The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewAndrew Anglin Archive
Jews Sell Lord of the Rings Gaming Rights to Garbage Swedes
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

If you enjoyed the black Lord of the Rings you’re going to love the black Lord of the Rings gaming franchise.


Intellectual Property rights to J.R.R. Tolkien’s ‘The Lord of the Rings’ and ‘The Hobbit’ have been sold to publishing giant Embracer Group, according to a company statement announcing it had entered into a total of five acquisition deals on Thursday as well as a sixth, with a “PC/Console gaming company.”

Embracer Group, which has been buying up almost any video game publisher or studio it can get its hands on, announced the acquisition of Limited Run Games, Tripwire Interactive, Tuxedo Labs, Japanese game studio Tatsujin as well as Middle-earth Enterprises – the company that has owned nearly all the rights to Tolkien’s works since 1976.

Earlier this year, the Saul Zaentz Company, which owned Middle-earth Enterprises announced that it would for the first time offer the rights for \$2 billion. However, Embracer’s public statement revealed that it spent only \$6 billion Swedish Kronas for all its purchases on Thursday, which is roughly equivalent to \$575 million.

Embracer sucks. They are buying everything (check the Wikipedia list of acquisitions) and they suck. It’s not even limited to games – they bought Dark Horse Comics last year.

I don’t know if these people are Jews – I can’t tell if Scandinavian names are Jewish or not. But I do know they suck.

It frankly doesn’t seem like it is Jews, because they had a good business plan (that you can read about in this Gamespot article) that involved strategically building up capital rather than just getting some massive loan through Jew nepotism.

It doesn’t matter if they’re Jews, because this whole model of mega-corporations buying up literally everything is Jewish in nature. Obviously, goyim have to copy the model to compete with Jews, but it just never, ever leads to anything good. Everything produced by these mega-corporations is sanitized and sterilized, designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

I never played any of the big LotR games. But JRR Tolkien is “exhibit A” in the argument for why copyright law is complete lunacy. I’m not an expert in the field, and I’m sure there are some arguments for protecting copyright while someone is alive so they can earn that income. But turning a system designed to keep people from profiting by printing someone else’s books into a system of keeping legal possession of ideas and words from 100 years ago is clearly just a scam. Tolkien has been dead for 50 years. LotR should be in the public domain, not being sold by the Jews for billions of dollars.

Tolkien died before video games existed, but he’s surely someone who would have been interested in the medium if he’d lived to see it. Now, ask yourself: would he prefer if 50 years after he died Jews were charging \$2 billion (or \$5765 million – whatever) to make a game based on his works? Or do you think he would say that the characters and ideas from LotR belong to everyone, and anyone should be able to take a shot at making a Middle-earth game?

The theory is, the family has the rights to the concepts and ideas after the creator dies, because the family should be able to make infinity money off the creative works of their dead family members, and then the Jews can buy the rights from the family and then resell them at billions in profit.

Why do things not enter into the public domain anymore? Is it because of the Jews?


The Jews over at Disney have kept the copyright scam going based on trying to keep Mickey Mouse from being drawn in a pornographic manner, which would hurt children (never mind that Jews also legalized pornography in the first place). That was the argument.

The first law protecting copyright, the Copyright Act of 1790, gave 28 years of exclusive publication rights to an author. If the book was still selling well after that period, he could renew the copyright for another 14 years, which would give him a total of 42 years. It expired when a man died. That was the original concept of copyright that has been transformed into this Jewish scam. Everyone likes money and everyone has a right to make money, but a family wanting to continue to bank off of a copyright after someone has died (and they’ve already inherited all the wealth that someone made during their life) – this is just Jews exploiting human selfishness for their own purposes.

Tolkien originally sold the movie rights to LotR for – let’s see here – oh – 1000 times less than Amazon paid the Jews for them.

That fat Jew Harry Saltzman bought the rights to ALL James Bond movies from Ian Fleming for \$50,000. Stan Lee, creator of virtually all of the characters in the MCU – and himself Jewish, actually – was nearly destitute in his old age while all of these films were coming out.

So, this is clearly not about protecting the authors.

This situation is clearly ridiculous. If “intellectual property” shouldn’t simply be abolished outright in the digital age, then at the very least it should end when a person dies.

(Republished from The Daily Stormer by permission of author or representative)
Hide 101 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Anonymous[926] • Disclaimer says:

    E. Michael Jones on Tolkien’s failed quest:

    Video Link

    • Replies: @Hitch
    , @Pierre de Craon
  2. Alrenous says: • Website

    If you didn’t want the allegorical Jews to own LoTR you should have bought it yourself.

    Don’t pretend to be upset when they clearly wanted it more than you. America: the entitled land of the everything-should-be-free.

  3. Hitch says:

    Tolkien’s masterpieces have been judaically transmogrified into a dagger that is being stabbed into the heart of European culture.

    I figured out that “copyright” law was a scam for Jewish lawyers long before I became an “anti-semite”.

    One of the newer aspects of the entire gaming culture is that all games seem to require that one has some kind of online “computer gaming” account with one of the “computer gaming” monopolies. These actions by Embracer would be a typical judaic strategy to buy up all the Goyim eye balls so that they can be harvested on the internet, or the coming “Meta” virtual world.

    To paraphrase Claus Schwab, ”

    You will own nothing, but you will be happy in the virtual gaming universe

  4. Tolkien died before video games existed, but he’s surely someone who would have been interested in the medium if he’d lived to see it.

    Not true in the slightest degree.

    Why do things not enter into the public domain anymore? Is it because of the Jews?


    • Agree: Pierre de Craon, Bill
    • Replies: @GenFranco
  5. Polistra says:

    the Saul Zaentz Company

    A name which shall live forever in infamy, particularly for those of us who value art, music, musicians, or just integrity.

    • Replies: @Brad Anbro
  6. Agree AA. Copyright has become a huge rentier scam that costs the public 100’s of billions a year.
    (I love the pharmaceutical biz — Gov pays most of their R&D costs & the CO profits of “its” discoveries for decades….)

  7. Whatzamatterwityou? You against the free market or something?


  8. neutral says:

    While I enjoy the works of Tolkien, the reality is that Tolkien was a naive fool when it came to understanding what true evil really was. He was your typical good mannered British citizen that was absolutely clueless about the jews, the perversion and destruction of his works by these corporate jews was very predictable.

  9. Dumbo says:

    I think I’m one of the few people who doesn’t care so much about Lord of the Rings. I tried to read it and found it boring. In this sense I agree with Borges, who found it tedious and never got into Tolkien, comparing him negatively to others such as Carroll. But I guess Borges in general preferred shorter works that went straight to the point than extremely long works.

    The films too were overlong, even if they had some moments. But I guess Tolkien was important and significative. He created a host of very bad imitators, too.

    I also think “intellectual property” is mostly a scam. It didn’t exist before mass media. It doesn’t really benefit authors as much as big companies such as Disney.

    But to make a compromise, perhaps copyright could extend for 20-25 years after an author’s death — to its immediate family ONLY. If they sell them to a company or someone else, the rights are cancelled. It shouldn’t be possible to sell intellectual rights, or for them to belong to a company. Just, at most, 20 years to sons or relatives of the author, then it becomes public domain.

    • Replies: @James J. O'Meara
    , @Rogue
  10. Who cares? LoTR is gay.

    • Replies: @Ray P
  11. Trump’s one accomplishment

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  12. Ed Case says:

    Stan Lee, creator of virtually all of the characters in the MCU – and himself Jewish, actually – was nearly destitute in his old age while all of these films were coming out.

    Okay, but how would Copyright ending at the author’s death have helped him?
    Did he have a gambling/ex-wives problem?

    • Replies: @Dumbo
    , @Joe S.Walker
  13. • Replies: @Supply and Demand
  14. Hitch says:

    That was an interesting interview, but actually only a small part was directly about Tolkien.

    I found Michael Jones’s discussion of the ring and how Tolkien plagiarized the idea from Wagner to be quite ironic in light of ZOG’s war against all things Wagner due to National Socialism’s idolizing of him. Actually it was Hitler who loved Wagner far more than the rest of the NSDAP, but then again Hitler, like Tolkien, fought for years in the trenches. The irony here is that the ZOG propaganda organs by copying Tolkien give credence to the superiority of European culture and then by association to the NSDAP.

    Jones also gets into how Tolkien clearly used the Dwarves as substitutes for Judea, with their love of gold and their search for new homeland. But Jones goes on to say that Tolkien was sympathetic to Jews and their “predicament” in the Germany under the NSDAP. So I guess we can

    • Replies: @Felix Krull
  15. Dumbo says:

    Bullshit. For a long time copyright didn’t exist and authors used each other’s material at will. Shakespeare copied and pasted from lots of sources.

    Murnau didn’t pay the rights for “Dracula”, changed the names and created a film that is a greater artistic piece than the original novel.

    “Intellectual rights” should not be held by companies, especially not companies unrelated to the original creators. If anyone should profit, it’s only the author. But he’s usually the last one to profit.

    • Agree: Kolya Krassotkin
    • Replies: @Alrenous
    , @Franz
  16. Dumbo says:
    @Ed Case

    The point is that authors and creators are not the ones profiting from copyright laws, but mostly middlemen and lawyers and big companies. Creators usually get screwed.

  17. @Priss Factor

    Assuming Liz doesn’t pull a Murkowski.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  18. @neutral

    Ever since I read his arrogant response to the German publisher I have felt glee whenever the Jews bastardize his work.

    Boomers like him will laugh and ridicule in face of danger, then they get fucked and somehow act surprised.

  19. Catdog says:

    The last Lord of the Rings game, Shadows of War by WB, featured a random black Gondorian as both a major NPC and playable character. He was implied to be in a relationship with a major blonde female NPC.

  20. @Hitch

    Tolkien didn’t “plagiarize” Wagner as much as reply to him, offering an Anglo-Saxon version of Volsunga’s saga to stand against Wagner’s Germanic one. I am no opera fan but on the merit of the storyline alone, Tolkien’s adaptation is by far the more creative.

  21. Alrenous says: • Website

    The other thing you can do, without even violently seizing the government so as to re-write the law, is to write your own LoTR. Lots of knockoffs skirt copyright law. N.B. standing on the shoulders of giants lets you see farther, so it should be possible to right not just some cheap knockoff, but a genuinely superior version of the thing.

    If you don’t want “corporations” to benefit from your copyrights, buy the copyrights back. Or – get ready to have your tiny mind completely blown – don’t sell them to corporations in the first place.

    In short, quit trying to be Communists who get everything for free. Don’t throw tantrums about someone doing things to stuff they own and you don’t own, especially when you could most certainly own it if you wanted it enough. You’re not two years old anymore; secure your shit.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
    , @Jim H
    , @Bill
  22. Veracity says:
    @Felix Krull

    Hate to tell gou but Anglo-Saxons are Germanic. Both Wagner and Tolkien sought to demonstrate the redemptive qualities of love, just from different perspectives.

    • Agree: Pierre de Craon
  23. Hitch says:
    @Felix Krull

    E Michael Jones did not see Tolkien’s saga as a “reply”. I really don’t care enough about either story lines to bother a rebuttal. I always hated English literature and the ever present bimbo secondary and high school teachers prattling on about hidden messages and hidden meanings. That is why I followed a path that put me into IT where everything is designed to be logical and efficient.

  24. @The Alarmist

    Cheney will not win the general election, period. The most she could do is draw enough Republican votes to make the Democrat win — though i doubt it — and I imagine she’d be fine with that.

  25. Ray P says:
    @The Alarmist

    Randal Graves: Let me tell you something. If Peter Jackson really wanted to blow me away with those Rings movies, he would’ve ended the third movie on the logical closure point, NOT the 25 endings that followed!

    Elias: What’s the “logical closure point”?

    Hobbit Lover: Yeah, friend, enlighten us

    Randal Graves: When fvckin’ Frido wakes up from his little comer, or whatever, and all the other hobbits are jumpin’ on his bed.

    [squinting his eyes]

    Randal Graves: And then Sam leans in the doorway and gives him this very fvcking gay look.

    Elias: Not The Rings, Randal! Say what you will about Jesus, but leave The Rings out of this!

    Hobbit Lover: [getting angry] I’m gonna kick your ass back to The Shire if you don’t shut your fvcking mouth.

    Randal Graves: That look was so gay. I thought Sam was gonna tell the little hobbits to take a walk so he could saunter over to Frodo and suck his fvcking cock. Now THAT would have been an Academy Award worthy ending.

    Hobbit Lover: Hey, faggot! They’re not gay! They’re hobbits!

    Randal Graves: And then, right after the Sam/Frodo suckfest, right before the credits roll, Sam fvcking flat out bricks in Frodo’s mouth.

    Hobbit Lover: I swear-

    [overcome by nausea]

    Hobbit Lover: Fvck you!


  26. @Dumbo

    Agree bigly with all points. Especially Tolkien being long and boring.

    As a teen in the 60s never knew anyone who read it, much less obsessed over it. I suppose it was read by a handful of proto-nerds. With the spread of PC’s and gamer culture it became part of the whole “nerd culture” which is decadent and about as relevant to White survival as Klingon language camp.

    Tolkien admitted he only wrote the books to provide texts for his invented languages. That should tell you how important honor, bravery, etc. were to him. Any mediaeval atmos is simply a residual product of his happening to be a Catholic, and if he’d been Jewish it would have been all about Zion.

    I did read Bored of the Rings by the Harvard Lampoon guys and that was enough. It’s been reissued and I recommend it anyone wanting to get up to speed on LOTR. Just remember the names are changed: Dildo, Arrowroot son of Arrowshirt, etc. 40 years later it was enough to follow the first film (never bothered with the rest).

  27. @Hitch

    That is why I followed a path that put me into IT where everything is designed to be logical and efficient.

    So, you abandoned culture to the Jews. Not a good plan.

    As Alexandros said above:

    Boomers like him will laugh and ridicule in face of danger, then they get fucked and somehow act surprised.

    There was no “long march through the institutions,” only a surrender.

    • Replies: @Hitch
  28. Dumbo says:

    Blablabla. Who says anything about getting stuff you don’t own? The discussion is about current copyright laws that extend intellectual property rights 75 years after the author’s death so that people who are not the author nor related to him in any way can make money. You think that’s a nice law. I happen to disagree. Whatever. Stop with your patronizing bullshit. Many creators are against current copyright laws. Also, lots of creators have been screwed out of their own creations by lawyers, producers or corporations. i.e. Stallone vs. Winkler:

    • Replies: @Alrenous
  29. Hitch says:

    If the Dwarves are Jews, then that makes Bilbo the biggest shabbez goyim in the realm of fables.

  30. Hitch says:
    @James J. O'Meara

    So, you abandoned culture to the Jews. Not a good plan.

    I would contend that I abandoned the “art” and “culture” as presented by the Judeo-gyno-sodomite bolshevized education system to the rest of the mind controlled goyim. Today it is even worse. There is nothing to be gained by any European studying “culture” in the bowels of the ZOG “Higher Education System”.

  31. @Hitch

    Tolkien wrote The Hobbit as a gift to his grandkids and the rest only
    by popular demand – and he always explicitly denied any hidden (esp. political)
    messages (the Great One = Sauron, Aragorn = Simon Wiesenthal etc.).

    • Replies: @Hitch
    , @Hitch
    , @Hitch
  32. Ray P says:
    @James J. O'Meara

    You have not experienced Shakespeare until you have read him in the original Klingon.

    Or Mein Kampf unless translated into Quenya or Sindarin.

  33. @Felix Krull

    Tolkien didn’t “plagiarize” Wagner as much as reply to him, offering an Anglo-Saxon version of Volsunga’s saga to stand against Wagner’s Germanic one.

    With respect, Felix, I don’t entirely agree. There is extraordinarily little in Tolkien’s own writing or in his recently deceased son Christopher’s accounts of his father’s work and its sources—an amount of biographical, philological, and interpretative research so vast that the word voluminous is inadequate to its description—to support the sort of conscious cultural parallelism the quoted sentence points to. In his lifetime, Tolkien more than once politely and graciously dismissed attempts to link LotR and The Nibelung’s Ring beyond what he once termed the two works’ obvious reliance on inspiration drawn from the same primary sources, especially the Volsungasaga and the Elder Edda. (Despite widespread assumptions to the contrary, the impact of the Nibelungenlied on either work is absolutely minimal.)

    Still less is there support for EMJ’s offhand dismissal of Tolkien’s “myth-making” oeuvre as rooted in plagiarism. What Doctor Jones overlooks or simply may not know is that Wagner and Tolkien, despite devising their respective creative works from much of the same source material, came to an interest in that source material from directions that certainly do not support a claim of, shall we say, dependence of the later on the earlier.

    As published catalogs of the contents of Wagner’s Dresden library from the late 1840s show, Wagner was plainly one of the most widely read men of his era, whether one is referring to the Greco-Roman classics, the Italian literature of the High Middle Ages and the Renaissance, or all of Western philosophy from the Pre-Socratics through to his own day. Wagner was also caught up in the intellectual ferment generated by the historical, narrative, and philological research of the brothers Grimm, among a half-dozen or so other pioneering historical philologists. It was via their influence that Wagner became passionate about the literature of medieval Germany, Iceland, and Scandinavia.

    In Tolkien’s case, a fascination with and love for language—perhaps rooted in his having been transplanted from South Africa to the English West Midlands when he was four years old—were primary passions from early boyhood. He specialized in Old Norse while at Oxford (Exeter College), and encouraged by Joseph Wright, then the foremost scholar of old Germanic languages in the English-speaking world, Tolkien subsequently made a close study of Gothic—i.e., the language of the Goths. Tolkien saw the English language as part of the Germanic family of languages (as indeed it is), and this consciousness became the mainspring for the bulk of his life’s work: creating not so much a mythology for England as a native English–based literature that drew upon “myths” that were, in effect, the product of his own understanding of England’s historical place in a world whose imaginative resources were largely philologically German in origin.

    In other words, I think it is more accurate to say that the obvious parallels in the work of Wagner and Tolkien stem from the “communal” nature of their source material, material that had first struck Wagner’s fancy in his twenties but that had been integral to Tolkien’s psychological and spiritual landscape from the single-digit period of his life.

    One last thing. Although Tolkien loved music deeply, albeit not to the extent he loved poetry and tales,* this aspect of his character is seldom remarked upon. Yet surely every reader with strong musical sensibilities has been struck by the fact that the texts of the various races’ songs in LotR seem to cry out for music to accompany them. Among writers in English, his only equal in this regard is Shakespeare.
    *It is interesting that, by his own account and with the sole exception of the four great Greek playwrights, he loathed the theater. He wasn’t even especially fond of Shakespeare, aside from the sonnets.

    • Agree: inspector general
    • Thanks: Bill
  34. Hitch says:

    he always explicitly denied any hidden (esp. political) messages

    I had never really thought much about the Dwarves being Jews until I watched that E Michael Jones video in comment #1. To be honest, I was always more focused on the parallels between Orcs and Negroes. Jones also mentioned how Tolkien was writing Lord of the Rings during the build up to WWII, and how the zeitgeist of that period was about sympathy for the “downtrodden” Jews. When I look back on the portrayal of the Dwarves in Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, it really does seem that Tolkien was acting as a philo-jewish propaganda organ.

    One could easily consider Tolkien’s metaphore to be that Smaug was equivalent Nazi Germany, who just went out and murdered all those poor Dwarves for no reason at all and then stole their gold.

    When I consider all the interesting parallels between the eternal “victims” known as Jews, and the Dwarves in the Hobbit, I find it hard to believe that it was just an innocent non-political book written for his grandchildren.

  35. Stan Lee, creator of virtually all of the characters in the MCU

    You meant to say Jack Kirby (also jewish). Check it.

  36. To me, video games are as boring as hell and the biggest timewaster of all time, next to the television. I’m very thankful that I never got into them, but if they turn your crank, don’t let me rain on your parade. Video games are probably more effective in brainwashing than TV because they command your total attention and turn on your receptive state. Millions of young males around the world have been turned into incel zombies who are perfectly willing to do whatever their masters want them to do.

  37. @James J. O'Meara

    As a teen in the 60s [I] never knew anyone who read [Lord of the Rings], much less obsessed over it.

    Plainly, then, what further need have we of witnesses?

    I suppose it was read by a handful of proto-nerds.

    Your intellectual generosity is one of the wonders of the age.

  38. Hitch says:

    In this recent Jay Dyer interview, Jay describes how Ian Flemming, the author of the James Bond novels, was inserting MIC/Deep State messages and predictive programming into his writing, even foreshadowing the war on terror that would come into fruition 50-60 years later. This is not too far off in time from when Tolkien was writing, and if Flemming was spreading ZOG propaganda in the 4o’s and 50’s, then there is no reason to think that Tolkien couldn’t have been performing the same kind of assignments in exchange for certain forms of compensation.

  39. 24 comments and nobody mentioned the incomparable T. B. Macaulay on copyright? Bad times indeed. Here are his two speeches on copyright, which will help you make up your mind about why copyright should exist but why it should be limited to as minimum as possible. And, for those who shout, “Communist!”, Macaulay was far from being a Communist.



    Some excerpts:

    “The advantages arising from a system of copyright are obvious. It is desirable that we should have a supply of good books; we cannot have such a supply unless men of letters are liberally remunerated; and the least objectionable way of remunerating them is by means of copyright. You cannot depend for literary instruction and amusement on the leisure of men occupied in the pursuits of active life.”

    “Copyright is monopoly, and produces all the effects which the general voice of mankind attributes to monopoly.”

    “…the effect of monopoly generally is to make articles scarce, to make them dear, and to make them bad.”

    “Thus, then, stands the case. It is good that authors should be remunerated; and the least exceptionable way of remunerating them is by a monopoly. Yet monopoly is an evil. For the sake of the good we must submit to the evil; but the evil ought not to last a day longer than is necessary for the purpose of securing the good.”

    “A monopoly of sixty years produces twice as much evil as a monopoly of thirty years, and thrice as much evil as a monopoly of twenty years. But it is by no means the fact that a posthumous monopoly of sixty years gives to an author thrice as much pleasure and thrice as strong a motive as a posthumous monopoly of twenty years. On the contrary, the difference is so small as to be hardly perceptible.”


    “But an advantage that is to be enjoyed more than half a century after we are dead, by somebody, we know not by whom, perhaps by somebody unborn, by somebody utterly unconnected with us, is really no motive at all to action.”

    “The principle of copyright is this. It is a tax on readers for the purpose of giving a bounty to writers. The tax is an exceedingly bad one; it is a tax on one of the most innocent and most salutary of human pleasures; and never let us forget, that a tax on innocent pleasures is a premium on vicious pleasures. I admit, however, the necessity of giving a bounty to genius and learning. In order to give such a bounty, I willingly submit even to this severe and burdensome tax.”

    “the fate of Milton’s granddaughter has been brought forward by the advocates of monopoly. My honourable and learned friend has repeatedly told the story with great eloquence and effect. He has dilated on the sufferings, on the abject poverty, of this ill-fated woman, the last of an illustrious race. He tells us that, in the extremity of her distress, Garrick gave her a benefit, that Johnson wrote a prologue, and that the public contributed some hundreds of pounds.”

    “Why, at that time, the duration of copyright was longer than even he, at present, proposes to make it. The monopoly lasted, not sixty years, but for ever. At the time at which Milton’s granddaughter asked charity, Milton’s works were the exclusive property of a bookseller.”

    “Here, then, is a perfect illustration of the effect of long copyright. Milton’s works are the property of a single publisher. Everybody who wants them must buy them at Tonson’s shop, and at Tonson’s price. Whoever attempts to undersell Tonson is harassed with legal proceedings. Thousands who would gladly possess a copy of Paradise Lost, must forego that great enjoyment. And what, in the meantime, is the situation of the only person for whom we can suppose that the author, protected at such a cost to the public, was at all interested? She is reduced to utter destitution. Milton’s works are under a monopoly. Milton’s granddaughter is starving. The reader is pillaged; but the writer’s family is not enriched. Society is taxed doubly. It has to give an exorbitant price for the poems; and it has at the same time to give alms to the only surviving descendant of the poet.”

    Wonderful logic; excellent examples; convincing arguments; I wonder if there is one Member of Parliament who can be equally persuasive? The English race has deteriorated indeed.

  40. Hitch says:

    James Perloff had an interesting article about Hollywood helping to set up the UN acknowledgement of Israel in 1947. If all of Hollywood has been taking the MIC/CIA dime to promote all kinds of political agendas including the founding of Israel, then why couldn’t Tolkien have been on their dime as well, writing about those poor Dwarves regaining their kingdom under the lone mountain? Even the Oscar award for best picture in 1948 were awarded to a very poor quality film about Jews:


    What amazed us was that this yawner had won the “Best Picture” Oscar. Mind you, we had nothing against the film’s message: that anti-Semitism is wrong. My father was Jewish himself, though non-practicing and completely assimilated into American culture. What bothered us was the flat-tire script that not even Gregory Peck or the gifted director Elia Kazan could pump life into.

    Today, nearly half a century later, as a veteran alt-media writer, that Oscar no longer mystifies me. It was awarded on March 20, 1948. Less than two months later, the state of Israel was proclaimed; on that same day, ignoring the objections of his advisers, Harry Truman made the United States the world’s only country to recognize it.

    Dignified and popularized by its “Best Picture” status, Gentleman’s Agreement served to prep the American public for the big day, and helped ensure that opposition to the decision would be silenced—for Judaism is often conflated with Zionism, and Gentleman’s Agreement continually suggested that any criticism of Jews, however minor or inadvertent, must be stamped out (a joke today, Hitler tomorrow). Indeed, Dorothy McGuire is unable to win Gregory Peck until, at the film’s end, she too takes an active stand against anti-Semitism.

    Suddenly Tolkien’s saga about downtrodden Dwarves as cardboard cutouts for Jews makes a lot more sense.

    • Thanks: nokangaroos
  41. Tolkien invented a mythology from whole cloth for the modern England of his time using Germanic, Scandinavian, Finnish, Greek and Roman mythologies while disavowing his use of Celtic(mainly Scottish and Irish) mythologies, paradoxically loving the Welsh language as he used it as the base for Elvish. The most obvious being the name for ring in Irish Gaeilge being ‘nasc’ and Scottish Gàidhlig ‘nasg’ meaning a bond or obligation in his own words. He was an English Roman Catholic in England…enemy within and all that. Funny character, taught and toured Ireland and professed to love the people but would deny the obvious influence in his work. I read his books as a young lad and just thought it was another story and forgive him our transubstantiation into Dunlendings. It’s 1984 “Whatcha mean there’s no tranny trolls? It’s there in the Legendarium”

    ‘I was from early days grieved by the poverty of my own beloved country: it had no stories of its own (bound up with its tongue and soil), not of the quality that I sought, and found (as an ingredient) in legends of other lands. There was Greek, and Celtic, and Romance, Germanic, Scandinavian, and Finnish (which greatly affected me); but nothing English, save impoverished chap-book stuff. Of course there was and is all the Arthurian world, but powerful as it is, it is imperfectly naturalized, associated with the soil of Britain but not with English; and does not replace what I felt to be missing. For one thing its ‘faerie’ is too lavish, and fantastical, incoherent and repetitive. For another and more important thing: it is involved in, and explicitly contains the Christian religion.

    Do not laugh! But once upon a time (my crest has long since fallen) I had a mind to make a body of more or less connected legend, ranging from the large and cosmogonic, to the level of romantic fairy-story-the larger founded on the lesser in contact with the earth, the lesser drawing splendour from the vast backcloths – which I could dedicate simply to: to England; to my country. It should possess the tone and quality that I desired, somewhat cool and clear, be redolent of our ‘air’ (the clime and soil of the North West, meaning Britain and the hither parts of Europe: not Italy or the Aegean, still less the East), and, while possessing (if I could achieve it) the fair elusive beauty that some call Celtic (though it is rarely found in genuine ancient Celtic things), it should be ‘high’, purged of the gross, and fit for the more adult mind of a land long now steeped in poetry. I would draw some of the great tales in fullness, and leave many only placed in the scheme, and sketched. The cycles should be linked to a majestic whole, and yet leave scope for other minds and hands, wielding paint and music and drama. Absurd’

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
  42. @Anonymous

    E. Michael Jones on Tolkien’s failed quest …

    Thank you for the link. Despite the fact that, as others have said, very little of the interview concerns LotR, there was much to like and, as ever with Jones, to be surprised or disarmed by, even—perhaps especially—when one finds himself unable to agree.

    I didn’t catch the interviewing kid’s name, but no great loss there. The kid’s constant reliance on “like” to fill the gaps where words or thoughts failed him left me wishing I could apply my knee to his neck for about an hour.

    • Replies: @Hitch
  43. Jim H says:

    ‘JRR Tolkien is “Exhibit A” in the argument for why copyright law is complete lunacy. Tolkien has been dead for 50 years. LotR should be in the public domain, not being sold by the Jews for billions of dollars.’ – Andrew Anglin

    Exhibit B is Mickey Mouse:

    ‘Mickey Mouse will enter the public domain in the year 2024, almost 95 years after his creation on 1 October 1928 – the length of time after which the copyright on an anonymous or pseudo-anonymous body of artistic work expires.

    Daniel Mayeda at UCLA School of Law said the copyright expiration does not come without limitations.

    “You can use the Mickey Mouse character as it was originally created to create your own Mickey Mouse stories. But if you do so in a way that people will think of Disney, then in theory, Disney could say you violated my trademark.”

    Copyright, extended far beyond an adult human lifetime, locks down our own culture. Now Disney is plotting new ways to lock it down forever.

    Disney is Public Enemy No. 1 in this regard, having corruptly lobbied for president Bill Clinton to sign the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998.

    Boycott Disney. Buttfuck the Mouse with a splintered broom handle.

    • Agree: Hitch
  44. @Hitch

    When I look back on the portrayal of the Dwarves in Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, it really does seem that Tolkien was acting as a philo-jewish propaganda organ.

    It isn’t clear one way or the other from your comment, but I get the distinct impression that you are reacting to the movies rather than the books. Am I right or wrong? As I have never seen any of the Hobbit films, however, in part because I was very offended by what Peter Jackson did to the second and third parts of LotR, an impression is all that my reaction can honestly be said to be.

    My point, to speak plainly, is that I simply don’t see how a reader of the books could react as you have. I first read LotR in the autumn of 1966, and I reread it either four or five times subsequently, though the last time was almost thirty years ago. Nor does The Silmarillion display any evidence of “philo-Jewish propaganda”—and that is a book that I reread much more recently. The same is true of the Book of Lost Tales and of the four or five volumes in the History of Middle-Earth series that I read before failing eyesight changed the reading of books from a fulfilling pleasure to a wearisome chore.

    • Replies: @Hitch
  45. Jim H says:

    ‘Standing on the shoulders of giants lets you see farther, so it should be possible to right [sic] not just some cheap knockoff, but a genuinely superior version of the thing.’ – Alrenous

    To create a genuinely superior version, it would be immensely helpful, first and foremost, to know how to spell ‘write.’

    Also to hold your pen pointy end down …

    • Replies: @Alrenous
  46. @The Alarmist

    Well, I honestly can’t argue with your point. Great graphic, by the way. But they’d need more massive vote fraud than appears to usually occur in US elections, to put her over the top the way she is (rightly) hated and resented by a big majority in Wyoming.

  47. JRR Tolkien is “exhibit A” in the argument for why copyright law is complete lunacy. I’m not an expert in the field, and I’m sure there are some arguments for protecting copyright while someone is alive so they can earn that income. But turning a system designed to keep people from profiting by printing someone else’s books into a system of keeping legal possession of ideas and words from 100 years ago is clearly just a scam.

    There is every reason to believe that Tolkien would have had no quarrel with Anglin on this score.

    A Statement from the Author about This American Edition

    “This paperback edition, and no other, has been published with my consent and co-operation. Those who approve of courtesy (at least) to living authors will purchase it, and no other.”
    —JRR Tolkien [as reproduction of signature]

    The author’s note reproduced above,* which reasonably asks for exclusivity during the author’s lifetime, was printed on the back of every copy of the first authorized US paperback edition of LotR. A pirate paperback edition from Ace Books had appeared in, I believe, 1964. Besides preventing Tolkien from earning even a cent for his labors, the edition was riddled with errors, virtually on every page. The authorized edition, published by Ballantine Books, then a division of Houghton Mifflin (both now RIP in the form in which they existed then), was almost identical to the hardcover edition of the mid-fifties. Corrections from Tolkien’s original MS submission, along with subsequent corrections that the author made to his own MS, became justifications for full republication in the late seventies (if memory serves).
    *I scanned the actual cover from the copy of The Fellowship of the Ring on my shelves, but I don’t know how to link a homemade .jpg file to a comment.

  48. @Ed Case

    Stan Lee stayed married to the same woman for about 70 years. But he had a daughter who was in questionable mental health and had to be bailed out from financially ruining herself, and in his later years he got into business deals with some crooked people.

  49. Wokechoke says:

    It was first published by Blackwell’s bookshop wasn’t it? I find it hard to think of the book without the context of Headington, Broad Street and the villages west of Oxford. London always feels a little like Mordor in that context.

    No need to think of anything beyond England. Even Smaug is just a rich old Lord (Rothschild) who has it all and only notices it when some yokel takes a trinket.

  50. Alrenous says: • Website
    @Jim H

    Good gotcha. I’m sure all your friends will be very impressed.

    Yes, that was an error. It resulted from the fact I have to think very carefully about the word ‘copyright’ to spell it correctly, and then a cache didn’t get cleared.

  51. Alrenous says: • Website

    stuff you don’t own?

    The discussion is about current copyright laws

    Kindly think about what you’re saying enough that I don’t accidentally think about it more than you have.

    You think that’s a nice law.

    Also, kindly into reading comprehension.

    You don’t own copyright law. It’s not your law.

    When you want to change a law that you don’t personally own, it is an act of war. I don’t see you raising an army, though? I see you snarking off in a fringe comment section. Specifically against someone who is telling you how to neutralize current copyright law without having to change it.

    Well, you can’t wake up someone pretending to be asleep. Last Psych: the American is upset about copyright law so that they may consider the legislature legitimate. Gotta defend that status quo.

    P.S. Anglin is relying on the LoTR copyright, which he does not personally own. Nor does his lord own it on his behalf. Shit status: not secured.

  52. Wokechoke says:
    @Dilín ó Deamhas

    The LoTR stuff reminds me of William Blake mostly.

    • Replies: @Dilín ó Deamhas
  53. Alrenous says: • Website
    @James J. O'Meara

    Tolkein’s peak stuff is distinctly mediocre. It has its high points, but it’s way too infected with Christianity to actually be good.

    Nevertheless, this compares favourably to nearly every other author of the so-called democratic age.

    E.g. there’s a ring a power, but, uh, Tolkein doesn’t even tell, let alone show the ring being powerful. Why would Sauron of all people care about being invisible? Whatever it really does, we never see it, or even hear about it. Nice nod to Plato I guess, maybe also see the part where he absolutely shreds democracy, that part’s kind of more important.

    I do like how the book continues after the climax. Although I don’t care about the characters, because I find they deserved to lose, so it’s boring and I skipped more of that than I did the rest of the works. Also apparently ents exist because Tolkein thought Hamlet was too unimaginative, which I can get behind.

    Tolkein was a proper non-hypocritical Christian, meaning he was a Revolutionary. The high (Sauron, elves) will be brought low, and the low (hobbits) exalted.

  54. The most sacred race in the UK.

  55. Franz says:

    For a long time copyright didn’t exist and authors used each other’s material at will. Shakespeare copied and pasted from lots of sources.

    Good point.

    Even where copyright law existed, it usually stopped at the border.

    In the 19th century Arthur Conan Doyle was America’s favorite mystery writer. But he never made a dime because American publishers just pirated stuff from overseas. Victor Hugo was another favorite that never got money for the US editions of his stuff, and they sold well.

    The old USSR shamelessly published anything they liked from the Free World copyright-free. Why would they want to make capitalist fatcats fatter?

    • Replies: @Hitch
  56. Hitch says:
    @Pierre de Craon

    I read The Hobbit probably in the early ’70’s and Lord of the Rings and Silmarillion in the mid ’70’s. I re-read The Hobbit and and Lord of the Rings when by children were growing up, probably in the late ’90’s or early 2000’s. That was all before I became “Jew aware”. I would like to say “Jew woke”, but unfortunately the “woke” has been hijacked by the globalists and the sodomites.

    I watched all the Jackson films shortly after they came out. I recently watched Hobbit 1+2 with my two grandsons, so I will concede that I am referring far more to the Hobbit films than the book.

    However, I would contend that there are too many parallels between the Dwarves and the Jews for it to be mere coincidence. I would also contend that Dwarves are portrayed it far to generous a light for any “Jew aware” “alt-right” European to accept Tolkiens portrayal as anything but a sugar coating of their perverted, depraved, sadistic and even genocidal history would demand. Finally, I would point out that the timing of the release of these books with the formation of the state of Israel is highly suspect.

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
  57. Hitch says:

    But he never made a dime because ((American publishers)) just pirated stuff from overseas.


    This was during the period when Jews were weak. Now Jews are strong, and strong copyright laws are good for Jews, whereas earlier strong copyright laws were NOT good for Jews.

  58. Thomm says:

    I am reminded of a day in the recent past, when the formidable trio of Ron Unz, Fred Reed, and Chanda Chisala did battle with a swarming horde of 100 WN wiggers. Evenly matched at this ratio, the battle was lengthy, epic, and multi-front, since it spilled into multiple threads. Chanda Chisala in particular wielded a veritable battle axe of rhetorical might.

    This battle was analogous to the ‘300’ Spartans who held the much larger force under the Obama-like Xerxes at bay at Thermopylae. Except that instead of 300 there were just 3 over here. Ron Unz was a Leonidas of our times. Like Leonidas before him, Ron Unz built a wall of his enemies’ skulls.

    This battle was also analogous to a situation of Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli taking on the Orcs of Mordor. And they did not have the Army of the Dead to help them either.

    Many great hymns shall emerge from this battle. It was a battle for the ages :

    • Troll: Hitch
  59. Hitch says:
    @Pierre de Craon

    The kid’s constant reliance on “like”

    An entire generation has been brought up with speech impediments. “Like” is not nearly as offputting as uptick and vocal fry, especially among college educated women. Clearly Jones is trying to reach out to the Millennials and Gen-Y’s, and he should be lauded for that. I certainly would not have his patience.

    • Replies: @Pierre de Craon
    , @Alrenous
  60. Rogue says:

    I must confess, I also found the LOTR trilogy a bit of a tedious read – though I did finish them.

    At the end of the last book was a gigantic chunk of addendums about LOTR related stuff. That I decided to give a distinct miss.

    The Hobbit (much shorter book for kids) was actually a lot more fun.

    The films were good – but not worth a repeat watch.

  61. Anon[178] • Disclaimer says:

    Sauron is Hitler and the Hobbits are Little England. The Elves etc. are the Allies against Hitler. It’s straight-up propaganda from British intelligence. Remove that context and it’s a pile of kitsch.

    • Thanks: Hitch
    • Replies: @Wokechoke
    , @GenFranco
    , @anonlb
  62. Smith says:

    Embracer group/THQ publishes a bunch of good games actually (Destroy All Humans, Darksiders, ELEX).

    Kinda weird that Anglin wants the LOTR licence to stay with american companies when it should belong to european.

    Ah yes, never mind, Anglin is still an american and think America is somehow “better” than Europe LOL

  63. @Wokechoke

    I wander thro’ each charter’d street,
    Near where the charter’d Thames does flow.
    And mark in every face I meet
    Marks of weakness, marks of woe.

  64. Yeah, copyright law is a joke in America.

    Take for instance, computer programs which have been obsolete for twenty years and you still can’t get a look at the source code!

  65. @Polistra

    I believe that he is 75% responsible for the breakup of the rock band, Creedence Clearwater Revival. If he had been half the manager and businessman he thinks he is, he would have WORKED with the group and attempted to help them patch up their differences and get on with making good music. But with him, it was all about the money; nothing else.

  66. Wokechoke says:

    Doesn’t quite fit. The Russians sort of recognized themselves in the demonization of the orcs like that Last ring bearer book. The Orcs never quite matched the Germans.

    What is Gondor and what is Rohan? Just various humans, city and countryside. Elves just seem like an alien species lording it over the men. Sauron is characterized as a literal supernatural demon as are the Orcs, which are a sort of demon elf.

    Elves and orcs just seem like a supernatural set of angels and demons interfering in the conflicts among the men. This is consistent with AngloSaxon dark ages lore.

    Hobbits function like a way for children to identify with a set of smaller characters.

    Perhaps that is kitsch. fair enough.

    • Replies: @Alexandros
  67. Bill says:

    Exactly. The rules are inviolate. Never complain about them or try to change them. And, when your betters change them, don’t complain just because you were too feckless to change them yourself.

    • Replies: @Alrenous
  68. GenFranco says:
    @James J. O'Meara

    Yes, Tolkien despised the telephone and the automobile with a white-hot passion. I don’t see him getting all giddy when someone gives him a Playstation.

    • Replies: @Alrenous
  69. GenFranco says:

    Agreed. I’m a huge fan and he was a great man in a lot of ways, but he lived in a time and a place where one could ignore jewish supremacy and pretend it did not exist. Like rural Canadians in the 1960s on the subject of black crime, Tolkien’s naïveté had no immediate or personal consequences.

    I’d like to think if he lived today and saw what was going on he’d at least glance in the direction of that red pill. But this is probably just a huge fan’s fantasy.

  70. GenFranco says:

    Sauren could be Hitler or Stalin, or anyone who industrializes and makes war. Tolkien despised such easy analogies in fiction. The Shire was threatened by the machine-world. Tolkien’s ideas on this go back before WWII.

    “It’s straight-up propaganda from British intelligence.”

    This is very silly.

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
  71. @Priss Factor

    I’m guessing she was denied because the transgender woman isn’t obese like most American females. We have a new crop of American white girls arriving in Dalian for their semester abroad (only 26 this year, compared to 43 fellas and 1 they/them) and 19 of the bio-femoids appear to be overweight. One is 6’6, probably 250lbs. Some variety of Scandinavian giantess hogged up on corn syrup.

    On the bright side, they’re going to encounter a slice of Chinese hospitality — there will be fat jokes to their faces.

  72. @Hitch

    “Like” is not nearly as offputting as uptick and vocal fry, especially among college educated women.

    Could you shed some light on my ignorance with respect to what “uptick” and “vocal fry” mean in this context? It would be much appreciated. Perhaps a link to an example?

    Since the topic is irritating speech habits that in large part result from having American kids educated by foreign-born or black teachers for whom standard American English is barely a second (even a third) language—and then having these bad habits reinforced, by osmosis, by Jewish trend-setters in the (((news and entertainment media))) who delightedly pick up those lowlife speech patterns—allow me to mention something that has driven me crazy for almost twenty years: the near-complete disappearance among people under 55 or so of the centuries-old pronunciation of the word the as if it were spelled thee when the precedes a word starting with a vowel. The result of this misguided, nonnative change is that millions of people now regularly use ugly glottal stops in our language, which till the day before yesterday had virtually none.

    Take the following sentence. In a spoken context, all too many people will fail to pronounce the the’s as thee’s and will instead make ugly clicking sounds more appropriate to Vietnamese or Squamish than to English. (The symbol “ʔ” is the phonetic character for a glottal stop.)

    The [ʔ] American, the [ʔ] Englishman, and the [ʔ] Italian caught a glimpse of the [ʔ] underwear of the [ʔ] Okinawan girl.

    Why can I never find my Glock 17 when I really need it?

    • Replies: @Hitch
  73. Hitch says:
    @Pierre de Craon

    Sorry, it is uptalk not uptick.

    Uptalk is the annoying habit of people using a higher pitch to close a sentence or phrase.

    Uptalkers put an upward inflection on the final word of a statement. In English, rising intonation indicates questions, so uptalk statements sound like questions.

    Vocal fry refers to sound created by a specific movement of the vocal folds. Normally, vocal folds rapidly open and close as air passes through them. However, if vocal folds close completely for brief periods before opening, the vibration causes a strange sound.

    Uptalk has been spreading like pandemic across the English speaking world, but where I noticed the most pronounced explosion of this nasty habit was from Australia during the Covid lock downs. Virtually every minister in every newscast became upticking blithering idiots. Check out this little press conference with Prime Minister Scott Morrison:

    This conference is also loaded:

    Women started over using vocal fry about a decade ago. Apparently they think it makes them sound smarter and more intelligent. During the last few decades I also believe that American women especially speak in deeper, more masculine, tones. It is just another aspect of the feminist war on femininity.

    • Replies: @Pierre de Craon
  74. Alrenous says: • Website

    No, that’s not what I said. Good attempt, though; partial credit. Care to try again?

    • Replies: @Alrenous
  75. Alrenous says: • Website

    Uptick sounds like this? Everything they say sounds like a question? Allegedly it’s supposed to display humility, like they’re willing to be tentative and accept correction? It’s super annoying because typically they’re fully dogmatic? The combination of insecurity and stubbornness is extremely offputting?

    Vocal fry is done by constricting the throat. Basically shading the voice with fart noises. Like they’ve almost shut up, but not quite.

  76. Alrenous says: • Website

    The Amish have demonstrated he was more correct than not about these things.

    Although it would have been a lot better if America hadn’t legalized running over children.

  77. Wokechoke says:

    The Eye in the tower could just as easily be Westminster Tower

    • Replies: @Francis Miville
  78. Wokechoke says:

    The Dwarves are not entirely likeable though are they? And you gotta have some sympathy for Smaug. He’s either a superkike or a grizzled Autocrator.

  79. @RadicalCenter

    Cheney croaks worse than Rodham-Clinton when she speaks. If campaigning were limited to candidates presenting voters with concise, intelligent essays, Cheney might have a better chance. But campaigning in the 21st century relies on live or electronic face time and speeches; and if your voice is unpleasant, people are not going to listen to you, and few will vote for you.

    Cheney should just enjoy the money she’s amassed selling political favors; and if she gets bored, she can do something like peddle reverse mortgages or payday loans.

  80. anonlb says:

    Sauron is Stalin:pretended to be ally of Trocky and other proponents of world comunist revolution until sized all power in USSR and tried to ‘rule them all'(extend his rule as much as possible).
    Hitler is Saruman: also started as an UK/USA ally but had different agenda, developed superior orcish race than Sauron, planned to eliminate and replace Sauron and his inferior orcs.
    Final LoTR battle is inspired by the last Ottoman attack on Wiena, in this context Sauron is turkish slutan Soleiman the Magnificent (died by natural death during attack), Rohirims are Poles whose calvary carge saved Wiena.

  81. @Hitch

    Thank you very much for the explanations. I am familiar (grrrr!) with both phenomena, just not with the names. Both terms are striking in their descriptiveness, and uptalk is particularly clever.

    Uptalk has been spreading like pandemic across the English speaking world …

    It certainly has.

    I first noticed it, however, a long time ago—i.e., the eighties, I’d say—when all of a sudden, it seemed as if every coed in the country, especially the ones at upscale colleges (of which NYC metro area has too damn many), had decided overnight that the “cool” way to talk was like a Valley girl. Indeed, I’ve often thought that they picked up the affectation from movies. It’s a pity that they all didn’t decide to mimic Julia Ormond instead.

    The problem, of course, is that when pretty girls start doing something that seems important to them, it’s never long before the boys who are trying to get into their knickers start doing the same thing.

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
  82. Wokechoke says:
    @Pierre de Craon

    There are several English actresses who ought to have been imitated by American girls. True.

    • Thanks: Pierre de Craon
  83. The carbuncles on the behind of humanity will continue unabated until extirpated.

  84. Alrenous says: • Website

    Not interested in a second attempt? Okay, I will take a second turn myself, then.

    Exactly. Us slaves should whine to master when we don’t like how we’re being whipped. When master changes from leather to pleather whips, make sure you tell him what you think about the new material. My rulers are inviolate, because they are better than me.

    Yes, I suppose I do need to explicitly tag my comments as formatted for non-slaves. American voters should skip them, as they don’t apply to mindless NPC sheep.

    Last Psychiatrist: the American whines about the whipping so that he may show up for tomorrow’s whipping.

    A moment of silence for those who were born unable to rebel against reject mortal authority.

    • Replies: @Bill
  85. @neutral

    … the perversion and destruction of [Tolkien’s] works by these corporate jews was very predictable.

    Of this, there can be no doubt.

    He was your typical good mannered British citizen that was absolutely clueless about the jews …

    This is dubious at best. Tolkien was distinctly atypical in the Britain of his day because he was a practicing Roman Catholic—indeed, a devout one, as can be learned from the testimony of everyone who knew him, as well as from Humphrey Carpenter’s authorized biography. On the basis of the experience of Chesterton, Belloc, and many other pre–Vatican II Catholics—including my own parents, who were born in 1909 and 1913—the perfidy of the Jews was a regular theme of sermons at Sunday Mass and was not glossed over in intermediate and higher education at pre–World War II Catholic institutions.

    Being far-from-welcome minorities in both Britain and the USA in at least the first forty years of the twentieth century, Catholics learned to keep their mouth shut about (((who))) was doing what to whom. Still, from the shanty Irish to the Establishment-wannabee sellouts, a great many Catholics back then knew the score. As the Second Vatican Council did with many other things (too many to count), it “adapted” the Church to the modern world by saying, in effect, that what had been bad about the Jews for nineteen centuries was now good.

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
  86. @Wokechoke

    He is being far too harsh on Tolkien. Yes he had his faults. He surrendered to Jews. He was an arrogant and clueless Englishman. He was a Catholic fool.

    But there is a reason his legacy is so beloved by white people. His soul longed for the myths of the Germanic people, and while he would never admit it, all his characters were developed on racial lines.

    The good guys:

    Hobbits: Englishmen.
    Gondorians: Germans.
    Rohan: Vikings
    Elves: OG Aryans.
    Dwarves: Whitewashed Jews.

    The bad guys:

    Sauron: Satan
    Haradrim: Sandniggers
    Orcs: Niggers
    Saruman: Fallen white man.

    Apart from the Jews it is clear where Tolkiens sensibilities lay when it comes to race. He could just not see past his Christian and Jewish Liberal upbringing, like so many boomers. George Lucas is a bit similar. Most of his heroes are Germanic looking whites, while the bad guys are some form of Jew.

  87. Alrenous says: • Website

    No no that social manoeuvre goes like this:

    • Replies: @Bill
  88. File under NO ONE CARES.

    Grown White men should not be fantasizing about wizards and dwarfs. It’s all reality avoidance.

    The books were never that great and Elijah Wood was awful. Sauron was right to go after him. He has such a punchable face.

    I really don’t get those movies. They are mediocre sludge.

    • Replies: @Wokechoke
  89. loren says:

    SAUL Z…john fogerty wrote a song about him amd a lawsuit resulted.

    John Fogerty had a band and sign w Saul and made saul richer.

  90. Bill says:

    You didn’t get that the first time, so I helped you to understand out of a surfeit of charity.

    • Replies: @Alrenous
  91. Alrenous says: • Website

    No no, not like that. Watch carefully. Let me demonstrate again:

    • Replies: @Bill
  92. Wokechoke says:
    @John Johnson

    Why do the Ukrainians use the Lord of the Rings story as their national mythos now? They call the Russians Orcs and themselves Shirelings.

  93. Wokechoke says:
    @Pierre de Craon

    Evelyn Waugh understood the Jews well enough. Same type of Catholic as Tolkien. Same education and status. The Catholics in the UK are one of three things. Irish migrants, intellectual converts or aristocrats with recusant family histories. Like the Dukes of Norfolk. Highly placed in the court. The Dwarves don’t come off well in the Hobbit and are wiped out in the Fellowship.

    Smaug could also be a Jewish banker for all that.

  94. @Wokechoke

    The real bigger thing has been built as Mecca’s Grand Mosque’s minaret skyscraper with a horned moon crescent atop.

  95. Atle says:

    “Jews Sell Lord of the Rings Gaming Rights to Garbage Swedes”.

    Like anybody didn’t know that shit

  96. @Alrenous

    Yess, sister! Let the free market free those hobbit children from the authoritarian Shire & it’s uptight homophobic attitudes!

  97. @Hitch

    The Dwarves were hardly portrayed as “eternal victims” in the Hobbit or Lord of the Rings. They were instead portrayed as often meeting any doomed ends they did due to their own greed, hubris and unwillingness to work with the other races. The idea that pro Jewish propaganda played a part in Tolkien’s writing process is dumb beyond even the most lardbrained wignat’s “fit blame Jews peg in every square” imagining.

  98. @Hitch

    Fleming was the head of an intelligence agency while Tolkein fought in the trenches, if that doesn’t tell you something then you just don’t want to hear it.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Andrew Anglin Comments via RSS
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Talk TV sensationalists and axe-grinding ideologues have fallen for a myth of immigrant lawlessness.
How America was neoconned into World War IV