quality product!
2004-05-31 17:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln]Issues are easy. People are impossible.[/QUOTE]
Not impossible, but much more difficult, for sure. But that's what being a manager is. You can know all there is to know about your product, but managing people is the real hard task.
This evidences the point some of us have been trying to make. You can't expect people to love you and not hold grudges when you have published scorching diatribes and rants filled with every invective known to man denouncing, insulting and demeaning them.
If Linder is hated by some in the greater nationalist cause, then it is because he hated first with a public, vocal passion and what goes around, comes around. Human nature 101. That's the very thing you don't do if you want to be a leader of men.
I still maintain that Linder is a cancer on the white nationalist movement and should be shunned at every occasion.
2004-05-31 17:02 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Stormfront doesn't own a floor at Rockafeller Plaza, despite your assertion that they "practice communist control of people's minds" in the "free marketplace of ideas." LOL I do imagine they would take such allegations as a compliment--that a lowly bulletin board is deemed so monolithically powerful by some.[/QUOTE] It is necessary to keep my comments in the context that they were intended. I agree that Stormfront, in the larger scheme of the political universe, has the importance of a gnat. But within that gnat-like insignficance, they do their best to control the minds of those white nationalists who dare to voice unpleasant truths.
But yes, I do agree with your assessment that Stormfront is "lowly".
2004-05-31 18:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]I still maintain that Linder is a cancer on the white nationalist movement and should be shunned at every occasion.[/QUOTE]
"Shunning" isn't how to treat cancer.
I suggest rather injecting him with cobalt and frying him with x-rays.
We should at least consider it.
Also, David Duke is a devout Christian. How in the world could he be associated with Linder?
2004-05-31 18:22 | User Profile
[QUOTE=General Rommel]It is necessary to keep my comments in the context that they were intended. I agree that Stormfront, in the larger scheme of the political universe, has the importance of a gnat. But within that gnat-like insignficance, they do their best to control the minds of those white nationalists who dare to voice unpleasant truths.
But yes, I do agree with your assessment that Stormfront is "lowly".[/QUOTE]
Stormfront's doing a pretty good job of mainstreaming the pro-White movement.
2004-05-31 18:23 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Tex]I still maintain that Linder is a cancer on the white nationalist movement and should be shunned at every occasion.[/QUOTE]
Every occasion? What are the bounds of this shunning? Not reading his page? I'm not going to defend the "Kevin Strom is a weenie" stuff, but Linder's writings have had way too much of an influence on me personally to dismiss. Back in college, it wasn't the dry writings of James Burnham or Russell Kirk that got me to thinking about conservatism. It was P.J. O'Rourke and his side-splitting stuff in Rolling Stone. Linder was the same for white nationalism. But he goes beyond that. If he's got one burning message, it's seize the damn day, white man. Breathe in deep and jump out of that plane! I mean, the guy could be a white nationalist Tony Robbins or something. You don't need to profess "Linderism" to be inspired. Put another way, [I]if it's Alex Linder's writing that pushes you to be a Jared Taylor instead of nothing at all, he hasn't been a cancer for us, he's been chemo.[/I]
I fully understand the shivers about "death to the Jews" and I wouldn't put Linder out there for anyone's "door to walk through," as one put it. (I wonder whether, if I were trying to reach a broad audience with a webpage of my own, I'd hesitate to link to VNN. Then again, why would I deny someone what I got so much benefit from? Isn't that the ultimate form of pettiness?) But in my case, he was. Maybe it's just me, I don't know.
I saw the man speak once, never mind the location. But there he was, quoting Camille Paglia. Like a media-trained prick I wondered how many people knew who that was. I'll wager most didn't. But that's kind of the deal. Linder makes white nationalism cool. And grad-student rebellious. That's got a lot of appeal for me and always has. Sometimes it's that stuff that's needed to get people in for reflection on the sober, serious and sincere. And if I'm not bloviating here, convincing quirky literate types of our plight might just do a damn lot of good. Those quirky literate types can be (or go) "high and inside," as we say about the quieter people in our movement.
I remember back in high school, there was a guy who spoke of joining the Klan. Apparantly, he had some real connections, maybe through dad or someone. I remember thinking, "Wow, that's terrible." And I remember that this guy was kind of a greaseball. He had the "Wisconsin Waterfall" hairstyle and wore half-shirts to school. So that was my impression. I was hanging out with the guys who listened to the Dead Kennedys. We thought we were pretty cool. So, who best appeals to who when it comes to white issues? I think it's different types for different types. If someone's having an effect, let's not shun them just because they don't have an effect on everyone.
2004-05-31 18:58 | User Profile
I have read Linder since he appeared in 2000, and found him through the old Sam Francis Forum.. I do laugh at posters who come to O.D. with a Hooey Weird CA. drama story to foist on U.S. and then suggests Linder is jewish.. I like O.D. and have not posted at VNN forum, but has Linder been wrong when you look around U.S. and see no zones and we have to put up with practically strip searches at Airports rather that profile non-whites period.
NO one has to like Tex, or Linder, but we are in a mess today as whites at large, and most people are just idiots and want/need leaders. I have had school teachers where I live that are over 40 get upset about [url]www.vdare.com[/url]. calling vdare sooo hateful and angry. I have had some tell me O.D. was too right wing, and they are college de-educated. That is how brainwashed folks at large are.
The good news is more of our smartest and successful whites are waking up or have awoken to the B.S. of our Treason Open Borders, with our N.K.V.D. looters who have taken U.S. over and whip U.S every day with P.C. media and their courts every day. I really sense whites are waking up faster than ever before. So does the treason crowd that is why they are cranking up the lie machine higher.
2004-05-31 19:01 | User Profile
There's an old story about a German doctor that goes something like this:
During a flu outbreak, a German doctor notices that prescribing sauerkraut and speck to his patients in an Olde Dutch neighborhood is causing miraculous cures of the flu.
Pretty soon words gets around to the Irish and Italian neighborhoods about the German doctors miracle cure.
The German doctor is called to see a wealthy Italian businessman named Tony and he prescribes sauerkraut and speck for Tony. Later that day he is called to the bedside of an famous Irish politician named Pat, and once again he prescribes the miracle cure of sauerkraut and speck.
A few days later he goes back to visit Tony and finds that poor Tony has died from the flu.
Then he goes to see Pat, and finds that Pat is also dead as dead can be.
The good German doctor then takes out his notebook and writes, sauerkraut and speck, good only for the Germans!:thumbsup:
2004-05-31 19:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln]Every occasion? What are the bounds of this shunning? Not reading his page?
No, disinviting him from any kind of white nationalist gathering or not including him in any organizational/coalition-building effort.
If he's got one burning message, it's seize the damn day, white man.
Of course I disagree. His one burning message has been "it's all about me", nihilism and dismissing anyone and everyone who doesn't agree with him. Those men among us who are responsible enough and possess the leadership qualities to lead and do the hard, yeoman's work to build some kind of real-world impacting movement cannot afford to associate with that kind of element. Not necessarily because of his language either, but mainly because you can't trust a nihilist that makes everyone his enemy.
He certainly has the right to put up his website and say whatever the heck he wants to. I'm just saying that any white nationalist organization or coalition that wants to do what it takes in the real world to have some kind of impact needs to publicly and privately keep Linder the man, his acidic rhetoric, finger-pointing, lashing out and his disastrous organizational history at full arm's length and then some.
So, who best appeals to who when it comes to white issues? I think it's different types for different types. If someone's having an effect, let's not shun them just because they don't have an effect on everyone.[/QUOTE]
You're making my point, Hugh. That's what some are trying to do. Linder won't let that happen because in his inflated mind it's all about him or nothing else. One day it's Bill White, today it's the National Alliance, Don Black or Stormfront, tomorrow it will be someone else. Let's grow up and start speaking, writing and acting like men, not petulant children. The hour is too late.
2004-05-31 20:01 | User Profile
I've read everything Linder has written on VNN that I know of and everything I've been able to find by his critics and I find him to be intelligent, honest, and talented, moreso than the people who deride him at every opportunity, often where the opportunity isn't even there. These are usually, though not always, the same folks who Jewishly concentrate on the evils of "nazism". He's ridiculed endlessly for being "insulting", in lieu of offering anything intelligent that refutes "insulting" (serious) points he makes. Of course his occasional bad language is offered as proof of his offensiveness and danger to us all. Small minds need look no further than this, to the delight of those who don't want them to.
Linder's style and steam-letting attracts people who're sick of the patrician tea party that has passed for a political movement for a half century and which has always betrayed our people. They're looking for leadership, but our potential leadership class, castrated by the Jews, are "offended" by such "vulgarites".
2004-05-31 21:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Bardamu said: [color=indigo]"Stormfront's doing a pretty good job of mainstreaming the pro-White movement."[/color] [/QUOTE] I would say that those who are instrumental in mainstreaming the pro-white movement are doing so in spite of Stormfront. As i see it, Stormfront is merely a popular forum where many voices come together, most of them size=1[/size] harmful to the goal of preserving Western peoples and civilization. Don Black himself is basically Neo-Nazi in his outlook - far from being "mainstream". Giving him credit for "mainstreaming" white nationalism would be like giving the inventor of the Internet credit for it - for both the Internet and Stormfront are mere communication portals. Black gets credit for providing a successful communication portal, but he himself is not a founder or a promoter of "mainstreaming" white nationalism. If anyone should get that credit, Jared Taylor is the most likely candidate.
Really, how can anyone believe that Stormfront is instrumental in "mainstreaming" the pro-white movement when it posts these kinds of inflammatory graphics on its website, each one sure to damage our cause in both the eyes of the mainstream white American and the scandal-hungry media: [img]http://www.stormfront.org/graphics/flag.gif[/img] [img]http://www.stormfront.org/graphics/nsdap.gif[/img][img]http://www.stormfront.org/graphics/eagle2.gif[/img]
[img]http://www.stormfront.org/graphics/skull2.gif[/img][img]http://www.stormfront.org/graphics/ironcr1.gif[/img][img]http://www.stormfront.org/graphics/haken1.gif[/img]
2004-05-31 21:40 | User Profile
I would never consider posting on either Stormfront forum or the VNN forum. Too many kooks, kids and immature adults. Not to mention jews and their shabbos goy acting as agent provocatuers or spreading dis-information.:caiphas:
2004-05-31 22:18 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis] Also, David Duke is a devout Christian.[/QUOTE]
?????????????????????????????????????????????
News to me; and I pay attention to those things.
2004-05-31 23:05 | User Profile
[COLOR=Navy][I]His one burning message has been "it's all about me", nihilism and dismissing anyone and everyone who doesn't agree with him. [/I] [/COLOR]
Wrong. And you can't find a sentence he's ever written that indicates that. Linder used to end most of his spintros with the phrase "Join the National Alliance", an organization which - we all now know - Linder had zero financial interest in. A guy paying to run his own website and pointing his readers' wallets towards somebody [I]else [/I] - because he thought that would achieve the greater good - may be many things, but a [I]me-firster [/I] is not one of them.
[COLOR=Navy][I]Those men among us who are responsible enough and possess the leadership qualities to lead and do the hard, yeoman's work to build some kind of real-world impacting movement cannot afford to associate with that kind of element. [/I] [/COLOR]
And not one of these men have the energy, the talent or the galvanizing quality Linder exhibited in his first fifty spintros. Linder has brought people to WN that none of the solid burghers were likely to - not just the football hooligans of the VNN Forum, but people like me & Hugh Lincoln. I agree that Linder might be a tactical mistake for people like Buchanan or Jared Taylor to endorse - but the active [I]shunning[/I], the public disparagement of a Linder that sometimes accompanies these tactical decisions has nothing to do with [I]leadership qualities & yeoman duty [/I] and everything to do with [I][B]Takin' it off here, boss! [/B] [/I] It's a grovelling before the Holocaust Lobby - a public display of excommunicating your own so you can be afforded a little extra freedom to criticize the people who make you excommunicate your own in exchange for a little extra freedom. Brimelow has a way of achieving [U]distance without disdain[/U]; the others should try it sometime.
And remember, ODers, that whenever you get giddy with excitement because Sam Francis just said "Likudnik", or Jared Taylor [I]came closer than ever before[/I] to saying "Jew", that these Responsible Leaders would not even be [I]this [/I] timidly assertive were it not for Linder raising the bar on allowable critical-commentary on Jews with his 'childish me-first grandstanding'. Without VNN, Francis would be writing about [I]foreign powers [/I] and [I]carpetbaggers [/I] and [I]The Borg [/I] in 20[B]20[/B] and hoping to God nobody at the ADL has cracked the code yet.
[COLOR=Navy][I]Not necessarily because of his language either, but mainly because you can't trust a nihilist that makes everyone his enemy.[/I][/COLOR]
But he pointedly does not 'make everyone his enemy', he is making Christian Zionism the enemy. Guess what? It is. The most daunting obstacle deterring a general cleaning of house isn't the nukes in Tel Aviv, it's the Fox News/Free Republic/John Hagee Nation [I]surrounding us [/I].... that believes patriotism is [I]doing whatever "liberals" don't want you to[/I], never realizing that nowadays that translates into [I]doing what you're told.[/I]
You may bitterly oppose his choice of acid-in-the-face rhetoric towards religion; and you might pose a very good argument, one I might already be half-sold on. But the hardcore Linderbashers don't do so because his message is pointlessly divisive so much as they hate him because he proudly and defiantly refuses to believe or suggest anyone else should. Not even a trial subscription, he'll go for.
And maybe Linder's Jesu-bashing isn't all that gratuitous after all. If you give these zealot-types an inch they uniformly take a mile and begin proselytizing away, no matter how nominally secular the arena. Linder, like Pierce, has put up enough definitive BEWARE OF DOG signs to keep the Jack Chick pamphleteers from hanging around VNN and making a nuisance of themselves the way they inevitably do when not chased away.
2004-05-31 23:38 | User Profile
I'm actually a little concerned about this Walter, not because Duke is associating with the Linder, but because he seems to have established close ties with the National Alliance. This Kelso person, although he struck me as a decent fellow, is an NA member. And at the Euro conference Duke gave the overall impression that he has fairly close to the NA.
Now, if Linder is right that these NA types are lying to Duke about Linder and about the NA's overall totalitarian outlook, could it be that the NA's upper management is also lying to Duke about other things, such as the fact that the NA considers Christianity to be inconsistent with Aryan society?
If anything, as General Rommel has already pointed out, Resistance Records is so vile and disgusting it makes Alex Linder look like Mary Poppins, and, moreover, the NA is every bit as anti-Christian as Alex Linder.
So in my opinion, Duke should be disassociating himself from Linder and the NA, not just Linder. And the fact that he isn't is a little troublesome to me.
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]
Also, David Duke is a devout Christian. How in the world could he be associated with Linder?[/QUOTE]
2004-05-31 23:48 | User Profile
Mr. Taylor wrote "Paved With Good Intentions" in 1993.. I have read all sorts of stuff about him, including that Taylor is a N.W.O. cia agent etc.. What ever Jared Taylor is, I wish for many more patriots like him step up.. As for Alex Linder, he has been called almost every thing too, and his writing's and his site and letter's section, with his many well written replie's, have provoked many to see the truth of the mess whites are really in, even if his style scares them. As I write this, Congoid beasts direct from Africa are being flown in at tax payer's expense in to our "Nation" for the final assault against U.S. as a component to this war.
These men are on ifferent sides of the street, but they are on our side.
Are any of U.S. thinking the same, or seeing the same as we did 5 or 10 years ago? I think not, and so we can move and change, and still be honest seeking what is truthful, right, and to fight for our rights.
2004-05-31 23:51 | User Profile
I find it hard to believe Linder attracted you to WN, IR.
Very hard to believe.
If that's true -- wow -- you've come a long way in only a few years.
Yggdrasil/Jared Taylor/Sam Francis/Pat Buchanan have each done more to bring sane fence sitters into WN than Alex Linder. Especially Ygg, I bet.
Linder probably has the record for attracting psychopaths and idiots, though.
[QUOTE=il ragno][COLOR=Navy][I]His one burning message has been "it's all about me", nihilism and dismissing anyone and everyone who doesn't agree with him. [/I] [/COLOR]
Wrong. And you can't find a sentence he's ever written that indicates that. Linder used to end most of his spintros with the phrase "Join the National Alliance", an organization which - we all now know - Linder had zero financial interest in. A guy paying to run his own website and pointing his readers' wallets towards somebody [I]else [/I] - because he thought that would achieve the greater good - may be many things, but a [I]me-firster [/I] is not one of them.
[COLOR=Navy][I]Those men among us who are responsible enough and possess the leadership qualities to lead and do the hard, yeoman's work to build some kind of real-world impacting movement cannot afford to associate with that kind of element. [/I] [/COLOR]
And not one of these men have the energy, the talent or the galvanizing quality Linder exhibited in his first fifty spintros. Linder has brought people to WN that none of the solid burghers were likely to - not just the football hooligans of the VNN Forum, but people like me & Hugh Lincoln. I agree that Linder might be a tactical mistake for people like Buchanan or Jared Taylor to endorse - but the active [I]shunning[/I], the public disparagement of a Linder that sometimes accompanies these tactical decisions has nothing to do with [I]leadership qualities & yeoman duty [/I] and everything to do with [I][B]Takin' it off here, boss! [/B] [/I] It's a grovelling before the Holocaust Lobby - a public display of excommunicating your own so you can be afforded a little extra freedom to criticize the people who make you excommunicate your own in exchange for a little extra freedom. Brimelow has a way of achieving [U]distance without disdain[/U]; the others should try it sometime.
And remember, ODers, that whenever you get giddy with excitement because Sam Francis just said "Likudnik", or Jared Taylor [I]came closer than ever before[/I] to saying "Jew", that these Responsible Leaders would not even be [I]this [/I] timidly assertive were it not for Linder raising the bar on allowable critical-commentary on Jews with his 'childish me-first grandstanding'. Without VNN, Francis would be writing about [I]foreign powers [/I] and [I]carpetbaggers [/I] and [I]The Borg [/I] in 20[B]20[/B] and hoping to God nobody at the ADL has cracked the code yet.
[COLOR=Navy][I]Not necessarily because of his language either, but mainly because you can't trust a nihilist that makes everyone his enemy.[/I][/COLOR]
But he pointedly does not 'make everyone his enemy', he is making Christian Zionism the enemy. Guess what? It is. The most daunting obstacle deterring a general cleaning of house isn't the nukes in Tel Aviv, it's the Fox News/Free Republic/John Hagee Nation [I]surrounding us [/I].... that believes patriotism is [I]doing whatever "liberals" don't want you to[/I], never realizing that nowadays that translates into [I]doing what you're told.[/I]
You may bitterly oppose his choice of acid-in-the-face rhetoric towards religion; and you might pose a very good argument, one I might already be half-sold on. But the hardcore Linderbashers don't do so because his message is pointlessly divisive so much as they hate him because he proudly and defiantly refuses to believe or suggest anyone else should. Not even a trial subscription, he'll go for.
And maybe Linder's Jesu-bashing isn't all that gratuitous after all. If you give these zealot-types an inch they uniformly take a mile and begin proselytizing away, no matter how nominally secular the arena. Linder, like Pierce, has put up enough definitive BEWARE OF DOG signs to keep the Jack Chick pamphleteers from hanging around VNN and making a nuisance of themselves the way they inevitably do when not chased away.[/QUOTE]
2004-06-01 00:41 | User Profile
Well, the whole matter about Linder-bashers is Linder's attitude about Christians. THAT'S THE WHOLE NUGGET.
Look, 'mainstream' Christians did nothing for decades re: Jews -- nothing. Churches sat and watched as Jews moved in and wrecked America. Their duty, as more-or-less 'spokesmen' for the collective Right, was to warn that Right about the Jew, and they did not. And now that Linder mentions that fact often, he is the 'bad guy,' not the ever-silent Christians. Nope. Not buying any. If that insults Christians, please tell me how I am wrong about that matter.
Maybe if most Christians put race 1st instead of 4th or 5th in order of importance, Linder would be more kind to them...in fact I know that he would...[by the way, no one really answered my prior question at OD: if/when non-Whites completely flood the West, will the West still be 'The West' without Whites as the majority? But that's ok, I think the non-responses answered that question for me....]
2004-06-01 00:53 | User Profile
No.
The whole nugget is the man's stupidity in the tactical arena.
WN won't get anywhere with an overt anti-Christian stance.
Hitler understood that. Linder doesn't.
[QUOTE=Franco]Well, the whole matter about Linder-bashers is Linder's attitude about Christians. THAT'S THE WHOLE NUGGET.
Look, 'mainstream' Christians did nothing for decades re: Jews -- nothing. Churches sat and watched as Jews moved in and wrecked America. Their duty, as more-or-less 'spokesmen' for the collective Right, was to warn that Right about the Jew, and they did not. And now that Linder mentions that fact often, he is the 'bad guy,' not the ever-silent Christians. Nope. Not buying any. If that insults Christians, please tell me how I am wrong about that matter.
Maybe if most Christians put race 1st instead of 4th or 5th in order of importance, Linder would be more kind to them...in fact I know that he would...[by the way, no one really answered my prior question at OD: if/when non-Whites completely flood the West, will the West still be 'The West' without Whites as the majority? But that's ok, I think the non-responses answered that question for me....]
----------[/QUOTE]
2004-06-01 02:17 | User Profile
[color=red] "Linder probably has the record for attracting psychopaths and idiots, though."[/color]
I think the World Church of the Creator should win that dubious award....
2004-06-01 02:32 | User Profile
Tele-evangelists win this contest hands down.
2004-06-01 02:36 | User Profile
I thought it was the Democrat and Republican parties.
2004-06-01 03:54 | User Profile
"Look, 'mainstream' Christians did nothing for decades re: Jews -- nothing. Churches sat and watched as Jews moved in and wrecked America."
I think the days of mainstream Christians not correcting the jews will soon be over.
Back in 1982 when the jews invaded Lebanon a respected Irish catholic priest political friend of mine got me involved in putting together a protest rally of the jew invasion of Lebanon. My part was insignificant, but, the priest went all out and was ostracized for his good efforts, even by the wealthy Lebanese and Syrian catholic businessmen and medical tribesmen who did not reciprocate as they should have.
For a protestant layman, it was a learning experience. I'm sure other have had similar early experiences in semite politics.:saddam:
2004-06-01 05:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Buster]?????????????????????????????????????????????
News to me; and I pay attention to those things.[/QUOTE]
Did you read his book?
2004-06-01 06:04 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]A guy paying to run his own website and pointing his readers' wallets towards somebody [I]else [/I] - because he thought that would achieve the greater good - may be many things, but a [I]me-firster [/I] is not one of them.
Ah yes, a real humanitarian. A regular Mother Theresa.
And not one of these men have the energy, the talent or the galvanizing quality Linder exhibited in his first fifty spintros.
Ah yes, I marvel at the awesome activist organization he has assembled. Truly a sight to behold.
Linder has brought people to WN that none of the solid burghers were likely to - not just the football hooligans of the VNN Forum, but people like me & Hugh Lincoln.
For every two of you, there are hundreds that walk away from WN, Pepto-Bismol bottle in hand, nauseous from reading the noxious verbiage that spills forth from VNN on a daily basis.
I agree that Linder might be a tactical mistake for people like Buchanan or Jared Taylor to endorse - but the active [I]shunning[/I], the public disparagement of a Linder that sometimes accompanies these tactical decisions has nothing to do with [I]leadership qualities & yeoman duty [/I] and everything to do with [I][B]Takin' it off here, boss! [/B] [/I] It's a grovelling before the Holocaust Lobby - a public display of excommunicating your own so you can be afforded a little extra freedom to criticize the people who make you excommunicate your own in exchange for a little extra freedom. Brimelow has a way of achieving [U]distance without disdain[/U]; the others should try it sometime.
You are making the same mistake that Linder deludes himself into making. Namely, that everyone agrees with you. Take note: they don't.
And remember, ODers, that whenever you get giddy with excitement because Sam Francis just said "Likudnik", or Jared Taylor [I]came closer than ever before[/I] to saying "Jew", that these Responsible Leaders would not even be [I]this [/I] timidly assertive were it not for Linder raising the bar on allowable critical-commentary on Jews with his 'childish me-first grandstanding'. Without VNN, Francis would be writing about [I]foreign powers [/I] and [I]carpetbaggers [/I] and [I]The Borg [/I] in 20[B]20[/B] and hoping to God nobody at the ADL has cracked the code yet.
Laughable megalomania.
But he pointedly does not 'make everyone his enemy', he is making Christian Zionism the enemy.
"Kike on a stick." Case closed.
The most daunting obstacle deterring a general cleaning of house isn't the nukes in Tel Aviv, it's the Fox News/Free Republic/John Hagee Nation [I]surrounding us [/I].... that believes patriotism is [I]doing whatever "liberals" don't want you to[/I], never realizing that nowadays that translates into [I]doing what you're told.[/I]
Christian evangelicals that support Israel are an easily attacked scapegoat. They have no real political power as evidenced by the complete political failures of the Christian Coalition, Moral Majority, etc.
But the hardcore Linderbashers don't do so because his message is pointlessly divisive so much as they hate him because he proudly and defiantly refuses to believe or suggest anyone else should. Not even a trial subscription, he'll go for.
So does Alan Dershowitz. My soul stirs with inspiration.
And maybe Linder's Jesu-bashing isn't all that gratuitous after all. If you give these zealot-types an inch they uniformly take a mile and begin proselytizing away, no matter how nominally secular the arena. Linder, like Pierce, has put up enough definitive BEWARE OF DOG signs to keep the Jack Chick pamphleteers from hanging around VNN and making a nuisance of themselves the way they inevitably do when not chased away.
On the flip side, that's the same way I feel about atheist nazis here. Would that you had given me such benefit of the doubt.
The bottom line is that your words defending Linder would have some weight if you were actively involved over at his forum helping him build his world-changing revolution. A quick check and I see six posts made.
Again, Linder is poison to the white nationalist movement and I would strongly urge all men of good faith to stay well clear of VNN on the off chance some of that poison leaks into and infects an otherwise healthy mind.
2004-06-01 06:04 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]I'm actually a little concerned about this Walter, not because Duke is associating with the Linder, but because he seems to have established close ties with the National Alliance. This Kelso person, although he struck me as a decent fellow, is an NA member. And at the Euro conference Duke gave the overall impression that he has fairly close to the NA. [snip] So in my opinion, Duke should be disassociating himself from Linder and the NA, not just Linder. And the fact that he isn't is a little troublesome to me.[/QUOTE]
I share your concern, but let's also admit that we weren't privy to the conversation, and so we don't know what the good David Duke is thinking. My brother in Christ David has certainly established his bona fides with me, and he'll get a major benefit of the doubt "pass" from me for the foreseeable future. It would take a lot for me to re-think my admiration for David Duke. It could happen, but it would take a lot.
I reiterate my position that the time for dialogue has ceased.
Dialogue is our enemy. The Catholic Church in America and elsewhere learned the hard way that the VATII slogan of "Dialogue with the World" can't work, since the world isn't interested in reasoned discussion. "Dialogue" quickly became the tactic of Modernist subversives - engage in endless empty talk with the Church in order to distract the Church from its main teaching mission and to legitimize dissent, while infiltrating the Church and taking over her key institutions.
That's the tactic of the Nazis/pagans right here on OD. Now, it's no secret that Tex is a Christian, and hopes to build a Christian Nationalist movement (at least that's what I'm assuming, please correct me if I'm wrong, brother Tex). But they're not here to help build a Christian Nationalist movement, they are here to PREVENT the same from forming. Why else would they be interested in spending their time on a Christian forum? In the end Tex winds up subsidizing Nazi propaganda.
By allowing Nazis and others - some of whom may simply be ADL disruptors - to monopolize the bandwidth, we who are on board with the Christian Nationalist program are distracted from the daunting task at hand. We have so much work to do, and we simply can't allow ourselves to be distracted from that.
I can just hear the feigned indignation of Nazis shouting "freedom of speech," but I say fine go ahead and yelp. It's not as if the Nazis would return the favour. They can never be trusted.
I also point out to my Christian colleagues here that while freedom of speech is a fundamental value for us, there is also "freedom of association," and I for one do not wish to associate with the likes of Linder and his followers.
Therefore, I ask Tex and my Christian brothers to consider whether it would behoove us to move from "dialogue" to "monologue."
"The Christian Nationalist Monologue."
Or maybe "The Freedom Monologue." I like that better.
We cannot be all things to all people. The best that we can hope for is to concentrate all of our efforts on building our own movement, and we begin that by bidding a fond farewell to those who would hinder us in executing our core mission.
And I do mean a "fond" farewell. I wish our Nazi friends well. But I really can't be around them.
Shoemaker, tend to thy last!
Walter
2004-06-01 06:09 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Maybe if most Christians put race 1st instead of 4th or 5th in order of importance...
If they did that they wouldn't be Christians.
..Linder would be more kind to them...in fact I know that he would...
I'm sure Christians' sense of self-worth is hanging on whether or not they have Linder's approval. Give me a break. Some of you people need to get out and away from the computer more often.
2004-06-01 06:19 | User Profile
Walter wrote:
I also point out to my Christian colleagues here that while freedom of speech is a fundamental value for us, there is also "freedom of association," and I for one do not wish to associate with the likes of Linder and his followers.
Therefore, I ask Tex and my Christian brothers to consider whether it would behoove us to move from "dialogue" to "monologue."
"The Christian Nationalist Monologue."
Does that mean, 'play ball our way or take a hike?' Is that what that means?
2004-06-01 06:34 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Does that mean, 'play ball our way or take a hike?' Is that what that means? ------[/QUOTE]
Yes.
Got that now?
2004-06-01 06:35 | User Profile
Gee, Walter, that doesn't sound very t-t-t-tolerant...
2004-06-01 06:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]I also point out to my Christian colleagues here that while freedom of speech is a fundamental value for us, there is also "freedom of association," and I for one do not wish to associate with the likes of Linder and his followers.[/QUOTE]
That brings up an interesting point when put in a larger context, Walter. For the doomsday revolutionaries out there, I believe our national problems could go a long way towards being greatly bettered, if not solved, if only our God-given freedom of association legal rights could be asserted, won back and maintained.
2004-06-01 06:50 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Gee, Walter, that doesn't sound very t-t-t-tolerant...
-------[/QUOTE]
You noticed!
Finally, Franco. It took you a while partner, but you finally understood.
I'm proud of you, guy.
2004-06-01 06:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]That brings up an interesting point when put in a larger context, Walter. For the doomsday revolutionaries out there, I believe our national problems could go a long way towards being greatly bettered, if not solved, if only our God-given freedom of association legal rights could be asserted, won back and maintained.[/QUOTE]
You might consider letting it begin with OD.
Ultimately, we'll do better for all by just being fully what we are, and let others be what they are.
I mean, isn't that real "diversity?" The key insight of nationalism is that we truly "celebrate diversity" by ensuring that all nations - the "personalities of mankind" as Solzhenitsyn put it - are allowed to exist and prosper, and to work out their own destinies. Live and let live, say I.
But there are two parts to that slogan. We first "LIVE" our own lives, and work out and advance our own program. At the same time, we "LET LIVE" by allowing others to do the same.
"Live and Let Live" implies the companion slogan "Out of Sight, Out of Mind." Which is exactly what I'd like to achieve in regard to Linder and his ilk.
I for one will not long mourn the departure of the Nazis here, but that doesn't mean I would seek to prevent them from pursuing their own thing. Let them go to Stormfront or VNN, they'll be right at home there.
We'll have our clearly defined Christian tendency, just as others have their tendencies. But we lose our very selves if we buy into the whole notion that we should allow others to dilute our message and muddy our waters in the name of "freedom of speech" or "tolerance" (the word makes me want to hurl). Again, neither are something that our Nazi friends could be trusted to reciprocate.
I mean, it's not like freedom of speech (or freedom of associaiton) blossomed in the Third Reich. They're Nazis, Tex. Let's get that clear in our own heads. They're all about power, and their methodology certainly includes little white lies told to their ideological enemies - in this case US. So, no, I don't trust them.
I take that back. I do trust them in a way: I have an unshakable faith in their own willingness to stab in the back the fools they convinced were friends when the right moment arrives for them. And arrive it will, if we let it.
Best to exclude them utterly today, and thereby avoid a very sharp pain in the right kidney tomorrow.
Besides, it seems to me that, generally speaking and allowing for certain important exceptions, guys who are attracted to Nazi ideology are of the lower-end variety, and not the kind of folks conducive to success. They tend toward finacial and professional failure, have little property, strike out with the girls, and have emotional problems. In a word, they tend strongly to be losers, and the thing to always keep in mind about losers is that [B]THEY LOSE[/B]. Besides generally being a hazard to navigation for the rest of us, of course. Who needs them anyway?
Any organization that tolerates their presence will take on this "loser" quality -certainly their most salient characteristic.
How about this for a new slogan: LOSE THE LOSERS!
In my humble opinion, of course.
I'm with you, Tex, whatever you decide to do.
Walter
2004-06-01 07:10 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]You might consider letting it begin with OD.
Ultimately, we'll do better for all by just being fully what we are, and let others be what they are.
I mean, isn't that real diversity? We'll have a clearly defined tendency, just as others have. But we lose ourselves if we buy into the whole notion that we should allow others to dilute our message and muddy our waters.
Walter[/QUOTE]
Here's a quote that has impressed itself upon me recently and shapes my thinking on all this. You might enjoy it, but just overlook the Pope comment (hey, if you can speak well of Cromwell...:))
From Dr. Martin Luther's Small Catechism:
In the first place, let the preacher above all be careful to avoid many kinds of or various texts and forms of the Ten Commandments, the Lord’s Prayer, the Creed, the Sacraments, etc., but choose one form to which he adheres, and which he inculcates all the time, year after year. For [I give this advice, however, because I know that] young and simple people must be taught by uniform, settled texts and forms, otherwise they easily become confused when the teacher to-day teaches them thus, and in a year some other way, as if he wished to make improvements, and thus all effort and labor [which has been expended in teaching] is lost.
Also our blessed fathers understood this well; for they all used the same form of the Lord’s Prayer, the Creed, and the Ten Commandments. Therefore we, too, should [imitate their diligence and be at pains to] teach the young and simple people these parts in such a way as not to change a syllable, or set them forth and repeat them one year differently than in another [no matter how often we teach the Catechism].
Hence, choose whatever form you please, and adhere to it forever. But when you preach in the presence of learned and intelligent men, you may exhibit your skill, and may present these parts in as varied and intricate ways and give them as masterly turns as you are able.
But with the young people stick to one fixed, permanent form and manner, and teach them, first of all, these parts, namely, the Ten Commandments, the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, etc., according to the text, word for word, so that they, too, can repeat it in the same manner after you and commit it to memory.
But those who are unwilling to learn it should be told that they deny Christ and are no Christians, neither should they be admitted to the Sacrament, accepted as sponsors at baptism, nor exercise any part of Christian liberty, but should simply be turned back to the Pope and his officials, yea, to the devil himself.
Moreover, their parents and employers should refuse them food and drink, and [they would also do well if they were to] notify them that the prince will drive such rude people from the country, etc.
For although we cannot and should not force any one to believe, yet we should insist and urge the people that they know what is right and wrong with those among whom they dwell and wish to make their living. For whoever desires to reside in a town must know and observe the town laws, the protection of which he wishes to enjoy, no matter whether he is a believer or at heart and in private a rogue or knave.
2004-06-01 07:51 | User Profile
Best to exclude them utterly today, and thereby avoid a very sharp pain in the right kidney tomorrow.
Besides, it seems to me that, generally speaking and allowing for certain important exceptions, guys who are attracted to Nazi ideology are of the lower-end variety,
First, that is a really sweeping generalization about who is attracted to Nazism. Truly amazing. Really.
Also, note that many fine people will bail out of OD if that occurs. I have talked to many of the non-God-squad people at OD about that issue, and you will indeed lose some good people.
And, since Walter has made such suggestions, I will no longer respond to anything Walter posts.
2004-06-01 07:55 | User Profile
[QUOTE][Franco]First, that is a really sweeping generalization about who is attracted to Nazism. Truly amazing. Really.[/QUOTE]
They're common generalizations because commonly they're true.
[QUOTE]Also, note that many fine people will bail out of OD if that occurs. I have talked to many of the non-God-squad people at OD about that issue, and you will indeed lose some good people.[/QUOTE]
You're breaking my heart.
Not.
[QUOTE]And, since Walter has made such suggestions, I will no longer respond to anything Walter posts.[/QUOTE]
Hey, Franco, it's not like you did much genuine responding anyway.
No loss there.
2004-06-01 09:14 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Jeanne D'Arc]]I'm sure he'll have trouble sleeping tonight.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I mean my heart is just broken to pieces here.
Franco's not talking to me anymoooorre. Wah! Wah!!! :crybaby:
2004-06-01 09:42 | User Profile
Let ye be separate...Gee, who said that? I do not think or believe that George Lincoln Rockwell, Charles Linbergh, Walt Disney, Thomas Edison, Joeseph McCarthy, Joseph Kennedy, J.F.Kennedy, Herbert Hoover, Senator Taft, Huey P. Long, Smedley Butler, or hundreds of other White patriots were anti Christ, but they all knew why and how we got in to WW1 and what it did to our Christian White nation, and the damage to the social fabric of U.S. Jimmy Cantrell at [url]www.thetexasmercury.com[/url] has written about the why's our churche's of today, and how this Apostasy of Christian's at large happened.
Woodrow Wilson was a black mailed president, from the Dec. 24th 1913 F.R.Act, to gettin U.S. in WW1 which got our republic smashed for the sake of saving his personal pride, vanity...Many of U.S. in 1917 died for a war that was to be to save Civilization, that was actually proclaimed in those days, can you imagine that B.S.?
Many men were assaulted and jailed for opposition to it.. In 1975 I meet a 84 year man who told me he went to prison for being against it and giving consul to young men not to go in service, and help in that horrible crime that was called WW1. Few people today know very much about WW1, or of it's direct affects on U.S. today.. Dukes Book covers some of WW1's important points in his book. Is there any one who post's and reads here who thinks that WW1 helped our "Nation" or Christianty and not lead to our mess today? Now we have the Espicoplian Church that Robert E. Lee belonged to, in full fudge packing and Cogoid importing celebrations! Calling themselves a Christian Church! Apostasy! Marxist B.S.! Those who think that that mixing the Race's in School, and allowing interacial marriage was a good thing, are part and parcel of our own self destruction.. For those who attended mix race schools as I did, it was a Marxist White hating willful crime..
Our Nation is at a war? Yet we have open borders and the flying in of primitive savages from Asia and Africa with so Called Christian churches fronting it on U.S. and in your face!. Our freedoms are being written off in the name of security at this same time. NO one congress except for a few give a dam what we want..
Lawyers as a group have never been any thing but a giant tool to for the alien plutocrats who have now taken U.S. over, to finally finish U.S. off from ever being able to resist them to save what has already been taken, hence the open borders against our will with TV watchers like old women I know thinking it's okay, it just U.S. racist's causing problems, because TV and talk radio has them brain washed and yet they VOTE.. Guess the most tolerant whites won't mind being the end of their racial line?..
Where I live it is 95% White, and we just recalled three of five commissioner's, by a land slide. They wanted an outrageous developement spending scheme to be backed by the property owners tax money, and who said hell no. The 35% who voted to keep them in, were almost all connected to the county court house, liar's and civil servants, cops etc, and leftist idiots, and most public employee's are a sort of fifth column, and they have power over U.S. This new Patriot act state of affairs may likely come in handy for thugs to abuse U.S. with shortly.. Rights hmmm?
John the Baptist was not joking in John 8:44.. Do you remember the scene in Gods and Generals where Thomas Jackson is consoling a dieing general and comrade, and he says General Jackson, you know I am not a believer and Jackson say's you let me believe then for both of U.S., if I remember correctly.
We whites all have Christ in U.S. whether we profess to believe in a Guru or a bug,or what ever, Christ will not abandon whites unless we abandon the spirit of God that is in U.S. Those of U.S. who have any education, values and love of our race beyound the F.R. dollar note should know that. Our actions,conduct, goals , bravery is what is going count in the end.
As for Jim Giles he may have offended some the O.D. posters, and I not saying that was good or implying such, and its none of my business to speak for him, but Jim Giles is trying to do something, even if is he not being like a salesman to some, we are in a struggle to stay alive and free. I believe thousands are waking up, this fall the election will be something to watch. The two parties/media will not allow a White Republic Nationalist to win like Jim Giles of Miss.
When Marcus Garvey was let's say not encouraged perhaps because the white elites of this country did not want the Congoid's in the U.S. organized for there own interests and to leave the U.S. either, as Mr.Garvey wanted them to do, and it was at this same time that the naacp showed up on the seen, 1909, if I am correct
I just noticed the poster above me, so now Jared Taylor, and Dr. Shockley are Nazi's too! Nazi is a yiddish anti white smear slogan any way, and by the way, I have never been in to the N.A.S. thing etc., but just all the Marxist bashing has made thinking brainwashed men, seek the truths. [url]www.amren.com[/url] Marxist's are under the beds at O.D. now. I would not care to be banned from here, but if I was let it be for stating such things as the Catholic Church at large is an a full blown pile of Apostasy pus, and a helper in the destruction of Western Civilization. WHERE was the Cat church when Belgrade a Holy Orthodox country was being bombed by U.S.? John 8:44, oh yeah babe....
2004-06-01 11:33 | User Profile
Besides, it seems to me that, generally speaking and allowing for certain important exceptions, guys who are attracted to Nazi ideology are of the lower-end variety, and not the kind of folks conducive to success. They tend toward finacial and professional failure, have little property, strike out with the girls, and have emotional problems. In a word, they tend strongly to be losers, and the thing to always keep in mind about losers is that THEY LOSE. Besides generally being a hazard to navigation for the rest of us, of course. Who needs them anyway? ---Walter Yannis
I hate to pop your can Walter, but, historically the Nazi's were a Roman Catholic movement in southern Germany. Most of the Nazi's were recruited out of the Catholic Zentrum party which was strong in southern Germany. I tried to make this point in a subtle manner in an earlier post.
In my personal experience with wanna be nazi's, the fact that they are usually from a Roman Catholic background; any I've ever personally encountered have been!
It wasn't until after the democratic revolutions of 1848 in Germany, that you had much in the way of Catholic immigration to the United States from Germany. The olde Dutch, the earlier immigrants from the German states, were maybe 98% or more protestant...my quibble with Linder, being an olde Dutchman & a protestant (?), he shouldn't lead the Catholics, who are prone to being turned into anti-christian megalomaniacs, down any dead ends. The stakes set by the jews are too high...:flex:
2004-06-01 11:52 | User Profile
[QUOTE]I hate to pop your can Walter, but, historically the Nazi's were a Roman Catholic movement in southern Germany. Most of the Nazi's were recruited out of the Catholic Zentrum party which was strong in southern Germany. I tried to make this point in a subtle manner in an earlier post.[/QUOTE]
Hitler started out as a Catholic, but then he embraced a foreign ideology. That's happened innumerable times. But so what? He ceased being a Catholic the moment he embraced Nazism. One cannot simultaneously be a Catholic and a Nazi. What do you think our Polish Pope's position is on that question?
[QUOTE]In my personal experience with wanna be nazi's, the fact that they are usually from a Roman Catholic background; any I've ever personally encountered have been![/QUOTE]
Same thing. One isn't a Catholic simply because one says so. A Catholic accepts certain doctrines, including the magisterial office of the Catholic Church. The Pope issued condemnations of Nazism, as I'm sure you're aware.
To join the Nazis, or even to affirm their principles, is to cease being a Catholic.
[QUOTE]It wasn't until after the democratic revolutions of 1848 in Germany, that you had much in the way of Catholic immigration to the United States from Germany. The olde Dutch, the earlier immigrants from the German states, were maybe 98% or more protestant...my quibble with Linder, being an olde Dutchman & a protestant (?), he shouldn't lead the Catholics, who are prone to being turned into anti-christian megalomaniacs, down any dead ends. The stakes set by the jews are too high[/QUOTE]
I'm part Pennsylvania Dutch myself. My mother's side of the family was mostly Welsh from Newcastle (recruited to work in the mines, at some time before the Irish showed up, I don't know the history well), and they intermarried with the PD. Regretably I lost all contact with that part of my family history.
2004-06-01 12:34 | User Profile
"One isn't a Catholic simply because one says so. A Catholic accepts certain doctrines, including the magisterial office of the Catholic Church." ---Walter Yannis
I find it interesting, that in a Pope's first ever address to the Italian parliament, a historical landmark by the current Pope---the topic of the Pope's speech to the Italian parliament was, [color=black]"Keeping Europe European". [/color] What do we look like here in the United States to the Pope? Particularly when you consider the deep involvement of the Pope's Roman Catholic Church, and its officals and offical organizations in bringing foreign nationals into the USA legally and illegally. The Somali's, the Sudenese, the Latino's of Central America, the Hmong, the you name its, all on the Pope's cuff.
Does the Pope wish America to be non-European?:blow:
2004-06-01 14:11 | User Profile
[QUOTE]I believe our national problems could go a long way towards being greatly bettered, if not solved, if only our God-given freedom of association legal rights could be asserted, won back and maintained.[/QUOTE]
"God-given?" Free association is a right man gives himself, if he's honestly self-governing. Maybe if you pray really really hard, your God will restore a strict interpretation of the Constitution. On the other hand, maybe he'll just restore the Volstead Act, grow bored, wander off to the other hemisphere and kick off the monsoon season a little early.
2004-06-01 14:22 | User Profile
[QUOTE]What do we look like here in the United States to the Pope?** Particularly when you consider the deep involvement of the Pope's Roman Catholic Church, and its officals and offical organizations in bringing foreign nationals into the USA legally and illegally. The Somali's, the Sudenese, the Latino's of Central America, the Hmong, the you name its, all on the Pope's cuff.[/QUOTE]
That, PD, is a truly fine question.
It's difficult to imagine that JPII - aka Karol Wojtyla, a Polish patriot if there ever was one - would think highly of Somalis settling his native Poland (or Vatican City for that matter). But he for some reason has no problem with sending them our way.
If I were to guess his motives as to his clear double standard here, I'd say three:
He buys into the whole "America as proposition nation" open to all. In a way, you can't really blame him for that - nobody proclaims that crap more loudly than we ourselves.
America has the money, and his heart genuinely goes out to the poor and downtrodden of the world, and is trying to get us to pay for it.
He knows that most of the immigration will come from Mexico, which will tend to increase his power and influence in the States.
Let me be clear about this. JPII is a great man and will without question go down in history as one of the greates popes in history, but he makes many mistakes. He let us down big a couple of times in the States. It's no secret that he sat on his hands as the lavender clergy ran amock on our kids, and also of course his callous disregard for the rights of the white, Christian, and English speaking American nation to all the benefits afforded to other nations.
He's not perfect. If we American Catholics weren't so fat, dumb, and lazy, then most of this wouldn't have gotten as far as it did.
Walter
2004-06-01 14:38 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]Did you read his book?[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately my local library does not carry either of Duke's titles. I've listened to his speeches and appearances for years and I've found his religious references very passing and superficial.
No disrespect intended, but the book excerpts he posts on his site read like a phone book.
What does he have to say?
2004-06-01 14:42 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Besides, it seems to me that, generally speaking and allowing for certain important exceptions, guys who are attracted to Nazi ideology are of the lower-end variety, and not the kind of folks conducive to success. They tend toward finacial and professional failure, have little property, strike out with the girls, and have emotional problems. In a word, they tend strongly to be losers, and the thing to always keep in mind about losers is that THEY LOSE. Besides generally being a hazard to navigation for the rest of us, of course. Who needs them anyway? [/QUOTE]
First they called the Southerners [I]losers and racists and anti-Semites[/I]- but I said nothing because I wasn't a Southerner. Then they called the old-style conservatives [I]losers and racists and anti-Semites [/I] - but I wasn't on the NR masthead and so I kept quiet. Then they called the anti-immigrationists and the strict Constitutionalists and the tax resisters and the conspiracy theorists and the iconoclasts and the dreamers and the patriots and the white working class [I]losers and racists and anti-Semites [/I] - but by that point there was no one left to speak up except Oliver Cromwell. And [I]he [/I] wasn't interested in anything but the sound of his uninterrupted 'monologue'.
2004-06-01 14:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE]For although we cannot and should not force any one to believe, yet we should insist and urge the people that they know what is right and wrong with those among whom they dwell and wish to make their living. For whoever desires to reside in a town must know and observe the town laws, the protection of which he wishes to enjoy, no matter whether he is a believer or at heart and in private a rogue or knave. [/QUOTE] Wise words from Dr. Luther. What is your response, Walter?
2004-06-01 15:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis] JPII is a great man and will without question go down in history as one of the greates popes in history[/QUOTE]
In my mind, nothing could be further from the truth. He has been at the vanguard of the NewChurch his entire career. New mass, new catechism, new canon law, new rosary, and all disastrous. Read the stats by Kenneth C. Jones, the Index of Catholicism's Decline. The best thing this Pope could do is die.
2004-06-01 15:12 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Buster]Unfortunately my local library does not carry either of Duke's titles. I've listened to his speeches and appearances for years and I've found his religious references very passing and superficial.
No disrespect intended, but the book excerpts he posts on his site read like a phone book.
What does he have to say?[/QUOTE]
He seems to hold basic Protestant beliefs. He based arguments on good scriptural references, seems to know the Bible much better than me at least (which probably ain't saying much).
2004-06-01 15:16 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Buster]In my mind, nothing could be further from the truth. He has been at the vanguard of the NewChurch his entire career. New mass, new catechism, new canon law, new rosary, and all disastrous. Read the stats by Kenneth C. Jones, the Index of Catholicism's Decline. The best thing this Pope could do is die.[/QUOTE]
That's a tad harsh, Buster.
He played a key role in bringing down the USSR, consistently spoke out for the unborn, and stuck to his guns on key doctrinal points. I don't doubt his personal holiness, and certainly his personal example has been an inspiration to many.
I agree that all of the innovations were disatrous. There's just no other way to put it. And he played a pivotal role in VATII, so there's not much wriggle room for him there, I'd say.
I'm no doubt too emotionally involved with the thing to even hope for anything like objectivity, so I'll end this for today.
2004-06-01 15:17 | User Profile
[QUOTE=mwdallas]Wise words from Dr. Luther. What is your response, Walter?[/QUOTE]
I've already signed on to that.
Did I just commit heresy or something?
2004-06-01 16:31 | User Profile
Franco, My suggestion is this. Assuming your interest here is sincere and that you're actually willing to work with Christians -- and I personally think that it is -- you might want to consider modifying your rhetoric and changing this line of argument, and if you're personally aquainted with Linder encourage him to do the same thing.
First, don't suggest that Christians should put anything before God. Christians don't put things before or on a par with God. Period. If someone asked you to put in the interests of another race ahead of our race, I'm sure they woudn't get anything from you but hostility. Well, that's how we feel when confronted with that kind of langauge -- it just strikes us as bizarre.
[QUOTE=Franco]Maybe if most Christians put race 1st instead of 4th or 5th in order of importance, Linder would be more kind to them...in fact I know that he would...[by the way, no one really answered my prior question at OD: if/when non-Whites completely flood the West, will the West still be 'The West' without Whites as the majority? But that's ok, I think the non-responses answered that question for me....]
----------[/QUOTE]
2004-06-01 16:43 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]He seems to hold basic Protestant beliefs. [/QUOTE]
That's exactly my impression. He "seems" to. But I am dubious as to his sincerity. Anyone can write a book with good scriptural references. On the stump last weekend he didn't refer to hell and heaven but to hell and "the stars." He appears to want to appease both the Christians and the "cosmos" crowd, or walk a fine line. Not that I would require him to be Christian to accept his participation in any activity.
As for the Pope, sorry to be harsh, but there will be no meaningful reform as long as he is alive. The Church will just go on in agony.
2004-06-01 17:07 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Buster]Unfortunately my local library does not carry either of Duke's titles. I've listened to his speeches and appearances for years and I've found his religious references very passing and superficial.
No disrespect intended, but the book excerpts he posts on his site read like a phone book.
What does he have to say?[/QUOTE] Your post which mentioned your library is a point I want to address. Before the internet, the local library where I live has its own taxing district, and had two lawyers on its board.. The library has supplus money, with good wages and great benieft's. A business I had built in town paid substantial taxes to it, and they could never stock or get any book I ask them to, like Norman Finkelstien, or one of the writers of the Village Voice, Mr. John Sacks if I remember his name correctly who wrote a book about the communist run prison camps in Europe after 1945 titled, "An Eye for an Eye" If you wanted it from the State library loan system, if they had it, the charge was 2 dollars. My point is that with the internet you can buy your books and get many reviews, and by pass them. I wonder what percentage of the library's are p.c. censored?.. The Library also filter's sites like Amren, and vdare, or did, would not be suprised if my worthless library did filter out O.D. then patrons could never hear some one say your a Nazi, and looser for seeking truth not idealogy in our political struggle against p.c lies. David Irving is looser to some, that comes to my mind, but he is not, he only lost in our lovely court systems of the West of today. Try giving a copy free to your local library of "My Awakening" and see what happens.
2004-06-01 18:14 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]Similarly, Linder's rants on VNN fulfill much the same role as Der Stuermer - information mixed with crude, titillating humor. Which is all fine and good, provided that the Streichers of today and yesteryear keep their place as purveyors of crude propagand rather than posing as "leaders."
Did Streicher write daily, scathing diatribes denouncing Hitler? I don't think so. If he did he would have been silenced.
There's your difference.
2004-06-01 18:17 | User Profile
AY - I think there's some truth to your analogy but I'd appreciate your opinion of the suggestion that race is often deemed a crude subject because it is primary, like reproduction and waste disposal. Intellectuals are inclined to look down their nose at it but parents have to teach it to their children nonetheless. These crudities of life are the heavy lifting that everyone knows exist and without which life as we know it can't go on, but don't want to talk about in polite company whilst reaping the benefits of that heavy lifting.
The more a society ignores these functions, the sooner the waltz will end. Many people are aware of this, though probably in different terms. Hence the cyclical calls for returning to basics.
2004-06-01 18:20 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]These crudities of life are the heavy lifting that everyone knows exist and without which life as we know it can't go on, but don't want to talk about in polite company whilst reaping the benefits of that heavy lifting.[/QUOTE]
So Howard Stern, Beavis and Butthead are heavy-lifters?
2004-06-01 18:23 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]So Howard Stern, Beavis and Butthead are heavy-lifters?[/QUOTE]
Do these fellows promote an understanding of functions that are essential to our survival or do they just swim in doodoo?
2004-06-01 18:31 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]Do these fellows promote an understanding of functions that are essential to our survival or do they just swim in doodoo?[/QUOTE]
'Essential to our survival' is a further qualification of 'crudities of life' that you didn't mention in the prior post. I'll just say this, there is much more essential to our survival than mere race. We are men, not animals. To place one's sole focus on race is to dehumanize mankind and the consequences of that quite frankly, scare me.
2004-06-01 18:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Did Streicher write daily, scathing diatribes denouncing Hitler? I don't think so. [/QUOTE]
Correct. But - since you see Hitler as a false messiah and a net-negative for humanity - you ought to be [I]championing [/I] Linder. Instead you begrudge him for doing what you condemn Streicher for [I]not [/I] doing!
A little consistency, please.
[QUOTE]I'll just say this, there is much more essential to our survival than mere race. We are men, not animals. To place one's sole focus on race is to dehumanize mankind [/QUOTE]
On this we agree. Where I feel most racialists fall down is by viewing everything and everyone through one prism, rather than limiting their focus to isolating and containing the one parasitic element in the race-pool whose unimpeded infestation enables a thousand other woes to befall the Western World. I personally don't care very much whether a white man has a Spanish or Filipina girlfriend, or vice versa, the way a lot of WNs do - I figure it's their business and his funeral. But I care very much about Jewish infiltration and domination because it is THE clear and present danger to me and mine.
Jewish power is the key that opens Pandora's Box, a box you can only securely lock the first time.....and to discount race [I]in order to look away from this particular bit of reality[/I] is stupid, swinish and craven.
2004-06-01 18:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Correct. But - since you see Hitler as a false messiah and a net-negative for humanity - you ought to be [I]championing [/I] Linder. Instead you begrudge him for doing what you condemn Streicher for [I]not [/I] doing![/QUOTE]
Huh? I only used Hitler as an example in the historical context provided by Streicher. No inconsistency there.
2004-06-01 18:47 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]I'm not sure why discussions of race have to be "crude." They have only been deemed so by a society that has made racialism a taboo ideology, and indeed serious discussions of race (even in objective scientific circles) beyond the bounds of "respectability." However, there is nothing intrinsically crude about racialism or discussions of race.[/QUOTE]
AY, I respectfully disagree on this point. Discussions of race can veer toward the crude because race is such a primal life fundamental, like blood, shit and placenta on the floor. What's absurd is the way we pretend it ain't so. Even the ever-respectable American Renaissance likes to go in and give you the filthy details of the Carr Brothers' afternoon of fun and games with white life --- as well they should. KAS fairly quivers talking about the possibility of hanging millstones around the necks of Jewish media moguls who degrade white womanhood --- as well he should. Their absence of slurs starts to become a pretty sheer formality at this point. All Linder does is connect the dots everyone else draws. For this he's crucified? Oy! The irony of all this is that dotting dots but stopping short of drawing the line is exactly what white nationalists say everyone else does --- yet here they are doing it themselves. Isn't that funny? Yes, that's funny!
Another of Linder's great points is that racial issues ain't all that damn complicated, with the exception of most folks' inability to see Jewish influence. Basically, you got a big mess of groups, some of which are just naturally smarter and better-behaved that others, and genetics makes it unfixable. That creates a lot of problems. Easy. Done.
All the pontificators like to prattle about hermeneutics and signifiers and such forth, but dude, cores of our problems are so amazingly simple it's worth a big hearty laugh. Ahem: Jayson Williams shot the white man because he's a nigger, for God's sake. Jayson Blair effed up in the Times for the same lapel-grabbingly simple reason. Don't go gettin' fancy on me here, kids. Pretending problems are more complicated than they are is a sure-fire way to guarantee they won't get solved.
2004-06-01 18:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]'Essential to our survival' is a further qualification of 'crudities of life' that you didn't mention in the prior post. I'll just say this, there is much more essential to our survival than mere race. We are men, not animals. To place one's sole focus on race is to dehumanize mankind and the consequences of that quite frankly, scare me.[/QUOTE]
Things that are taboo usually scare people. It shouldn't be surprising that the most easily scared are those who're most likely to be insulted at having to face 'crude' realities i.e. the menial but necessary chores that sustain them.
Yes, there are other things that are important, but race is the biggest battle facing us now, whether by our own negligence or not.
Do you consider the Confederate leaders to have been crude?
2004-06-01 19:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Jeanne D'Arc]The real problem with VNN is not style but substance. It's substantially an outlet for anti-Christian bile. Linder's ideology is not even "strict racialism" but rather anti-Christianism: Iranians are allowed to post articles, so long as they attack Christianity. VNN tastes more jewish than kashrut. It's the jews' way of driving Whites away from the truth.
Linder is the jew's favorite "racialist".[/QUOTE]
Dear Walter's girl,
I'm sure you've read a lot at this site you can't stand, and must therefore have a real good idea of the percentage of material directed against Christianity.
2004-06-01 19:20 | User Profile
Here's a little sample of Linder on the role of Christianity and religion:
[size=4]Here Reese exposes his ignorance of [url="http://www.lewrockwell.com/reese/reese77.html"]religion[/url], imagining that all "great" religions teach the same thing. The basic thing that protects our persons, our property and our liberty is the morality that individuals possess in their own hearts. The law cannot be a substitute for that. No law can protect you from a dishonest merchant or a thug because the law is always, of necessity, applied after the fact, and then only on a selective basis. Furthermore, as we have seen, the law and the system of justice often degenerate into a tragic farce. Most violent crime is the work of niggers, whom religion today tells us are our "equals." So religion today makes not for political prosperity, but for political destruction. Religion goes this way and that, and is not to be relied upon as one may rely upon, say, a thermometer, or gravity. The Founders were less religious than their countrymen. Without religion, a Christian couple wouldn't run to "forgive" the drunk nigger who just drove over their child. How much misery the policy of "turn the other cheek" has led to, yet how seldom is that misery ever mentioned. Guilt and confusion are sown by Christianity, which works, as do all jewish commandments for Aryans, to induce the double-clutch, so the Aryan no longer knows whether he's coming or going. Forced to live among niggers he can't abide, he is assured that his natural reaction is a "sin." His bought preacher Graham tells him this on Sunday, and every few columns. This is nothing good. This is something bad. This is something we want less of. This is Christianity; danger to man and nation alike. Nobody can deny that Christianity makes men less manly, more passive, and weaker than they would be otherwise. It was set up with that end in mind, and the only adult converts it attracts are drunks like Mel Gibson and George Bush.
[/size]
2004-06-01 19:29 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln]Another of Linder's great points is that racial issues ain't all that damn complicated, with the exception of most folks' inability to see Jewish influence. Basically, you got a big mess of groups, some of which are just naturally smarter and better-behaved that others, and genetics makes it unfixable. That creates a lot of problems. Easy. Done.[/QUOTE]
And there you have it -- biological determinism. Marxism's ideological brother.
Can you not see where this ideology leads? Human sterilization, genetic screening and forced abortions, institutionalized euthanasia, etc. etc. Huxley's [u]Brave New World[/u], lobotomized humanity.
Now this may be the future you and Linder pine for, but don't pretend it has anything to do with Western Civilization. At least anything noble about Western Civ. In fact, it is the brother of materialist marxism and if allowed to flourish will only lead to massive death and destruction. Therefore I oppose it with everything I have available to me to do so.
2004-06-01 19:31 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Dear Walter's girl,[/QUOTE]
ROFLMAO. For a moment I thought this might've been a [I]Norman Bates/Mother[/I] dynamic at work.
2004-06-01 19:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE]A Christ-hating jew would certainly say that when he has nothing substantial to add. Which is most of the time.[/QUOTE]
Natural, itz! So?....who's up for [I]heresy and halavah[/I]?
2004-06-01 20:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]And there you have it -- biological determinism. Marxism's ideological brother.
Can you not see where this ideology leads? Human sterilization, genetic screening and forced abortions, institutionalized euthanasia, etc. etc. Huxley's [u]Brave New World[/u], lobotomized humanity.
Now this may be the future you and Linder pine for, but don't pretend it has anything to do with Western Civilization. At least anything noble about Western Civ. In fact, it is the brother of materialist marxism and if allowed to flourish will only lead to massive death and destruction. Therefore I oppose it with everything I have available to me to do so.[/QUOTE]
That's right, "biological determinism" is so evil we must avoid it all costs, even when it hasn't existed for sixty years. Tex, what do you think of the Confederacy's "biological determinism"?
How about some perspective? HL merely stated what anyone with the ability to see can see. He's not in charge of the US Eugenics Dept.... I don't think.
2004-06-01 20:07 | User Profile
I just love another psychotic personality on this forum with the visions of Christ being crucified. Reminds me of those zhids with cubes on their heads, bowing monotonically to the rhythm of their Talmudic chants.
And one of the most revealing pieces that don't need a psychiatrist to decode is something like:
[quote=Jeanne D'Arc] Admit it, you want to be tormented. At bottom, every rebel against Christ is a masochist.
2004-06-01 20:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE=General Rommel]I would say that those who are instrumental in mainstreaming the pro-white movement are doing so in spite of Stormfront. As i see it, Stormfront is merely a popular forum where many voices come together, most of them size=1[/size] harmful to the goal of preserving Western peoples and civilization.
Wait a second. . .a person describing himself as "General Rommel" declaims Stormfront as being "Neo-Nazi" ? :thumbsup:
As others have observed in this thread, SF has toned-down the fiery (and stupid) rhetoric of its posters. The Matt Hale groupies are largely silent now (thanks in large part to Uncle Sam's shenanigans). There are very few Kluxers. Yes, there are some CI folks, and I agree they're an unusual lot. Yes, there are some Nazis, but they hardly determine the tenor of the place. The very success of SF has caused a decrease in the percentage of whackiness, since the total number of Kluxers, Sieg Heilers, etc, is very small compared to the general population.
I don't regret to report there is no Soviet-style intelligentsia over at SF, General. The laugh-out-loud funny part of your beef is that the Linderites you and others here malign (rightfully so, imho) similarly hold the bizarre belief that SF is--somehow--"controlling" their minds. (One does wonder how a person so weak-minded can manage to crawl out of bed.) But, surprisingly, those strong enough to break the Stormfront "mind control" can only manage to spend their time venting on how bad Stormfront is, just as you and the Linder hooligans do.
I wouldn't cherry pick some people I disagree with on certain issues and conclude, "Original Dissent is a board populated by anti-Christian nut jobs whose inane rhetoric is inimical to the goal of preserving White peoples and civilization." Yet you do so with SF.
This is a great place. Let's enjoy it without knocking another venue that is in friendship with this one.
[url]http://www.originaldissent.com[/url] [url]http://www.stormfront.org[/url]
2004-06-01 20:29 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]That's right, "biological determinism" is so evil we must avoid it all costs, even when it hasn't existed for sixty years. Tex, what do you think of the Confederacy's "biological determinism"?[/QUOTE] What "biological determinism?" In the South, being black did not automatically make you a slave, and free blacks could not become slaves. Perhaps you'd care to elaborate on what this is supposed to mean?
2004-06-01 20:43 | User Profile
It seems to me that the rush to categorize/label disparate strands of Far Right thought is as premature as the labels are inaccurate.
What we are witnessing is simply the coalescing and formation of [I]21st century American anti-Semitism[/I], though no one feels comfortable calling it that....maybe because WNs require old-European precursors to point to to avoid the taint of yahooism...or maybe because the mold has a ways to go yet before it cools and hardens. But it's getting there. Events and conditions will continue to worsen until "anti-Semitism" will lose its sociological booga-booga onus, and at last be viewed as [I]common-sense self-defense[/I]...however regrettable.
When World War 4 is here - for [I]real[/I], like it or not - this bandwagon's gonna be standing room only.
2004-06-01 20:43 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Quantrill]What "biological determinism?" In the South, being black did not automatically make you a slave, and free blacks could not become slaves. Perhaps you'd care to elaborate on what this is supposed to mean?[/QUOTE]
They may not have used the term 'biological determinism', but it sounds like biological determinism to me:
Mr. Davis: Several southern Senators around have spoken to me to the effect that in each of their States the protection is secured, and a suit may be instituted at common law for assault and battery, to protect a negro as well as a white man. The condition of slavery with us is, in a word, Mr. President, nothing but the form of civil government instituted for a class of people not fit to govern themselves. It is exactly what in every State exists in some form or other. It is just that kind of control which is extended in every northern State over its convicts, its lunatics, its minors, its apprentices. It is but a form of civil government for those who by their nature are not fit to govern themselves. We recognize the fact of the inferiority stamped upon that race of men by the Creator, and from the cradle to the grave, our Government, as a civil institution, marks that inferiority.
[url]http://jeffersondavis.rice.edu/resources.cfm?doc_id=1502[/url]
2004-06-01 20:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Tex]And there you have it -- biological determinism. Marxism's ideological brother.
Can you not see where this ideology leads? Human sterilization, genetic screening and forced abortions, institutionalized euthanasia, etc. etc. Huxley's Brave New World, lobotomized humanity.
Now this may be the future you and Linder pine for, but don't pretend it has anything to do with Western Civilization. At least anything noble about Western Civ. In fact, it is the brother of materialist marxism and if allowed to flourish will only lead to massive death and destruction. Therefore I oppose it with everything I have available to me to do so.[/QUOTE]
Well, sure, I believe that biology determines a lot --- how can it possibly be otherwise? I believe females are the ones who give birth and birds are the ones that fly. None of that can be changed, and wise policy should be built around that, not in contravention of it. I'm sympathetic to the concern that belief in racial differences could lead to nasty stuff. But the nasty stuff we're up to our waists in now is a direct result of steadfast belief in environmental determinism.
In fact, I have recently been saying that in the long run, racial issues [I]are[/I] a distraction, and that they aren't ultimately what we ought to spend our days thinking about/dealing with. But race only ceases to be an issue when it ceases to be --- something that doesn't happen outside a context of healthy separation. That in turn is unlikely to happen without some basic understanding that races are in fact different, and that the differences are immutable to an extent. Once there's a healthy level of homogeneity, the differences within that should be greeted with the respectful silence that our ancestors always did (Mary is a little slow, but sugar, we just don't talk about that, now. She does just fine with her job at the store, wavin' to the folks and bein' friendly). To me, that is the decent society, and ultimately what conservatism is all about --- progress within the limits reality sets. Add a dash of the spiritual to make it smell nice.
2004-06-01 20:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]They may not have used the term 'biological determinism', but it sounds like biological determinism to me:
Mr. Davis: Several southern Senators around have spoken to me to the effect that in each of their States the protection is secured, and a suit may be instituted at common law for assault and battery, to protect a negro as well as a white man. The condition of slavery with us is, in a word, Mr. President, nothing but the form of civil government instituted for a class of people not fit to govern themselves. It is exactly what in every State exists in some form or other. It is just that kind of control which is extended in every northern State over its convicts, its lunatics, its minors, its apprentices. It is but a form of civil government for those who by their nature are not fit to govern themselves. We recognize the fact of the inferiority stamped upon that race of men by the Creator, and from the cradle to the grave, our Government, as a civil institution, marks that inferiority.
[url="http://jeffersondavis.rice.edu/resources.cfm?doc_id=1502"]http://jeffersondavis.rice.edu/resources.cfm?doc_id=1502[/url][/QUOTE] Ruffin, using this quite loose definition, then an aristocracy is "biological determinism," because those born outside the noble families will never be aristocrats. Prohibiting women's suffrage is "biological determinism," because women will never be able to vote. The entire Catholic priesthood is based upon "biological determinism," because women can never be priests. Is this really what you mean? And if it is, then isn't this definition far too loose to really have any value?
2004-06-01 21:07 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Quantrill]Ruffin, using this quite loose definition, then an aristocracy is "biological determinism," because those born outside the noble families will never be aristocrats. Prohibiting women's suffrage is "biological determinism," because women will never be able to vote. The entire Catholic priesthood is based upon "biological determinism," because women can never be priests. Is this really what you mean? And if it is, then isn't this definition far too loose to really have any value?[/QUOTE]
It's a closer definition than was the statement by Hugh Lincoln that aroused such alarm about it. My point was that the alarm bells were premature and unwarranted, as HL points out in his most recent post.
2004-06-01 21:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]And there you have it -- biological determinism. Marxism's ideological brother.
Can you not see where this ideology leads? Human sterilization, genetic screening and forced abortions, institutionalized euthanasia, etc. etc. Huxley's [u]Brave New World[/u], lobotomized humanity.
Now this may be the future you and Linder pine for, but don't pretend it has anything to do with Western Civilization. At least anything noble about Western Civ. In fact, it is the brother of materialist marxism and if allowed to flourish will only lead to massive death and destruction. Therefore I oppose it with everything I have available to me to do so.[/QUOTE]
As I noted to Valley Forge and Franco, multiculturalism also tends to be an ideology of biological determinism.
Valley Forge, Franco, and Foxman have a great deal in common. As MacDonald noted.
2004-06-01 21:57 | User Profile
Of course.
But I thought we're supposed to be working to build a political movement here?
In the context of political activity, focusing on race and the Jewish question to the exclusion of all else is perfectly sensible.
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident] I'll just say this, there is much more essential to our survival than mere race.[/QUOTE]
2004-06-01 21:58 | User Profile
I am not a strict determinist, biological or otherwise.
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]As I noted to Valley Forge and Franco, multiculturalism also tends to be an ideology of biological determinism.
Valley Forge, Franco, and Foxman have a great deal in common. As MacDonald noted.[/QUOTE]
2004-06-01 22:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust] Valley Forge, Franco, and Foxman have a great deal in common. As MacDonald noted.[/QUOTE] Okie at his finest, building bridges.
By the way, hasn't McD also noted that the whites are going to have to "become Jews" (=emulate survival methods) in order to survive?
2004-06-01 22:25 | User Profile
Jeanne,
How do you propose we revive traditional Christianity without confronting the Jewish question?
2004-06-01 22:26 | User Profile
Jeanne,
This was my response to Tex when we debated this point the other day
[quote=ValleyForge]
Texas Dissident: There is no doubt that jewish influence permeates our culture and government...I believe said jewish influence is a symptom of the disease affecting America and not the root cause.Ours is a spiritual crisis and if it were not atheistic (marxist?) jews taking advantage of our present weakness then it would be some other group.
VF:That doesn't change the fact that it's not someone else taking advantage of our present weakness -- it's Jews, as you yourself readily admit.
Do we not have to deal with short term before the long term?
If Western man is in the grips of a spiritual crisis -- and I agree with that assessment -- how do you propose we as Christians go about engendering a spiritual awakening with Jews standing in the way of any message of hope we might bring to our people?
Consider the roll call for a moment.
Can Nationalist Christians get their message into the public schools? No.
The media? No.
The newspapers? No.
Hollywood? No. Unless you're a millionaire like Mel Gibson.
NBC? No.
ABC? No.
CBS? No.
Local government? No.
State government? No.
Federal government? No
All of these instutions, and many others, are CLOSED TO CHRISTIANS because of Jewish Supremacist influence, yet, amazingly, you claim that focusing on Jews is ââ¬Åshortsighted.ââ¬Â
I don't get it.
How the hell are we supposed to move forward as Christians if we don't plow through the people standing in our way? (no need to answer; that's a rhetorical question)
Even if we Christians were to put our heads together and collectively come up with a meaningful message of hope to deliver to our people for spiritual renewal, we wouldn't be able to do anything with it because of Jews.
2004-06-01 22:29 | User Profile
Okie is a palecon purist. :lol:
Just like the hardcore, divisive NSers, but in reverse.
[QUOTE=madrussian]Okie at his finest, building bridges.
By the way, hasn't McD also noted that the whites are going to have to "become Jews" (=emulate survival methods) in order to survive?[/QUOTE]
2004-06-01 22:57 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]It seems to me that the rush to categorize/label disparate strands of Far Right thought is as premature as the labels are inaccurate.
What we are witnessing is simply the coalescing and formation of [I]21st century American anti-Semitism[/I], though no one feels comfortable calling it that....maybe because WNs require old-European precursors to point to to avoid the taint of yahooism...or maybe because the mold has a ways to go yet before it cools and hardens. But it's getting there. Events and conditions will continue to worsen until "anti-Semitism" will lose its sociological booga-booga onus, and at last be viewed as [I]common-sense self-defense[/I]...however regrettable.
When World War 4 is here - for [I]real[/I], like it or not - this bandwagon's gonna be standing room only.[/QUOTE]
Howdy il ragno,
Good to see you here again, but I get the feeling the Holy War is about to heat up again, as all the signs from the last one are here, including an appearance by the Anti-Christ himself, Alex Linder!
I think you're right on the money when you say we're witnessing a coalescence of the 21st century's anti-Semitism. Growing pains aren't called that for nothing, are they? I think small pebbles are starting to have a cumulative effect. Fritz Hollings, Zinni's statements, Foxman's increasingly desperate rhetoric, etc. We could actually live to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
I make it no secret I see the value in both the Texes and the Linders in our struggle, with a few exceptions like Walter Yannis, Okiereddust and types at the VNN Forum who pray for nuclear war to punish all those non-racialist Whites, forgetting that there's a learning curve in waking up to Hyman's hijinks as well as the fact that they too were once ignorant lemmings. It truly is funny how Yannis' "worse is better" rhetoric nearly mirrors Norcalnative's fervent thermonuclear fantasies over at VNNF.
Speaking of Walter, now there's a scary fella! Well, not too scary. I get the feeling he's willing to cheer on the death and destruction of his enemies (that would be everyone not as devout as himself) from afar, though not having the stomach to look an "atheist" in the eye as he pulls the trigger. No, that's what his "Christian Taliban" is for! The fact that a decent guy like Tex could sign on to that kind of rhetoric or idea bothers me some. You were most right when you once said the best result would be mutually assured destruction when it came to the Charles Martel Christians vs. The Second-Coming-of-Hitler Nazis.
It also strikes me as being correct when you said that religion can oftimes serve as the meninges for the pschye when it comes to confronting the sometimes-senseless face of reality, allowing people to get up and function with the idea that "it all makes sense" at some level. For others, like Walter, I propose it also serves the dual purpose of being a stable platform from which to gleefully throw stones, while ducking all incoming missiles as "anti-Christian" hate speech or somesuch. Neat trick and you know what, very jooish! What was that quote about the worst tyrants being the do-gooders, who oppress you with the blessings of their conscience? Back to the "Christian Taliban" we go!
One thing I've noticed among a fair portion of the visceral Linder-haters is the fact that they don't read much of his stuff beyond what pisses them off or don't read it at all, relying insead on other's opinions to form their own. Valley Forge is an example of the latter. Good guy, but jumped on the anti-Linder bandwagon based on the OD elders' opinions that he's a nihilist, anti-Christian Nazi, or whatever. The White side has its fair share of people who don't think, either, it appears. They hate what their authority figures tell them to hate, whether that's Tex, Walter or Linder. Human nature that's not to be gotten around, apparently.
Like you, I'm half-sold on Linder not doing himself any favors by constantly attacking Christianity. If it serves that meninges function in otherwise healthy and allied individuals, why go out of your way to alienate them in a most irreversible manner? On the other hand, I see his point in that there can be no denying that the Church in its modern form has been horrendously bad for Whites and no amount of equivocation from the faithful can change that, so why waste time splitting hairs by trying to identify which Christians are "bad" and which are "good" from a White survival point of view? I understand the reaction of those Christians Linder irritates, but can they point to where he's wrong, at least on the physical damage that modern Christianity does? Ya know, "remove the mote from thine own eye..." stuff and all that. I do think the "all Christians are retarded, backwards stumblef*cks" and "dead kike on a stick" stuff is way over the top, though.
By the way, before any of you accuse me of being a Nazi, anti-Christian, just know that...
Oh, nevermind. Think what you want.
2004-06-01 23:02 | User Profile
[QUOTE=MadScienceType]It truly is funny how Yannis' "worse is better" rhetoric nearly mirrors Norcalnative's fervent thermonuclear fantasies over at VNNF. [/QUOTE] One thing that always comes to my mind when hearing that sociopathic "worse is better" mantra is that if I had an enemy, his repeating that slogan would be most welcome from me. How often do you encounter an opponent or an enemy keeping saying that as they keep losing?
2004-06-01 23:10 | User Profile
Well, I see the logic behind "worse is better" and agree with it to the extent that a lot of Whites will have to be uncomfortable before they "wake up" but I draw the line at hoping for them to die, even if some of them are asking for it.
Way I see it, without a plan of action you're willing to carry out, the "worse is better" strategy is nothing more than nihilism itself.
2004-06-01 23:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]Okie at his finest, building bridges.
By the way, hasn't McD also noted that the whites are going to have to "become Jews" (=emulate survival methods) in order to survive?[/QUOTE]Sort of. So pass the kosher pickles.
2004-06-01 23:13 | User Profile
[indent]What remains of the "west" is almost entirely post-christian. The major exception is the US Bible Belt. A religious revival among the highly secularized whites of Europe seems extremely unlikely- except possibly in Russia. Despite the fact that their birth rates are collapsing as much as their more affluent cousins to the west they seem to retain a healthy nationalism and historically have an aversion to soulless materialism. I haven't heard or read what David Duke has to say about Russia, I think he is the guy to ask.
But assuming what I said was correct could such a revival spread to the historic lands of the Catholics and Protestants? And for Christianity in those lands to recover some of its past virility and realism would require a cultural revolution of monumental proportions.
[/indent]
2004-06-01 23:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Sort of. So pass the kosher pickles.[/QUOTE] I love them pickles. Of course, the zhids learned everything about them from the host nations.
2004-06-01 23:28 | User Profile
[QUOTE=seelow heights][indent]Despite the fact that their birth rates are collapsing as much as their more affluent cousins to the west they seem to retain a healthy nationalism and historically have an aversion to soulless materialism.
How did they manage it without religion?
2004-06-01 23:28 | User Profile
On the contrary, MST, I didn't jump on any "bandwagon." I've made my fair share of comments defending Linder as well as criticizing him, some as recently as week ago.
Now, I'm not sure how you could possibly know how much of his stuff I have or haven't read, but -- this point aside -- the fact is, the man's anti-Christian bile turns my stomach. Always has.
Tex has been right all along. This man needs to be shunned by right thinking people interested in building a broad Nationalist movement in this country.
Yeah, he says some things that need to be said, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.
[QUOTE=MadScienceType]One thing I've noticed among a fair portion of the visceral Linder-haters is the fact that they don't read much of his stuff beyond what pisses them off or don't read it at all, relying insead on other's opinions to form their own. Valley Forge is an example of the latter. Good guy, but jumped on the anti-Linder bandwagon based on the OD elders' opinions that he's a nihilist, anti-Christian Nazi, or whatever. The White side has its fair share of people who don't think, either, it appears. They hate what their authority figures tell them to hate, whether that's Tex, Walter or Linder. Human nature that's not to be gotten around, apparently.[/QUOTE]
2004-06-01 23:29 | User Profile
Living for 90 years under the Jewish heel will work wonders.
[QUOTE=madrussian]How did they manage it without religion?[/QUOTE]
2004-06-01 23:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Jeanne D'Arc]They don't, genius. Most Russians are Christians - and the Orthodox Church is powerful.[/QUOTE] You are like Perun the "Ukrainian", full of shit.
Most Russians are like me: atheists, who don't give a shit about political correctness.
2004-06-01 23:42 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]Living for 90 years under the Jewish heel will work wonders.[/QUOTE] It enriches your soul and makes you less materialistic? Somehow the opposite effect is observed in the US.
2004-06-01 23:45 | User Profile
Touche.
[QUOTE=madrussian]It enriches your soul and makes you less materialistic? Somehow the opposite effect is observed in the US.[/QUOTE]
2004-06-01 23:52 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]On the contrary, MST, I didn't jump on any "bandwagon." I've made my fair share of comments defending Linder as well as criticizing him, some as recently as week ago.
Now, I'm not sure how you could possibly know how much of his stuff I have or haven't read, but -- this point aside -- the fact is, the man's anti-Christian bile turns my stomach. Always has.
Tex has been right all along. This man needs to be shunned by right thinking people interested in building a broad Nationalist movement in this country.
Yeah, he says some things that need to be said, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.[/QUOTE] You would hope that someone as bright and as talented as Linder would some useful role to play. Now that I think of it, he is fulfilling that role right now and should not go beyond it. He is a good source of information for discerning readers with a strong stomach. Saying that, I really have to give him a lot of credit for what he did at Topeka.
2004-06-01 23:55 | User Profile
Writing low brow material for Whites on the left side of the bell curve is probably where Linder should focus his efforts.
[QUOTE=seelow heights]You would hope that someone as bright and as talented as Linder would some useful role to play. Now that I think of it, he is fulfilling that role right now and should not go beyond it. He is a good source of information for discerning readers with a strong stomach. Saying that, I really have to give him a lot of credit for what he did at Topeka.[/QUOTE]
2004-06-02 00:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]It enriches your soul and makes you less materialistic? Somehow the opposite effect is observed in the US.[/QUOTE] When we start experiencing crushing poverty and Bolshevik slave labor and extermination camps the magic might do its work. Then again Russia is different, it is not quite the West.
2004-06-02 00:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]Tex has been right all along. This man needs to be shunned by right thinking people interested in building a broad Nationalist movement in this country.
At best his work is a Beavis and Butthead-type sideshow that distracts from and makes a mockery of white nationalism and the real work that needs to be done. At worst his work reflects an underlying philosophy that I believe is evil and would, if followed and enacted would invariably lead to disillusionment, despair and untold suffering for our people. In this manner I would liken it to, say, someone like Fahey advocating the use of LSD to expand one's consciousness. Is this the message we want to teach our young men and women? What is leadership and what effect do the personal morals, values and character of leaders have on their message? These are the sobering fundamentals folks and our situation is serious. It's way past time to put aside the childish clown acts. Our leaders should be living examples of what we want to achieve. Husbands of one wife in stable marriages with children that are respectful of authority. If you aint livin' it, then don't preach it.
But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. "Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin! Such things must come, but woe to the man through whom they come! - Matthew 18:6-7
2004-06-02 00:08 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]Writing low brow material for Whites on the left side of the bell curve is probably where Linder should focus his efforts.[/QUOTE]I think high testosterone is a better description is a better description than low brow; I think his main audience is males in their teens and twenties . A few very bright people post on his forum and they really stand out among the knuckeheads and psychos.
2004-06-02 01:07 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Jeanne D'Arc]You live in California, don't you, what would you know about Russians in Russia proper? Christianity, not atheism, is the dominant religion in Russia. The stats show this to be true. [/QUOTE] Russians can't live in California? Whatever stats you saw, they must have simply lumped all of the non-muslims as Christians. In those few years after I've left, there could not possibly be a miraculous conversion from atheism to Christianity, and if you insist otherwise, you are even dumber than I thought.
2004-06-02 01:16 | User Profile
I know. From experience.
You are insisting. Wishful thinking.
You are stupid.
2004-06-02 01:19 | User Profile
Switched from "most" to the vague "many", Darcy?
2004-06-02 02:11 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]By the way, hasn't McD also noted that the whites are going to have to "become Jews" (=emulate survival methods) in order to survive?[/QUOTE]
I'm in the middle of the forbidden volume --- Separation and its Discontents. I call it that because only recenly was I able to procure a copy. SAID is the middle book (A People That Shall Dwell Alone is No. 1, and Culture of Critique is No. 3). I orignally saw if for $300-plus on the Internet and gasped. Why so pricey? Well, who knows, but it might have something to do with the controversiality of the Nazi chapter (and even the Christian stuff). Not to worry, I got a cheaper copy later, after reading No. 3 first and No. 1 second.
MacDonald in SAID says both Christianity and Nazism were responses to highly organized Jewish competition with the gentile worlds of Europe (the middle ages for Christianity, Germany of the Weimar period for Nazis). Nothing more, nothing less. Christianity was essentially a mirror response to Judaism: a self-identification function with a spiritual grounding that helped gentiles to compete with Jews by giving them a group to call their own and to set off with boundaries. It gave non-Jews a ring to grab. Naziism was the most deadly for Jews because it emulated them almost perfectly. In other words, the closer you get to acting like Jews, the more effective you will be in combatting their efforts to take over your society.
Some of this was stoked by middle and upper-class gentiles who couldn't help but notice that Jews were grabbing up all the top positions in society. Why shouldn't we have those? They must have asked. And what do we have today, but professional gentiles wondering why the hell THEY can't be judges, reporters for big papers, editors, politicians, etc.? (He's even got this interesting part where he goes over times in history where it was forbidden to speak of Jews and Jewish power, so people developed these little codes for talking about it, and you rose based on your knowledge of the code! Maybe Linder can take comfort that failure to name the Jew has historical roots.) Anyway, it's interesting stuff, to be sure. Christians will be offended to hear that it wasn't the special holiness of Jesus but a couple of rat Jews who set the whole thing off, and Nazis will be bummed to hear that a "Nazi" is just a gentile acting like a rat Jew, but there ya go. That's the theory on the table.
2004-06-02 02:47 | User Profile
[quote=Hugh Lincoln][QUOTE=madrussian]By the way, hasn't McD also noted that the whites are going to have to "become Jews" (=emulate survival methods) in order to survive?[/QUOTE]
I'm in the middle of the forbidden volume --- Separation and its Discontents. I call it that because only recenly was I able to procure a copy. SAID is the middle book (A People That Shall Dwell Alone is No. 1, and Culture of Critique is No. 3). I orignally saw if for $300-plus on the Internet and gasped. Why so pricey? Well, who knows, but it might have something to do with the controversiality of the Nazi chapter (and even the Christian stuff). Not to worry, I got a cheaper copy later, after reading No. 3 first and No. 1 second.
That is interesting. I understand MacDonald or whoever has recently made an organized effort to make his books more available. I think this includes SAID. The $300 price doesn't surprise me though. I was told by a book dealer once that there is an organized effort by some to by up free copies of un-PC books (sounds like the ADL) to reduce their availability.
[quote=Hugh Lincoln]MacDonald in SAID says both Christianity and Nazism were responses to highly organized Jewish competition with the gentile worlds of Europe (the middle ages for Christianity, Germany of the Weimar period for Nazis). Nothing more, nothing less. Christianity was essentially a mirror response to Judaism: a self-identification function with a spiritual grounding that helped gentiles to compete with Jews by giving them a group to call their own and to set off with boundaries. It gave non-Jews a ring to grab. Naziism was the most deadly for Jews because it emulated them almost perfectly. In other words, the closer you get to acting like Jews, the more effective you will be in combatting their efforts to take over your society.
Some of this was stoked by middle and upper-class gentiles who couldn't help but notice that Jews were grabbing up all the top positions in society. Why shouldn't we have those? They must have asked. And what do we have today, but professional gentiles wondering why the hell THEY can't be judges, reporters for big papers, editors, politicians, etc.? (He's even got this interesting part where he goes over times in history where it was forbidden to speak of Jews and Jewish power, so people developed these little codes for talking about it, and you rose based on your knowledge of the code! Maybe Linder can take comfort that failure to name the Jew has historical roots.) Anyway, it's interesting stuff, to be sure. Christians will be offended to hear that it wasn't the special holiness of Jesus but a couple of rat Jews who set the whole thing off, and Nazis will be bummed to hear that a "Nazi" is just a gentile acting like a rat Jew, but there ya go. That's the theory on the table.
Here's his summary in chapter 8 of CoC.
The present tendencies lead one to predict that unless the ideology of individualism is abandoned not only by the multicultural minorities (who have been encouraged to pursue their group interests by a generation of American intellectuals) but also by the European-derived peoples of Europe, North America, New Zealand, and Australia, the end result will be a substantial diminution of the genetic, political, and cultural influence of these peoples. It would be an unprecedented unilateral abdication of such power and certainly an evolutionist would expect no such abdication without at least a phase of resistance by a significant segment of the population.
As indicated above, European-derived peoples are expected to ultimately exhibit some of the great flexibility that Jews have shown throughout the ages in advocating particular political forms that best suit their current interests. The prediction is that segments of the European-derived peoples of the world will eventually realize that they have been ill-served and are being ill-served both by the ideology of multiculturalism and by the ideology of deethnicized individualism. If the analysis of anti-Semitism presented in SAID is correct, the expected reaction will emulate aspects of Judaism by adopting group-serving, collectivist ideologies and social organizations.
The theoretically underdetermined nature of human group processes (PTSDA, Ch. 1; MacDonald 1995b) disallows detailed prediction of whether the reactive strategy will be sufficient to stabilize or reverse the present decline of European peoples in the New World and, indeed, in their ancestral homelands; whether the process will degenerate into a selfdestructive reactionary movement as occurred with the Spanish Inquisition; or whether it will initiate a moderate and permanent turning away from radical individualism toward a sustainable group strategy. What is certain is that the ancient dialectic between Judaism and the West will continue into the foreseeable future. It will be ironic that, whatever anti-Semitic rhetoric may be adopted by the leaders of these defensive movements, they will be constrained to emulate key elements of Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy. Such strategic mimicry will, once again, lead to a "Judaization" of Western societies not only in the sense that their social organization will become more group-oriented but also in the sense that they will be more aware of themselves as a positively evaluated ingroup and more aware of other human groups as competing, negatively evaluated outgroups. In this sense, whether the decline of the European peoples continues unabated or is arrested, it will constitute a profound impact of Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy on the development of Western societies.
[url]http://www.euvolution.com/articles/lastchap.html[/url]
2004-06-02 03:00 | User Profile
I had my suspicions from the first, but seeing her quote AY (for the purposes of attacking him) clinches it: Jeanne d'Arc/Leaf Dragon is aka "Gabrielle" as well.
Baby, in the carny freaktent of unstable people best kept far from an ISP account, you're Exhibit A.
2004-06-02 03:08 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln]I'm in the middle of the forbidden volume --- Separation and its Discontents. I call it that because only recenly was I able to procure a copy. SAID is the middle book (A People That Shall Dwell Alone is No. 1, and Culture of Critique is No. 3). I orignally saw if for $300-plus on the Internet and gasped. Why so pricey? Well, who knows, but it might have something to do with the controversiality of the Nazi chapter (and even the Christian stuff). Not to worry, I got a cheaper copy later, after reading No. 3 first and No. 1 second.
MacDonald in SAID says both Christianity and Nazism were responses to highly organized Jewish competition with the gentile worlds of Europe (the middle ages for Christianity, Germany of the Weimar period for Nazis). Nothing more, nothing less. Christianity was essentially a mirror response to Judaism: a self-identification function with a spiritual grounding that helped gentiles to compete with Jews by giving them a group to call their own and to set off with boundaries. It gave non-Jews a ring to grab. Naziism was the most deadly for Jews because it emulated them almost perfectly. In other words, the closer you get to acting like Jews, the more effective you will be in combatting their efforts to take over your society.
Some of this was stoked by middle and upper-class gentiles who couldn't help but notice that Jews were grabbing up all the top positions in society. Why shouldn't we have those? They must have asked. And what do we have today, but professional gentiles wondering why the hell THEY can't be judges, reporters for big papers, editors, politicians, etc.? (He's even got this interesting part where he goes over times in history where it was forbidden to speak of Jews and Jewish power, so people developed these little codes for talking about it, and you rose based on your knowledge of the code! Maybe Linder can take comfort that failure to name the Jew has historical roots.) Anyway, it's interesting stuff, to be sure. Christians will be offended to hear that it wasn't the special holiness of Jesus but a couple of rat Jews who set the whole thing off, and Nazis will be bummed to hear that a "Nazi" is just a gentile acting like a rat Jew, but there ya go. That's the theory on the table.[/QUOTE]
The Christianity part, perpahs he's right when talking about the Middle Ages: it was a flag to unite under by the gentiles. But how does that logic work for the earlier period when it was just adopted by the Romans? Is he claiming the same?
I am sure McD's ideas will be offensive to many Christian Talibanists, is he religious? Probably not, being from academia and all that.
To silly Darcy's bleating: the survival and group dynamics laws are the same for everyone and the zhids haven't been the first to discover them and patent them. So there's not really a shame in using universal group dynamics laws, even though they've been most successfully used by the zhids.
2004-06-02 03:10 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]I had my suspicions from the first, but seeing her quote AY (for the purposes of attacking him) clinches it: Jeanne d'Arc/Leaf Dragon is aka "Gabrielle" as well.
Baby, in the carny freaktent of unstable people best kept far from an ISP account, you're Exhibit A.[/QUOTE]
Spider attacks the prey, after waiting for it to become entangled in the web.
But look at the allies she's made in the length of just one day :D
2004-06-02 03:29 | User Profile
Nazism de-westernizes its adherents.
Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!! Ever seen Nazi art? Ever seen Nazi architecture? It's so Western it's scary. Heh, heh......your attempts to demonize the Nazis are not working. Maybe you should just give it up, eh?
2004-06-02 04:04 | User Profile
Wow, over $300 for the SAID book edition by Dr. MacDonald.. I have "Culture of Critique" and the core chapter lay's out the facts for how and who engineered the 1965 immigration law changes and worked at it since the 1920's..
If the adl or itz agents are buying the SAID books up, when ever they show online, then perhaps Dr.K.M. should hurry up and get some printed and sell them that way, at least the man could make some money for his very good research and work on these great books.
2004-06-02 04:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE]So says a swarthy, creepy Mediterranean who praises Hitler and dumps on Christians when not applauding pro-pedophile academics like Camille Paglia.[/QUOTE]
You oughta hear my version of "Tomorrow Belongs To Me" played on the miniature concertina. I put on my white pizza-maker's hat for the big finale where I set fire to a church! (Sorry, I couldn't figure out a way to work Paglia in there as well.)
2004-06-02 04:33 | User Profile
Looks like Amazon still has it for sale: [URL=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1410792617/qid=1086150550/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/?v=glance&s=books]Separation and Its Discontents Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism[/URL] by [URL=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author=MacDonald%2C%20Kevin]Kevin MacDonald[/URL] :thumbsup:
2004-06-02 05:12 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]You oughta hear my version of "Tomorrow Belongs To Me" played on the miniature concertina. I put on my white pizza-maker's hat for the big finale where I set fire to a church! B[/[/B]QUOTE]
"Where Camille was saying mass dressed as a Druid with a large statue of Isis on the altar."
Just a suggestion.
2004-06-02 05:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!! Ever seen Nazi art? Ever seen Nazi architecture? [/QUOTE]
Sure have seen Nazi art.
Clearly their main inspiration was the Jewish Bolsheviks.
Lose the losers.
2004-06-02 05:14 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]But look at the allies she's made in the length of just one day[/QUOTE]
And think of the enemies you've made in a couple of years.
You should be able to work so efficiently.
2004-06-02 05:15 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Jeanne D'Arc]That's not my proposal, because it's not possible. We can't revive traditional Christianity without confronting the jewish question. Traditional Christianity is "anti-Semitic" to the core. That's why jews want to wipe it out completely. We should take up Christ's cross without apology and drive its proverbial sharp end into the heart of judas.[/QUOTE]
Ditto.
2004-06-02 05:35 | User Profile
Walter, I realize that all you require is a steed, a sword and a Grail to chase after, but doesn't that Bible of yours warn you about wolves in sheep's clothing? No? How about ADL trolls then? (If it doesn't, try Aesop instead.)
It's not that I don't take "Jeanne" at face value....it's that I suspect she [I]ju-u-ust might[/I] have a pair of balls hanging between her fishnet stockings.
2004-06-02 05:40 | User Profile
She has bigger balls than Walter: something that Walter only ominously has been hinting at (and more perceptive posters caught right away), Darcy the Bitch yells at a public square.
The Christian Taliban is going mainstream.
Lose the psychos.
2004-06-02 05:46 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]She has bigger balls than Walter: [/QUOTE]
Isn't this the same thing you said about WI.
Shute, we need a women with balls around here, when so many of the men's are so small they can't even take a little criticism.
2004-06-02 05:52 | User Profile
You have to have your little victories, Okie. I cannot deprive you of them, because that would be cruel.
2004-06-02 06:05 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]Of course.
But I thought we're supposed to be working to build a political movement here?
In the context of political activity, focusing on race and the Jewish question to the exclusion of all else is perfectly sensible.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, but we can't build a movement until we get real clear about our goals.
The whole disagreement between the Christians and Nazis on this board comes down to the fact that we want very different things.
Christian Nationalism seeks to restore the Christian Faith to undisputed dominance in American society. That goal implies, as a rather subsidiary matter, a mild form of white nationalism for America.
In contrast, I think that the goal of Nazis and their sympathizers is to institute white racialism/National Socialism as the undisputed and dominant ideology of American society. Uncle Franco and others love to repeat "put race first." That slogan says it all, IMHO.
But we Christian Nationalists most emphatically do NOT "put race first." National idenity - which in turn includes a racial component - is an important part of Natural Law, Revelation, Holy Tradition, and the Magisterial teachings of the Catholic Church, and it is certainly the part of Christian teaching that our age chooses to ignore and vilify by turns. But race is just a part of God's creation, and we Christians worship God the Creator instead of creation or any part of it. Thus, "put race first" is a thoroughly idolatrous slogan, and one that no Christian (or any monotheist for that matter) could have anything to do with.
There is no more fundamental disagreement than this.
Clearly then, we cannot work together.
I am not interested in working with Nazis, or for that matter even associating with them. I've spent enough of my precious time on this. The hour is late, my Christian brothers. If we want to do this thing, we need to lose the losers now.
This is Tex's forum, and I, like the rest of us, are merely his guests.
It's his call.
2004-06-02 07:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]Exactly, but we can't build a movement until we get real clear about our goals.
The whole disagreement between the Christians and Nazis on this board comes down to the fact that we want very different things.
Christian Nationalism seeks to restore the Christian Faith to undisputed dominance in American society. That goal implies, as a rather subsidiary matter, a mild form of white nationalism for America.
In contrast, I think that the goal of Nazis and their sympathizers is to institute white racialism/National Socialism as the undisputed and dominant ideology of American society. Uncle Franco and others love to repeat "put race first." That slogan says it all, IMHO.
But we Christian Nationalists most emphatically do NOT "put race first." National idenity - which in turn includes a racial component - is an important part of Natural Law, Revelation, Holy Tradition, and the Magisterial teachings of the Catholic Church, and it is certainly the part of Christian teaching that our age chooses to ignore and vilify by turns. But race is just a part of God's creation, and we Christians worship God the Creator instead of creation or any part of it. Thus, "put race first" is a thoroughly idolatrous slogan, and one that no Christian (or any monotheist for that matter) could have anything to do with.
There is no more fundamental disagreement than this.
Clearly then, we cannot work together.
I am not interested in working with Nazis, or for that matter even associating with them. I've spent enough of my precious time on this. The hour is late, my Christian brothers. If we want to do this thing, we need to lose the losers now.
This is Tex's forum, and I, like the rest of us, are merely his guests.
It's his call.[/QUOTE]
Youve been manipulated by ScatTroll beautifully Walter.
As I recall, this board was founded to escape the Zhiddiots and others who used to go around screaming "Nazi!Nazi!" at every insightful, truly conservative poster. It was to promote a broad front, and not to take the bait at parochializing elements. Yet it seems every time I visit the board, those elements are its raison d'etre. There is no true end to this of course, and the hair will be split finer and finer- creating a poisonous atmosphere of competing and hostile camps instead of bright posters willing to speak their minds.
But make NO mistake Walter, and every other genuine poster here- to the people youre fighting against, you are ALL Nazis and you always will be.
2004-06-02 07:28 | User Profile
A white man could come out of the jungles of Boliva, knowing of NO history at all, having only learned to read, and only having been taught with the Bible, not by TV type preachers, and if he stood up against the perverts and evil fudgepacker's and violent savage Congoids/Mongols attacking members of his white family, he would be called a Nazi...Get it?
2004-06-02 10:51 | User Profile
[QUOTE][Campion Moore Boru]Youve been manipulated by ScatTroll beautifully Walter. [/QUOTE]
You seem to imply some sudden change in my position has occurred with the return of a poster you identify as ScatTroll. But my position on these subjects have been basically unchanged for quite some time now. I therefore see no reason in support of your conclusion that I was somehow "manipulated."
[QUOTE]As I recall, this board was founded to escape the Zhiddiots and others who used to go around screaming "Nazi!Nazi!" at every insightful, truly conservative poster. [/QUOTE]
Perhaps, but you seem to assume here that some of the usual suspects here are not actually advancing Nazi positions. I agree that the "Nazi" charge as hurled on FR and other places is usually without merit, but that is not the case here. The people on the other side of the current debate openly sympathize with Hitler and his ideas. Thus, the term Nazi isn't simply bandied about, as you seem to imply.
[QUOTE]It was to promote a broad front, and not to take the bait at parochializing elements. Yet it seems every time I visit the board, those elements are its raison d'etre. There is no true end to this of course, and the hair will be split finer and finer- creating a poisonous atmosphere of competing and hostile camps instead of bright posters willing to speak their minds.[/QUOTE]
I also entertained the notion that we could all get along and work toward building a broad front, but I've seen the error of my ways on that point. In retrospect it should have been obvious even back in Sam Francis days, but I don't claim to be the quickest study in the world.
[QUOTE]But make NO mistake Walter, and every other genuine poster here- to the people youre fighting against, you are ALL Nazis and you always will be.[/QUOTE]
Great. Frankly, I care not a fig what they think I am. My job is to simply be what I believe God has called me to be, and not to worry about the disapproval of our latter-day Pharisees. We Christians here need to focus on what we are and what we can do to advance the cause of the Gospel as best we can, and then leave the results up to God.
I believe that God has called me to be a Roman Catholic in the deepest sense of the word. Since Roman Catholicism is utterly at odds with Nazi ideology, I can have nothing to do with Nazis or Nazism.
Besides, the practicalities are such that the presence of Nazis and their sympathizers is a terrible liability to building a Christian Nationalist movement. We don't need them, and the sooner we are shut of them the better off we will be.
Warmest regards,
Walter
2004-06-02 12:14 | User Profile
This from Linder's VNN Forum should get to your favorite "Jewdough Conservative" or "Jewdough Liberal" for that matter: [url]http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=5635[/url] :punk:
2004-06-02 12:50 | User Profile
Walt, I'm a little curious as to what your spiritual hiararchial standing is..
Why don't you start discribing your position contra the Catholic choire-boys scene..
What's YOUR story buddy?!
2004-06-02 14:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kosmos Luftwaffe]Walt, I'm a little curious as to what your spiritual hiararchial standing is..
Why don't you start discribing your position contra the Catholic choire-boys scene..
What's YOUR story buddy?![/QUOTE]
Do you have anything substantive to offer the board, Cosmo?
Anything at all or is this pretty representative of what we should expect from you? It doesn't even make any sense.
2004-06-02 15:04 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Campion Moore Boru]to the people youre fighting against, you are ALL Nazis and you always will be.[/QUOTE]
Bro. Campion,
It could care less what the enemy calls me and that's not the point. The point is I disagree with national socialism or nazi ideology at a fundamental level. Therefore, I seek to discredit it and influence others to my side of things.
The jews call us nazis and the nazis call us jews. I fight on both sides.
Miss seein' you around, amigo. Hope all is well.
2004-06-02 15:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Do you have anything substantive to offer the board, Cosmo?
Anything at all or is this pretty representative of what we should expect from you? It doesn't even make any sense.[/QUOTE]
Tex: Cosmo promised to reveal his own relgious beliefs, which apparently involve cutting-edge New Age technology such as oxygen tents and soft, velvet thingies, as well as the wise words of Indian Guru Deepak Chopra (sp?).
At his request I started a thread on this very subject here:
[url]http://forums.originaldissent.com/showthread.php?t=14016[/url]
Cosmo: I assure you that your religious beliefs will receive a respectful hearing from Tex and me. I for one look forward to learing more about your very interesting spiritual practices.
Walter
2004-06-02 15:47 | User Profile
Lady, your carping and complaining means a little less than nothing to me and the only reason I'm bothering to reply is so that others here that I may disagree with won't get lumped in with the likes of you. At least I respect them in the main.
You've come in here, elbowing everyone aside in your haste to cut down the barbarian, heathen hordes afflicting the board, spouting rhetoric ex cathedra, brooking no opposing points of view and impugning those expressing them as "swarthy" "greasy" and worse. What chutzpah! Yet, you are the one clamoring for a return to a theocracy (under the tender ministrations of those like yourself) forgetting that was one of the reasons our forebears came over here in the first place. No thanks, I'd sooner take my chances with Franco.
Judeo-Christians powerless? Wishing won't make it so. You may have noticed the invasion of Iraq when you weren't trolling message boards, due in large part to the agitation of the Judeo-Christian flock. The fact that they're being herded by jews excuses them not a whit. Ever heard of Ralph Reed? Pat Robertson? These guys serve up votes for the Zio War Machine like clockwork. I mean, someone's gotta be buying all those Left Behind books, you know? G Dubya certainly doesn't consult with you before he utters the slightest peep about the mideast, the way he does AIPAC or the Judeo-Christians.
Tell you what, if you won't "Name the Jew" to your heathen enemies' satisfaction and get justifiably tired of that unceasing drumbeat, how about you "Name the Judeo-Christian" instead?
Not that it's up to me, but I'd prefer a Church that's an asset to the community and not a detriment, like the ones setting out water for illegals and importing Somalis by the 747-load. Yeah, I know they're not all like that, and bless y'all working to steer back onto the course of sanity from within, but the others are either one of the best-kept secrets today or are a statistical drop in the bucket in comparison. Whatever y'all want to do to right the list, short of conversion at bayonet point, I'm right there with you. Want to build your own house of worship? I'll be there in the 100-degree weather, saw in hand, to help, even if I'd be turned away at the door when it's done.
2004-06-02 16:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE=MadScienceType]You've come in here, elbowing everyone aside in your haste to cut down the barbarian, heathen hordes afflicting the board, spouting rhetoric ex cathedra, brooking no opposing points of view and impugning those expressing them as "swarthy" "greasy" and worse. What chutzpah! Yet, you are the one clamoring for a return to a theocracy (under the tender ministrations of those like yourself) forgetting that was one of the reasons our forebears came over here in the first place. No thanks, I'd sooner take my chances with Franco.[/QUOTE]
To each his own I guess, MST. Obviously Joan was a disruptor that went too far and is now gone. I can't guess why or what his or her motivations were, but he/she did make one thing evident:
The nazi keyboard warriors are the biggest bunch of crybabies on the internet.
2004-06-02 16:11 | User Profile
Fanatics tend to be so.
2004-06-02 19:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Do you have anything substantive to offer the board, Cosmo?
Anything at all or is this pretty representative of what we should expect from you? It doesn't even make any sense.[/QUOTE]
Hi Tex!
Yeah. I've made an apology to Walter on another thread and I think we're cool now.
I will work on the sense and sensibillity part, and I'm telling you; I've got some good, informative stuff coming. All in good time.
Also, it's important to keep an open mind to views and thoughts from other parts of the world, even if they're a little different. The last thing I would want to do, is to come back here as a girl..
2004-06-02 23:24 | User Profile
Hey, Wintermute's BoyToy:
Why do you have that screenname, "BoyToy?"
What are you doing at OD?
2004-06-02 23:27 | User Profile
[B]"Wintermute's BoyToy?"[/B]
Hey, Tex...how much confirmation do you [I]need [/I] that the ADL trolls are out and about? Or did you hang an IDIOTS WANTED sign in the window that I missed?
"Jeanne", "Gaita", "Boy Toy"....yeah, you don't have to be a creepy, swarthy Mediterranean to smell a [I]Ubangi in the fuel supply [/I] here (though it helps, of course)....
2004-06-02 23:46 | User Profile
Uh huh. Another Christian soldier. [I]Onward, then! [/I] (Out the fu**in' door.)
2004-06-02 23:54 | User Profile
Hit the road troll. You won't be here long anyway.
[QUOTE=Wintermute's BoyToy]Spider, my Mediterranean brother in the Gods of Olympus, I feel that your bodily chakras are out of balance. Perhaps it's the lunar phase, or perhaps your home's chi is out of whack. That's no good, ya'll. Gotta keep yall's energy balanced or all Hell will break lose. I recommend taking a deep breath and humming a silent prayer to Poseidon. Or make that Neptune since you're more of a Roman. As God of the Sea, he'll hopefully calm your troubled waters. You can also pray to Uranus - but not mine, it's too sore tonight.
See, we pagan Hellenes are much more sophisticated than those soooooo un-hip Christians.
Wintermute's BoyToy[/QUOTE]
2004-06-03 01:15 | User Profile
[quote=Valley Forge]But I thought we're supposed to be working to build a political movement here?
In the context of political activity, focusing on race and the Jewish question to the exclusion of all else is perfectly sensible.
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]Exactly, but we can't build a movement until we get real clear about our goals.
Walter, my contention is that we need to distinguish between short term and long term goals.
And in my opinion the appropriate short term goal should be building a general Nationalist movement that welcomes Christians, but does not make belief in Christianity an absolute requirement for participation.
We should also focus on confronting Jewish power and awakening racial consciousness in our fellow Whites in the short term. As tradional Christians, we'll get no where in the political sphere without doing those two things. We'll certainly never be able to lead a Christian revival with the Jews controlling all of the opinion shaping institutions in this country. There is no chance, none, that Jews will ever let that happen.
So, at this point in time, I have to say I just don't see a down side to working with non-Christian Nationalists, especially when many of these Nationalists are already in our corner when it comes to confronting two of our most pressing problems (opposing Jews, and awakening racial consciousness). As long as they're not hostile to Christianity, and many aren't, what's the big deal?
Also, I have to ask: if not even everyone on OD is buying into your brand of Christian-based politics, what makes you think you'll be able to get anywhere with the general public? (and for the record not all of these non-Christian posters are "Nazis," as IR, AY, PaleoconAvatar, Ruffin, etc. prove. Franco is the only avowed Nazi, and he stays respectful most of the time and has repeatedly stated a willingness to work with Christians).
And while we're on the subject of unworkable ideas, I think now is probably a good time to point out that even among just the conservative White Christians in this country, there are probably a large number that wouldn't care to live under your ideal regime (Taliban-style Catholic theocracy) even if you could wave a magic wand and create one.
There has never been a theocracy on American soil. I know you know that, of course, but the reason I feel the need to point it out nonetheless is because on that Hitler thread, in your ongoing effort to discredit all aspects of Nazism, you were quick to point out the historical dissimilarities between Nazi-style totalitarianism and traditional American-style limited government.
Well, if totalitarianism is not consistent with the American tradition, let's remember that neither is Christian theocracy.
The USA was not only not founded as a theocracy, the founders, in their wisdom, even included a "no establishment of religion" clause in the federal Constitution.
Now, I don't support "separation of Church and State" in the modern sense -- where ââ¬Åseparation of church and stateââ¬Â is just a Jewish code word for anti-Christianity -- but I do firmly believe that any attempt to establish a Christian theocracy on American soil will be impeded by many difficult if not intractable problems. THere are in fact so many problems standing in the way of establishing a theocracy I don't see how a serious person like yourself can even consider it.
Let's just look for a moment at one of the most obvious problems: within the Christian family, who would you suggest get the power and authority of the Taliban's Mullahs?
Catholics? Traditional Catholics? Orthodox Christians? Protestants? Which Protestants? All of above?
And by the way, would you be comfortable living in a Protestant Nationalist nation? How would you like it if I started calling vociferously for a Protestant Nationalist movement on Original Dissent and saying loudly "I can't work with Catholics because of fundamental theological differences and goals"? Honestly? I'm betting that would make you feel unwelcome here and somewhat hostile toward me even though we agree on many things and could otherwise work together against the common enemy.
This is why the founders did not establish a theocracy. They knew entangling religion and politics too closely would lead to nothing but trouble. So let's follow their example.
Respectfully,
2004-06-03 01:28 | User Profile
Franco is the only avowed Nazi,
Not really.....maybe 80% or 85%....not totally Nazi...
2004-06-03 01:30 | User Profile
And while we're on the subject of unworkable ideas, I think now is probably a good time to point out that even among just the conservative White Christians in this country, there are probably a large number that wouldn't care to live under your ideal regime (Taliban-style Catholic theocracy) even if you could wave a magic wand and create one.
There has never been a theocracy on American soil. I know you know that, of course, but the reason I feel the need to point it out nonetheless is because on that Hitler thread, in your ongoing effort to discredit all aspects of Nazism, you were quick to point out the historical dissimilarities between Nazi-style totalitarianism and traditional American-style limited government.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
2004-06-03 01:37 | User Profile
Exactly. So the picture is a lot more complex than just "Nazis" and "Christians."
If even you're not a 100% committed Nazi, where the heck are all these Nazis we're always hearing about on OD?
I don't see a lot of Nazism of this board. I really don't.
[QUOTE=Franco]Not really.....maybe 80% or 85%....not totally Nazi...
------[/QUOTE]
2004-06-03 01:57 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]Exactly. So the picture is a lot more complex than just "Nazis" and "Christians."
If even you're not a 100% committed Nazi, where the heck are all these Nazis we're always hearing about on OD?
I don't see a lot of Nazism of this board. I really don't.[/QUOTE]
You do OD a valuable service here, VF, with your reasoned call for clarity and thought.
You've also posted a great question I'm curious to know the answers to myself. I've been wondering if maybe there isn't such an amazing political divide around these parts as much as there is a personal one. Perhaps one or two posters somehow personally offended another one or two posters on "the other side" and they decided to lend legitimacy and a "Cause" to their personal rift by making it about "warring political factions." Just a theory.
I'm also curious to see who here is willing to post a list of the "Nazis" they've identified. I wonder how those on The List would in turn describe themselves. Part of me would laugh at such a list, though, since it seems somewhat of a "witch-hunting" behavior. Then again, it might be an honor to be on such a list. After all, if someone puts you on "their list," then that's an indication you've done something right--you've at least made someone think, or made someone confront something they have yet to come to terms with. Let's all look into the Abyss together now, shall we? :)
Perhaps the tone of my own post here might serve as an example of "the way out." Use humor and a sense of proportion. Step back from the heat of the situation. Some of the anger and angst comes from people taking it too seriously (Of course, I'm not saying that politics and our situation as a nation isn't serious). People should not allow themselves to become the prisoners of their own ideas, but their masters.
2004-06-03 02:32 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis]You seem to imply some sudden change in my position has occurred with the return of a poster you identify as ScatTroll. But my position on these subjects have been basically unchanged for quite some time now. I therefore see no reason in support of your conclusion that I was somehow "manipulated."
No not necessarily a "sudden" change in your position. Rather I was referring to the troll flapping a red cape in your face so that you could charge the heathen. Perhaps I was wrong, and you dont need any encouragement to perform as the "Leland Gaunt" of the Catholic position. But, I daresay, when I recall you joining, I do not remember you calling for the internet version of the Thirty Years War against those who disagree with you religiously but agree with you politically on the vast majority of issues. As to your less than muted calls for a return to 17th Century Theocracy on American soil (though outside some abortive attempts in Maryland I do not recall a Catholic version), I would ask you in all honesty, and without being facetious, WWJD? Did Christ urge his brethren revolt against secular Rome for the benefit of the Pharisees? Or did he deliver the eternal words of Render unto Caesar...? As an aside, was this Francis Xavier's mode of missionary work?
And I call whatsherface "Scattroll" b/c in my layman's opinion I have little doubt she is the Scatfetishist "Raina" who has also posted as "Scatvamp" at other phora. That you would be so enamored with a troll who has AY's ADL folder at her fingertips and moreover posts his personal info is disturbing. AY who has always been the model of gentlemanly conduct here, as well as being one of the best writers and most insightful posters I have ever encountered on the internet. For shame Walter.
Perhaps, but you seem to assume here that some of the usual suspects here are not actually advancing Nazi positions. I agree that the "Nazi" charge as hurled on FR and other places is usually without merit, but that is not the case here. The people on the other side of the current debate openly sympathize with Hitler and his ideas. Thus, the term Nazi isn't simply bandied about, as you seem to imply.
Firstly, you must expound to me what a "Nazi" position is.
Secondly your assertion that the Nazi charge is not hurled here w/o merit merely begs the question.
Thirdly, there are perhaps two to three avowed Nazis who post here. One is a Hollywood buffoon, who in my estimation performed the same role as Joan though perhaps he is more genuine. Braun has conducted himself well, I have never seen him resort to pointless attacks or caustic posts. Others, who do not label themselves Nazis, do not merit your gratuitous labelling. I am sure they can identify themselves. If your contention is simply that some advance Nazi or "Naziesque" positions, then you should weigh your stone carefully before you throw it, Walter.
I also entertained the notion that we could all get along and work toward building a broad front, but I've seen the error of my ways on that point. In retrospect it should have been obvious even back in Sam Francis days, but I don't claim to be the quickest study in the world.
What convinced you of this? That there are a&&holes in the world who can brook no dissent from any of their positions, no matter how inconsequential, and will call you an idiot for it?
Great. Frankly, I care not a fig what they think I am. My job is to simply be what I believe God has called me to be, and not to worry about the disapproval of our latter-day Pharisees. We Christians here need to focus on what we are and what we can do to advance the cause of the Gospel as best we can, and then leave the results up to God.
I truly dislike casual usage of the term Pharisee. Its a grievous charge to a Christian, and I think, at the minimum you should substantiate your position before you hurl that charge around.
I believe that God has called me to be a Roman Catholic in the deepest sense of the word. Since Roman Catholicism is utterly at odds with Nazi ideology, I can have nothing to do with Nazis or Nazism.
Really Walter. A simpleton's argument. Would you have me believe that the Pope would refuse to meet Adolf if he was Chancellor today? Would Aquinas deliver your statement?
But the point really is, you are willing to marginalize yourself into a non-entity. Perhaps this is irrelevant for someone who argues for an American Catholic theocracy. Funny thing is, even the Nazis werent so .. well ... "Nazi" :D
Besides, the practicalities are such that the presence of Nazis and their sympathizers is a terrible liability to building a Christian Nationalist movement. We don't need them, and the sooner we are shut of them the better off we will be.
Right, that "Lose the losers!" motto youve so well substantiated. And given your nebulous position on "Nazis" thats rather a large swath.
Just a little request for admission, as I believe you are or were counsel,
Do you deny Christains fought for Germany, Italy or their assorted allies during the Second World War?
Yours in Christ.
2004-06-03 02:36 | User Profile
If even you're not a 100% committed Nazi, where the heck are all these Nazis we're always hearing about on OD?
I don't see a lot of Nazism of this board. I really don't.
Yes, indeed. Where are these "Nazis" that I keep hearing about?
2004-06-03 02:37 | User Profile
Let's put it this way...I can picture [I]Mrs [/I] Yannis rolling her eyes in infinite patience and gently closing the door of Walter's study in mid-rant while telling their kids, "I'm afraid His Holiness is at it again". Two or three times a week [I]at least[/I].
He's much more dogmatic and inflexible these days. Too often, he'll let an argumentative thread continue under its own steam until the secular side begins to gain a seeming advantage - at which point he'll make an appearance to sternly condemn the heretics. Webmasters of message boards - by their very nature - speak with the authority of God to begin with; it's very disconcerting to find one who takes it [I]literally [/I] as well. Thus, an ADL troll like you-know-who, simply by [I]mimicking [/I] the sounds of pious Christianity, are allowed to rain as much discord on this board as they like; while a Fade the Butcher, who is at least prepared to back up any claim he makes, has [I]thismuch[/I] rope to play with, and not a centimeter more.
I'm sure if you were to ask him, Tex would tell you himself he couldn't care [I]less[/I] about fairness and equal time for rebuttal; he simply wants [I]his side to win[/I], regardless if that means rigging the game. And that is something you couldn't say about him a year ago.
2004-06-03 02:41 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Bro. Campion,
It could care less what the enemy calls me and that's not the point. The point is I disagree with national socialism or nazi ideology at a fundamental level. Therefore, I seek to discredit it and influence others to my side of things.
The jews call us nazis and the nazis call us jews. I fight on both sides.
Miss seein' you around, amigo. Hope all is well.[/QUOTE]
I know T, but my larger point is that everyone on this board is in the same boat, whether you truly admire your neighbor or not. To the enemy its all minor distinctions, save that we are the "enemy."
God bless you and the family Tex. Fish more, post less. :thumbsup:
2004-06-03 04:05 | User Profile
IR, many Southerners have forgotten that they weren't always "the bible belt." Before the wbts they saw the north as the bastion of religious fanaticism, which it certainly was. Yeah, we had some preachers down here but they were mostly independent and jolly though sometimes fire-breathin' travellers, not ideologues organizing a campaign to impose the good news on a wayward world. It's no coincidence that the newer more righteous South has been for a long time now the most supportive of imposing freedom and democracy on the globe. I think it's a mistake to think that this zealotry is confined to Israel-worshippers though. There are many who aren't crazy about this latest international triumph and who resent their government immensely who nevertheless are convinced that the Lord will strike them blind for impure thoughts. In my imperfect estimation this is what has gotten into Tex, with plenty of encouragement from the "Catholic" lawyer. He says things now that I suspect he would've laughed at not long ago. One such is in my signature and the Joshua Chamberlain-like doctrine behind it is pretty clear.
Tex, you may think I'm being out of line here but I could just keep my mouth shut and let you hear it from others who, believe it or not, aren't out to get you or to destroy America. I had hoped that you'd see how odd some of the positions you've declared lately sound when re-read. If I've seemed hostile to you lately, go back and read some of our little exchanges and see if I'm the one who's been unreasonable.
2004-06-03 05:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Let's put it this way...I can picture Mrs Yannis rolling her eyes in infinite patience and gently closing the door of Walter's study in mid-rant while telling their kids, "I'm afraid His Holiness is at it again". Two or three times a week at least.[/QUOTE]
Ouch.
I hate to admit it, but that's actually damned near a bull's eye.
2004-06-03 05:35 | User Profile
Interesting that when a poster ask Okie if Western Society would be Western Society, if it were no longer white or a white majority, Okie replied that it was debatable... If my memory is right on Okie's reply to that question, it says a truck load about his mind set to the horrors we face now..
Every year since 1960 that non-white population went up in the U.S. the quality of living in the U.S. has gone down.
Marxist Hooey Weird is unhinged for open border's and insane for fece movies and TV degradation that is damaging against whites for at least the last 35 years. Time and time again they have showed white Christians as kooky or insane etc. The greasey filth of hooey weird CA. have pushed a one sided propaganda race war against white Americans, and we whites have paid with a high body count, and not to mention the daily stress and terror of poor whites who must live in beast areas.. Racial honesty, and separation for Whites must be demanded as our God given and self preseravation right, or we will be no more.
Rhodesia, has whites in Jail today that are tortured with U.S. TV Media and Talk Radio being silent.. Auckland N.Z. and Fargo N.D. have imported Congoids directly from Africa, and this is paid for by white taxes, so these invaders have now raped white young girls. Hello??
When I still had a TV hook up in 1999, I was viewing Politically Incorrect, and it was 30 minutes of Bashing whites and poking fun of people who work every day and live between NYC and HOOEY WEIRD CA..
2004-06-03 06:08 | User Profile
[QUOTE][Campion Moore Boru]No not necessarily a "sudden" change in your position. Rather I was referring to the troll flapping a red cape in your face so that you could charge the heathen. Perhaps I was wrong, and you dont need any encouragement to perform as the "Leland Gaunt" of the Catholic position. [/QUOTE]
Obviously, I don't know who any OD poster is (well, with a couple of exceptions via PM). Any of us could be posers as far as the rest of us know. So, I'm forced to take all of this at face value.
[QUOTE]But, I daresay, when I recall you joining, I do not remember you calling for the internet version of the Thirty Years War against those who disagree with you religiously but agree with you politically on the vast majority of issues. [/QUOTE]
You recall correctly. As I said, I was hoping that I could work together with Nazis, pagans, and assorted non-Christians. I was wrong.
[QUOTE]As to your less than muted calls for a return to 17th Century Theocracy on American soil (though outside some abortive attempts in Maryland I do not recall a Catholic version), I would ask you in all honesty, and without being facetious, WWJD? [/QUOTE]
Please forgive my callowness, but what does WWJD mean?
[QUOTE]Did Christ urge his brethren revolt against secular Rome for the benefit of the Pharisees? [/QUOTE]
In a spiritual sense, yes. He brought not peace but the sword.
[QUOTE]Or did he deliver the eternal words of Render unto Caesar...? [/QUOTE]
Your quote does not support your position. "Render unto Ceasar" is filled with meaning and nuance, but I think it at least means "comply with the civil authorities to the extent you may justly do so. There's no sense in picking a fight with the civil authorities if it can be avoided. You should not confront them directly, at least not yet."
[QUOTE]As an aside, was this Francis Xavier's mode of missionary work?[/QUOTE]
The Xavier example supports my case. The Jesuit model of subversive conversion work is what I advocate, because it's a proven winner: within the organization tight discipline and zero tolerance for ideological deviation, while presenting to the outside world a warm face and endearing emotions. Tolerance for heterodox practices is encouraged, pending the day when power is sufficiently consolidated that the apple falls under its own weight.
Good heavens, CMB, the Trotskyites stole that page from the Catholic playbook in their long march through the institutions. The Jesuits ran the schools of Europe, and in that way they sought to perpetuate their power. They came pretty close to it, too. But you know the events leading up to the French Revolution better than me.
Are you suggesting that the Jesuits would have tolerated [B]inside their own organization [/B] heretics like, say, the Albigensians? That's just absurd.
Respectfully, you're confusing the "inside" with the "outside." The Jesuits taught us that distinguishing sharply between the two is the key to an effective subversive organization.
[QUOTE]And I call whatsherface "Scattroll" b/c in my layman's opinion I have little doubt she is the Scatfetishist "Raina" who has also posted as "Scatvamp" at other phora. That you would be so enamored with a troll who has AY's ADL folder at her fingertips and moreover posts his personal info is disturbing. AY who has always been the model of gentlemanly conduct here, as well as being one of the best writers and most insightful posters I have ever encountered on the internet. For shame Walter. [/QUOTE]
For all I know, AY is an ADL troll. And for all he knows, I'm an ADL troll. I don't believe either proposition, it goes without saying, but you're going on your own speculation there that does not reasonably bind me in my coversation here.
[QUOTE]Firstly, you must expound to me what a "Nazi" position is. [/QUOTE]
I see no problem here. The Nazi position is no secret, and folks who embrace Hitler and his ideas are reasonably understood to have adopted that ideology.
George Lincoln Rockwell wrote a book about it, which you may consider checing out. Dr. Pierce was a follower of Rockwell, and his National Alliance propogated Nazi ideas that many posters here have adopted as their own.
Surely you dissemble, my friend.
[QUOTE]Secondly your assertion that the Nazi charge is not hurled here w/o merit merely begs the question.[/QUOTE]
Quite to the contrary. I was called a Nazi in those sorts of forums, but nothing could be further from the truth. But to call one who openly advocates Nazi ideas a "Nazi" is certainly reasonable.
[QUOTE]Thirdly, there are perhaps two to three avowed Nazis who post here. One is a Hollywood buffoon, who in my estimation performed the same role as Joan though perhaps he is more genuine. [/QUOTE]
That simply isn't true. Fade advocated Nazi ideas. Ruffin has nice things to say about Hitler.
Nothing personal, but I can't be associated with that.
[QUOTE]Braun has conducted himself well, I have never seen him resort to pointless attacks or caustic posts.[/QUOTE]
Again, I agree that FB has been a gentleman throughout. The same can be said for Ruffin and Fade. But the fact remains that these good people advance ideas that stand in direct contradiction to the Gospel. They shouldn't be here on this Christian forum, IMHO.
[QUOTE]Others, who do not label themselves Nazis, do not merit your gratuitous labelling. I am sure they can identify themselves. If your contention is simply that some advance Nazi or "Naziesque" positions, then you should weigh your stone carefully before you throw it, Walter.[/QUOTE]
I don't believe I labeled anybody a Nazi here who has not advocated Nazi ideas. Your charge isn't fair.
[QUOTE]What convinced you of this? That there are a&&holes in the world who can brook no dissent from any of their positions, no matter how inconsequential, and will call you an idiot for it?[/QUOTE]
I became convinced that working with non-Christians is counterproductive based on a cold analysis of the situation. As you've probably noticed, my education and work experience bent my mind to think in certain categories, and in applying a basic B school approach to the organizational issue, I thnk that this conclusion is obvious.
Job #1 of any organization is to define clearly the goal. Job #2 is to ensure that everybody within the organization is 100% on board with achieving the goal.
Now, I disagree with non-Christians here as to the goal to be achieved. My long conversation here forced me to ask myself what it is that I want, what my goal is.
I'm now clear on this. My goal is to institute Christianity to undisputed and undisputable dominance in American society.
That's what I want. That's Job #1.
Now Job #2 is to get everybody inside the organization on board with that mission, and that means taking a "Chainsaw Al" approach to those who will not give their all to achieving our mission. Thus, Nazis, pagans and others who stand directly opposed to our mission must be excluded from the "inside" and relegated to the "outside."
[QUOTE]I truly dislike casual usage of the term Pharisee. Its a grievous charge to a Christian, and I think, at the minimum you should substantiate your position before you hurl that charge around. [/QUOTE]
The charge was not leveled at Christians, but rather at Jews, as I think the context (mentioning the ADL) made clear. Since most Jews today self-identify with the Talmudic (Pharisaical) tradition, the charge is most to the point.
[QUOTE]Really Walter. A simpleton's argument. Would you have me believe that the Pope would refuse to meet Adolf if he was Chancellor today? Would Aquinas deliver your statement?[/QUOTE]
You misunderstand me. My purpose is not to refuse all contact with Hitler, it is rather not to admit him into the Church.
[QUOTE]But the point really is, you are willing to marginalize yourself into a non-entity. Perhaps this is irrelevant for someone who argues for an American Catholic theocracy. Funny thing is, even the Nazis werent so .. well ... "Nazi" [/QUOTE]
It is the Nazis, pagans and other non-Christians who are the marginalized "loser" group here. As the astonishing "Passion" phenomenon makes clear, Christianity is still very much at the heart of American society, just as the complete non-presence of the Nazis in the American public consciousness proves that they indeed occupy the far periphery, somewhere out there with aging Yippies or the International Workers of the World (I've actually met a few Wobblies in Chicago, they still exist, believe it or not).
"Losing the losers" is exactly what we must do to move this thing to the center of the debate. So long as we have guys like Fade advocating the physical destruction of the Jews or even far more reasonable men like Ruffin praising Hitler even associated with this forum, very few will take it seriously.
We need to define the mission and remove all those not 100% on board with it. That's the key to success. As soon as we make a viable Christian Nationalist forum with a clearly projected image of repectability (this is all about marketing, remember), then they will flock to us.
[QUOTE]Right, that "Lose the losers!" motto youve so well substantiated. And given your nebulous position on "Nazis" thats rather a large swath.[/QUOTE]
I think I've clarified these points above, please let me know if you have any additional questions.
[QUOTE]Just a little request for admission, as I believe you are or were counsel,
Do you deny Christains fought for Germany, Italy or their assorted allies during the Second World War? [/QUOTE]
No, I do not deny that.
Many Christians fought for the Turks, so what?
Many Christians are no fighting an illegal and immoral war in Iraq right now.
What is your point with that?
One can be a Christian and do stupid things. One cannot be a Christian and accept Hitler and his ideas anymore than one could be a Christian and accept Mohammed as the Prophet of God.
[QUOTE]Yours in Christ.[/QUOTE]
Same here.
2004-06-03 06:18 | User Profile
"One may dislike Hitler's system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as admirable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations." ~ Winston S. Churchill, Great Contemporaries, 1937
2004-06-03 06:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE]They shouldn't be here on this Christian forum, IMHO.[/QUOTE]
Then Tex should stop playing footsie to draw a bigger crowd and restore that "Home of Christian Nationalism" banner [I]immediately and forever[/I]. Can't hide your intent to lure in the suckers... and [I]then [/I] stamp your foot petulantly when they reject the little 'surprise' you've prepared for 'em.
[QUOTE]"Render unto Ceasar" is filled with meaning and nuance, but I think it at least means "comply with the civil authorities to the extent you may justly do so". [/QUOTE]
Wait a second. You want to impose an iron Christian rule upon the world, yet you fudge your own reading of doctrine with "I think it at least means.."? So it's [I]show the world a decisive face [/I] - but privately shrug, grin and admit you don't know what it is exactly you're advocating? Well, at least it's consistent with the Christianity I'm familiar with.
[QUOTE]The Jesuit model.... is what I advocate, because it's a proven winner: within the organization tight discipline and zero tolerance for ideological deviation, while presenting to the outside world a warm face and endearing emotions. [/QUOTE]
Yup. Hypocrisy and deceit - but it's ok because [I]it's for your own good[/I]. For Pete's sake, you reject Vatican II and the authority of your own Pope - you're hardly in a position to demand blind obedience; you don't seem too disposed to swallow your pride and take one for the team unless you're [I]running[/I] the team. As usual, the loudest voice decrying individualism refuses to yield one iota of his own. But the rest of us are better off without ours, you betcha!
[QUOTE]It is the Nazis, pagans and other non-Christians who are the marginalized "loser" group here. "Losing the losers" is exactly what we must do to move this thing to the center of the debate. [/QUOTE]
Then by all means - now don't be shy! - make sure you include Southeners still loyal to the Confederacy in their hearts; the most spectacular [I]losers [/I] in American history, bar none. After all, you've said many times that the deal-breaker for you re the Nazis is they lost ("losers [I]lose[/I]" was your phrasing, I believe) and that the subsequent Victors' Justice, no matter how harsh, is all such losers should rightfully expect and deserve. Surely your strong and sinewy faith [I]demands [/I] that you excoriate these slave-owning, julep-sipping, still-whining-about-it losers with all the venom you expend on similar [I]foreign-born[/I] losers, correct? You wouldn't be pulling your punches re the South merely to make doe-eyes at your allies on this measly message board, would you?
[QUOTE]As the astonishing "Passion" phenomenon makes clear, Christianity is still very much at the heart of American society[/QUOTE]
Then it stands to reason that, along with Yahweh, [I]ObiWan and Gandalf [/I] form the other two-thirds of the Holy Trinity. If we're using box-office receipts as a spiritual bellwether, that is.
And correct me if I'm wrong - but you haven't even [I]seen [/I] this wonder-working movie yourself, have you?
2004-06-03 07:07 | User Profile
Gee, first you were a girl - three or four different times! -and twice today alone! - and now you are a..... "boy".
Harold - what [B]do [/B] you wanna be when you grow up? (Besides a paid informant, I mean.)
2004-06-03 07:15 | User Profile
Well, well, well...I think I done got a [I]rise [/I] out of Mr Co - errm, the "Boy Toy".
What's wrong, dear? One would think you're [I]used [/I] to getting it in the ass. Too big, perhaps? [I]That's [/I] gotta be a first for you.
2004-06-03 07:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Hugh Lincoln]Maybe I'm not clear on the David Duke homecoming set-up (was it invitation-only?), but if it was an open invite, monitoring for Linder and then stopping him at the door seems pretty girlish.[/QUOTE]
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Duke's EURO Conference was open to all and sundry. Linder's "disinvitation" was simply a matter of making it known his specific presence wasn't welcome (not that he'd be physically barred at the door) and thus as an honorable man, he'd not wish to impose his presence where it wasn't wanted.
2004-06-03 07:29 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Alex Linder]Most of the comments on here are right. Typing's not enough. Spoken words move people. We are in a bad situation, folks. You have to go to one of these rallies physically, viscerally to understand - the bad and the good. The bad is all the Aryan dogs and jew dogtrainers are set against us, and the length they go to record and render impotent. But the people are more open than fraidycons think. There are things you see in people's eyes that outweight the value of everything else, they reinforce and explain reality to you in a way the Internet cannot communicate.
We can take 'em.
"I'm not like you, Charlie Brown. I have to win sometimes."
There comes a point when losing's not good enough anymore. When telling the active guy how he, not you, ought to do it better's not good enough. At that point the conservative becomes a man - an Aryan, to be precise.[/QUOTE]
I took a few hours away from all this to visit with my family and clear my mind a bit. Something about looking your children in the eyes that makes all the problems one might be carrying somehow diminish the burden. I'm sure those of you who have young kids know exactly what I mean.
Anyway, after some reflection on the recent events we've had here I still wasn't coming up with any good solutions on how best to fix it. By nature I'm not real comfortable writing alot of sentences that begin with "I", but given my position here there's no real way to get around that, I guess.
Despite whatever impressions are made here in our exchanges each day, I generally don't much care for conflict and am certainly not a confronter-type person. Those that know me on some kind of personal level, and granted there are few here, may vouch for that if asked. Nevertheless, I do have my principles and convictions and admittedly can be pretty stubborn when pushed. Sometimes that can be a good thing and sometimes it can be bad.
I tried to think on and pinpoint what might have been the root causes of the current flame wars taking place on this board. For three years now this discussion board has monopolized most all of my free time away from my family and work. Obviously when one has vested that kind of time in a project centered around a subject they feel passionate about, when disputes arise as they always do in any kind of human endeavor, then emotions can quickly get out of hand leading to negative results. I'm as guilty as anybody in that regard.
So anyway, back to this current mess and root causes. There are a number of issues and personalities involved, most of whom I have always considered friends even if only impersonal cyber-ones at that. I suppose that each of them will have to be addressed on some level in the days to come, but I wanted to start here because this is where I felt led to start for whatever reason.
Alex Linder,
I can't honestly say I agree with you on much and may never do so, but obviously the times and circumstances have led each of us in our respective pursuits to deal with the same subject matter and cross paths on occasion here in cyber-space. We don't share similar philosphies and/or argue for similar solutions to the problems we are facing, that's obvious to everyone I think. Nor am I at all certain we ever will. But having said that, I realize that when your work at VNN has spilled over into this board that I haven't conducted myself and my rhetoric in the way befitting a responsible discussion board administrator. So for what it's worth and not worrying about how it is received, I want to apologize to you personally for some of the statements I've made about you and your work at VNN. Not to offer up any excuses, but it's a fine line one has to walk in this type a venture, holding the beliefs I do, heading-up a family and yes, being a white man in today's rotten society.
As I stated, I don't agree with your style or what I perceive as your underlying philosophy, but I should not have ever demeaned or insulted your character or personal integrity. I'm sorry for that.
Although I am often deeply offended by what you write, whenever it happens to come to OD in whatever context, from this point on I will try not to let it get personal and address the facts only whenever and wherever I am able. And please don't think that I am trying to influence in any way what you do at your site. What you do there is entirely your business and I am only responsible for my conduct here at OD. But I thought I needed to post this irregardless of whatever anyone else might think by my doing so.
With regards,
Jason
2004-06-03 07:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Yes, indeed. Where are these "Nazis" that I keep hearing about?
-----------[/QUOTE]
Ahem.
Looking on these 15 pages of debate, I guess this whole Christian-vs.-Nazi Pagan doctrinal dispute is a wee bit more alive here at OD than I'd realized. For the record, I've always been open about my National Socialist leanings and have always been treated very graciously by the Christian Nationalist majority here When I first found this site, I had assumed it WAS a Nazi site, by simle virtue of the fact that the people here clearly understood the role of the Jews in Western affairs. In my previous experience, the only such persons to understand that role were all fellow Nazis. Its good to see there are other people who understand the danger that global Jewry, and its collaborators, pose to the West. It seems a shame for people with such a vital element in their shared perspective to engage in conflict. It actually seems almost suicidally insane, in my humble opinion.
2004-06-03 07:43 | User Profile
I'm proud of you, Tex.
You managed to articulate your misgivings fully and accurately, while not allowing them to wrest the steering wheel away from you.
[I]This[/I] is the Tex I first encountered here 3 years ago. [I]Well done![/I]
2004-06-03 07:49 | User Profile
Tex, your pondered words stated here say you are a thoughtful patriot..... Salute......
2004-06-03 09:50 | User Profile
[QUOTE][il ragno]Then Tex should stop playing footsie to draw a bigger crowd and restore that "Home of Christian Nationalism" banner [I]immediately and forever[/I]. Can't hide your intent to lure in the suckers... and [I]then [/I] stamp your foot petulantly when they reject the little 'surprise' you've prepared for 'em.[/QUOTE]
Very well put, as usual Spiderman.
That's exactly what I'm suggesting. Let's get honest about it. Exactly right.
[QUOTE]Wait a second. You want to impose an iron Christian rule upon the world, yet you fudge your own reading of doctrine with "I think it at least means.."? So it's [I]show the world a decisive face [/I] - but privately shrug, grin and admit you don't know what it is exactly you're advocating? Well, at least it's consistent with the Christianity I'm familiar with.[/QUOTE]
Fudge is right. I'm not about to state the I understand all the nuances of the words of the Word Made Flesh. That little bit of waffling you see might save me a considerable amount of time in Purgatory.
[QUOTE]Yup. Hypocrisy and deceit - but it's ok because [I]it's for your own good[/I]. For Pete's sake, you reject Vatican II and the authority of your own Pope - you're hardly in a position to demand blind obedience; you don't seem too disposed to swallow your pride and take one for the team unless you're [I]running[/I] the team. As usual, the loudest voice decrying individualism refuses to yield one iota of his own. But the rest of us are better off without ours, you betcha![/QUOTE]
The point is to win. I'm merely pointing out what those winning tactics are.
Man, I gotta tell you. Spidey, old pal of mine, you really do have this altar boy thing that can be a bit much. No offense intended, but dude, get real. We're dealing with the world here. The question isn't about me, it's all about defining a winning strategy. I want to WIN.
And that means we're going to get our hands dirty, do questionable things, and basically wrestle with our consciences. We can always feel guilty about it later, wallowing in guilt. Go to confession, say four Our Fathers, three Hail Marys, and a firm Act of Contrition, and we move on with the rest of our lives. Joyce has a great story about that in Dubliners, forget what it's called. We're in the world, and we're not going to win by adopting boy scout tactics. This is war, and we should play it that way. That means lying to the enemy, stealing from the enemy, killing the enemy, just as much as it means telling the truth to our own and being willing to lay down our own lives in the defense of their rights.
The moral inconsistency here is entirely yours. You say you admire Hitler, which is fine, I guess, in a way. I believe in giving credit where it's due. The man wrote a best seller on power politics, and I have no problem with studying that. But, respectfully, where do you get off admiring Hitler and then calling me down on my proposed tactics?
I understand Hitler's tactics. As I've said, the Inqusition, Jesuits and other great Christian groups of the past were willing to apply, although to a compariatively limited degree. I think you have to hand it to the Fuehrer, he really took the whole thing to a new level. I mean, Private Schickelgruber was really unconstrained by any notion of God's love of man or the words of Jesus, and if push came to shove I'd rather face a Spanish inquisitorial court in 1450 than an SS officer with many interesting questions in 1943. But I digress.
The point is NOT his tactics so much, but his goals. Nazism's goals are fundamentally opposed to mine. The Nazis want one thing, I want quite another.
Therefore, while there might be considerable overlap as to tactics (I emphasize, however, that there are some things I won't do for my country), it is clear that we Christians cannot work together with Nazis because our strategic goals are diametrically opposed.
[QUOTE]Then by all means - now don't be shy! - make sure you include Southeners still loyal to the Confederacy in their hearts; the most spectacular [I]losers [/I] in American history, bar none. [/QUOTE]
I have a soft spot in my heart for the Confederacy, too, as do many Americans. They were on the whole wrong, but that is not to say that they didn't have much to recommend them. Especially their Christianity, their literature, art, customs, manners. I wish that I had more of all of that, indeed I do.
But again the inconsistency is entirely with those here who claim General Lee - who prayed daily for his enemies while keeping his personal honor blameless under the most trying circumstances - as their own, while simultaneously admiring Himmler.
Lee was a gentleman. Himmler was not.
[QUOTE]After all, you've said many times that the deal-breaker for you re the Nazis is they lost ("losers [I]lose[/I]" was your phrasing, I believe) and that the subsequent Victors' Justice, no matter how harsh, is all such losers should rightfully expect and deserve. Surely your strong and sinewy faith [I]demands [/I] that you excoriate these slave-owning, julep-sipping, still-whining-about-it losers with all the venom you expend on similar [I]foreign-born[/I] losers, correct? You wouldn't be pulling your punches re the South merely to make doe-eyes at your allies on this measly message board, would you?[/QUOTE]
You misunderstand.
My hope is that a Christian Nationalist movement will emerge in America. It's a long shot, but I think it's the best shot we have. This should be as broad a coalition as practicable, and I wish to exclude only those who aren't behind the project of restoring the Gospel to undisputed dominance in American life, and then only to the extent necessary. That is, if a non-Christian gets behind the project of restoring the dominance of the Gospel, I would personally welcome his presence. Again, I would like the movement to be as broad as possible.
"He who is not against us is with us."
But the Nazis et al are definitely against us. They are outside that boundary. They cannot be on board with the main project, and so should be excluded immediately.
Now, we Christians on this board have our own disagreements, but I believe that once we end these endless Nazi discussions by excluding forever their main exponents, that we will have a chance to form a coalition that can actually get some practical things done.
I think that we Christians can agree to disagree about our doctinal differences, but of course Tex would have to police that one, too. And I also believe that we Christian Americans can also trust each other enough that we won't always have to be worrying about a knife in the back, which would be sure to come from the other side.
Maybe I'm wrong about the possiblity of a broad Christain Nationalist movement that encompasses everybody from Christian Identity to the Mormons to the Evangelicals to the Missouri Synod to the Orthodox and Catholics, and Heaven knows I was wrong about my original notion that I could be part of some broader WN movement that encompassed both Nazis and Christians. So, I could be very well be wrong. But I think - I hope - that our common faith in Christ and in His Gospel and our shared American identiy will suffice to take us forward from here and over the foreseeable horizon.
[QUOTE]Then it stands to reason that, along with Yahweh, [I]ObiWan and Gandalf [/I] form the other two-thirds of the Holy Trinity. If we're using box-office receipts as a spiritual bellwether, that is.[/QUOTE]
That was completely gratuitous, and evinces an unbecoming absence of good faith on your part.
The Passion flap did more in a few months to expose the Pharisees and their agenda to a broad American audience than all the American Nazi and National Alliance ranting did in the preceeding 40 years.
Did Star Wars expose the Hebrews and what they really thought about the great majority of Americans and their most cherished beliefs? Did Lord of the Rings accomplish the same? Clearly, no. The Nazis/VNN/Natvan side has ZERO success in forty years, while the traditional Catholic Mel Gibson scored a resounding success in just a few months.
That's a fact. And it made money doing it, which is the point you seem to miss. We need to finance this. We need to market it. We need to be smart. And having guys like Fade who rant about how much he wants to off all the Jews associated with OD make OD a non-starter from a marketing perspective.
And dude, that's what this is. It's marketing.
Get a basic textbook on the subject. I swear, it's hard talking to you guys sometimes because you don't have the business background. I assure you that there's an enormous body of science standing behind marketing. Seriously. The advice I'm giving comes straight out of that textbook.
Although the basics are just common sense.
[B]Identify your goal. Get everybody on board with it. Identify your target consumer group. Understand their needs and desires. Tailor your message to play on their needs and desires to achieve your marketing goal. [/B]
If we focus on that, we increase our chances of success. If we charge off like a bunch of teenagers all hyped up about Dr. Pierce's novels, we play to the marketing strength of our competitors.
Get smart. Move to Christian message packaging.
[QUOTE]And correct me if I'm wrong - but you haven't even [I]seen [/I] this wonder-working movie yourself, have you?[/QUOTE]
Not yet, I'm waiting for it to come out on DVD.
But so what? Forget about me and focus on my ideas, I beg you.
Ragman, I feel you're not listening to me. I'm making a marketing argument here. Forget the content, which I understand that you don't accept. Fine. I know a lot of Catholics who thought it was a very mediocre work of art, and since these are folks whose opinion I respect, I suspect that it probably was, which is why I'm not all hyped up to see it (I was also out of the country all of Lent and the weeks thereafter).
But forget the content for a moment, and focus on the marketing lessons to be learned from the Passion flap. They are manifestly important to our cause.
Gibson's low-budget flick showed that a Christian wrapper is the surest way to get the American political consumer's eye. Conversely, Natvan's utter lack of marketing success proves that a Nazi wrapper is a [B]sh*tcan dog [/B] of a marketing strategy.
The Passion controversy proved that the best way to provoke the Elie Wiesels and Charles Krauthammers of the world into showing their hands and more importantly PAYING FOR IT is by giving them the Gospel straight up without a chaser. Conversely, the fact that our Kosher friends nearly completely IGNORE groups like Natvan and VNN and use them only as helpful negative examples in their own advertising prove that they see nothing to fear there. I suggest that we all respect their opinion as to the relative chances of marketing success between the two strategies. These guys do political marketing for a living.
Listen, guys, you all need to take a basic B-school course, if you haven't done so already. Your Nazi strategy is worse than evil, it's just plain dumb, dumb, dumb.
Forget the content, and focus on the packaging. Your packaging seeks with the most shoestring budget imaginable to un-do the brainwashing advertising effects of 60 years of highly-funded, anti-Nazi messages. You'll lose. It's a dog, a non-starter.
DROP IT.
Ragman: please acknowledge that you've read and understood the marketing argument made above, and kindly respond to it directly.
Walter
2004-06-03 14:38 | User Profile
I understand Hitler's tactics. As I've said, the Inqusition, Jesuits and other great Christian groups of the past were willing to apply, although to a compariatively limited degree. I think you have to hand it to the Fuehrer, he really took the whole thing to a new level. I mean, Private Schickelgruber was really unconstrained by any notion of God's love of man or the words of Jesus, and if push came to shove I'd rather face a Spanish inquisitorial court in 1450 than an SS officer with many interesting questions in 1943. But I digress.
The point is NOT his tactics so much, but his goals. -Walter Yannis
Only a Roman Catholic could be so fixated on Nazi's; particularly since they have not existed since 1945. Although, the belief in an infalible pope is pretty bizzare, authoritarian and has definite overtones of megalomania...ach the competition:yawn:...btw, any wanna-be nazi's I have ever encountered have always come from catholic backgrounds...:wallbash:
2004-06-03 15:06 | User Profile
Alex Linder created some serious waves when he was able to raise in a short time, a large amount of cash for a not too smart white politician in Georgia---one Chester Doles.
This fund raising effort was done on Alex's VNN website, and, Linder has a natural talent for fund raising. He made it fun, and, got everyone involved in the act:thumbsup:. I hope he does it again soon, only for VNN this time.
I think some folks in the white-nationanlist-populist-jeffersonian-founding fathers-political movement were shocked that Linder could raise money from his website with ease!
Now Dave Duke has been around for awhile; many of these other white politicians really haven't been around and are probably afraid that Linder would cut into a limited pool of funding. I'm sure that Duke and the more experienced and astute white politicians know that there are tens of millions of folks out there who might put a 5, a 10, a 20, a 50 or more in an envelope and send it along...
I would like to see VNN make it as a newsource, a real network, and as a source of cutting edge information & commentary regarding the political jew janus, and its left and right faces...the old two sides of the same jew snake analogy...:clap:
2004-06-03 15:31 | User Profile
[quote=Valley Forge]And in my opinion the appropriate short term goal should be building a general Nationalist movement that welcomes Christians, but does not make belief in Christianity an absolute requirement for participation.
We should also focus on confronting Jewish power and awakening racial consciousness in our fellow Whites in the short term. As tradional Christians, we'll get no where in the political sphere without doing those two things. We'll certainly never be able to lead a Christian revival with the Jews controlling all of the opinion shaping institutions in this country. There is no chance, none, that Jews will ever let that happen.
So, at this point in time, I have to say I just don't see a down side to working with non-Christian Nationalists, especially when many of these Nationalists are already in our corner when it comes to confronting two of our most pressing problems (opposing Jews, and awakening racial consciousness). As long as they're not hostile to Christianity, and many aren't, what's the big deal?
Hey VF,
I want to apologize for singling you out earlier in the thread. I thought you'd jumped to conclusions about Linder based on other people's opinions of him, but I see that you've taken the time to arrive at your own. Never mind that they haven't changed a bit. I wasn't trying to make you like the man and I know exactly where you're coming from in your dislike. I'm sorry to say I was hasty in pointing the finger at you and am glad to be shown wrong.
Thanks also for bringing a little sanity common sense to the thread. Your post, partly quoted above, is exactly what I've been trying to get at, but you stated it better than I.
2004-06-04 04:16 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Forget the content, and focus on the packaging. [B]Identify your goal. Get everybody on board with it. Identify your target consumer group. Understand their needs and desires. Tailor your message to play on their needs and desires to achieve your marketing goal. [/B] [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Imagine a sort of Christian Taliban and you basically have my vision for America and the world. [/QUOTE]
Actually, Walter, the most glaring inconsistencies are yours.
You rail on and on about [I]soldiering for Christ [/I] and [I]falling in line behind the Faith of El Cid[/I] - then you flip on a dime and chide your critics for having their heads in the clouds and not being sufficiently [B]marketing-savvy[/B]. I mean, words fail me.....your 'plan' has got to be the non-starter of the year! [I]Paying 8 or 10 dollars for a movie ticket is a looong way from renouncing everything you know to head back to the Middle Ages.[/I] Seriously.
You try to turn this into a clash of marketing strategies - yet you refuse to acknowledge that even [I]wiccans [/I] are one-up on 11th century Catholicism in terms of sex appeal and desirability to the average Westerner. Marketing? Yeah, that Christian Taliban brand you're trying to get on store-shelves should do a land-office business. PS: if you [I]really[/I] want to hit upon a "a unifying ideology for the American nationalist movement", maybe it's also best if you stop admiringly sighing and fluttering your eyelashes when you utter sweet nothings like “The Holy Roman Inquisition". (There's a [I]reason[/I] Brown & Williamson doesn't offer brands of cigarettes called COFFIN NAILS and LUNG SPOTS, you know.)
Presumably, your morality is rooted in your deep religious convictions....yet you scoff at any moral misgivings one might have by derisively referring to the doubters as 'altar boys'. ([I]Good marketing strategy [/I] for the Roman Cathlic Church, btw. "Give us your children and we'll own the little bitches forever.") With typical blowhard-Christian chauvinism, you presume that all moral qualms - save your own, deeply-felt, ones, natch - are mere squeamishness.
While it may not be fair to equate you and Tex, you [I]are [/I] sort of partners in this thing, so allow me to scratch my head wondering how your [I]"Walt from Marketing sez: get with a winner for once!" [/I] maxim can comfortably co-exist with Tex's po-faced "Quantity does not equal quality. Popularity does not equal truth.” I may not be on board with Tex’s version of The Way It Is, but at least I recognize that his “squeamishness” is based on those Christian values which all demagogues find damnably inconvenient, but I find myself sorta grateful for: mercy, kindness, forgiveness – weak sister stuff like that. Whether these things are blessings or hindrances to you seems mostly to depend on whether you’ve been at the sacramental wine already before logging in.
And there’s that question I’ve already asked Team Martel (lookit that: I’ve just given your marketing group that all-important Catchy Monicker!) that I still don’t have an answer to: mainly, why is it that fellows like yourself [I]continually [/I] decry and defame the cancer of individualism when you yourself refuse to relinquish a jot of your own? Could you be happy as a clam to be an unquestioning footsoldier should, say, Tex’s Lutherans swipe your boss ‘marketing plan’ and sweep to power? Pardon me for thinking not.
2004-06-04 04:33 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]I find it hard to believe Linder attracted you to WN, IR.
Very hard to believe.
If that's true -- wow -- you've come a long way in only a few years.
Yggdrasil/Jared Taylor/Sam Francis/Pat Buchanan have each done more to bring sane fence sitters into WN than Alex Linder. Especially Ygg, I bet.
Linder probably has the record for attracting psychopaths and idiots, though.[/QUOTE]
Why do find it so hard to believe Linder would attract anyone but a psychopath or an idiot to WN? He attracted me, and I am neither a psychopath nor an idiot and I believe the rules of this forum prevent you from calling me such. It was Alex Linder, and Alex Linder alone, who changed me from a Taylor/Francis/Buchanan reading crypto-Republican/Conservative/crypto-libertarian/crypto-whatever who a few years ago thought it was politically daring to listen to Rush Limbaugh and often spoke in code words about jews and race to an active White Nationalist today. I was swayed by Linder's intellect and honesty, not to mention his sense of humor -- most of which seems to pass over his critics' heads.
rich brooks [url]http://www.whitealert.com[/url]
2004-06-04 06:07 | User Profile
DesertFox [are you really Rich Brooks?] --
You make a good point.
Think of it this way, people: of all the WNs at OD, I bet that 90% were formerly paleoconservatives [I was]. But what changed those WNs from paleocons to WNs? Riiiight. Reading the hard-core racial stuff, from NA to VNN to whomever else.
It is that hard-core stuff that transforms people. Paleocon stuff does not transform. Oh, sure, the paleocon stuff may be a gate-way, but the true transformation of a White person comes when he understands, through that hard-core stuff, that The Jooo is the taproot of our problems, and, that if the West is to survive White people must think racially 24/7 [no Whites, no West, and someone tell me different, I challenge you]. Once that happens, everything else -- politics, Left/Right, etc. -- is bullsh**.
2004-06-04 06:20 | User Profile
Good to see you dropping in again, Rich.
2004-06-04 20:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE=dfox]It was Alex Linder, and Alex Linder alone, who changed me from a Taylor/Francis/Buchanan reading crypto-Republican/Conservative/crypto-libertarian/crypto-whatever who a few years ago thought it was politically daring to listen to Rush Limbaugh and often spoke in code words about jews and race to an active White Nationalist today. I was swayed by Linder's intellect and honesty, not to mention his sense of humor -- most of which seems to pass over his critics' heads.[/QUOTE]
Ditto. (Actually, I never even spoke in code words about Jews --- I just figured they were a witty but oppressed people hangin' around in the background. Just some good ol' boys... Never meanin' no harm...) Linder's writing has put me in planes, trains and automobiles. I faithfully read William F. Buckley, Jr. for years, and never once was I likewise inspired. A Dead Poets Society for white nationalism, I guess you could say.
2004-06-04 22:23 | User Profile
Yggdrasil's presentation was sufficient to bring me over.
I still think you guys are the exceptions. The VNN forum proves it.
Linder attracts mostly stupid dolts that are an embarassment to the cause.
[QUOTE=Franco]DesertFox [are you really Rich Brooks?] --
You make a good point.
Think of it this way, people: of all the WNs at OD, I bet that 90% were formerly paleoconservatives [I was]. But what changed those WNs from paleocons to WNs? Riiiight. Reading the hard-core racial stuff, from NA to VNN to whomever else.
It is that hard-core stuff that transforms people. Paleocon stuff does not transform. Oh, sure, the paleocon stuff may be a gate-way, but the true transformation of a White person comes when he understands, through that hard-core stuff, that The Jooo is the taproot of our problems, and, that if the West is to survive White people must think racially 24/7 [no Whites, no West, and someone tell me different, I challenge you]. Once that happens, everything else -- politics, Left/Right, etc. -- is bullsh**.
----------[/QUOTE]
2004-06-04 22:52 | User Profile
VF, it just might be that the stupid dolts are the ones who make the most noise. I understand why you're offended by some of Linder's ideas, but I'll bet you anything that a lot of intelligent people enjoy his material tremendously, even if they'd never admit it. Otherwise he'd be just another white racist with a web site instead of the subject of so much controversy.
2004-06-04 22:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Pennsylvania_Dutch]I think you have to hand it to the Fuehrer, he really took the whole thing to a new level. I mean, Private Schickelgruber was really unconstrained by any notion of God's love of man or the words of Jesus, and if push came to shove I'd rather face a Spanish inquisitorial court in 1450 than an SS officer with many interesting questions in 1943. [/QUOTE]
Good point. Definitely deserving a cookie. [IMG]http://www.pumpkinridgecreations.com/psptutorials/christmasstarcookie/starcookie2.gif[/IMG]
2004-06-04 23:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Paleoleftist]Good point. Definitely deserving a cookie. [IMG]http://www.pumpkinridgecreations.com/psptutorials/christmasstarcookie/starcookie2.gif[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Are you Don Rickles?
2004-06-04 23:19 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge] Now, if Linder is right that these NA types are lying to Duke about Linder and about the NA's overall totalitarian outlook, could it be that the NA's upper management is also lying to Duke about other things, such as the fact that the NA considers Christianity to be inconsistent with Aryan society? [/QUOTE]
Not to mention the late Dr.Pierceôs obsession with abandoned mines. :dry:
2004-06-04 23:20 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]Are you Don Rickles?[/QUOTE]
Who is Don Rickles?
2004-06-04 23:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]For the doomsday revolutionaries out there, I believe our national problems could go a long way towards being greatly bettered, if not solved, if only our God-given freedom of association legal rights could be asserted, won back and maintained. [/QUOTE]
This is an observation I find [I]extremely[/I] valuable. Something has gone wrong, when you can have clubs that are "Jews Only", but no clubs that are "No Jews". We should no longer put up with accepting that asymmetry as perfectly fair if not God-given. :wallbash:
2004-06-04 23:51 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Walter Yannis] ... I take that back. I do trust them in a way: I have an unshakable faith in their own willingness to stab in the back the fools they convinced were friends when the right moment arrives for them. And arrive it will, if we let it.
Best to exclude them utterly today, and thereby avoid a very sharp pain in the right kidney tomorrow. [/QUOTE]
Lol; indeed, we shouldnôt repeat the mistake of the [I]Catholic Center Party[/I]: [QUOTE]The Catholic leaders trusted Hitler. The CP and the BPP brought about their own ends by supporting Hitler in his “Enabling Act,” giving Hitler extraordinary power. Without the support of Catholic parties, Hitler could not have reached his goal easily. For Catholics the vote became a loyalty issue toward the state. They were afraid of being called less patriotic than other Germans. The Catholics were hoping to save Catholic civil servants from Hitler's purge but they could not even save themselves in the end. [/QUOTE]
Politics for Dummies, Rule I: [B]Never make a treaty with Hitler.[/B] [QUOTE]Nazi Germany signed a concordat with the Pope on July 20, which made the Third Reich the guarantor of the civic and religious interests of German Catholics. The treaty gave guarantees for Catholic schools and continued governmental subsidies to the Church; it banned priests from participating in politics, and closed all the political, social and vocational organizations that made up the German Catholic sub-cultural infrastructure. Hitler never respected this treaty. He shut down the Catholic Youth League, arrested Catholic priests and nuns, and suppressed the Catholic publications. [/QUOTE] [url]http://hist.academic.claremontmckenna.edu/jpetropoulos/church/tamerpage/index1.htm[/url]
2004-06-05 00:28 | User Profile
Btw, I just noticed a mistake on my part, crediting Dutch with a quote that was actually WY. Reading up on a long thread, it seems I got confused who said what, but as I was giving a cookie and not throwing a horseshoe, I suppose no harm done.
(That WY deserves a whole chocolate cake for his contributions goes without saying.)
2004-06-05 00:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Paleoleftist]Who is Don Rickles?[/QUOTE]
If you knew who Don Rickles was you'd lose your cookies.
Maybe.
2004-06-05 01:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]If you knew who Don Rickles was you'd lose your cookies.
Maybe.[/QUOTE]
Lol; looked him up and I think I [I]like[/I] the guy. :thumbsup:
2004-06-05 19:14 | User Profile
[QUOTE]PD said: "Alex Linder created some serious waves when he was able to raise in a short time, a large amount of cash for a not too smart white politician in Georgia---one Chester Doles."[/QUOTE] Certainly Mr. Linder deserves some of the credit for this fund raiser, but not all of it, or even most of it. The real force behind it all was an individual named Marc Moran, who gave $25,000 of his own money towards Chester Doles' defense.
That's [size=4][color=darkolivegreen]$25,000[size=2][color=black].[/color][/size][/color][/size][color=black] [/color]
Without that incentive, Linder's viewers would not likely have come up with more than two or three thousand dollars, if that. So the real hero behind the successful Doles fund raiser was this man:
[img]http://www.onepeoplesproject.com/images/moran.jpg[/img]
2004-06-05 19:33 | User Profile
VNN came up with almost exactly $50,000 on itz own..Not counting the money of that mans photo you so kindly posted, why?
2004-06-06 02:56 | User Profile
I don't know that the idenity of the "goy genius" was ever made public---so who ever made the large matching contribution remains unknown to the public. All in all, raising that amount of cash in a short time, for a "shakey" Georgia politician, was impressive.
I sincerely hope, that Alex uses his fund raising talents again to improve VNN as a news and commentary website---I'm sure there are stories for sale that would otherwise not see the light of day.
VNN has itz negatives. Getting a little too close with a self marginalizing white political organization---bright folks---with a dumb name. Led by a southern educator...I expect more from the gentlemen of the olde south...
Alex, also had a short relationship with a well known internet kook and gossip that also cost him friends and readers.
2004-06-07 21:38 | User Profile
[QUOTE]VNN came up with almost exactly $50,000 on itz own..Not counting the money of that mans photo you so kindly posted, why?[/QUOTE] I posted "that photo" because, without Marc Moran's promise to match contributions from VNN viewers (up to $25,000) VNN would not have raised so much money.
As for "that photo", I've not violated anyone's privacy, since that photo was taken from a mainstream news article on Mr. Moran, after he was "exposed" as a member of the National Alliance (after which the NA cowardly turned the other way as Moran was torn to pieces by the press).
[QUOTE]I don't know that the idenity of the "goy genius" was ever made public---so who ever made the large matching contribution remains unknown to the public. [/QUOTE] It was "made public" on Bill White's Overthrow forum, and probably elsewhere. VNN never denied it was Marc Moran, either. Anyway, Moran was the real power behind the success of the Chester Doles fundraiser, not Linder. The irony of it all is that Chester Doles copped a plea, and opted for a prison cell. A man who was truly innocent would have fought to the end. Doles, however, was guilty as charged, and he knew it. And like Moran before him, Doles was abandoned by the cowards at the National Alliance. To Linder's credit, he orchestrated - with Moran's generous donation - a successful slap in the face to the leadership of the National Alliance, a slap which remains a stinging insult to them to this very day.
2004-06-08 18:44 | User Profile
What I liked about the Chester Doles defense was NOT
1) that it was a "slap in the face" of NA 2) that Doles wasn't probably a little dull to be toting guns around as a convicted felon 3) that it legitimized VNN 4) that he copped a plea anyway
But that he was one of ours, ZOG was messing with him, and we messed back.