The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 James Lawrence Archive
An Antidote to the Jewpill (Part 2: Antichristianity)
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

In the first part of this post, we took a hammer to the work of Dr. Kevin MacDonald – albeit not primarily to destroy, but to build. What we built was a theory in which the revolutionary, progressive ideology co-opted and converted the Jews to its own purposes, rather than the other way around.

The order of events in history being what it is, we might assume that this theory could not possibly be opposed by any intelligent person. In Europe, it was the French revolution that emancipated the Jews, not the Jews who unleashed the revolution. In America, it was the Progressive and New Deal movements that raised them into the governing elite, and set the stage for everything that MacDonald describes in The Culture of Critique. Even Zionism, contrary to popular belief on the Dissident Right, was a 19th-century Protestant religious obsession (called ‘restorationism’) before it was taken up by Jewish nationalists like Emma Lazarus and Theodore Herzl.

Alas, this theory contradicts the central dogma of white nationalism: that racial self-interest is primary, and truths, doctrines and ideas are secondary. WNs want to live in a dark fever-dream, where every race except the white one is strategising for its self-interest under a cynical veil of ideals – and we need only become paranoid enough to perceive the hidden strategies, and deceptive enough to conceal our own self-interest in the same way. They do not want to live in the light of consciousness, where ideals really motivate individuals, and solidify the cohesion of groups – because in this reality, their own dream is reduced to a narrow and paltry ideal, a cult of biological race.

What they need, in order to defend their dogma, is some way of inverting the historical narrative and projecting Jewish machinations onto revolutionary movements before the 20th century. As I showed at the end of the first part of this post, MacDonald’s Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition can be of little use here, as it shows too much fidelity to history. Although presented as a supplement to MacDonald’s trilogy on the Jews, this book in fact undermines them, by laying out a theory of ‘moral communities’ based on shared ideals rather than racial interests. Once we understand the revolutionary, progressive ideology as just such a ‘moral community’ – to all intents and purposes, a separate religious tribe in its own right – we can no longer follow MacDonald in excusing gentile elite behaviour as ‘individualism’, while attributing collective motives for social destruction solely to the Jews.

Now, it is a matter of historical fact that the progressivist religion originated not from Judaism, but from post-Reformation Christian heresies that adapted their doctrines to the corruptions of power. And having passed through all sorts of mutations (or degenerations), it now bestraddles the US imperial order in much the same way that the Catholic Church once bestraddled Western Christendom. Can we expect a vacuous, amoral, narrow-minded cult of the white race to do battle with this dragon? Somehow it seems more likely that when a lie has metastasised into a universal, absolute lie, then only a universal and absolute truth can do battle with it.

Enter Dr. E. Michael Jones, stage right, into the dissident movement.

Jones has a solution: the West has to go back to its old church, the Catholic one, and reject progressivism and white nationalism alike. Not only does he assert the primacy of religion over race, ideals over interests, God over Man, etc., but he even goes as far as to say that race does not exist. I can’t say I agree with him on that last point, but you have to admire his total lack of compromise on it. He is out to convert the Race Cult to his religion, and has no intention of being converted to its idolatry.

But the Race Cult doesn’t need to convert Jones. All it needs is to use his book, The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit (hereafter JRS), as ballast to plug the holes in the Jewpill that always open up when progressivism is traced back beyond the 19th and 20th centuries. The synthesising glue will be the Darwinist ontology of the Race Cult (i.e. racial interests come first, religious ideals second) – which allows white nationalists to talk about ‘God’ and ‘Truth’ and ‘Logos’ and so on with a nudge and a wink, knowing that all of these are just so many adaptive memes to be utilised by the biological tribe. A superficial acceptance of Christianity will allow the Race Cult to lie low in an increasingly religious and traditionalist Dissident Right, until it has gathered up enough energies to return to its activist form and repeat its destruction of the Alt-Right.

Am I being uncharitable? Paranoid? Preposterous? You be the judge – at least one Jewpiller is already getting started with the synthesis of Jones and MacDonald, and hinting none-too-subtly at its desired results:

“Of course, Jones is dead wrong about [race], but…this intellectual chasm between the two men is all the more reason to achieve a synthesis of MacDonald and Jones…over the last two decades I’ve found myself accepting a belief in the existence of Satan and Evil, and undeniably, from the perspectives of Whites and other non-Jews, Jews are inextricably associated with Satan, though I’ll leave it to others to argue whether they are, in some sense, actually Satan or more along the lines of being under the spell of that malicious being.” (emphasis added)

Satan as Le Happy Merchant! And “from the perspectives of Whites”, no less – because every good WN takes his religious truths and moral absolutes with a large pinch of Salter, and treats them as relative to the material interest of the ethnic-genetic tribe!

This is not so much heresy as outright travesty, so we can assume that Jones would not approve. However, by writing a book full of outrageous fallacies that blames the revolutionary tradition squarely on the Jews, he has given the Race Cult all it needs to keep its hold on a dissident movement increasingly sceptical of activist herdthink and atheistic social science. And thus he has given us more than enough reason to treat him as a Jewpiller in this post, although strictly speaking he is not.

The Revolutionary Spirit and the Jews

I welcome Jones’s emphasis on truth and reason over irrational racial strivings. But wisdom is a harsh mistress, and those who lack the competence to court her will end up embracing the same delusions as those who reject her outright.

This book has some value as history, but ought to be renamed to The Revolutionary Spirit and the Jews, for this is its true subject matter.
This book has some value as history, but ought to be renamed to The Revolutionary Spirit and the Jews, for this is its true subject matter.

And I really do mean the exact same delusions. Just like MacDonald – who claimed that the Jewish God was a symbol for Israelite genes in A People That Shall Dwell Alone – Jones begins his study with an eccentric definition of Judaism. The difference is that this idea is much more important to the coherence of Jones’s argument, because he tends to work by logic where MacDonald would work by empirical evidence. This book contains over a thousand pages of detailed narrative history, but it is all held together by a few flimsy logical threads – which we will now proceed to cut.

So what is Judaism, according to Jones? It is a tribal identity, but more importantly, it is a tradition of revolutionary opposition to the Christian principle of Logos:

“At this point we come to…the Jewish attack on Logos, which manifests itself not by the threat of invasion from without, as is the case with Islam…but by the threat of subversion from within, otherwise known as revolution. If Muslims are alogos [i.e. irrational, unreasonable]…then Jews are anti-Logos, in the sense that they reject Christ altogether. Islam did not reject Christ; Islam failed to understand Christ…

“The situation with Jews is completely different. The Jews were God’s chosen people. When Jesus arrived on earth as their long-awaited Messiah, the Jews…had to make a decision. They had to either accept or reject the Christ, who was, so Christians believe, the physical embodiment of Logos.

“As we will see, the Jews began by wanting to have the Messiah save them on their own terms, which were suffused with racial pride. When the Jews tells Jesus in John 8 that they are the “seed of Abraham”…He changes the term of the argument by replying “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do as Abraham did”, which is to say follow God’s will and accept Jesus as the son of God and the Messiah…

“Once Jesus arrives in Jerusalem, the term Jew in the Gospel of St. John is no longer a purely racial term. Jew has come to mean a rejecter of Christ. Race is no longer the focus. The Jews who accept Jesus will henceforth be known as Christians. The Jews who reject him are known henceforth as “Jews”. As St. John reports in the Apocalypse, “those who call themselves Jews” are really liars and members of the “Synagogue of Satan”…

“The Jews rejected Christ because he was crucified. They wanted a powerful leader, not a suffering servant… When the Jews rejected Christ, they rejected Logos, and when they rejected Logos, which includes within itself the principles of social order, they became revolutionaries.” (JRS, pp.14-15; all emphasis added)

Does Jones back up his interpretation of Jewish beliefs with an analysis of the Talmud, or perhaps the Kabbalah? Certainly not – wherever he mentions such Jewish religious writings in his book, it is only to dismiss them as “mumbo-jumbo” or make vague and sweeping assertions about their teachings. His first stop for corroborating evidence is the self-report of modern American Jews:

“The renowned Jewish scholar Jacob Neusner [says], tellingly, that Christianity plays a special role in defining who counts as a Jew either ethnically or religiously: “the ethnic community opens its doors not by reason of outsiders’ adopting the markers of ethnicity…but by reason of adopting what is not ethnic but religious… While not all Jews practice Judaism, in the iron-clad consensus among contemporary Jews, Jews who practice Christianity cease to be part of the ethnic Jewish community, while those who practice Buddhism remain within.”

“Without knowing it, Neusner is simply restating the thesis of this book: when Judaism rejected Christ it rejected Logos as well. In rejecting Christ, Judaism took on a negative identity… The recent Jewish convert to Catholicism, Roy Schoeman, writes: “I remember praying, ‘Let me know your name – I don’t mind if you are Buddha, and I have to become a Buddhist; I don’t mind if you are Apollo, and I have to become a Roman pagan; I don’t mind if you are Krishna, and I have to become a Hindu; as long as you are not Christ and I have to become a Christian!'”” (p.18, emphasis added)

Before we even start scrutinising the not-so-orthodox credentials of Neusner and Schoeman, common sense should tell us that the “iron-clad consensus among contemporary Jews” is heavily influenced by modern liberalism, nationalism and progressivism. (The same, of course, can be said for the “iron-clad consensus” among contemporary Christians – which is, of course, that Jews are poisecuded victims who dindu nuffin and that people like Jones are bigots.) Traditional, religious, shtetl-dwelling Jews – i.e. the ones discussed throughout most of JRS – would not give the time of day to a ‘Jew’ who didn’t practice Judaism and conflated the name of God with Buddha, Apollo and Krishna, regardless of what they thought of Christianity.

But Jones pronounces this basic-bitch secularised Semitism to be entirely consistent with the Talmud – on the grounds that that three-thousand-page tome, among its innumerable hairsplitting dialectics, contains a “deliberate and sophisticated anti-Christian polemic” (very logic!) Then he brings up the history of Jewish support for revolutionary, anti-Christian forces – citing the theory of Kevin MacDonald (much reason!) – and traces it back to the Jewish national revolts against the Roman Empire, a polytheist state that also treated Christians as subversives (so rationality!) This, at least, serves to make the point that the Jews chose revolution over the spiritual conquest of Rome because they wanted a “carnal” Messiah:

Political messianism is a manifestation of the carnal Jew. According to the Church Fathers, the Jews perennially await a Messiah who will restore their political power. Christianity is incompatible with political messianism and Jewish revolutionary activity because it recognises another [spiritual, otherwordly] Messiah.” (p.66; emphasis added)

From this point, Jones goes on to write a fairly standard Trad-Cath history of humanism, Renaissance occultism, Protestantism, heretical millenarianism, Enlightenment liberalism, and revolutionary communism and progressivism – albeit bound up with the conceit that those who took part in these movements were “linked to Jews or heavily influenced by Jews” (p.20). As we’ll see, most of the historical facts presented by Jones do not justify this narrative focus. And the chapters of the book in which the Jews recede furthest into the background are precisely those that deal with the crucial outbreak of heresy and revolution, in the Renaissance and early modern eras.

During these chapters, Jones is wending through the history of revolutionary movements overwhelmingly carried out by Christians, and leans heavily on the idea that the revolutionaries were “judaisers” or “demi-Jews” serving an essentially Jewish cause. Sometimes he will find an immediate foothold for this in the fact that so-and-so studied Hebrew, dabbled in the Kabbalah, had some contact with Jews, or made overtures to the Jewish community. Ultimately, though, the equation of Christian revolutionaries with Jews is nothing but a brittle, hollow crook of casuistry, crafted out of the borderline-nonsensical arguments made at the beginning of JRS.

If you publicly take up the cause of defending logos, only to hang a thousand pages of convoluted narrative history on a fallacy of the undistributed middle
If you publicly take up the cause of defending logos, only to hang a thousand pages of convoluted narrative history on a fallacy of the undistributed middle

It can be expressed as follows: 1) Judaism is synonymous with revolution, anti-Christianity, carnalised messianism, and racial tribalism (plus extraneous and irrelevant “mumbo-jumbo”); therefore 2) anything else that is revolutionary, anti-Christian (i.e. anti-Catholic), carnally messianic, and somehow favourable to the Jewish racial tribe is synonymous with Judaism. Kick this crutch out from under Jones’s narrative, and it turns upside-down – or rather, right-side-up – and becomes a history of Christian-derived revolutionary movements that allied with and partially converted the Jews.

Am I strawmanning Jones? Misrepresenting him? Let’s lay out a few examples from JRS (all emphasis added hereafter), so you can judge for yourself:

“Around the time of the first crusade, millennialism, the Jewish Messianic philosophy of history and political liberation based on the Book of Daniel, broke out in Europe after remaining largely dormant for a millennium. Ironically, it broke out among people who were not Jews, and, more ironically, the Jews suffered at their hands.” (p.88)

He’s talking about the Rhineland massacres of Jews during the People’s Crusade, an outburst of popular messianism sparked off by Pope Urban II and led by the anti-Jewish Peter the Hermit. In this case, the so-called Jewish revolutionary spirit not only had nothing to do with the Jews, but was not even “somehow favourable to the Jewish racial tribe”. So it looks like I have, indeed, misrepresented Jones – by steelmanning him.

“The concept “holy nation” as a conflation of the secular “regnum” with the spiritual “ecclesia” is a Jewish idea. The Hussite revolution was, at its core, a rejection of the Roman Church and its adherence to Christ’s claim that his kingdom was not of this world. The popes would term the idea that a holy nation wielding the sword could create heaven on earth a return to the vomit of Judaism. This was the essence of revolution then, and revolutionaries from Bar Kokhba to Trotsky have remained faithful to this creed.” (p.153)

This is from the fifth chapter on the Hussite movement in Bohemia – in which Jones points out circumstantially that Prague was a centre of Jewish usury, and that the local Jews mucked in with the rest of the population when the Hussites had to defend it against a royalist siege, but comes up with precious little else by way of direct Jewish involvement. There was certainly a foreign influence on the heretical ideology of the Hussites, but it came from the Englishman John Wycliffe – whose country had been purged of Jews by Edward I over a hundred years earlier.

“Luther was a philo-Semite, who in a few years would become a violent anti-Semite, but he was also a Judaizer malgré lui [in spite of himself]. Luther did for Christianity what Jochanan ben Zakkai did for Judaism: he turned the evangelical Church into a debating society, in which the evangelical rabbis would offer competing interpretations of scripture with no way of adjudicating differences except by splitting off from whomever one disagreed with.” (p.266)

Luther’s vacillations on the Jews are quite typical of the Christian heretics and revolutionaries described in this book. They point to the obvious conclusion, which is that the alliances between the two groups have always been based on convenience, and not on some sort of essential identity. Note how Jones tries to muddy these waters by a vague reference to “evangelical rabbis”.

“The accusation that Protestants were Jews was not new. Calvin claimed an opponent “called me a Jew, because I maintain the rigor of the law intact.” Others claimed the Genevan reliance on “jure gladii”, the law of the sword, to suppress dissent made Calvin “a Jew.” Calvin was a lawyer before he became a reformer; his reliance on the law to micromanage the minutiae of everyday life reminded many of Jewish proscriptions in Deuteronomy and Numbers… The idea that Calvin was a Jew or that he was working for the Jews [!] was, therefore, not new or far-fetched.” (p. 334)

Here the underlying fallacy of this book emerges into plain sight. Jones is deliberately conflating the Christian exegetical concept of judaising – i.e. emphasising the Hebrew Bible over the New Testament – with the actual Jewish religion and people, who are supposedly incriminated every time Christians decide to read heresies into their own canonical religious texts. Of course, Jones could just claim that he is analysing the ideas phenetically – but why, in that case, does he find it necessary to sift through the lurid rumours, accusations and counter-accusations of warring Christian sects to find every Jew in history who so much as mumbled mazel tov to a revolutionary heretic?

What makes this even more spurious is Jones’s repeated assertion, elsewhere in his book, that Judaism by the Middle Ages had become centred on the Talmud and Kabbalah instead of the Hebrew Bible. Unless the likes of Luther and Calvin also adopted these texts (which they did not), they could no more become Jews than Renaissance humanists like Petrarch could become ancient Romans. Like MacDonald’s definition of a group evolutionary strategy – which is ‘switched on’ whenever he looks at Jewish misbehaviour, and ‘switched off’ whenever he looks at non-Jewish elite misbehaviour – Jones’s definition of Judaism is a vague and protean entity that he adapts to the immediate purposes of his argument.

“Contact with the Jews tended to encourage Millennialist fervor, not “rationalism”, among Judaizing Christians. The converse was also true. Contact with 17th Century millennialist sects like the Ranters, Diggers, Quakers, and Puritans, encouraged Millennialism among the Jews.” (p.415)

Note: on p.329 of JRS, Jones claims that the Jews remained in England after 1290 “under the mask of Christianity” (note the shifting of definitions here, as he usually accepts converts to be sincere unless proven otherwise) and that the Lombard bankers in London were “crypto-Jews”. Rarely for Jones, this is backed by no names, no details, no references, and I cannot but suspect he made it up. But I don’t make such accusations lightly, and I’m willing to be proven wrong by evidence.
Note: on p.329 of JRS, Jones claims that the Jews remained in England after 1290 “under the mask of Christianity” (note the shifting of definitions here, as he usually accepts converts to be sincere unless proven otherwise) and that the Lombard bankers in London were “crypto-Jews”. Rarely for Jones, this is backed by no names, no details, no references, and I cannot but suspect he made it up. But I don’t make such accusations lightly, and I’m willing to be proven wrong by evidence.

So now Jones admits that he doesn’t even know who’s jewing who anymore. But the answer is easy when we remember that all those sects emerged in 16th- and 17th-century England – a country that looms large in Jones’s narrative as the early modern hub of revolution, regicide, conspiracy, capitalism, and millennialism. Yet during these centuries, England was still Judenrein as a result of Edward I’s expulsion in the thirteenth century – and as Jones correctly notes, the Jews were not readmitted to England by the anti-papist Elizabeth or the revolutionary Cromwell, but by the relatively conservative Charles II in return for “contributions of mony, Armes or Ammuncion”. In order to somehow join up the right angles of his narrative, Jones is reduced to dark speculations about the role of the Freemasons in brokering this new Anglo-Jewish alliance.

“Freemasonry provided a forum for the exchange of ideas of intense interest to the Christians. It also provided protection for the Jews. Both were bound by vows of secrecy and loyalty; both were united by a desire to learn the secret knowledge of Cabala and by a desire to find practical application for that knowledge, be it in buildings or governments.” (p.490)

This is a common argumentative tactic of Jones. Having muddied the lines between Judaism and Masonry by the sort of sophistries that could misconstrue a snail as a tortoise, he then attempts to set them up on the common ground of the Kabbalah – a tradition that has always been studied by Christians for its magical and esoteric properties, and not as some sort of gateway drug to the Talmud. We might just as well look at the large number of alchemical texts that passed into European hands from the Arabs, then make some spurious connection with the influence of Averroes on certain Renaissance humanists, and end up concluding that the outbreak of revolution in Europe was some sort of Muslim terrorist conspiracy.

You can well believe that I could go on throwing out more examples and commentary, but I think I’ve said enough to make my point: that the bulk of the factual content in this book has little or nothing to do with its thesis. Jones’s work on the Jews has found an uncritical reception in white nationalist circles (e.g. at the Occidental Observer, run by that scrupulous academic who considers my humble blogpoasts beneath his notice, where Jones only ever seems to be criticised for his views on the nonexistence of race). But it would long ago have been laughed out of a serious dissident movement animated by a genuine interest in the truth.

To be more charitable to Jones, we could say that he has made the same basic misstep as the brilliant Eric Voegelin – who conflated modern revolutionary progressivism with the ancient Gnostic heresy in The New Science of Politics. There is certainly a common ground between Gnosticism and revolution: namely, the conviction of intellectuals that the world is ordered on evil and irrational lines. The difference is that the Gnostic seeks to escape the world spiritually, whereas the revolutionary seeks to destroy and reconstruct it materially – resulting in chaos, injustice, bloodshed, madness, etc.

In much the same way, the commonalities between Judaism and the modern revolutionary spirit are decisively outweighed by the differences. Both are messianic – but the Jew waits for the Messiah, whereas the revolutionary seeks to become the Messiah. Both lay out all-embracing rules for life, justified by pettifogging dialectics – but the Jew must trace his rules back to Biblical tradition, whereas the revolutionary traces them forward into utopian “progress”. And both stand in opposition to Christianity, but so does every rival monotheistic religion, e.g. Islam.

(And no, before you ask, these conflations have nothing to do with analogies made across time and space – such as ancient druids : mediaeval priests: modern academics, or Roman imperator : Persian shahanshah : Chinese huangdi. Essentialist, archetypal reasoning can dispense with most of the details, but historical narratives must take full account of them. And anyone who cannot tell the difference needs to put logos down gently, and back away slowly, before he has someone’s eye out with it.)

The True Name of the Revolutionary Spirit

Later in life, Voegelin admitted that the revolutionary spirit could not be simplistically equated with Gnosticism:

“I paid perhaps undue attention to gnosticism in the first book I published in English, The New Science of Politics… … But in the meanwhile we have have found that the apocalyptic tradition is of equal importance, and the Neo-Platonic tradition, and hermeticism, and magic, and so on. … So there are five or six such items – not only gnosticism – with which we have to deal.” (quoted in Ellis Sandoz’s introduction to Voegelin, Science, Politics and Gnosticism)

The best way to illustrate this point in the case of Jones’s book is by way of a thought experiment. Let’s imagine two alternative versions of JRS, rewritten around different theories of the revolutionary spirit. Each of these rewrites would change the title and the narrative focus, and add a certain amount of extra material, while subtracting nothing from the factual history presented in Jones’s original.

Our first rewrite is by an Orthodox Jewish author (I will leave the invention of a suitably Semitic name for him to the imagination of the reader), and its title is The Christian Revolutionary Spirit.

According to this character – who certainly observes all 613 Jewish commandments – the revolutionary essence is not carnality or messianism, but antinomianism, namely the idea that the spiritual elite are not bound to obey the moral law. Naturally, the trouble all started when the Romans destroyed the Temple and the Christians stopped observing circumcision and the dietary restrictions, and now here we are at the thick end of the wedge with 613 genders and the Passion of St. George Floyd.

The narrative of CRS would get off to a difficult start, because it would find it necessary to do the same hatchet job on Christianity that JRS does on Judaism. It would have to ignore the fact that some of Jesus’s teachings (notably on divorce) are stricter than the pre-existing Jewish ones, and that the Pauline epistles endorse the hierarchy of husbands over wives, fathers over children, masters over servants, etc. It would also be obliged to explain why the Christian revolutionary spirit lay more or less dormant for about a thousand years, until it was revived at the end of the Middle Ages by movements that championed the Old Testament and sometimes allied with the Jews.

”Napoleon issued a decree on May 1806 summoning a General Synagogue of the Jews in Paris on June 15. Napoleon scheduled the first meeting on a Saturday, causing an immediate split between orthodox and reform Jews. When they finally assembled on February 4, 1807, Napoleon put the Jews on the defensive by questioning their loyalty as Frenchmen. … If the Jews were serious about accepting Napoleon as their Messiah, he was going to make sure they accepted him on his terms, not theirs.” (JRS, p.556)
”Napoleon issued a decree on May 1806 summoning a General Synagogue of the Jews in Paris on June 15. Napoleon scheduled the first meeting on a Saturday, causing an immediate split between orthodox and reform Jews. When they finally assembled on February 4, 1807, Napoleon put the Jews on the defensive by questioning their loyalty as Frenchmen. … If the Jews were serious about accepting Napoleon as their Messiah, he was going to make sure they accepted him on his terms, not theirs.” (JRS, p.556)

But once he got to Jones’s chapters on the Hussites, Anabaptists, Protestants, Puritans, etc., our Jewish apologist would need only to play them straight. As we’ve touched upon, in chapters five and ten, Jones stumps up precious little evidence of Jewish involvement in the Bohemian and English revolutions; in chapter nine, on the Anabaptist rebellion in the Low Countries, he stumps up nothing at all. And the pickings for his thesis are not much richer in the middle-to-late chapters, when Cromwell’s Puritans are shown deciding against the readmission of the Jews, and when Napoleon is shown manipulating them into messianic fervour. Whole swathes of JRS that appear as vast digressions would be very much on-topic for CRS.

At first glance, Jones’s position stands on stronger ground in the later chapters of his book – such as chapter fifteen, on late 19th-century Russia, which describes a revolutionary movement disproportionately run out of Jewish shtetls and staffed by Jewish activists. But Jones is not MacDonald, and the focus of his argument is religion and ideology, not biological group strategy. What were the ideas, doctrines, and beliefs of revolutionary Jews, and did they have anything to do with Judaism? Let’s turn to Jones, and try to keep our eye on this ball throughout his usual hand-waving routine:

“What began when Grigorii Peretts [a converted Jew who participated in the Decembrist revolt] imbibed from the stream of [Moses] Mendelssohn ended when Trotsky rode Bolshevism to power in 1917. … The continuity in radical Jewish behaviour was traceable to the Enlightenment in general and Mendelssohn in particular. [Erich] Haberer [author of Jews and Revolution in Nineteenth-Century Russia] feels that Mendelssohn is the ultimate source of Jewish Nihilism because Mendelssohn’s “example proved irresistible to the younger generation of Maskilim who had been seized and cast adrift by the forces of modernity which irreparably cut them loose from the moorings of Judaism.”” (JRS, p.653)

The Maskilim were the members of the Haskalah movement, a.k.a. the Jewish Enlightenment – which, as this name suggests, secularised the Jews in much the same way as the wider Enlightenment secularised Christian society. To a biological theorist like MacDonald, rabbinical and secularised Jews are uniformly and primarily ‘Jewish’, just as pagan, Christian and secular Europeans are uniformly and primarily ‘European’. But Jones, who professes to take religious categories more seriously than racial ones, cannot make this move. If he wants to say that secularised Christians are dissenting from their religion, but that secularised Jews are affirming theirs, then it behoves him to come up with some sort of reasoning to justify this double standard.

And he does, indeed, come up with some sort of reasoning:

“The Jewish position derived from their rejection of Christ and would perdure beyond the Enlightenment. Christians, according to this point of view, are not blind; they are credulous and self-deluded. Christians believe in an impossible fairy tale about Christ rising from the dead. Because Christianity has nonetheless prospered for the past 2000 years, the Jew, religious or not, naturally tends to be a debunker, who comes up with ever new variations on a common theme: everyone thinks such and such, but the real story is this. So for Marx, everything is economic, for Freud, Moses was really an Egyptian and “all men” really want to have sex with their mothers and sisters, and for Derrida, meaning is really an illusion.” (p.564)

But Jews steeped in Talmudic and Kabbalic lore must believe an even larger number of fairy-tales – so surely their own religion would be the first casualty of such a culture of critique. In order to square this circle, Jones must summon up the Mephistophelian spectre of Derrida, whom he has just dismissed:

“As a result of their contact with the German Enlightenment, the Jews of the younger generation converted to nihilism during the course of the 1860s. The Talmud played a crucial role in that transformation. The Talmud, as Jacques Derrida noted…has always been a sign of absence. When the Temple was destroyed, “everything became discourse”, which is to say talmudic-like commentary on commentary. [At this point Derrida is quoted at length]

“The Mendelssohnian Enlightenment had a catastrophic effect on young Russian Jews in the 1860s because it destroyed orthodoxy without putting anything in its place. The Talmud had been a source of contention among Jews since Maimun’s attacks in Berlin in the 1780s. When the Talmud finally succumbed to the blows of the Maskilim, the Jews awoke to the realization that there was nothing to take its place, and nihilism, always latent in the Talmud’s methodology, followed almost automatically.” (p.648)

Well, that clears things up. So what happened was that the Talmud deconstructed itself, because it was based on nothing, and once that nothingness had been nothinged there was nothing to take its place. And so to nihilism, which was the absent centre of Judaism all along. Logos wins again! And there was I, thinking that the movement from Judaism to liberalism to secular messianic lunacy looks a lot like…the movement from Christianity to liberalism to secular messianic lunacy.

Still, at least someone like MacDonald could say that the secularised Jews remained committed to their group interests. Oh, wait – according to Jones, they didn’t:

“Before long, [Lev] Akselrod began to see himself as “the Russian [Ferdinand] Lassalle”, who would eschew the narrow goal of Jewish emancipation in favour of the universal quest for brotherhood and equality. The Jewish question paled in significance next to Lassalle’s universal vision which encompassed all of mankind:

“[Quoting Akselrod:] I still remember how, reading the book of Lassalle, I felt a kind of shame at my concern for the interests of the Jewish people. What significance, it seemed to me, could the interests of a handful of Jews have in comparison with the “idea of the working class” and the all-embracing, universal interests of socialism. After all, strictly speaking, the Jewish question does not exist. There is only the question of the liberation of the working masses of all nations, including the Jewish. Together with the approaching triumph of socialism the so-called Jewish question will be resolved as well. Would it not be senseless and also sinful to devote one’s energies to the Jewish people, which is no more than a single element in the vast population of the Russian Empire?” (p.652)

Ah yes, but MacDonald has instructed us well in the ways of self-deception! What matters is that the actions of Jewish revolutionaries never harmed the group interests of the Jews. Oh, wait – according to Jones, they did:

“There is no real evidence that the government promoted the pogroms [after the 1881 assassination of the Tsar], but there is a significant body of material showing that the revolutionaries did. The revolutionaries, many of whom were Jews, felt the same way about the Jews as Karl Marx did [see here] and promoted the pogroms as an attack on nascent Russian capitalism and the abuses that went along with it as a way of parleying local resentment into global revolution. The failed pogroms in Odessa and Yekaterinoslav were probably the work of Narodnaia Volia, which hoped to capitalize on the pogroms to foment a general revolution in Russia. On August 30, 1881 the Narodniki , who were, it should be remembered, significantly Jewish, circulated fliers attacking the Jews: “Who took over the land, the woods, and the bars? The Jews… The Jew offends mankind, deceives him and drinks his blood.”” (p.662)

I’ll say one thing for Jones: throughout most of his book, the facts are all there, and we need only interpret them with a pinch of salt and an ounce of common sense. Alas, most Jewpillers have far too much of the former and not so much as a drop of the latter.

Along with the early modern role of England, the lack of Jewish influences on the Northern racial-religious crusade against the South is another huge hole in the Jewpill, and at least one WN honestly admits this.
Along with the early modern role of England, the lack of Jewish influences on the Northern racial-religious crusade against the South is another huge hole in the Jewpill, and at least one WN honestly admits this.

But let’s get back to asking what our imaginary Jew would make of all this material. Surely he would take the line that the Maskilim had been co-opted into enlightenments and revolutions derived from Christianity, which did not develop independently among the Jews in the Muslim world. From there he would move to amend Jones’s chapters on America – such as the discussion of the Civil War in chapter fourteen (in which he concentrates almost entirely on the soap opera between the Jewish feminist Ottilie Assing and the black abolitionist Frederick Douglass), or the later chapters on the Leo Frank and Scottsboro Boys trials (in which he focuses solely on the Jewish role in events that took place in the context of longstanding Northern moral hysteria against the South).

Game, set, and match? Not exactly. Let’s bring in some competition from our second rewrite of JRS – this time by a Protestant fundamentalist author, and entitled The Pagan Revolutionary Spirit.

Let’s make this author an Anglo with libertarian leanings, and let’s say that he understands the essence of revolution to be state-worship. Just as Jones traces Jewish revolution all the way back to Simon bar Kokhba, this author would trace pagan state-worship all the way back to the Roman empire whose emperors were posthumously deified. Like Jones, he would be able to back up his views with Biblical chapter and verse – specifically, the Book of Revelation, in which the famous number of the beast corresponds to the name and title “Nero Caesar”. The figure of Nero can be interpreted as a synecdoche of Roman state-religious tyranny, which persecutes true Christians and furthers the coming of the Antichrist.

PRS would make a subtle but devastating change to the narrative of the original book. As we’ve already touched upon, Jones consistently puffs the pudding of Jewish influence throughout the early and middle chapters of JRS, and one of his favourite tactics is to bring up the study of Hebrew or Kabbalah by Renaissance humanists and Enlightenment philosophers. The implication that these aspirants were being recruited into a Jewish revolutionary cause is questionable in the extreme:

“[Ludwig] Geiger claims Pico [della Mirandola] was interested in the writings of Plato, but what really fascinated Pico were the later neoplatonic texts, and what neoplatonism and Caballah had in common was gnosticism and magic. There is no Greek-Hebrew dichotomy. Pico was as avid to learn from the Hebrews as [Johann] Reuchlin. He was not afraid to avail himself of Jewish teachers…who taught him Hebrew and Caballah. Pico claimed he could derive from the Caballah proof for Christian teachings like the Incarnation of the Word, the arrival of the Messiah, and original sin. But his main interest was magic. … To get to the meat of the magic tradition, one needed the oral tradition through the Caballah and the Hebrew language. … The magic Reuchlin proposed was not the “forbidden art” found repugnant in others. It was, as Pico had indicated, a tool for Christian apologetics: “Caballah provides the weapon of choice against the Jews, who of course in their own way honour the Caballah but without having insight into it.”” (JRS, p.250)

This shows that Christians who studied the Kabbalah and Hebrew were generally after magical and esoteric knowledge, and were not necessarily well-disposed towards the Jewish religion and people. But what it also shows – and what should be obvious – is that they also sought these things in all sorts of non-Christian traditions, such as Pythagoreanism, Neoplatonism, Hermeticism, and Arab alchemical texts. Arguably, these pagan-esoteric influences were stronger than the Jewish-esoteric ones – to take as an example just one of the occult works discussed by Jones, the Monas Hieroglyphica by John Dee, anyone can scroll through it and see that its symbolism owes more to hermetic-alchemical imagery than that of the Kabbalic Tree of Life.

And all of this took place amidst the Renaissance intellectual obsession with ancient Greek and Roman culture, which predated and influenced the Protestant obsession with Old Testament morality (even the arch-villain Luther changed his name from Luder in homage to the Greek word eleutheros, meaning free). In PRS, all of this would be presented as one vast religious-ideological reversion to the vomit of paganism. And it would not be at all hard to find corroborating evidence in the political ideas of the time, which were shifting in favour of Roman law and the absolutism that comes with it.

But what, we might ask, was the living nexus of this vast neopagan conspiracy? Why – our author would respond – none other than the semi-heathen seat of Romish popery, with its fey priestly wiles and imperial presumptions of sovereignty!

By taking this line, our Protestant polemicist would be able to plug a yawning gap in Jones’s narrative: the high-water mark of papal power during the High Middle Ages. Having begun from an attempt to secure the independence of the Church against the secular power of the Empire, this expanded into a progressive extension of religious authority into the realm of temporal power, which arguably laid the foundation for all the carnal messianism and absolutist hubris that followed. We’ve seen that Jones’s narrative is already full of evangelical rabbis and Calvinist mitzvoth; it will not become any more grotesquely confused by the addition of mediaeval Catholic colour revolutions, humanitarian interventions, struggle sessions, #MeTooings, etc. etc.

Leaving such lurid analogies aside, the opinion that the Church was being corrupted by power-lust was very common among mediaeval Catholics (although you’d never know it from reading Jones’s sectarian historical journalism). Dante committed greedy and ambitious popes to Hell in his Divine Comedy, and wrote a separate tract called De Monarchia in which he advocated the separation of religious authority and political power. At the other end of Europe, William Langland’s poem Piers Plowman (itself an inspiration to rebels) had this to say about the Donation of Constantine:

Whan Constantyn of curteysye Holy Kirke [en]dowed
With l[a]ndes and [landsmen], lordeshipes and rentes,
An angel men herde [o]n [high] at Rome crye,
Dos ecclesiae this day hath y-[drunk] ven[o]m
And tho[se] that ha[ve] Petres powere ar[e] a-poysoned alle.’

The author of PRS would trace this ‘poison’ to the vestiges of the Roman Empire in the Catholic Church, and would see nothing but its symptoms in all subsequent revolutionary outbreaks. And he would find some backing for this view in Larry Siedentop’s Inventing the Individual, which traces the genesis of individualism to the legal and political authority of the mediaeval papacy. Individualism, of course, is the social basis of liberalism, the ideological gateway drug to modernity:

“The process of turning the church into a unified legal system did not take place overnight. Its complete development awaited the thirteenth century. Yet its implications would prove to be revolutionary. For although it was the popes who first claimed a ‘sovereign’ authority within their sphere, it was not long before secular rulers came to understand their authority in the same way. The example of the church as a unified legal system founded on the equal subjection of individuals thus gave birth to the idea of the modern state.” (Inventing The Individual, p.207; my emphasis)

Siedentop quotes St. Bernard of Clairvaux, a major luminary of mediaeval Catholic monasticism, as having this to say about the expansion of Church temporal power in a 12th-century missive to the pope:

“What slavery can be more degrading and more unworthy of the Sovereign Pontiff than to be kept thus busily employed, I do not say every day, but every hour of every day, in furthering the sordid designs of greed and ambition? What leisure hast thou left for prayer? What time remains over to thee for instructing people, for edifying the church, for meditating on the law? True, thy palace is made to resound daily with noisy discussions relating to law, but it is not the law of the Lord, but the law of [Roman Emperor] Justinian.” (ibid., p.213)

Although he would easily trace a line between the mediaeval power of the Church and the modern-day Church of power, our Anglo apologist might have a hard time explaining why Protestantism did so much to advance that Church. But he could simply argue that the project of sola scriptura was never fulfilled in the long term, and provided nothing more than a passing phase of religious freedom and moral purity through which modernity passed on its way to full pagan barbarism. This argument is by no means watertight, but it is no leakier than anything in Jones. And it is certainly easy to argue that revolution moved faster, bottomed out sooner, and ended up with more tyranny in countries like France and Russia where there was no entrenched Protestant culture. So you can stick that in your Puritan Theory and smoke it.

Now, I’m aware that Jewpillers tend to read my posts with an inquisitorial eye (when they can be bothered to read them at all), so let me clarify that I’m not endorsing either of these two perspectives. In their own ways, they are both as wrongheaded as Jones’s original thesis, and that is the whole point. What I am trying to do is to show how easily a narrative of religious decline can degrade into omissions, distortions, conflations, and recriminations, when the intent to shed light on the tragedy of the West gives way to the desire to sling muck at some modern scapegoat.

What I am suggesting is that we discard the dross of all these narratives, synthesise the gold, and come up with a true name for the revolutionary spirit. This is my proposal:

As you can see, we have accommodated all three of the preceding narratives, while reaching beyond the sum of their parts. From CRS, we have accepted that the modern revolutionary spirit emerged into the world through transformations of Christianity; from PRS, that it was midwifed by early modern attempts to restore classical culture and wet-nursed to maturity by the state; and from JRS, that it went through a phase of ‘judaising’ Christianity and made allies and converts of the Jews. What we have not accepted is that the revolutionary spirit can be called Christian, when it has abandoned all reference to God and legitimised every Biblical sin; that it can be called pagan, when it is incapable of bridging the thousand-year gap between modernity and antiquity; and that it can be called Jewish, when it did not originate among the Jews, and seems to be slowly sloughing off a habit of philosemitism that has outlived its usefulness.

The name Antichristianity captures several things about the revolutionary spirit: that it was originally derived from Christianity, that it always opposes more traditional and orthodox forms of Christianity, and that it inverts Christian doctrines in much the same way that a pool of water inverts the sky above it. Obviously this name is also a provocative reference to the figure of the Antichrist – which implies, on the one hand, that Christians ought to oppose the revolutionary spirit without compromise, but on the other hand that they ought to view it as a permanent ‘occupational hazard’ of Christianity. The loss of faith in God and degeneration of religious doctrine can always degrade Christian otherworldliness into revolutionary nihilism – just as it can turn spirituality into hubris, messianism into charlatanism, charity into hypocrisy, etc. etc. That is why genealogies of revolutionary ideas often conceal as much as they explain – for there might be any number of pathways leading in the right and wrong directions, and what matters is not so much how you proceed as where you end up.

My original plan was to wrap up this post right here, but I’m afraid our adversary is not beaten yet. By showing that MacDonald cannot exonerate Western elites, and Jones cannot blame the history of revolution on the Jews, all that we’ve done is to force the Jewpill onto its strongest and safest ground: the total rejection of all forms of Christianity as one gigantic bimillennial Jewish psyop. But in the third, concluding part of the post, we’ll see why this position is nothing more than a hill for this stubbornest of all dissident delusions to die upon.

(Republished from Affirmative Right by permission of author or representative)
Hide 204 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. g8way says:

    Although E Michael Jones doesn’t recognize it, it’s pretty clear that Jewish Revolutionary Spirit goes back at least to the Golden Calf incident in Exodus. The whole Old Testament is replete with it, and Jesus went on and on about it. Purim and Hanukkah are celebrations of it.

  2. Chap.8 The Culture of Critique

    • Thanks: Richard B
  3. frankie p says:

    “I command the Jews not to agitate for anything beyond that which they have hitherto enjoyed, and not from henceforth, as if they lived in two cities, to send two embassies — a thing which never occurred before now – nor to intrude themselves into games and elections, but to profit by what they possess and to enjoy in a city not their own an abundance of all good things, and not to introduce or invite Jews who make voyages to Alexandria from Syria or Egypt, thus compelling me to conceive the worst suspicions; otherwise I will by all means take vengeance upon them, as fomenting a general plague upon the whole world.”
    Emperor Claudius, Letter to the Jews at Alexandria, A.D. 41.

    You must understand, the leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. It cannot be overstated. Bolshevism committed the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant and uncaring about this enormous crime is proof that the global media is in the hands of the perpetrators.
    Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

    “Well now, this whole Jewish world which constitutes a single exploiting sect, a sort of bloodsucker people, a collective parasite, voracious, organized in itself, not only across the frontiers of states but even across all the differences of political opinion—this world is presently, at least in great part, at the disposal of Marx on the one hand and of the Rothschilds on the other. I know that the Rothschilds, reactionaries as they are and should be, highly appreciate the merits of the communist Marx; and that in his turn the communist Marx feels irresistibly drawn, by instinctive attraction and respectful admiration, to the financial genius of Rothschild. Jewish solidarity, that powerful solidarity that has maintained itself through all history, united them.”
    — Mikhail Bakunin, “December 1871 Letter to the Bologne Members of the International”

    • Replies: @Daniel Rich
    , @Jacobite2
    , @lobro
  4. Jones has a solution: the West has to go back to its old church, the Catholic one, and reject progressivism and white nationalism alike. Not only does he assert the primacy of religion over race, ideals over interests, God over Man, etc., but he even goes as far as to say that race does not exist. I can’t say I agree with him on that last point, but you have to admire his total lack of compromise on it.

    His total lack of compromise should not be admired since it is pretty much required for race denial. There are too many problems for egalitarians once you acknowledge that race at least partially exists.

    Liberals and libertarians share this problem. Once they admit that race exists in some areas it becomes much more difficult to deny that it exists elsewhere. Better to just write it all off as racist and try to shut down the debate through control.

    For liberals this can work since they control the medium. They teach that race doesn’t exist in the schools and know how to ruin the careers of any professor that steps out of line. The media is overwhelmingly liberal and the competition (Fox) also won’t bring up the question.

    Libertarians don’t control any mediums and are forced to defend weak arguments. When they promote open borders for example they avoid any questions about race and economics.

    A Franco type state that denies race could certainly work with the right people in charge but how would a modern Western state get there? Especially if it is clear that the end goal is a Catholic culture? Liberals and establishment conservatives would probably band together which is what happened in the Spanish civil war. Leftists and establishment conservatives were fighting next to each other in trenches against Franco’s revolutionaries.

    But with that said secularism is definitely not the answer. Most Whites that go secular switch to liberalism without even realizing it. Meaning they think all their positions are based on “the science” and they have no interest in counter-opinions. The latest data suggests that 9/10 Whites go left after leaving Christianity. The alt-right anti-Christian types have no solution here other than wishful thinking. Ironically a lot of them promote anti-Christian views when the data is clear that secularism in Whites merely feeds Marxism.

  5. John Hagee and Donald Trump disagree with this and the reason being both overcame Covid with God’s help and their Jewish Foreskin talisman.

  6. saggy says: • Website

    I couldn’t read this … can anyone? …. so I skipped to the last paragraph.

    By showing that MacDonald cannot exonerate Western elites

    Does MacDonald really attempt to exonerate Western elites? That would seem to be absurd on its face.

    Jones cannot blame the history of revolution on the Jews,

    What we can blame on the Jews is a venomous hatred of everything non-Jewish that dates from Jacob swindling Esau out of his birthright to become the progenitor of the Jews. Esau, who became the progenitor of Edom, Rome, Christianity, and the West, did not react well and they became bitter enemies and their descendants have remained enemies from that time till today. The Jews are even now dreaming of the return of the Mashiach who will conquer all the nations of the world, enslave the peoples, and slaughter the non-believers. They teach it starting very early ….

    Video Link

  7. “In Europe, it was the French revolution that emancipated the Jews, not the Jews who unleashed the revolution. In America, it was the Progressive and New Deal movements that raised them into the governing elite, and set the stage for everything that MacDonald describes in The Culture of Critique. Even Zionism, contrary to popular belief on the Dissident Right, was a 19th-century Protestant religious obsession (called ‘restorationism’) before it was taken up by Jewish nationalists like Emma Lazarus and Theodore Herzl.”

    And the sayanim reveals himself again. Not even trying huh? Just blasting away with Talmudist duplicity…

    • Agree: Hans
    • Thanks: Nancy
  8. @g8way

    Haman was wise to them, so long ago, and they did him in, and his sons, as well as the patriots of the Achaemenid domain. That is their threat to everyone and every land: “Look, goyim, look, what happened to Haman and his sons? To those who would defend their state against us? It will surely happen to you too!”

  9. eredr says:

    The element of the neo-nazis that attack Christianity is quite foolish because the Bible said that YHWH is the Aryan Vedic god Ahura Mazda, so are they against an Aryan god? In old Persian it was “Ahmi yat ahmi” which means YHWH. The Persians even paid to have sacrifices to God at the temple in Jerusalem. The Babylonian Talmud, written for just Jews to read, said the Persian God was YHWH.

  10. The jews are doing nothing wrong. I admire them. Survival of the fittest. They’re following nature which your christianity does not. Your faith demands you worship an invisible dude who never existed. This is the reason America and every western nation will crumble. Capitalism combined with Pantheism is the future and the future belongs to the evolved man. I mean look at the recent demographics. Anglo saxons are in the 60 percent already. So like I said…the jew did nothing wrong. China is doing what they did – no wonder the talmund has become immensely popular in that country…google it. Meanwhile you clowns are busy decorating a pine tree and singing hymns which are so fucking pathetic and corny I get a headache 5000 miles away when I have to listen to them in the occasional hollywood movie. Curse me but you know I’m right. Your only solution is to give up the abrahamic faith, eradication of christianity from every corner of America and then think of something.

  11. fausto says:

    Jew and Jesus are the two strands of the white men’s DNA. Impossible to unwind and unwinding will result in self destruction. You have no choice but to yield to the Asians. Hope the Chinese are wise enough to gas all the Christians in their population when they take over the world.

    • Disagree: Liosnagcat
    • LOL: Mike Tre
    • Replies: @Hans
  12. You are obviously an educated man and well read. However, you fail to differentiate what people actually say and what they really do (the Jews). You seem to lack a serious understanding of the Jewish Religion and what the their “Controllers” actually think. MacDonald writes on their behaviors and the resultants through economic and social pathways that they control.

    Here’s good analysis that goes deeply into what their religious behaviors and beliefs truly mean:

    Video Link

  13. anaccount says:

    Apparently hairs can be split into more than two strands.

  14. Tucker says:

    I started to read this article, but the second this guy started shoveling manure on Professor Kevin MacDonald – I immediately bailed out.

    Kevin MacDonald’s excellent and well documented exposure of the JQ is impeccable and cannot be refuted and any feeble attempts to do so only serves to prove MacDonald is 100 percent correct.

  15. Sepp says:

    7800 words of barely intelligible drivel resulting from a extended session of mental masturbation by a faux intellectual. I would rather watch masturbation porn of Jesse Smollet and his new wanker partner than try to decipher this verbal diarrhea. It reads like some screed Ratches would produce.

    In Europe, it was the French revolution that emancipated the Jews, not the Jews who unleashed the revolution.

    From the very start the article is chock full of lies and half truths. John Robinson’s “Proof of a Conspiracy” lays it all out. The Illuminati take over of the Masonic lodges of France and Bavaria were orchestrated by the highly inbred Jewish Rothschild family. The king of Bavaria and the Pope both ended up abolishing the order.

    Anyway, for all the blather, I cannot figure out what points the author is trying to make other than Jew good, white man bad. Can some kind soul please give me the TL;DR version?

  16. IronForge says:

    Jesus never existed dot com…

    The Constantine’s Supporting Crestus(“Meaning Good, Useful”) Cult – rejected for Decades by the BodyPolitic – was Re-Invented as “Christianity” in Nicea under his Patronage.

    The Crestus-Cult Plagiarized, Plundered, Took Over the Religions+Assets of Dionysus, Mythras (Dec25 Solstice BirthDeathResurrection), probably Dagon (Fish Mitre), and attempted to Hijack Judaism for the Sumerian Creation Lore, their Deity, Messiah, and Future-Spanning Existential Prophecies.

    The Gospels were written AFTER Nicea inder the Patronage of Constantine. They first appeared as part of the first appearance of the Completed New Testament, which also first appeared as the Completed Christian Bible.

    All Published as a Complete Set. Only the Jewish Bible – Christians call the Old Testament – were written Prior. There were no Source Documents regarding the Gospels prior to the Completed Christian Bibles’ Publications (Dead Sea Scrolls’ Claims were a Hoax debunked 20 Years Ago).

    There were no writings about Christianity in the 1stCE for obvious reasons. 1stCE(what Christians call 1stAD) was arbitrarily established by a Christian Monk during the Dogma Suppressed Dark Ages of 6thCE.

    So, there’s no ethical/moral/spiritual obligation for Non-Jewish Peoples to submit to Judaism or treat the Jewish as if they were God’s Chosen People. People may have contemplated the means of Expressing their Spirituality from reading the Jewish Bibles; but the Christian New Testament are all Made Up by the Chrestus Cult.

    Rejoice, since your Favored Existence in the Afterlife doesn’t require Fighting Wars for ISR and Diaspora Tribals.

  17. Anonymous[124] • Disclaimer says:

    Unholy Moses: nearly 8,000 words of hasbaric horseshite!


    Who has time to read such nosebergian nonsense?

    And what chutzpah! Publishing it on December 7th, the day another J-tribe tried to destroy Christiamerica!

    Mein gott! The same Tribalists who demand that goyim kids worship to the Holycost in schools (and use US money to build walls in Matzonia to treblinka Palestinians), continue to dump on Christmas.

    Even after the founder of Wreaths Across America agreed not to put wreaths on chosenite vet grave markers (using the absence of wreaths to cuck for the Shoah), it wasn’t good enough. Another Weinstein…this time “Mikey”…bitched-bitched-bitched.

    He should be shipped post-haste to Mosesistan!

    It’s not his first grinching, either:

    Christians and other goyim need to sue the bejesus(!) out of hymies based on being “offended” by Smallhatitis: the fetid fever that seeks to ruin American traditions.

    Why the eff are just 2% of this nation allowed to cause so much damage?

    Why do decent people let the Tribe use Founding Fathers’ laws against the latter’s descendants?

    • Agree: RedpilledAF
    • Replies: @lydia
  18. @saggy

    I couldn’t read this … can anyone?

    No. It’s a mess.

    • Agree: Dingo bay rum
  19. Affirmative Right is edited by Colin Liddell, a weasly cuck maggot with his head straight up Zionist ass.

    Total slimeball.

    • Agree: Dingo bay rum
    • Thanks: Sepp
  20. Anon[115] • Disclaimer says:

    You are just a bunch of phoenician merchants that worship baal it doent matter what you externally wear a snake will remain a snake

  21. Andreas says:
    @RJ Macready

    “The jews are doing nothing wrong. I admire them. Survival of the fittest. They’re following nature which your christianity does not.”

    That’s the bottom line. Jews should be admired. And it is survival of the fittest. When the US shit-hole collapses once and for all, Jews will still be Jews and have each other, bound by their self-identification, commitment to learning and intelligence, and millenniums of rabbinical tradition to tie it all together. They’ll just move on and thrive in the next Promised Land.

    • Replies: @RJ Macready
  22. Levi says:

    What McDonald and Jones ought to argue, but are blinded by ignorance (in the non-pejorative sense) is that Satan is the enemy of Christ, and that history is réductible to this, and only this dichotomy.

    Had they both read and understood the works of René Girard, they would recognize that ANYONE, even a Christian, who departs from Christ is in some way doing Satan’s revolutionary anti-Christian work. Like Muslims who deny certain fundamental creeds relating to Jesus as messiah and the trinitarian nature of God, the rabbinic Jews, especially the powerful secular ones, indeed have a greater proclivity for anti-Christian activities in this regard (I am a Jewish convert to Catholicism) and therefore, from a political point of view, warrant reasonable suspicion of anti-Catholicism. Indeed, they have unquestionably given some egregious examples of antichrist from their midst, throughout history – but it is Satan’s work to identify the Jews themselves as The Problem.

    The response should first be a return to deeper and more serious study by intellectually weakened Catholics as to the nature of Satan, coupled with greater Evangelization of all non-Catholics, before the Jews are considered for blame and exclusion from Catholic society.

    I think Dr Jones’ work is otherwise good, and he understands Logos very well, but he hasn’t fully grasped its opposite, which is Satan, not the Jew.

  23. Hans says:

    It was hilarious. Try again with a puke bucket handy.

  24. Hans says:

    If they gas us, we’ll make out like (((bandits))). The only thing to fear is if they soap and lampshade us.

  25. Marcali says:
    @RJ Macready

    Survival of the fittest? Tell that the victims and surviving realatives of the holocaust.
    Or you want to tell us something about the ingroup selection for holocausting?

    • Replies: @Bukowski
    , @Liosnagcat
  26. ariadna says:

    Why not be succinct?
    Just say this:
    “The Jews are nowhere near as bad as the Goyim kvetch and, at any rate, the Goyim made them do it. Every goddam’ time!”

  27. chrimony says:

    The element of the neo-nazis that attack Christianity is quite foolish because the Bible said that YHWH is the Aryan Vedic god Ahura Mazda, so are they against an Aryan god?

    The white version of the Black Hebrew Israelites. Pathetic, really. Europeans had their own gods before they adopted the Jewish one.

    • Replies: @gotmituns
  28. Weave says:

    I gave up after a few paragraphs and skipped to the end. I have learned that truth reveals itself in clarity and lies are always purposefully confusing. This article is a good example.

  29. profnasty says:

    All opinion and commentary.
    “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
    This says more in two sentences than the above says in two thousand.
    A lesson to be learned.

  30. profnasty says:

    Only, I believe A.Hitler declared Deutchland a Christian nation, and himself a Roman Catholic.
    Why would “Neo” “”Nazi[s]”” disagree?

  31. Smith says:

    Christianity (especially Catholicism and Protestanism) are brainwashing method.

    Study the classics (Greek-Roman Plato and Aristotle, Chinese Confucius and Mencius) and regain rationality and morality.

    • Replies: @GomezAdddams
  32. This is very well done. Based on a number of textual and paratextual indicia, I am convinced that Jones’s work was deliberately bad— ultimately the fruit of an intelligence agency designed to track anti-Semites. The chapter on Lorraine Hansberry is one of the more egregious examples of something absurdly disconnected to the “Jewish” revolutionary spirit. Jones can’t be serious in my opinion. Once one steps outside the dogmatic borders of Catholic doctrine, one is already within the territory of what Foucault calls that “warm amd tender Freemasonry of useless erudition.” Not yet a Gnostic, nor a magician, not necessarily Protestant or Jewish, the adherent of this ambiguous rationalist middle ground is a modern person. There is considerable ambiguity on what else he is. But to lay the blame, if blame is appropriate, at the feet of cthe Jews” is a sad diversionary tactic which does not withstand even superficial scrutiny. Well done.

    • LOL: Hans
  33. @eredr

    Yahweh is not an “Aryan God.” Yahweh is Saturn, (Shabbat-Shabbatai). And his day is Saturn’s Day. Sanchuniathon, the “Phoenician Priest” was cited by Porphyry (in Eusebius) as having said that “Yahweh is Saturn.” Many others have also made the same observation. Ezra wrote, and made, up the Torah. The “Exodus” part is propaganda to persuade the Judeans who went to Egypt at the destruction of the First Temple in 587 BC, to return under new management. (You remember, Jeremiah: “the good figs went to Babylon, the bad figs went to Egypt.” Come back, bad figs, come back, we need a people without a land for a land without people.)

    Ezra went to Jerusalem, from Babylon, around 398 BC. This is 141 years after Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BC and Zoroastrianism began to flow into Mesopotamia. Ezra is a Pharisee, that is a “Farsi,” someone who has been Persianized. The Book of Genesis, up until the tribal history begins, is the Zoroastrian creation myth retold. Similarly, Ezra took the Zoroastrian “I am that I am” (from the Avesta) and put it into the mouth of the idol. The idol quotes Zoroastrianism, but remains an idol. The fact that it is the only idol, a monopolistic idol, rather than a collegial one as among the Greeks does not help.

    • Replies: @eredr
  34. I’m in the midst of reading From Yahweh to Zion right now. It makes a compelling case that the Jewish revolutionary spirit dates back to at least Hellenic times. Even back then it was written that these were subversive, revolutionary, highly tribal people who refused to integrate into their host societies. This resulted in them being eventually expelled from most communities they came into contact with.

    The Book of Esther was a self defense strategy that militarized Jews against hosts seeking to expel them. Purim is a religious celebration of the mythical event where Jews preemptively slaughtered 75,000 innocent men, women, and children who they believed were going to expel them (there is no documented evidence of anyone ever trying to genocide the Jewish people – militarized bands of radicals and partisans? Yes. But Jewry as a whole? No. This hasn’t stopped Jews from believing that every resistance to their inclinations is an attempt to genocide them). This is revolutionary on its face, and its written right there in the Old Testament, which predates the French Revolution last I checked. Sometime in the 5th century the Jews began to burn Haman in effigy every year during the celebration of Purim. Over time all of the Jews’ enemies (which was basically everyone who wasn’t a Jew) were converted to Christianity, making it easier for the Jews to label Christians broadly as their enemy. So the burning of Haman in effigy turned into burning Jesus in effigy.

    As far s blaming the American and French revolutions on Jewry? Not sure I’m comfortable making that argument. Anglo-liberalism is at the root of these historical disasters, but I do think liberalism and the Enlightenment opened up the doors for Jews to taking leading positions in areas of society that previous systems had barred them from, knowing the radical and subversive nature of Jews in positions of power.

  35. profnasty says:

    So, the Chosen possess the celestial light of Divine inheritance in their breast: Not of this earth.
    I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.
    To be continued….next week.

  36. You can tell jews are really motivated by ideas and principles by the way they turn on a dime and throw all of their previously stated beliefs out the window every time they get a chance to harm White people.

    This article is a lot of words to say something you could discover with 15 minutes of Game Theory.

  37. Anon[159] • Disclaimer says:

    Who is this lying sophist Jew anyway?

    Unmask yourself, you Jew Stooge.

  38. Publius 2 says:

    Jew Jew Jew Jew Jew. Jew this. Jew that.

    Jew here. Jew there. Jew everywhere. All the time.

    Every day. Is it the Jews? Let’s analyze. Every day.

    Everyone notices.

    Analyze the Jews. Executive producer is always a Jew.

    The CEO is a Jew. The head of every deep state agency is a Jew.

    Jews print the money.

    Trump spent 4 years sucking up to israel.

    “Hate” crimes up. Jews feel “terrified.” Jew this. Jew that.

    They know we know. They just can’t hide it. They cannot stop themselves from being how they are.

    Civilized men have noticed it for 2,000 years.

    The fact so much energy, so much time, so many words are devoted to the JQ proves the JQ really is everything.

    The worldwide hysteria since trump descended on the elevator in 2015 is all about the “start” — really it’s a continuation — of the next “world” war. Once again Germanics all over the world are under attack by international Jewry.

    It’s about which money system controls the real property.

  39. Publius 2 says:
    @Avid Reader Guy

    And the book of Esther is the only one that does not mention God, at all.

  40. Alrenous says: • Website

    The British conquered the entire world. Twice. And wignats tell us we’re supposed to be afraid of the Jews?

    Who created Israel? That would be the British, mfers.

    The fact Jones has to argue so vehemently against Hebrew thought yet has to rely so heavily on Sophism to do so suggests Jones himself does not genuinely believe the facts are on his side. Why not use real evidence, if real evidence exists? It’s an accidental but thoroughly condemnation of Christianity. You can going point by point and use him as a map directing you to exactly what he needs to hide and cover up.

    Voegelin is wrong. The revolutionary spirit can pretty much be simplistically be equated to Gnosticism. Both Gnosticism and revolution are about rejecting the real, physical world and turning inward.
    The revolutionary is consumed by envy and refuses to admit anyone is superior to them in any way, specifically that they might benefit from following a leader. “I would rather die in battle than swear fealty.”
    The Gnostic rejects a heavenly lord instead of a mortal lord, but his motives are largely identical. The Gnostic believes God fucked up while creating the physical world – generally because the Gnostic’s body is sick or weak and they want someone to blame.

    Both revolutionaries and Gnostics end up replacing curiosity and looking outward with strict rituals, encasing themselves in a socially-constructed world.

    Explaining why Christianity’s pathologies lay dormant for a thousand years (actually 600 or so) is not in fact very difficult. It was temporarily de-Sophized due to breakdown in communication. Sophism relies on some level of sophistication to work; after Rome fell, sophistication also fell and essentially everyone clustered at the grug-brain part of the midwit curve, incapable of understanding that they may want to take Sophist points in the least seriously.

    Unfortunately this did not remove Sophism from the Bible. The book remained relatively well-preserved. Oops. With the library at Toledo liberated and exposing Christians directly to Sophist texts, and sophistication rising again, the disease was re-activated.

    Problem: Christianity is nearly Atheism, and Atheism is Gnosticism. It is not surprising that Christianity constantly spawns heresies which take its evil theology to its logical conclusion.

    Christianity is indeed the problem in the first place. And in any case, returning to Christianity is foolhardy in the extreme; it has already flagrantly proven its political inferiority to this particular heresy.
    You had one job, and it turned out you were working for the other side.

    • LOL: Gabe Ruth
    • Replies: @fausto
    , @John Johnson
  41. @RedpilledAF

    “…And the sayanim reveals himself again…”

    Sayanim is plural. The singular is sayan.

    • Replies: @RedpilledAF
  42. @RedpilledAF

    The whole book of Esther is fiction. Why should we be afraid of fictions?

    • Replies: @RedpilledAF
  43. gay troll says:
    @RJ Macready

    Meanwhile you clowns are busy decorating a pine tree

    The pine tree stays, as does the Yuletide. King Joshua is NOT the reason for the season.

  44. @Andreas

    Thanks. At least someone understands. The problem with these anglo saxons is that they are obsessed with morality and doing good. They are so naive it boggles my mind. Life is a struggle, a challenge. But these clowns have taken the christ route and it has mellowed them to such an extent it’s in their genetic now. What is funny is the Christians are taking in hordes of immigrants by their own accord. My friend is a christian here in India and his parents got the American citizenship past year just on the basis that they go there and do the missionary bullshit that they do. Guess what? They invited at least 35 people from their church in the one year since and all of them are now in North Carolina. I’m pretty sure they’ll all get their permanent residency. Meanwhile these morons come here and weep about how their land is being taken over. Every single day I see thousands leave and go to the west….student visa, work visa, religious visa, refugee status. I worked at an embassy(in Chandigadh Punjab), one of the 16 embassies here in india and I would literally see hundreds of them leave every single day! You do the math….16 centers, 800(rough estimate) times 16…..EVERY SINGLE DAY for the 3 months I was there. I am a Hindu but I abhor all religion but it’s clear that christianity has done the worst damage. They’ve destroyed the land of the brave the forefathers of these imbeciles posting here. Atleast Islam is confined to the middle east which was always crap and Hinduism in india, which was also always crap. I simply dont understand their mentality. On the one hand they are against abortions and yet they send their sons to die in wars. How many soldiers have uselessly perished since 2001? But as usual they’ll blame the Jews. The Jews are amazing. They know how life works. They are close knit. They are money minded and exploit capitalism to the fullest. Meanwhile these clowns go to their Sunday church hoping and praying that an invisible fake deity will grant them salvation LMAO. They created heaven here on earth. But they squandered it and now they want to die and get off this rock. Clearly they’re done for. They are too fragmented to form any kind of alliance. The future belongs to China and how the Jew bigshots carve out the west.

  45. Anonymous[380] • Disclaimer says:

    Ugh, another wall of lies from our friend, (((James Lawrence))). Can’t wait for part 3. /s

    • Agree: Dingo bay rum
  46. eredr says:
    @Peter Rabbit

    You said “Ezra took the Zoroastrian ‘I am that I am’ (from the Avesta) and put it into the mouth of the idol.” Thus you are saying YHWH is an Aryan God.

  47. BADmejr says:

    Although I would say this is a valuable attempt at trying to place the blame for Jews being Jews on the shoulders of the various peoples among whom they have lived amongst for thousands of years, I don’t buy it, although to some extent it is possible Jewish infused ideas were put into the populace largely because “we gave them the means to do so.”

    After all, Europeans are far more egalitarian than other peoples. However, one cannot discount the fact that Jews have been exerting their influence for thousands of years, and it usually wasn’t through appealing to the masses to let them be “one of us.” Jews typically made relations with the aristocracy of a given society and used that influence to exert their will down to the unwilling little people. This happened far more often than the reverse.

    I haven’t the time to make a long thought out rebuttal. However, the “Jewish Question” has existed far longer than the days in which egalitarian movements gave them the power to COMPLETELY subvert societies. We sure didn’t ask them to divide up into factions dispersed throughout all the nations of the civilized world to work towards their own interests.

    In addition, a large part of why they were able to gain so much power beginning with the time periods mentioned is that technology to spread and control information was invented, often by goyim desiring to benefit society as a whole. As we well know is generally the case, Jews have tended to work ferociously towards what they view as their own interests, which they usually perceive as running contrary to their fellow “countrymen” in whatever people were kind enough to allow them in.

    The argument in the article is like saying it’s my fault I got that E. coli bacteria that made me sick. After all, I ate the burger!

  48. @Franklin Ryckaert

    They use the plural interchangeably often, more often than the singular, for special terms of importance such as cohen, which will often be referred to as “a cohanim” or “that cohanim,” by other jews, as well as himself “I am a cohanim.” I had the wonderful opportunity to be around them intimately for a few years. I never heard them use or refer to an individual as sayan, always sayanim in conversation.

    • Replies: @Franklin Ryckaert
  49. @eredr


    Ezra is clear they hoodwinked Kyros the Great (by their own admission the
    “Anointed of the Lord”!) into building them a “second” temple (nowhere is there
    a whiff of ever a “first” one) by telling him that of course they had the right god,
    From the beginning the hard-working grain farmer (Kain) meets disdain and the
    vagrant chicken thief (Abel) pleases the Yahu with blood and smoke.
    This is not the god of Zarathustra:

    What is the essence of Mazdanism, ô Ahura Mazda?

    How to mightily grow corn, ô Spithama Zarathustra!

    From the right mix of biologism and Bachofen the picture emerges …

    It all centers on the Neolithic Revolution (what Bachofen calls the “Demetric” phase):
    The archetype of the sacrificed and resurrected, law-giving vegetation deity
    with interesting birth is universal – Zarathustra, Jesus, Osiris, Tammuz,
    Demeter/Persephone; and so is the Law (H.K. Erben distilled it to 11 commandments,
    without the Yahu and the schabbes).
    Christianity is stereotypical, Islam is a pre-neolithic culture supporting an
    alien high religion superstructure.
    Judaism is not pre- but actively anti-neolithic; far from being “monotheist”
    it never rose above monolatry, From the beginning the believer is exhorted to
    swindle (Esau), steal (Exodus), incest and genocide.
    The Commandments are an obvious xenotransplant – the early New Kingdom
    had the Negative Confessional (one of the oldest and most elegant formulations
    of the Law) at the same time the Israelites had to be threatened with the pyre so
    they didn´t shag goats 😛

    • Thanks: RedpilledAF
  50. @Franklin Ryckaert

    No, it is the most real and factual book of their testament. It is the tale of how they take over and rule empires, nations, states, tribes, etc.

  51. Just like after my attempt to get through part 1 of this incoherent lunacy, I need to ask:

    “Hey rabbi, watcha doin?”

  52. Abandoned this talmudic drivel less than halfway.

    Interesting to see the talmudic supporters commenting.
    They think that b/c they admire the Hyena, it will be friendly to them.
    Not intrinsically capable of seeking Truth, they are/will remain victims of deception spun by the children of the Father of Lies, which will destroy them.

    • Agree: Sepp
  53. gay troll says:

    Christianity is not an internally consistent literature. For this reason it is the cause of endless schism and re interpretation. As long as people insist that the story of Jesus Christ is based in literal truth, they will be unable to agree, they will be at each other’s throats and at the mercy of their very own supposed adversary: the Jews. Not only is the gospel a fiction, it admits to being a fiction: a sales pitch on one hand, and a parable on the other.

    The root of Christianity is the Greek Old Testament, from which Paul says he first learned of Jesus Christ. Paul says he laid the foundation of Christianity. And secular scholars agree, estimating Paul to be the earliest Christian literature, written around 50 CE, before Titus destroyed the Temple. Paul says a lot of other interesting things. He says that Christianity offers no wisdom, and no miracles, but only the nonsensical and unseen. He says that a Mashiach (Christos) named Joshua (Jesus) came down from heaven, made himself like a man, and allowed to himself to be impaled on a stake by archons, before resurrecting to heaven. Paul says he only learned about this by reading the Jewish Bible and receiving a visitation from Christ along with a few other witnesses. He makes no mention of the life of a world famous healer and wise man. Moreover, he states that the purpose of Christianity is the conversion of Gentiles to Judaism, so they can circumcise their hearts and send a donation to Jerusalem.

    Of course, this is not the Christianity we recognize today. Mostly we recognize Matthew, which is the first book of the New Testament and the anchor of JC’s biography. But there is an earlier link in the evolution of Christianity, and this is the book of Mark. Secular scholars believe Mark was the first gospel to be written, about a generation after Paul, after the destruction of the Temple, as early as 80 CE. It is evident that Mark is adapting the letters of Paul. He takes Paul’s attitudes toward Jewish law, and marriage, and brotherly love, and puts them in Jesus’s mouth. Mark turns JC into precisely the person that Paul says his generation lacked: a world famous wise man.

    Yet the crucial thing about Mark is that its fiction is transparent. It is meant to be readable on two levels: first, as a literal history, and second, as a parable. In Mark, Jesus explains to the Jews why they are evil and why they will therefore be destroyed by Titus 40 years hence. It is a narrative founded on dramatic irony: it assumes the reader knows that the prophecies of Jesus regarding the coming Son of Man were fulfilled by Titus in 70 CE. In Mark, Jesus says he teaches only in parable, because this is the only way the lessons of heaven can be related. He says that not all who hear his teachings will interpret them correctly. He says that only a few will comprehend their true meaning. Therefore no less than Jesus Christ himself would regard a literal reading of Christianity to be moronic.

    But as addressed, Matthew is the anchor of popular Christianity, and Matthew takes the evolution of Christianity even further than Mark: from a parable to an outright satire. In Matthew we have the absurd: genealogy that proves Joseph is the seed of David, plus insider knowledge that Jesus is not the seed of Joseph. Matthew is a pesher, blackly humorous, as Jesus advises the Jews to hide themselves in closets or else follow him to the stake. He knows he is not their Mashiach. So do we. Yet he is happy to instruct them to abandon Mosaic strictures.

    All that said, there is a great redeeming feature of gospel Christianity, which is that it rejects Mosaic law and belief. However, this is not compatible with a literal reading of the New Testament. If you insist that the Gospels are historically accurate, you open yourself to humiliation and defeat every time, because you are quite simply wrong. The earliest gospel itself endorses the notion that it is meant to be understood as fiction.

    • Replies: @James J O'Meara
  54. gotmituns says:

    Europeans had their own gods before they adopted the Jewish one.
    Quite right and after christianity is gone, we’ll have our Aryan Gods back.

  55. @RedpilledAF

    Then those Jews don’t know Hebrew themselves.
    They use the word goy, which is a collectivum meaning “people”, for individual non-Jews, which is equally grammatically wrong.

    • Replies: @RedpilledAF
  56. @RedpilledAF

    It is the Manual of the Hofjuden, and understood as such, yes.

  57. geokat62 says:

    … but it is Satan’s work to identify the Jews themselves as The Problem.

    Judaic eschatology:

    1. blot out the memory of amalek
    2. erect the third temple
    3. anoint the Mosiach

    … rule over the goyim (2,800 Noahide slaves for each Jew) for eternity.

  58. nsa says:

    Summarizing this 7800 word unreadable exercise in pseudo intellectual gibberish and opacity: the pathetic chrissies are junior members of the vile yid cock cutter cult.

  59. Simplify – ‘…by their fruits you shall know them’!
    Pretty much sums it up for all of us.

  60. chris says:

    Sorry, meant to click on Agree, Sepp, though definitely not about the Smollet part 🙂

    I couldn’t even bring myself to finish reading the article, it just sounded too much like a very elaborate but completely transparent fabrication.

    He’s even lying about the progressives taking over the government in the 1930s. The takeover had taken place during WWI when Bernie Baruch and his gang amassed the greatest control of the US economy to date.

    That story probably requires another expose from Ron Unz, bridging the gap between his description of the British and Jewish propaganda war unleashed on the US, in order to cause its entry into that war. And how all those people settled inside the US government and were there ready to take it over when the engineered “great depression” was unleashed on the US and the world in the 1930s.

    Incidentally, we are currently at the beginning of the next engineered take-down of the US and world economies.

    • Replies: @Sepp
  61. “So now Jones admits that he doesn’t even know who’s jewing who anymore.”

    Does the verb “to jew” in the above case refer to the process of bargaining or negotiating, lying or cheating/deceiving? It’s not so clear.

  62. Dumbo says:

    Yeah, I actually liked his previous article or at least found it intriguing, but I have no idea what he was trying to say with this one. I gave up halfway. I second your request for a TLDR summing up.

  63. anonymous[176] • Disclaimer says:

    At this point we come to…the Jewish attack on Logos, which manifests itself not by the threat of invasion from without, as is the case with Islam…but by the threat of subversion from within, otherwise known as revolution. If Muslims are alogos [i.e. irrational, unreasonable]…then Jews are anti-Logos, in the sense that they reject Christ altogether. Islam did not reject Christ; Islam failed to understand Christ…

    Logos!! Lol! Who comes up with such delusional shit? And, who believes such delusional shit?

    I know… batshit crazy pagans!

    Yes, an accursed pagan godless people who have taken men (father/son) for “gods,” purely on hearsay from pedophilic priests, are of the rational and reasonable kind, and those who proclaim, God is One!, God cannot be man!, are of the “irrational,” “unreasonable”?

    Keeping with this idiocy, I am sure that other pagan mangods worshippers, such as the Hindoos and perhaps others who still believe in Nordic/Greek myths, will find the oh-so-rational Christians, to be quite “irrational” and “unreasonable,” for having failed to “understand,” Shiva, Zeus and Odin. Lol!

    It is best if you accursed pagan vermin stick to needling each other’s pagan “in-our-image-mangods” faiths, rather than try bring Islam into the argument.

    The true monotheism of Islam is unassailable, and trying to imply that the blessed faith is less rational than “gods” having human form, “gods” begetting children, “gods” reincarnating, etc., is rather pathetic, and begging for ridicule.

    Go, and argue amongst yourselves, godless pagans.

    • Agree: Druid55
  64. Exile says:

    The mobs in the streets and the Jews in your workplace subjecting you to “racial awareness” classes aren’t talking about “Christian supremacy,” “Christian privilege,” etc… This is about being White.

    The original article did nothing to dent much less demolish Kevin MacDonald.

    Like all race denialists, religious or otherwise, the only thing this author is “building” is a faery-castle in his own imagination.

    The author would love for us all to engage in a debate over Christianity rather than staying focused on the question of race and the unique Jewish role in organizing and supporting anti-White movements. From the above comments, it appears many people have taken the bait.

  65. @Franklin Ryckaert

    They were chassidim and especially from chabad. The talmid chachim and in-house academics/scholars. I don’t think you understand. You are using reasoning which they don’t use. They speak in the plural because they see themselves like that. It is part of their sociopolitical theology of talmudism. It is on purpose.

  66. @Franklin Ryckaert

    No, it is very real. We witness it everyday. We read it in the chronicles of the past. There is nothing fictional about it. There is always a Mordecai and an Esther, in fact, often several at many levels and in many places in one nation. Sadly, there are far too many Ahasuerus in the world but not enough Haman (in the sense of not enough men in power that see it and want to fight it).

  67. “To a biological theorist like MacDonald, rabbinical and secularised Jews are uniformly and primarily ‘Jewish’, just as pagan, Christian and secular Europeans are uniformly and primarily ‘European’.”

    A Jew won’t denounce another Jew just because he is of a different color/race, whereas, a White only recognizes a man for his color, in another words, if he is not of his own color than he is from a different race and subject to indifference.

  68. @frankie p

    One doesn’t even need history to see what’s happening in Occupied Palestine today.

    It’s there for all to see [provided one’s not too terrified to see the truth, and say it out loud].

    Yeah, yeah… antisemitism/holocasut/ the world’s fed up with this usual {and automated] BS response.

    Time to move on [and to another country – poor them. The other country, that is]

    • Replies: @frankie p
  69. LarryS says:

    Judaism 101 The Mashiach (Messiah)

    “The mashiach will be a great political leader descended from King David. The mashiach is often referred to as “mashiach ben David” (mashiach, son of David). He will be well-versed in Jewish law, and observant of its commandments. He will be a charismatic leader, inspiring others to follow his example. He will be a great military leader, who will win battles for Israel. He will be a great judge, who makes righteous decisions. But above all, he will be a human being, not a god, demi-god or other supernatural being.

    Before the time of the mashiach, there shall be war and suffering.
    The mashiach will bring about the political and spiritual redemption of the Jewish people by bringing us back to Israel and restoring Jerusalem. He will establish a government in Israel that will be the center of all world government, both for Jews and gentiles. He will rebuild the Temple and re-establish its worship. He will restore the religious court system of Israel and establish Jewish law as the law of the land.

    Jews do not believe that Jesus was the mashiach. Assuming that he existed, and assuming that the Christian scriptures are accurate in describing him (both matters that are debatable), he simply did not fulfill the mission of the mashiach as it is described in the biblical passages cited above. Jesus did not do any of the things that the scriptures said the messiah would do.”

  70. fausto says:

    And pray tell who controls the British.
    Are you shitting in your pants now?

    • Replies: @Fart Blossom
  71. I hope, to wake up one day, and all is clear [to me and you].

    Nothing but you and me.

    That’s all I long for.

  72. Agent76 says:

    May 21, 2021 Israeli Party Leader: Hamas is a Strategic Asset

    The P.A. is a liability and Hamas is an asset. On the international playing field, in this game of the delegitimization think about for a second, the P.A. is a liability and Hamas is an asset.

    May 27, 2020 Israeli apartheid condemned in European Parliament

    Mick Wallace, a member of the European Parliament from Ireland, confronts EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell about EU’s failure to hold Israel accountable, at a hearing of the Security and Defence Committee, 26 May 2020.

  73. Mefobills says:

    I would like to see the author (James Lawrence) synthesize Hudson into the canon of thought he is developing.

    The nature of sin, and debts is miscast in both Christianity and Judaism. Ergo, both religions are out of alignment, and have morphed into something different from their founding.

    Hudson’s book is extremely revolutionary if one takes the time to understand it:

    Judaism did try to defeat mammonism and usury inherent in the tribes long history – hence the “golden calf” and Moses.

    The long history of the merchant and his donkey caravans, and taking usury on out-groups goes all the way back to Sumer.

    The Romans did it too, taking usufruct, only in a different way. They conquered new peoples and then hung the debt hook on them.

    With regards to Jones and the Protestant reformation, that cannot be understood absent the stock market capital in Amsterdam, and the first corporations. Then there was the printing press being used to broadcast narrative for the first time. And yes, our (((friends))) are heavily implicated in usury operations during the 200 years after Isabella and Ferdinand kicked them out of Spain.

    Here is a sample from Hudson:

    In …and forgive them their debts, renowned professor of economics, Michael Hudson – and one of the few who could see the 2008 financial crisis coming – takes us on an epic journey through the economies of ancient civilizations. For the past 40 years in conjunction with the Harvard Peabody Museum, he and his colleagues have documented the archeological record and history of debt, and how societies have dealt with (or failed to deal with) the proliferation of debts that cannot be paid. In the pages of …and forgive them their debts, readers will discover shocking historical truths about how debt played a central role in shaping ancient societies. Perhaps most striking of all is that – in a nearly complete consensus of Assyriologists & biblical scholars – the Bible is preoccupied with debt, not sin.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  74. Lot of comments here. No one will notice mine. But I am the only correct one here. This is because it is simple.

    The reason why Christianity has been so revolutionary is because it is unnatural to the Aryan Spirit. The Aryan Spirit has to fight the semitic straightjacket and much of this struggle results in the social disruption and turmoil of the West.

    Semitism is unnatural to the Occident.

    This is basically what the German Philological tradition stated. I am not sure why everyone on the Right ignores this or doesn’t know about this.

    Semitism pollutes Aryan consciousness. End of Story.

  75. @gay troll

    “Christianity is not an internally consistent literature.”

    Even the books themselves are not internally consistent, but a patchwork of copy/paste over several generations. “The epistles can have no authority, because they have no author.” — Robert M. Price

    “Yet the crucial thing about Mark is that its fiction is transparent. It is meant to be readable on two levels: first, as a literal history, and second, as a parable. ”

    Yes, Mark has Jesus explain how to interpret his parables, and expects his reader to grasp the point that this is how to read Mark as well. Being written in Greek, he assumed his audience had a much higher IQ than the average Christian today.

    Paul, however, was not the first Christian. Paul left the Jerusalem church (aka Qumran community )and joined Marcion’s Cosmic Christ cult. He made a bundle fleecing the congregations, then offered the bankrupt Jerusalem 12 (led by James/Peter/John), which, like all socialist communes, ran out of other peoples’ money (Acts) cash in return for adding his Christ, which they did, creating a biography for him from the OT.

  76. Masta James Lawrence has to have dedicated readers, as his writing is much convoluted, coded and difficult to comprehend by lesser folks such as me.
    Have fun, say I. And dont let the Jews win.

    • LOL: Marcion
  77. @g8way

    The converted Jews of today are NOT the Israelites of the Old Testament.

    Judaism is Pharisaism, and NOT the faith that Jesus practiced.

    I so hope that people will stop looking at these modern converted Jews as if they were the people of the bible. They’re NOT.

    • Replies: @Mulegino1
  78. @fausto

    And pray tell who controls the British.

    Your answer is correct and I’d like to point out that the place is infested with the type as badly as the US government is. Also, I’m not a Brit, and I am not knowlegable about their history, but I’m going with the belief that the tribe had been kicked out by King Edward I, but the “puritan” (christian) Cromwell (who was involved in having the King (Charles) liquidated), let ’em back in, and only then did the “Brits” really get their empire going until someone sets me straight .

    It wouldn’t be the first time nor the last that a national leader got zapped by agents of the usurers.

    Are you shitting in your pants now?

    Probably doesn’t understand enough to be frightened; or he approves.

    • Replies: @Alrenous
  79. anarchyst says:
    @Marcion was Right

    I don’t buy it…Aryan principles and Christian principles can co-exist if jewish influences are kept out.
    It was the Catholic Church that established the first modern-day “institutions of higher learning”, hospitals, and other organizations.
    This was way before Christianity went “off the rails” and incorporated judaic supremacism into Christianity. Even Martin Luther rallied against the jews, but his breakaway denominations ended up worshipping the jews, anyway.
    Pure pre-Protestant Christianity recognized jews as being the “enemy” with their usurious practices, visceral hatred of Jesus Christ (which exists to this very day) and their insistence on jewish supremacy.
    It was only in more recent times that Christian organizations turned to the jewish banksters to fund their social and political aspirations–a major mistake. Even the Catholic Church (still) uses jewish banksters as a financial mechanism.
    From the get-go, the Old Testament should have been divorced from the New Testament, being recognized only as a prequel to the New Testament with little or no doctrinal authority.
    The “Vatican II Ecumenical Council” sealed the deal” and incorporated judaic supremacism into the Catholic Church–not good.

    • Agree: Robert Dolan, Robjil
  80. Agreed.

    In addition, the Scofield Bible infiltrated the church and brought the idiocy of Christian zionism, a contradiction in terms.

    I am always puzzled by those who claim that Christianity is a “jewish plot” and that it was designed to assist jews in their world takeover.

    If this is the case, then WHY have the jews worked so feverishly to destroy Christianity?

    As you said, a correct reading of the NT labels the jews as evil satan worshipers. Christ specifically mentioned jews following the “Laws of Men,” the oral tradition that became the Talmud.

    For nineteen centuries Christians believed the jews rebelled against God, killed Christ, and face eternal damnation unless they repent.

    Luther wrote a scathing assessment of the jews and this was the normal perspective of that time.

  81. Jon Chance says: • Website

    It’s sadly amusing that Old-Testament terrorists (Jews, Muslims, and fake Christians) regard themselves to be superior to “animals”.

    Yet, as even the youngest child can observe, the behavior of non-human animals is generally far superior to the behavior of the human animals who’ve been reduced in moral and intellectual capacity by their delirious worship of a collection of sadomasochistic fairytales known as “The Old Testament”.

    The Talmud and Koran are even more deranged, but examination of those documents isn’t necessary to understand the world’s foremost problem.

    Is it surprising that the Jews of New York have recently removed a public statue of Thomas Jefferson?

    “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.”

    – Thomas Jefferson

    What are these Jews trying to hide — other than history itself?

    The Jefferson Bible, or The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth as it is formally titled, was Thomas Jefferson’s effort to extract what he considered the pertinent doctrine of Jesus by removing sections of the New Testament containing supernatural aspects as well as perceived misinterpretations he believed had been added by the Four Evangelists.

    Using a razor, Jefferson cut and arranged selected verses from the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in chronological order, mingling excerpts from one text to those of another in order to create a single narrative. After completion of The Life and Morals, about 1820, Jefferson shared it with a number of friends, but he never allowed it to be published during his lifetime. The most complete form Jefferson produced was inherited by his grandson, Thomas Jefferson Randolph, and was published in 1895 by the National Museum in Washington.

    Once published in black-and-white facsimile by the Government Printing Office in 1900 as a gift for new members of Congress, the Jefferson Bible has never before been published in color in its complete form. The Jefferson Bible, Smithsonian Edition is an exact facsimile reproduction based on the original copy in the Smithsonian collections. The Jefferson Bible, Smithsonian Edition is as beautiful an object as was so painstakingly crafted by Thomas Jefferson himself.

    • Replies: @Druid55
  82. Mulegino1 says:
    @Doug Ryler

    That is the truth about “Judaism.”

    At its core it is a Pharisaic rejection cult, a counter to the Christian Church. It derives its identity from this. It is the shadow of Christianity.

    The Jewish collective is against Christ and calumniates Him and His followers because the message of the Gospel stands in direct opposition to the fundamental materialism and mammonism (leaven) of the Pharisees. They oppose the letter of their outdated and superseded law, which brings death, to the living spirit of justice and truth, which vivifies. Christ fulfilled the Law and the Prophets in His incarnation, passion, death and resurrection. Judaism is a dry, empty, and lifeless husk kept alive by its hatred for the rest of humanity and its hope of eventual worldwide domination. Its “Mosiach” is Antichrist.

    The Sanhedrin or Jewish collective cannot openly oppose or subvert a culture or civilization when the latter is strong and vigorous. It must wait patiently for elements of corruption to enter into the lifeblood of a nation- via greed, moral collapse, spiritual anemia, etc. That is the way that Jewry infiltrates and subverts a culture. It thrives only when the host culture is vulnerable to infiltration.

    The Jews, sensing cultural or spiritual weakness, merely take advantage of the doors being thrown wide open for them. Little by little, they burrow into the institutions and economies of their host.

  83. anonymous[176] • Disclaimer says:
    @RJ Macready

    Ladies and gents, we have here an atheist-dindoo (yeah, like there are God-aware dindoos? lol!) who deludes himself a thinking man. This idiot commentator of the wall-of-text in front of us feels that “Islam is confined to the Middle East.” Lol!

    This idiot also compares the reasonable development of the Middle East (as gaudy as some parts may be, and excluding the parts laid waste by western imperialists), to the dunghole that is his home country.

    Has he taken a gander at the various world indices and where his country is placed amongst them? Has he taken note of the number of expats who have taken home in the Middle East? Except for missionaries, and a few business people, how many expats have made his dunghole their home?

    All the dindoos are good at is kissing up to the judenscum, which he too displays here. For that they are given haloed positions in American multinationals… like these corporations don’t really have competent whites to lead them?

    The huge Indian market is a cash cow which offers much milking.

    The problem with these anglo saxons is that they are obsessed with morality and doing good.

    This idiot has also drunk himself senseless with the koolaid of the nonsense he spits here. All the anglo-saxons want is to continue their hegemony over the world. Their financial wellbeing depends upon it. Hegemony & Morality/Doing Good are antithetical to each other.

    He is displaying a characteristic which is all too common for a dindoo plagued by deep-seated inferiority complexes… White/Juden Worship (dindoos view juden as white too).

    praying that an invisible fake deity

    Except, there is nothing “invisible” about their “fake deity.” They literally have idols and graven images of their “fake deity” everywhere. This is quite similar to your own pagan idiot kind who claim a better connection to “gods” through their caricatured idols. The christians clearly feel the same way.

    Fcuking godless pagans, all of you!

    • Agree: W
  84. @saggy

    I couldn’t read this … can anyone?

    No, and here’s an example of why:

    The synthesising glue will be the Darwinist ontology of the Race Cult (i.e. racial interests come first, religious ideals second) – which allows white nationalists to talk about ‘God’ and ‘Truth’ and ‘Logos’ and so on with a nudge and a wink, knowing that all of these are just so many adaptive memes to be utilised by the biological tribe.

    That’s when I bailed. This single paragraph embodies the circumlocuitous navel-gazing of any post-graduate course at any university in 2021 America. Jesus, who has the patience for this? A week’s stay in Barbados for anyone grammatically nimble enough to diagram this sentence.

    Write like Ron, honey, if you want people to understand you.

    P.S.: A sure give-away a blog article fails is when its clickbait headline generates few comments. That means it’s unreadable.

  85. Art says:

    Hmm — 7,800 wasted words on the Jews – condemning them for today would be productive. See the words of the leader of the Jews.

    Latest extrajudicial execution confirms ironclad Israeli support for murder of Palestinians

    Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said he “fully backs” the officers who shot the Palestinian assailant, saying they “operated as expected of Israeli officers.”

    Israel has decided to build an iron wall of denial concerning its murderous extrajudicial execution policy.

    • Replies: @Franklin Ryckaert
  86. @Marcion was Right

    “…The reason why Christianity has been so revolutionary is because it is unnatural to the Aryan Spirit…”

    This is certainly true, but only partially so. Christianity started as a heretical Messianic movement within Judaism, but after being rejected by the Jews themselves, it spread into the Hellenistic world and thus had to adapt itself to a different cultural environment. In that process it changed of character.

    From the Greeks it adopted Greek philosophical thinking to construct an elaborate theology. From the Romans it adopted the Roman genius for organization to construct its ecclesiastical structures. Finally from the Germans it adopted their heroic spirit (crusades!).

    Thus Christianity is “Semitic” in only a limited sense. Whether we would be better off if we had remained pagans is doubtful. Like it or not, but monotheism is a higher form of religion than polytheism, even if Christianity with its doctrine of the Trinity is not a pure form of monotheism, such as is Islam.

    Christianity with its high morality, charity and family values, raised the moral level both of the civilized Greeks and Romans, and the barbarian Celts, Germans, Slavs and Balts. Without Christianity a civilized Europe is hardly conceivable.

    We cannot “return” to a belief in Zeus, Juppiter or Odin/Wotan, so unless we find something better, let us not reject what is valuable.

  87. anon[241] • Disclaimer says:
    @Franklin Ryckaert

    never better said except by me. i bow to you sir.

    and there was never a more antisemitic institution than the roman church until less than a century ago.

    but there’s a very greek line in the pentateuch which converted merton.

    ego sum qui sum is what the burning bush says to the stranger in a strange land moses.

    and christianity can’t be understood, because it’s not of this world.

    credo quia absurdum.
    credo quia impossibile.

    it took me forever to grok the mary jive of the romans. but i did.

    thou art peter, and upon this rock…

    the oldest institution on earth. protestants are boring.

  88. anon[260] • Disclaimer says:

    The jews are doing nothing wrong. I admire them. Survival of the fittest.

    so you admire the nazis?

    at least the nazis were honest…except about the showers.

    they thought, “for every german who dies in this war there’s gonna be at least one jew.”

    and today no one cares about the german dead.

    maybe hitler was right.

    don’t put things in your butt, including jews.

    • Replies: @Robert Dolan
    , @Liosnagcat
  89. @Art

    When I see such images of Israeli confirm-the-kill actions, I am inclined to ask:

    “What is the difference between a Palestinian terrorist and an Israeli terrorist?”

    Answer: “A Palestinian terrorist wears civilian clothes, an Israeli terrorist wears a uniform”.

  90. @anon

    Nazism is the mirror image of judaism:
    ingroup preference
    outgroup hostility
    genetic purity

    The deeply evil aspect of the jews particularist philosophy is that they KNOW what is best for their group’s survival and success, yet they viciously DENY the same policies for gentiles and even pathologize gentiles who try to utilize any of the same cohesive group strategies.

    Furthermore…..they spew blood libel on innocent whites while KNOWING full well that such venom leads to genocide. Here is a great clip from Fuentes that really nails the point:

    Video Link

    • Agree: Jack McArthur
  91. The article has merit but I differ with the underlying suggestion(s) that readers return to institutions or modifications to formerly held beliefs, namely religious beliefs in the hope that a novel and orderly path towards universal peace can be found..

    The Catholic church must be viewed as having two distinct parts, the parishioner and Vatican bureaucracy. The Vatican, as a institution, suffers from the concupiscence within it’s corporate and state architectures. For example the Vatican bank scandals and priests who are not permitted to marry thus laying groundwork for perverse behaviors. Marriage entails property entanglements and divorce, something the Vatican State leadership does not wish to deal with. Along the same lines, I am a U.S. citizen but have little affiliation, agreement or connection with transnational corporations who happen to have their headquarters situated on the soil of my country with political agendas dominating both my “so-called” government representatives, their policies or future direction(s).

    The practicing Jew, be they of orthodox, conservative or liberal persuasion, derives spiritual strength from the first five books of the Christian bible (Torah) or Tanakh, and the Nevi’m (The Profits) and Kethuvim (The writings) what Christians call the Wisdom literature. During the time of Jesus, the Jews had, up to that point, engaged in much ritualistic practice, tied directly to their faith. Readers may wish to read any good source material such as The Encyclopedia of Judaism by Geoffrey Wigoder, for those of us looking from the outside in (goyim)

    In any case, Jesus made it clear that ritual practice be it anything from washing hands up to the wrist before dining to forbidding certain work practices on the Sabbath, such stipulations do not strengthen the spiritual aspect of a believer. Washing of the hands masks the unwashed heart engaged in again, concupiscence of the eyes, flesh ie., pride, ambition, envy and so on. It was an unwelcome challenge not because the audience were Jews but because they were human. Who likes to be told what to do and who among us likes to be judged,rather harshly, by some Nazarene carpenters son? Who has the right to scrutinize our laws that eventually would evolve into a compilation referred to as the Kabbala. Jesus was oft accused as being born illegitimate and having no divinity within himself whatsoever? It may be suggested here, that even Jesus himself was unaware of his divinity until later in his life, and further He didn’t care if a Jew believed in his Godliness, only that the followers believe in his teachings but no matter. As a practicing Catholic I do not embrace all the doctrines laid down by Cardinal theologians, such as birth control but must adhere to all the Church Dogmas. And now to the point…Institutions will inevitably fail us. We as individuals must derive our own beliefs and strengths, be open to incorporating alternate belief systems of the far east (Taoism, Shinto, Buddha), Africa and West Indies i.e., Cuban Santeria, Ifá, Palo Mayombe, Abakwa, and Roman Catholicism to find the fullest truth and way to global peace. Why did Catholic institutions and their familiars ( followers of St Ignatius) fail? The Church simply put, became a official State, held gold (current estimates approximately one third of the worlds gold) immersed in the dealings of Mammon. Jesus warmed in Matthew 6:24 the opposing goals of money and love-being mutually exclusive of each other. Yes, keep the (your) faith, your citizenship, but at the same time, realize that we’re on our own as separate individuals with personal accountability before the highest Judge-on that final day.

  92. Learn how to write clearly, jagoff!

    • Disagree: Liosnagcat
  93. Bukowski says:

    The holocaust is third rate propaganda. It’s been debunked already. Maybe you can explain why in countries that have holocaust denial laws you get more time in jail than if you raped someone ? If the holocaust is true why does it need special laws to protect it from criticism ?

    • Replies: @Robert Dolan
  94. These styles of essays require abstracts. For both the reader and the writer. Nick Land is recommending this so I’ll try to give it another go.

  95. @RJ Macready

    From the Western viewpoint, there are really only two objectionable things regarding Jews and their actions:

    1) They are looking out for Jews at the expense of Gentiles, and we are the Gentiles. We are, in fact, in competition with them; they are the opposition. Admire them all you want, but it doesn’t change the simple fact that they don’t want or need your admiration; they want your demise. While you blather on about how they are the fittest, they will demonstrate their fitness by plowing you under. A victim who admires the technique of his killer is missing the point.

    2) Their tactics have long been alien to us, which largely explains the effectiveness of said tactics. In spite of centuries of Judaization and exposure to their deceit and cunning, Western man is still largely trusting, cooperative and willing to treat others as individuals. Far from being charmed by these qualities, the Jew sees them as avenues to be exploited, signs of Gentile gullibility. Western man wants to play ball fairly; the Jew wants to cheat while getting credit for winning legitimately, the easier to cheat again.

    Western man can employ any number of strategies for dealing with Jewish actions, but, first and foremost, he must acknowledge that there is a contest afoot, and the Jews are the opposition. Sadly, Western man is so damned trusting, cooperative and willing to treat others as individuals that he is oblivious to the contest; he even engages in sharp denial when the facts of the matter are placed before him. He is, in a word, gullible.

    The Third Reich had a workable strategy, but never counted on the intransigent gullibility of so many of their Western brothers (e.g., U.S., U.K., etc.) who were gulled by the Jew into fighting against Germany.

    • Thanks: W
    • Replies: @RJ Macready
    , @simple mind
  96. @Bukowski

    The H needs special laws to protect it because if you ask basic questions the entire narrative falls apart very quickly.

    Why was the H not mentioned in the biographies of Eisenhower, Churchill, and de Gaulle?
    I’m sure they had daily intelligence briefings during the war… mention of gas or lampshades…..
    no mention of jewish babies being thrown in the air and stabbed by German bayonets ( a tough job even for the meanest of Nazis)

    The answer is that the H was invented as a marketing tool in 1967 to provide support for Israel’s war on Arabs. So….it’s kind of hard to come up with a cohesive narrative twenty years after the supposed event.

    • Replies: @Druid55
  97. @anon

    “. . . maybe hitler was right.”


  98. @Sepp

    7800 words of barely intelligible drivel resulting from a extended session of mental masturbation by a faux intellectual

    Yep. That just about nails it.

    “Jew good, Christian bad” as you’ve almost expressed it, is a solid bit of perception also. And when the “solution” to the manufactured “MacDonald problem” is called “Anti-Christianity” a smart guy knows he’s now wandering through the very heart of Jew-owned Chutzpahland. But in this case, the central argument is even more patently false than you might expect, the trajectory of that argument crashes and burns on take-off – and the readability of the essay is laughably crippled by pseudo-academic arrogance, and obvious and copious factual and historical error.

    Ohhh… And the writing style is utter shit. 7,800 words for a ludicrously obscure and wholly incorrect and invalid argument. Really ? REALLY ?? Verbose, turgid, condescending and vastly pretentious – as anyone might well expect of some sad knowledge-free loser apparently seriously attempting to rubbish not only the devout (and despised by Jews) Catholic E. Michael Jones, but also Kevin MacDonald’s most important life works – with nil understanding of the underlying academic specialism which enabled him to write them in the first place.

    Easily one of the ten worst and most pointless, barely-readable articles I’ve ever struggled through on TUR. Anyone would have to ask: Is he a ((( ))) ?

    • Replies: @Badger Down
    , @Sepp
    , @Druid55
  99. Panadechi says:

    The anti-white Woke next to the establishment are going to great lengths to humiliate and dispossess the white race.

    Video Link

  100. frankie p says:
    @Daniel Rich


    I agree. I posted the Emperor Claudius quote as a response to the writer’s shallow analysis of Jewish malfeasance and his attempt to lay the sins of the Jews on the Christians, at least those sins starting in the 19th Century. The guy is just another Nathan Confas; he has an agenda to delegitimize KMAC and E. Michael Jones’ analyses and books on the Jews, and he builds his straw man argument based on his agenda, conveniently trying to blame Zionism on Protestantism. Zionism may be the biggest current sin against an indigenous people, but the sins of the Jews have been a constant narrative throughout history, and there weren’t any Protestants to blame in the time of Emperor Claudius. However, the behavior described in his quote matches perfectly the behavior of the Jews today and throughout history.

    • Replies: @Dave Bowman
  101. Perhaps this chap and Fred Reed should collaborate on the ultimate magnum opus of jEwish artful dodgery of their despicable history. It would take a Dickens or Shaw to adequately filet this verbal stew of historical BS.

  102. jsigur says:

    Jews are behind all Revolutions including original Christianity as well as the Protestant Reformation which had the purpose of undermining the one religion that was having some success in holding back the Jew’s obsession with world total domination.
    Of course I am talking about the secret Jewish leaders who hide behind masonry and other supposed secret entities to scheme away in private.
    That great book, The Protocols of Zion pretty much lays out the jist of their methods for coopting foreign powers, that revelation made harmless with the many cries of Jews and gentiles ( who take Jewish pronouncements as fact) that, of course the protocols are a forgery!
    This article from 1928 though filled with some necessary equivocating about some recent issues, made as good a case as I have seen for Christianity being but one of the first in a long line of subversions against non-Jews (in this case Rome)

    and forced me back in 2015 to put the beginning of the JWO at when Paul decided to quit persecuting a problematic sect within Judaism and bring its philosophy to the Roman masses and after a couple hundred years with the undoing of Rome, other Jews schemed to start Christianity’s main rival, Islam and thus assure that the goyim had lots and lots of reasons to fight and kill each other. (Like bankers funding both sides of class warfare and keeping their presence little known) there is no MSM press that will allow posts about the nefarious aspects of Judaism while all other religions are “hate speeched” against by disguising the revelations as “real news”

    Liddel, I find your posts quite refreshing and look forward to reading more.

  103. jsigur says:

    Just wanted to say I haven’t been able to edit my comments for quite a while. I suppose it could be my browser
    I’m glad that someone doesn’t mind criticizing McDonald and the other guy. Again, quite refreshing!

  104. Why would anyone bother to argue with E. Michael Jones’ political theology? It is absurd because Jones conflates spirituality with rationalism, i.e. Jesus represents objective truths of the universe. The looniness is right there. If people want to accept religion as faith, prophecy, or imagination, that’s fine. But anyone who claims religion = reason has no understanding of either.

    Jones is useful to our side because, in his shotgun approach to Jewish Power, he sometimes hits the right targets. Same with Rick Wiles of TruNews. Even Neo-Nazis are useful in this regard. It’s like radical leftists got so much of history wrong, but their anti-Americanism and anti-capitalism sometimes hit the right targets, the rottenness of the US empire and globalist-capitalism that needs to be exposed.
    Otherwise however, there’s no point in addressing E. Michael Jones’ worldview. He’s essentially a Paleo-Catholic crank who can’t tell logos apart from bogus. But then, this ‘James Lawrence’ sounds rather too much like Nathan Cofnas larping as a ‘Christian’. But whereas E. Michael Jones is clearly and sincerely nutty, there’s something weasely and disingenuous about Lawrence’s piece. It reads like misdirection that boils down to “Don’t blame the Jews. Goyim started it, and Jews just followed, rather haplessly.”

    In Europe, it was the French revolution that emancipated the Jews, not the Jews who unleashed the revolution. In America, it was the Progressive and New Deal movements that raised them into the governing elite, and set the stage for everything that MacDonald describes in The Culture of Critique. Even Zionism, contrary to popular belief on the Dissident Right, was a 19th-century Protestant religious obsession (called ‘restorationism’) before it was taken up by Jewish nationalists like Emma Lazarus and Theodore Herzl.

    First of all, only a moron rightist believes that everything revolutionary is bad and caused by Jews. Only a moron rightist thinks that everything leftist is wrong and that everything right is somehow noble. True, there are moron-rightists who still dream of monarchs & aristocracy and feel triggered by anything that hints of ‘revolution’. In a way, such position has more to do with the likes of Bill Buckley — National Review ran countless articles on how the French Revolution was a dress rehearsal for 20th century radicalism, not only communism but Fascism — than with Alt-Right or the New Right, many of whom see the value of socialism and the positive role that revolution and social reforms played in the development of the Modern West. After all, what distinguished the West from the Rest? West accepted and even accelerated changes, revolutions in so many areas. This dichotomy also applies to the Christian West and Christian East, especially Byzantium. While the former grew and grew, the latter declined and fell under the Ottoman Muslims. If Christian logos is a sure formula of truth and power, why did Byzantium fail? It was far more ‘theocratic’ than the Christian West that broke free of Medievalism and gained much from neo-paganism of the Renaissance. What really made the Modern West was the fusion of neo-paganism(that sparked creativity in the arts and Hellenistic approach to logic and science) and Christian prophecy. The ‘problem'(if it is a problem) with paganism is it lacks a unified vision of the universe and the future. According to paganism, there are many gods, therefore there is no single direction to history but a contest of competing forces, like with the gods in THE ILIAD. In contrast, Christian monotheism says there is one force, God, that leads history to fulfill a certain prophecy. Thus, the Christian mindset is more committed to a linear theory of progress. Now, Christianity alone could mean Byzantine enervation or Medieval ascetism that hardly moves history forward. But when fused with neo-pagan creativity and spark, the combination could open new horizons.

    Anyway, only a fool would argue that the revolutionary spirit was necessarily bad for the West. If anything, it is what made the West, relative to the far more conservative Rest(and Byzantium). Pro-Western people don’t have a problem with revolution per se. Rather, the problem has been with impatient radicalism rooted in the cult of rationalism. (Radicalism isn’t content with organic pace of change and seeks to bring about utopia in single leaps. Granted, change and progress aren’t necessarily organic. Rather, they must be encouraged and pushed. It’s like plants need sun and nutrients to grow. Children need to be pressured by parents to study. Coaches must drive athletes hard. Inertia is often the natural state of things. Leftism in sane doses can prod society to move a bit faster, hastening the pace of change. There are limits, of course. A child can learn only so much in a week, and an athlete can improve his ability only so much in a season. Leftism sometimes pushes good ideas too fast, but it is truly fatal when it blindly pushes bad ideas as the answer, like with communism.) While the emergence of rationalism was a great thing for the West(especially in science, technology, medicine, etc), it also led to the hubris that mankind could figure everything out and know, based on ‘science’, what must be done. The result was Marxism(with its supposed ‘scientific materialism’) and, more recently, Covid Nuttery.
    Science is of immense value, but it also spawned ‘scientism’, the conceit that one’s worldview or ideology is foolproof for being based on ‘science’. Such Iron Rationalism actually undermines real rationalism. This usually applies to the human sciences. At one time, the ‘scientistic’ element favored the ‘scientific racists’ who were so sure of their theories of race. Today, the ‘scientistic’ element favors the ‘scientific anti-racists’ who, based on incomplete evidence or willful self-delusion, insist that race is just a social construct. In both cases, true science is clouded by ‘scientism’ that really amounts to misuse of science for what are ideological purposes. (‘Scientific Anti-Racism’ will be far more harmful to the West as it will argue that 500 million black African immigrants won’t make any difference to Europe because people are just people. ‘Scientific Racism’ led Europeans to mistreat or murder some peoples or groups, but ‘Scientific Anti-Racism’ can only lead to wholesale murder of Europe.)

    Maybe some extreme Anti-Jewite or ultra-rightist believes every revolutionary movement was bad(and that we should be living in the Middle Ages) or that Jews were the key players in all these events. But that’s mostly a red herring because it misses the essence of the current criticism of Jewish Power among today’s white nationalists or white-centrists, most of whom don’t care what happened 500 yrs ago, let alone 1000 or 2000 yrs.
    Of utmost importance is what is happening NOW, and who can deny that Jewish Supremacism rules the West? Furthermore, who can deny that, what Jews push onto white goyim doesn’t apply to Jews themselves. If indeed ideology controls the Jews, they would judge themselves by the same yardstick with which they judge whites. But they don’t. A case in point. If the ideology of ‘anti-racism’ is indeed dominant in the West, Jews would not only be bashing whites for past discrimination against blacks but for white support of Jewish tyranny over the Palestinians. But the very Jews who decry white treatment of blacks insist and demand that whites support whatever Israel does to Palestinians(and Arabs in outlying territories). But ‘James Lawrence’ is rather like Nathan Cofnas on this issue. He’d rather sweep it under the rug while yammering about some Christian theological controversy from 1000 yrs ago. Like who cares about that crap? Maybe E. Michael Jones cares, but even most people who value Jones’ criticism of Jewish Power don’t care to read his books or lend any credence to his notion that Logos = Worshiping Jesus. I’d argue that most white nationalists or white-centrists are, at heart, neo-pagan, and good for them!

    Also, what do we mean by Jews in the historical sense? Your average Jew throughout history didn’t amount to much. The real movers and shakers were elite Jews, often the bankers and others with close ties with European elites. These individuals were most certainly manipulating events for Jewish interests. FDR, for example, had the overwhelming support of Elite Jewry. It’s true that Jews were absorbing lots of ideas and attitudes from Anglo-Protestants and even following their lead, but it’s also true that Jews were playing a prominent role in steering Anglos toward certain goals, like war with Germany. Sometimes, Anglo and Jewish interests overlapped, but more than any other group, Jews steered events in the interests of their tribal interest. Who can deny this? Jews were pro-Soviet at one time because Jews played a key role in the Russian Revolution and because Soviet Union fought Hitler’s Germany. After the war, many Jews spied for the Soviet Union. But as the Soviet Union turned more pro-Arab and anti-Israel, even so-called ‘leftist’ Jews grew hostile to communism, and Neocons joined and even came to lead the anti-communist crusade in the 1980s. Who doesn’t see a tribal angle to this?
    And if ideology matters so much to Jews, how come all those ‘liberal Jews’ don’t condemn ultra-rightist Israel? Why are they silent about Jewish oligarchs allied with Naziesque forces in Ukraine? If they’re such good ‘secular liberals’, why do they turn a blind eye to Israel’s support of ultra-religious ISIS and other crazy Jihadists working against secular Assad of Syria? Never mind what happened 500 or 1000 yrs ago. Why can’t ‘James Lawrence’ address the world today? Why is he misdirecting our focus from the obvious truths in the here-and-now to some mumbo jumbo theological debates centuries ago?


    Alas, this theory contradicts the central dogma of white nationalism: that racial self-interest is primary, and truths, doctrines and ideas are secondary. WNs want to live in a dark fever-dream, where every race except the white one is strategising for its self-interest under a cynical veil of ideals – and we need only become paranoid enough to perceive the hidden strategies, and deceptive enough to conceal our own self-interest in the same way. They do not want to live in the light of consciousness, where ideals really motivate individuals, and solidify the cohesion of groups – because in this reality, their own dream is reduced to a narrow and paltry ideal, a cult of biological race.

    What a lying piece of turd. White Nationalists don’t say racial self-interest IS primary. They know it from White Decline all around. If racial self-interest were primary, whites wouldn’t be in this mess. What they say is that racial self-interest MUST BE primary. In other words, it can’t be taken for granted and must be embraced as a consciousness. They say identity must dictate ideology, not vice versa. Why? History shows time and again that identity has greater resilience and longevity than ideas or ideology or whatever. Any people who forget this are fated to fade away and die.
    Also, white-centrists don’t believe in some ‘dark fever dream’ where whites must conceal their own self-interests. No, they are for exposing the Jewish self-interest and for OPENLY and HONESTLY exhorting and exercising white self-interest.

    Being pro-identity doesn’t mean one is anti-ideological. Rather, it means ideology must complement identity. History bears this out. Every religion came to be a tool of power, of a people or an order. Thus, Catholic kingdoms fought other Catholic kingdoms. One Arab tribe, though Muslim, fought another Arab tribe, also Muslim. Russia and China were both communist, but Russian communism served Russia, Chinese communism served China. Russian history is a clear case of identity outlasting ideology, i.e. Russia was Russia before communism, during communism, and after communism. Any people, culture, or civilization can weather the rise and fall of ideologies or political systems AS LONG AS the people remain intact. It is when the people are replaced that it’s really game over. The fall of Imperial Tsarist system wasn’t the end of Russia. The fall of communism wasn’t the end of Russia either. But if Russians were to be replaced by another people, it’d be the end of Russia regardless of ideology. This is why ‘muh democracy’ is so dumb. “Gee, I don’t care if white nations become 90% non-white as long as it still has free markets and elections.”
    The course of current Western History goes to show that racial self-interest doesn’t come naturally or first-and-foremost among a people. A people can be brainwashed to welcome their own destruction in the name of false gods of ideology. Or a people can be conditioned to believe their purpose is to serve another people. The lower castes in India were made to feel this way about members of higher caste. In the past, blacks in the South were made to believe their lot was to serve whites because, on their own, they’d just be crazy dumb ni**ers. It’s like dogs can be trained to favor the interests of the master over their own dog-hood.
    But any people that wants to survive into the future better put race/identity before ideology or make ideology bend to identity. China adopted universal communism but molded it to serve the Chinese people. Iran practices universal Islam, but this doesn’t mean it rejects Iranian national interest. Nicaragua practices democracy, but it’s a national democracy than one that bends to the US globalist world order.

    According to ‘James Lawrence’, the cult of biological race is a ‘paltry ideal’. The white race, or any race, is the product of 100,000s or at least 10,000s of yrs of evolution. White race was forged by survival through all sorts of climates and terrains. It came into existence even before white civilization. Before there was white culture/society, there was the white race. In other words, race came before all else. What we call ‘history’ is maybe 5,000 yrs, or at most 6,000 yrs. ‘History’ and high civilization came to Northern Europe much later. Perhaps, Northern European history is 1,500 or 1,200 yrs, much shorter than Egypt’s, Persia’s, India’s, and China’s. Long before the rise of European civilization, there was the European race forged by struggle in ice and fire over many eons. This is a rich biological heritage that has value regardless of ideology. After all, a European’s primary value is his European being, not whether he’s a ‘Christian’, ‘atheist’, ‘anarchist’, ‘socialist’, ‘capitalist’, ‘libertarian’, and etc. This isn’t to discount the importance of ideas but to state the obvious: being precedes believing. So, the most valuable ideology is one that places Being before Believing. European race came into existence long before Christianity or any other idea-system. And yet, for ‘James Lawrence'(a larping version of Nathan Cofnas?), white consciousness of rich and deep racial history is a ‘paltry ideal’. Maybe ‘Lawrence’ feels this way because he happens to be a paltry specimen of the white race: an ugly stupid dork idiot.

    Now, it’s true that one can read too much into the supposed Jewish Plan. It can get rather silly, like with Adam Green’s theory that Jews cooked up Christianity and spread it to goyim to gain power over them. Green, like E. Michael Jones, is useful as a critic of Jewish Power because he sometimes hits the right targets. But the grand conspiracy theory of Christianity is just ludicrous.

    Video Link

    Video Link

    According to Green, Jews turned goyim into Christian Anti-Semites who oppressed Jews so that Jews could, 2000 yrs later, guilt-bait goyim into serving Jews. ROTFL and LOL rolled into one. It’d be like saying blacks cooked up the slave trade so that blacks could one day guilt-bait whites into kissing black ass. And maybe Japan actually planned to lose WWII to become an ally of the US and gain access to US markets.

    This is where grand-theorizing can easily jump the shark. Now, there is a kernel of truth to Adam Green’s view. Jews are big thinkers and tend to be more strategic than other races. Jewish personality can be glimpsed in Isaac Asimov’s FOUNDATION series where some Big Mind prophesies future events and sees what the normal mind doesn’t see. Stanley Kubrick’s films were also conceived on the Big Think principle. Jews have been obsessed with chess, a game of strategy where the winner is usually the one who computes more moves ahead. Now, some might argue this is merely the result of higher intelligence, but intelligence isn’t necessarily interested in Big Ideas or grand concepts. Anglos have been an intelligent people but their mental skills were focused on empiricism, things that could be observed, collected, and studied. Plenty of very smart people are narrowly focused on a single topic or task. Intelligence per se doesn’t strive for the grand theory of everything or the grand prophecy of what will be(or what must be). In other words, most intelligent economists weren’t like Karl Marx with a grand theory of history, one who tried to tie together all the past with all the future, the science with the theory of justice. So, the Jewish mindset isn’t merely the product of high intelligence. Rather, it’s part of the Jewish prophetic tradition(which is more accurate than the ‘revolutionary spirit’). Now, what came first in a chicken-or-egg way? Jewish personality or Jewish prophecy? Was there something in Jewish personality that favored propheticism? Or did the culture of propheticism favor those Jews who claimed to be farther-seeing and more profounder in reach? I don’t know.

    Now, does this mean that Jews long ago looked into the future and brought about events that led to the 20th century? No. While Jews are more strategic and farther-seeing than most peoples, no people(however intelligent or strong-willed) can look into the future and plan events that happen centuries, let alone millennia, later. Kubrick’s films are about ‘perfect plans’ that always fail due to some unforeseen X-factor. There are lots of X-factors and/or black swans in history. Karl Marx based his prophecy on economic trends in his time. He failed to see how those trends would change with new developments in science and technology. Also, he underestimated the element of individual will and the power of the irrational. Furthermore, prophecies tend to undermine themselves because they not only serve as vision of the future but alarm that wakes the enemy. Marxist prophecy forced capitalists to wake up and amend their ways and make compromises with moderate socialists lest growing unrest and radicalism lead to real revolution. Thus, most prophecies are self-defeating by alerting the enemy to what’s up ahead unless something is done(to suppress the movement or to win over the moderate voices within it).

    Jewish History cannot be understood apart from goy history as most of it is about Jews co-existing with the far more numerous and powerful goyim. Thus, Jews lacked the autonomy that the Persians, Hindus, and Chinese had. Persians had their dominant space. Hindus had their own cosmologically ordered society. Chinese had their own Middle Kingdom. In contrast, Jews had to exist alongside goyim, and this meant they could never practice the kind of centrism of the great goy powers.
    Now, if Jews were simply aiming to assimilate and do business, this would have been no big deal. Plenty of minority cultures assimilated and became part of larger cultures. Most of the tribes mentioned in the Bible no longer exist. They became part of Persian folks, Arab folks, Turkic folks, European-Christian folks, and etc. It could have been the same with Jews but for the fact that they came up with the most powerful religious concept and the idea of the Covenant that set themselves apart from goyim. So, even as goyim were more numerous and more powerful, Jews held this conviction that, ethno-spiritually at least, they were the best because of the Covenant with the one true God.

    But because Jews insisted on serving their own JEWISH interests despite lacking a secure world of their own, they had to be more esoteric, clever, shadowy, and devious in their thinking and approach. They had to latch onto goy systems, values, fashions, and trends while somehow manipulating them to favor Jewish interests. Of course, Jews themselves were profoundly impacted by these goy values and systems(though, with something like Christianity, one could debate til the cows come home as to whether it’s ‘semitic’ or ‘aryan’ because it’s ‘semitic’ as foundation but ‘aryan’ as edifice). But no matter how much Jews adopted goy ways and ideas, they eventually made them serve Jewish identity because the very foundation of Jewishness is the ethno-spiritual Covenant; this core concept of Jewishness is so essential that it even defines secular Jews.

    In contrast, Christianity is about weakening one’s tribal identity in favor of universal values. To become a better Christian, you favor fellow Christians of all color over your own kind on the basis of blood. However, to be a good Jew means to stick with the Covenant and to believe in the fusion of spirit and blood, the Jewish blood. Thus, even if Jews and white Christians adopt the same ‘universal’ values, they eventually go separate ways. White Christians try to make themselves less white and more universal because the core principle of Christianity is to unite all of humanity as brethren under Jesus. In contrast, given the nature of Judaism, Jews use the same ‘liberal’ or ‘universal’ ideals to serve Jewish identity and interests because the core function of Judaism is preservation of the race on account of its sacred blood.

    Look at Jewish Liberals and Wasps Liberals from the New Deal era. After WWII, with each passing year, white liberals became less race-centric, less tribal, and less nationalist, whereas Jewish liberals became more race-centric, more tribal, and more nationalist(even to the point of supremacism). If the power of ideology is paramount, white liberals and Jewish liberals would have ended up the same way. But today, white liberals denounce Hungary for trying to preserve itself while Jewish ‘liberals’ not only support ultra-right Israel but work with neocon Jews to make sure ALL US POLITICIANS totally support Israel while kicking Palestinians into the dirt. What do Jewish ‘conservatives’ in the US and Jewish ‘conservatives’ in UK have in common? Do they care about the preservation of the white race or Christian heritage in either country? No, it all comes down to “Is it good for Jewish Power?” The fact that there is far less animus between Jewish ‘left’ and Jewish ‘right’ than between white ‘left’ and white ‘right’ goes to show that Jews put identity before ideology, whereas whites put ideology before identity, a fatal development. Now, one could argue that the relative tribal unity among Jews stems from the anxiety of minority status, but it’s the same in Israel where Jews are the solid majority.

    There are two reasons why Jewish Identity is easier to utilize as the basis of political conviction. Jewish ethnicity has been sacralized via the Covenant. So, according to Judaism, Jewish pride isn’t based on tribal arrogance alone but on the very word of God. In contrast, there’s nothing in Christianity that bestows specialness on the white race. Thus, while white Christians could feel the glow of sanctity as Christians(though not so much anymore because Jews associated the history of Christianity with ‘antisemitism’, ‘racism’, and cultural repression), they can feel no such merely as whites. In contrast, the mere fact of being Jewish means God is watching over you. He chose your kind. (This is why the only solution for whites is to forge their own covenant with the power of the universe. White blood must be sacralized, but this requires the emergence of white prophecy. Christianity, in contrast, means that your blood is hopelessly tainted with sin and can only be cleansed with infusion of Jesus’s blood. Covenant binds. Goy way was to divide goyim into aristocrats and subjects. Elites and peons. Because white elites looked down on white peons, Jews could manipulate the division by aiding the goy elites in the exploitation of goy masses. In contrast, the Jewish Covenant says even the blood of the lowliest Jew is equal to that of the richest Jew in the eyes of God. One good thing about National Socialism was it valued every German as part of the national volk.)

    The other reason why Jewish Identity is politically justified is ironically due to Christian morality and its emphasis on victimology as basis of virtue. Jews ran with the Holocaust Narrative and made themselves to be the biggest victims in history… at the hands of the Christian West no less. (Some will say the Nazis were neo-pagan, but Jews argue that the entire history of Antisemitism, beginning with the Christian kind, led to the horror in WWII.) Thus, Holocaustianity guilt-baits white Christians with a twist on Christian morality. Jews are suddenly the new jesuses crucified by White Gentiles/Christians as the New Romans.
    This guilt-consciousness has been the Achilles Heel of Christianity, at least IF non-Christians were to gain control of the Narrative. In contrast, Muslims are immune to such psycho-emotional manipulation because Muhammad told his followers to do some Jihad, kick butt, never apologize, and convert infidels(or kill them if they get in the way). You don’t see Muslims groveling before Jews or bending down to wash stinky Negro feet. Islam can be plenty repressive and dogmatic but it’s not sanctimonious like Christianity with ‘turn the other cheek’ spiel. Muhammad told his followers to kick the other (ass) cheek of the enemy, not turn the other cheek for the enemy to slap. Of course, Christians hardly turned the other cheek and preferred to wage war and kill lots of people, but this could eventually be used to guilt-bait Christian conscience IF the enemy were to gain control of the Narrative. And Jews gained control over the Narrative, which is why the New Western or Schwestern Values are based on a litany of white historical sins, especially to Jews and blacks(as Jews don’t want whites to feel sorry for what they did to Arabs and Palestinians).

    Now, it’s true that what we call Jewish Power is the result of interaction of Jews and goyim. It’s like Jews in Italy were different from Jews in France were different from Jews in Britain were different from Jews in Russia were different from Jews in Brazil were different from Jews in America from Jews in Iran and so on. If the Anglo World never existed, Jews would not be ruling the world. Anglos were super-ambitious and highly talented as world conquerors, and Jews rode on that white horse to world power. Also, even though certain Jewish elites had considerable influence throughout Western history, it’s only recently that Jews gained anything like supreme power via the Anglos, especially Anglo-Americans who, at some point, decided to get on all fours and play white horsey to the Jewish rider.
    So, Jewish worldview always changed and adapted in accordance to shifting historical landscapes. It’s not as if a cabal of Jews in the 12th century were planning the Bolshevik revolution of the 20th century or globo-homo parades of the 21st century. Still, whatever Jews were faced with through history, there has been a running thread of bending and twisting things to serve Jewish interests, not least by suppressing criticism of Jews while amplifying criticism of their rivals or enemies.
    Take Hollywood. One could say Jews didn’t invent motion pictures. Jews weren’t the first to start the movie business. But once they gained dominance in the industry, they were mindful to make it Jewish-friendly. Of course, Jews had to make compromises. In the early 20th century when Christians and moralists(and anti-Jewish elements) had lots of power, Jews had to agree to stuff like the Hayes Code and appease the Catholic Church. Jews were also mindful not to offend the American South. Still, Jews made sure Hollywood made lots of anti-German movies in the 1930s. And Jews in Hollywood did everything to blacken Joe McCarthy’s name because HUAC at one time forced Jewish Hollywood to blacklist certain Jewish writers and directors. And Hollywood also made stuff like EXODUS while not making a single pro-Palestinian movie. So, while, in one way, Hollywood is just another American Capitalist success story, it’s also been a Judeo-centric enterprise. Who can deny that Jewish control had a profound impact on how so many Americans(and global audiences) came to see the world? Via Hollywood movies, countless people around the world came to see Islam as synonymous with terrorism. Via Hollywood movies, countless Europeans came to regard white Americans as mindless gun-toting ‘racists’ who lynch blacks at the drop of a hat.

    In a way, Jews are too smart for ideology or fashion trends even as they pretend to go along or get swept up for awhile. In the Sixties, Jews and goyim alike took part in the Counterculture. But whereas many simpleminded white goyim gave themselves fully to the hippie culture and the like, many Jews soon realized how silly it was. And there was too much money to be made than rolling in the hay, wearing flowers in your hair, and searching for Indians to touch. Better to organize rock concerts and rake in the profits than wear tie-dyes and waste your days as a ‘deadhead’. Be like David Geffen.

    Jewish intelligence can’t help but seeing goyim as dumb. Suppose someone with 100 IQ found himself among those with 80 IQ. Would he want to take orders from the dummies? Would he consider them as his equal? He might pretend to because he’s outnumbered. It’d sure be dumb for the 100 IQ guy to say to the 80 IQ crowd, “You guys sure are dumb. I’m smarter, I deserve to rule, so do as I say or kiss my ass!” Even dummies will take offense and kick his ass. So, what should he do? He pretends to be for ‘equality’ and act in interest of the common good while slyly gaining power over them. He may also guilt-bait the 80 IQ crowd by saying they are ‘privileged’ over the 60 IQ crowd even though he, with 100 IQ, is the most privileged among them all.

    Higher IQ simply wants to rule over lower IQ. It’s just human nature. It’s like blacks, being tougher, want to be the alpha race over others. Blacks will not say it but feel it just the same. Indeed, blacks would be far less anti-white IF whites were equally tough. Suppose whites were just as good at fighting and sports. Suppose NBA and NFL were majority white and blacks made up only 13% of the players. Blacks would actually respect whites and have far less problem with whites having lots of good stuff. But blacks, being obsessed with fighting and sports, look upon whites as inferior wussy fa**oty race of slow white boys. Whites are inferior, so why they gots more than blacks? This infuriates blacks who believe they, as the alpha race, should rule. Jews feel the same way but on the basis of higher intelligence.

    But it’s not just about brawn or brains. After all, there are big tough guys who are mellow in temperament. And there are smart people who are nice and kind. So, their superiority doesn’t make them especially nasty or hostile. But blacks are naturally oogity-boogity due to evolution alongside hippos, hyenas, and lions. They be nasty. And Jews are naturally pushy-wushy due to reasons of evolutions stemming from rabbinical and merchant competition. Thus, there are lots of Jews with personalities of Albert Brooks, Alan Dershowitz, Sarah Silverman, and Howard Stern. No wonder then that black brawn consciousness often leads to jive-ass thuggery, and Jewish brain consciousness often leads to sneering contempt, so evident among the likes of Chuck Schumer, Jerry Nadler, Adam Schiff, Jennifer Rubin, Rob Reiner(meathead), John Podhoretz, and etc.

    This is why Jews and blacks sort of see eye to eye. Being advantaged in different areas, they often fear or resent the other, but they also take pride in having extra juice for causing havoc for the rest of us. Terms of Jew-Black Alliance goes as follows: “Jews will use all their might to browbeat and guilt-bait whites into elevating blacks as the gods and idols of the New US, and blacks in turn will dump on whites and ‘white supremacism’ but will not call out on Jews and Zionist tyranny over Palestinians.”
    But then, Jews get away with such anti-white crap because whites worship Jews as either the Chosen(Christian Zionists), Holy Holocaust People, Endearing Comedians, or High IQ Geniuses. Indeed, even HBD-sphere is worshipful of Jews. Why does Jared Taylor remain silent about the very people who’ve done most to de-platform him? It’s because he’s so enthralled with Jewish Greatness. People like Taylor and John Derbyshire are not hoping for equal partnership with Jews. Rather, they are willing to be servants and sidekicks of Jews in return for Jewish tolerance of white interests. “We white goyim will serve you superior Jews, the true master race, IF you Jews permit our white interests.” But why would Jews agree to that? If Jews are the master race, it’s only fitting for Jews to serve their own interests, not allow white interests. Now, what if some whites argue that Jewish interests and white interests are totally aligned… like the notion of Judeo-Christian? But Jews are not stupid. They know Christianity began as an anti-Jewish religion. Also, Jews and Europeans had a long troubled history, and all of sudden, Jews and whites are Best-Friends-Forever? No way. Besides, even if whites turned over a new leaf and are sworn to be nice to Jews henceforth, Jews know it’s only a matter of time before ‘antisemitism’ resurfaces. Why? Because bad Jewish behavior will get out of control again. Jews know this. There are good Jews who prefer to play fair and decent, but there are also bad Jews who use every dirty trick in the book. The problem is, given the nature of Jewish Identity, if good Jews had to choose between good goyim and bad Jews, they will go with the latter. It’s just a tribal thing. And so, bad Jews go unchecked and give Jews a bad name, and this leads to ‘antisemitism’. Good Jews may not want bad Jews to act so badly, but they just can’t make themselves side with good goyim against bad Jews. So, Jews have decided to destroy every last vestige of white identity and unity because, then, there won’t be any white resistance no matter badly the bad Jews act and how much the good Jews cover for bad Jews. (Of course, if good Jews aid bad Jews, they too become bad Jews.) Besides, good Jews figure, as nasty as bad Jews are, they(the bad ones) got bigger cojones to do what good Jews wouldn’t dare do. Thus, sometimes, it’s the bad Jews who really make things happen, from which even good Jews can profit… like the spread of gambling and Zionic scramble for world domination.
    It’s like good Anglos often relied on the ambition and adventurousness of bad Anglos to gain more territory and loot. But whereas whites reached a point where good ones called out on bad ones, good Jews dare not call out on bad Jews. Same with blacks. There are some good blacks, but in the name of ‘brotherhood’, they stick together and the good ones don’t call out on bad ones… which makes black behavior worse, which can lead to more ‘racism’. Even though good whites are far more likely to call out on bad whites, there’s a limit to white conscience(as it lacks agency). In their worship of Jews and blacks, good whites dare not call out on bad Jews or bad blacks. Why, that’d be ‘antisemitic’ or ‘racist’. It’s a vile and vicious cycle of moral blindness and hypocrisy that the West has fallen into.

    • Agree: ziggurat
    • Thanks: W
  105. This complete blather is so try hard and dripping with pilpul it’s a wonder that any commenter would take it seriously. Cut through the bullshit, is white America better off with our without the Jew? Simple test.

    • Replies: @Anon
  106. No, people don’t go to jail for stealing 70 cents worth of items.

    Jewish oligarchs can steal millions or billions, and black looters can run off with tons of loot.

    Jews and Blacks have the license to steal as either white collar or black holler criminals.

  107. geokat62 says:

    Telegram comment posted by American Renaissance:

    VIDEO: Sam Dickson says Americans of European origin must have a nation and that there is no hope of political reform. He points out that the Left has given up on everything it once championed, and adds the rising number of people who see our government as illegitimate “offers great hope for the future.” He concludes with his belief that “we will have our own nation.”

  108. @John Johnson

    There are too many problems for egalitarians once you acknowledge that race at least partially exists.

    Well, I wrote an entirely Catholic, entirely essentialist, entirely anti-modern essay proving that race does exist and describing how to treat of it, which also happens to disprove the bio-theological crypto-metaphysics which is the Darwinian error. It ought to be taken a lot more seriously than the nonsense that E. Michael Jones writes.

    • Thanks: Barbarossa
  109. @Alrenous

    Christianity is indeed the problem in the first place. And in any case, returning to Christianity is foolhardy in the extreme; it has already flagrantly proven its political inferiority to this particular heresy.

    What is the plan exactly? Secular Whites have fewer children than any Christian denomination and are second to Jews when it comes to donations to the Democrats.

    This thread is predictable as always. Attacking Christianity but without any semblance of a solution for dealing with secular Whites going left.

    Most Jews vote Democrat and would much prefer Whites to be secular than Catholic.

    This idea that Christianity is a Jewish psi-op doesn’t make any sense.

    White people are not served by secularism. They can’t separate it from liberalism. Anyone that has been around secular Whites is aware of this. They take liberalism and make it their new religion without even realizing it. The oddball White guy that logs onto Unz is not the norm.

    The Mormons have the right idea which is to come up with a new take on it. People snicker at the Mormons and yet their numbers continue to expand. The typical “rational” secular White really believes that race doesn’t exist and we can just import millions of Africans or Mexicans if Whites don’t have children and everything will be the same. They really believe this. In fact they think it would be an improvement. In their minds “the science” has settled this even if they can’t explain why the third world still exists.

    • Replies: @Alrenous
  110. anon[220] • Disclaimer says:

    What McDonald and Jones ought to argue, but are blinded by ignorance (in the non-pejorative sense) is that Satan is the enemy of Christ, and that history is réductible to this, and only this dichotomy.

    There is some validity to what you say. However, your point is only valid for those who share a Christian worldview. Most rational and secular people, MacDonald included, are going to analyze history in terms of political and social trends using a strictly empirical approach. MacDonald in particular examines Jewish influence in terms of group evolutionary strategy. It’s not that he’s ignorant (in the non-pejorative sense, thank you) but that he doesn’t share the basic premises underlying your worldview. In fact, most people on this forum probably don’t.

    To the extent that your point is true for Christian, it’s still irrelevant if only because it reflects a skewed set of priorities. What’s the bigger problem: Christians falsely conflating the demonstrably immoral work of organized Jewry with Satan (i.e. seeing Jews as the “The Problem”)? Or is it the inverse, namely that Christians falsely conflate modern-day Israel and Jewry with God’s will, maybe even the Messiah, despite the clear message of Scripture, which declares that Jews are no longer living in obedience to God, that they will not inherit the Kingdom of God, that the Church is the true Israel, and that salvation is by faith in Jesus Christ? I would submit to you that the latter is the problem of utmost concern, especially under the current cultural zeitgeist. Conflating Israel and world Jewry with the work of God is the error that you should be concerned with, not with the few Christian dissidents on the Right whose historiography sets up a Jews-vs-God dichotomy.

    I get that you’re responding to this article, and that your post is being made in a particular context. That being said, given your concern for the state of Catholicism, the response should be a return to more serious study by intellectual Catholics to the fallen and unholy nature of Judaism, the fact that it blasphemes God, that its organized leadership, be it secular or otherwise, with all its political machinations, is extremely ungodly. Far from being considered for “exclusion” and “blame,” Jews are treated as theological celebrities, with the Catholic clergy going on never-ending apology tours for anti-Semitism.

    You have everything ass-backwards, and this is always a red flag for me when I consider Jews claiming to be converts to this or that. Your priorities are still to uphold and advance Jewish interests while making implicit attacks on your perceived racial and spiritual enemies. You are to Catholicism what Michael L. Brown is to Protestantism. Another Jew who uses his “conversion” credentials to attack the goyim.

    In short, you are not to be trusted.

  111. @Liosnagcat

    You make some very good points. I dont worship the jew. I didnt even know anything about them till 3 years ago. If you check my posting history you’ll know where I stand on most issues.

    WW2 is a fascinating subject. I graduated in history and it is fascinating to see what the real truth was. Churchill is considered a great man, which he was, but he fucked up with the Jew bait, as did FDR. Which shows that not everything is black and blue. Meh, life is complicated. Better to relax with a beer and end time on this rock.

    • Replies: @Liosnagcat
  112. @Priss Factor


    Your work is always fascinating and your reply is actually much better than the article itself.

    I take issue with the idea that jews are more intelligent than goyim because I don’t believe it’s true.
    I don’t believe that it’s intelligence that elevated jews to rule over us and this is a standard jew narrative (and the one that Cofnas used to explain jewish supremacism and goy defeat)

    Just by considering the fact that the white population vastly outnumbers the jewish population, we have FAR more high IQ whites than there are high IQ jews.

    Seems to me I once saw some figures regarding this and it was a big win for team white overall.
    And the average IQ for Israel (at 100) is about the same as the average for the USA.

    I think jews rule over us because they are THE MONEY POWER. They can buy off every white leader and turn them into useless sellout pieces of shit. Jews use money as a form of control, and they also use deception, lies, propaganda, intimidation, and violence.

    The problem is that high IQ whites operate in a Christian value system that is universal and considerate of all mankind, whereas the jewish elite observes a Talmudic system that is particularistic and centered on their own group and to hell with everybody else.

    Whites are going to have to learn to play dirty and they are going to have to pick it up very fast.

    • Agree: Ned kelly
  113. Jacobite2 says:
    @frankie p

    Don’t forget the infamous incident where Jerusalem Jews, after the Persian conquest of the Levant, purchased 60,000 Christian captives, and killed them all.
    The Maccabean Revolt (no Romans directly involved) first involved the Jewish religious fanatics’ massacre of all Jews they considered too Hellenized. Only later did the Seleucid king attack Judea. The revolt, like all Jewish wars and later revolutions, involved solely a revolt against Western/European Civilization in every aspect. All Akum are considered animals in a human form, created by Yahweh for the sole purpose of serving his princes night and day forever. Decent translations of the Talmuds are hard to find, although not as hard as finding an English translation of Solzhenitsyn’s “Two Hundred Years Together” twenty years after publication in Russian. Just in case you heard any vicious rumors about Jews controlling book publishing.

  114. @Avid Reader Guy

    By stirring up shit, you can create a market for your services.

    Daffy Duck understands.

  115. “In much the same way, the commonalities between Judaism and the modern revolutionary spirit are decisively outweighed by the differences. Both are messianic – but the Jew waits for the Messiah, whereas the revolutionary seeks to become the Messiah. Both lay out all-embracing rules for life, justified by pettifogging dialectics – but the Jew must trace his rules back to Biblical tradition, whereas the revolutionary traces them forward into utopian “progress”. And both stand in opposition to Christianity, but so does every rival monotheistic religion, e.g. Islam.”

    What was Jewish Zionism but a progressive movement among Jews, who having tired of waiting for God to put them back in the Holy Land, became their own Messiah and did the needful? Their narrative of the Holocaust virtually makes them their own Christ: having been all but immolated in Hitler’s ovens, they have risen again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and their kingdom shall have no end! No, most Jews are not waiting for the Messiah.

    • Replies: @Dave Bowman
    , @Druid55
  116. @RedpilledAF

    What all “revolutions” end up doing is creating new bosses, same as the old bosses.

    The same people, who were in charge of the New England colonies under the King, were in charge after the Revolution. All of the signers were related to the Peerage and thus to the Royals. Every US President has been related back to those lines. Elections are all in the Families. Voting has always been useless. “Exporting Democracy” is a big lie.

    The Russian revolution was all about stealing the Russian Imperial Treasury and sending it west to the Bankers. The Romanovs played their part in the deception that continued the enslavement of the Russian people under the Commissars.

    The author bends logic, and over backward, to pretend that Jews have had nothing to do with manipulating World History.

    The break away from circumcision in the “Christian” movement was the action of Saul of Tarsus, a Jew acting as an intelligence agent. The original disciples of Jesus kept the Jewish ways. Saul, now Paul, wanted to increase followers of his Christian movement and the knife was in his way.

    • Thanks: RedpilledAF
  117. @Dave Bowman

    Thank you. I soon got bogged down trying to read this absurd piece. Jew this and Jew that. It’s enough to turn the reader antisemitic.

    On a similar note, I’ve been trying to find the bad news about China “genociding the Uyghur”. I’ve watched and read some credible denials, but where is the Prosecution? DW, BBC, and CNN just say “China did it and it’s terrible”, without any evidence. Weird!

  118. Anonymous[313] • Disclaimer says:

    Is not the trouble of learned discussions of this kind, synthesizing for example, the work of Jones and MacDonald is that they quickly devolve in to confusion, much as when the construction of the tower of Babel was confounded by proliferation of different languages –in this case ideologies. You are right that Girard alone of contemporary thinkers is able to make sense of the larger picture. The only problem is that the solution poses itself as a challenge as Girard himself saw that his anthropological reading of the Gospels amounts to apologetics.

  119. @Franklin Ryckaert

    We cannot “return” to a belief in Zeus, Juppiter or Odin/Wotan, so unless we find something better, let us not reject what is valuable.

    This is what the anti-Christian right doesn’t seem to get. We can’t just hand out pamphlets on Odin and Valhalla.

    They can give us 5 page essays on problems with Christianity as if we are supposed to be impressed. It as if they think they are the first people to notice that Christianity has flaws or Jewish influence. It’s actually Sephardic influence while complaints about Jews are really about their Slavic hybrid cousins.

    Secularism in Whites doesn’t lead them to some higher level of rationality or self-interest. It leads to liberalism/leftism and this has been true since the 1930s. This is why Marxists consider Christianity to be the enemy while Islam and Judaism are ignored. Marxists correctly assess Whites and especially Germanic Whites (American Whites are mostly Germanic) to be their only true enemy and Christianity is viewed as the White religion. That is why Marxists have been attacking Christianity since the Russian revolution. In fact the early Bolsheviks allowed the Muslim regions of the USSR to practice their religion while Orthodox priests were slaughtered in the streets and nuns were raped before being killed. All in the name of equality.

    There is absolutely no reason to believe that secularism will work against the left.

    Sweden is one of the most secular countries in the West and they put a woman in prison for merely posting online that she doesn’t like Muslims. Washington/Oregon are very secular compared to the rest of the US and reliably liberal.

    It’s easy to criticize but much harder to plan and strategize.

  120. @Robert Dolan

    PrissFactor is amazing. I have interacted with him on here, always about cinema, but he is spot on about most things. I often wonder what he looks like. He has to be an old man(over 75) who has seen things, thus forming his rational conclusions.
    Best poster on this forum.

    I also agree wholeheartedly with Robert Dolan. We can shut the comments right away….Priss and Robert’s perspective is correct.

  121. The Revolutionaries co-opted and converted the bankers! Haym Solomon was converted to the Revolutionary Faith by the Founding Fathers! Christian evangelicals invented Zionism!

    “Yes, my dear fellow, it all amounts to this: in order to do something you must be something. We think Dante great, but he had a civilisation of centuries behind him; the House of Rothschild is rich but it has required more than one generation to attain such wealth. Such things all lie deeper than one thinks.”

    Jews were a power long before the French Revolution. Jews were expelled from many states because they were a hostile minority that were inimical to the Christian population. Jews have tried to dominate Christian polities forever. Jews keep Richard F. Burton’s original manuscript on the Jews locked up. Jews (like the Prizkers – a crazed transvestite in that family!) pull the strings of niggers like Obama, not vice versa. Communists are ignorant fanatics whose operations are sustained by Jewish activity. Pull the plug of Jewish support and Communism limps on towards inevitable collapse.

  122. lobro says: • Website
    @frankie p

    Like radioactive substances that decay faster than can be identified, I cannot figure out the gist of what the above article is trying to establish—as I read one sentence, I forget what the previous one said.
    But those quotes you supplied summarize much of the truth about Jews.

    And of course, Jesus hit the bullseye with every claim He made against them—and this cannot be overemphasized—His (and only) Testament is a nuclear denunciation of Judaism and Jews—an early Mein Kampf.
    Which is why Hitler wisely sought to scrub and pry stain of Torah off of the Testament of Christ (Positive Christianity) and why the corrupt brothel known as Vatican under Pacelli demonized him at every turn.

    Novus Ordo (Mundi) was the tombstone that put paid to these counter-satanic efforts.

  123. Ghali says:

    “In Europe, it was the French revolution that emancipated the Jews, not the Jews who unleashed the revolution.” Today, Jews are in total control of France. In fact Jews dominate France more than they control the Anglo-Zionist regimes in the US, UK, Canada and Australia.

  124. @RJ Macready

    This is indeed a powerful piece of polemical writing by Priss. The overall effect is one of complete demolition. Priss is particularly effective in exposing Lawrence’s heavy reliance on straw man arguments and his muddled thinking on important concepts. On prose style alone, Priss dominates. His clear, direct, and robust style, with its effective mix of colloquial and intellectual writing, makes Lawrence’s seem insipid and weak by contrast.

    As for your guess that Priss is 75, I think he is in his early 60’s at most and perhaps still in his 50’s. His (encyclopedic) familiarity with 60’s and 70’s music and other popular culture of that era suggests to me that he grew up in those decades. His energy level and prolific writing output also suggest to me that he is much younger than you surmise.

    • Agree: RJ Macready
  125. Dear James,
    A lovely kernel of truth in your observation that the revolution made the Jew as the Jew made the revolution; our memories are incontrovertibly entwined. Thank you for that. But whence our futures?

    For your next assignment, please address the serial assassinations of Kennedy’s and the Jewish bomb, LBJ’s attempt to sink the Liberty to provoke nuclear war with Russia, and the implications of the awkward fact that the Basic Law makes every Jew a citizen of Israel, a political space with no borders, which cherishes the avowed intention of ruling the world (for the benefit of the goyim, of course, who desire it avidly). And exactly where all this nonsensical madness leads anyone, including the poor bewildered and abused Jewish people themselves.

  126. @RJ Macready

    In the post by Robert Dolan to which you responded, Dolan said that Priss’s “reply is actually much better than the article itself.” I think I would go further and say that in his basic approach Priss is also superior to Kevin MacDonald. It seems to me that the evolutionary psychology frame through which Macdonald views these issues obscures more than it illuminates.

  127. Sepp says:
    @Dave Bowman

    Well put, far better than I could.

  128. @RJ Macready

    Thanks, R. J.

    I’m no fan of Churchill’s or FDR’s. . . kowtowing to the Jews at the expense of one’s own people is a deal-breaker for me, I’m afraid.

    As far as great men go, one need look no further than Napoleon and Adolf.

    That said, I readily accept your prescription of relaxing with a beer.



  129. Sepp says:

    “He’s even lying about the progressives taking over the government in the 1930s. The takeover had taken place during WWI when Bernie Baruch and his gang amassed the greatest control of the US economy to date.”

    I too got the impression that this was somehow really about “Progressivism” and their alliance with Judea. Progressivists are really just closet Communists, but they are the real poster boys for Lenin’s “Useful Idiot”, or Rakovsky’s idiot Freemason in Red Symphony:

    “If one day you were to be present at some future revolution then do not miss the opportunity of observing the gestures of surprise and the expression of stupidity on the face of some freemason at the moment when he realises that he must die at the hands of the revolutionaries. How he screams and wants that one should value his services to the revolution! It is a sight at which one can die … but of laughter.”

    • Thanks: chris
  130. @Marcali

    The holocaust. . . that’s pretty funny. 🙂

  131. @Mefobills

    It cannot be coincidence Jesus developed his ideas at the same Hillel
    discovered the famous pilpul to not forgive them their debts.

  132. @RJ Macready

    So, is your intent to simply cheer for the Jews and the Chinese, or do you have a plan?

    Have you accomplished anything, or are you just flinging turds?

    Are you a savvy critic or just a whiny cynic, jaded beyond your years and experience?

  133. Pheasant says:

    Can sombody tell this moronic yid to shut up please?

    What utter trash.

  134. Alrenous says: • Website
    @Fart Blossom

    you’re so weak lol
    lol “fart blossom” == shitting his/her/its pants

    have you tried being less pathetic?

  135. Alrenous says: • Website
    @John Johnson

    need a “too short for this ride” button

    it’s not that I disagree exactly, it’s that this “johnson” have no idea what I’m talking about and yet is pretending that he does

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  136. Though I am as anti-Semitic as almost anyone here, the persistent Jew-baiting at The Unz Review does not suit me. It’s too much. The incomparable Ron Unz, our honest proprietor, is Jewish, as most of us know. Manners at least recommend a politer title for an article here than “Jewpill.”

    Mr. Unz isn’t censoring. The uncensored have a responsiblity in return to show more restraint.

    Mr. Lawrence: I never read your article. Its title put me off. Is that the effect you wanted? Because it isn’t censorship that is preventing you from reaching me, is it? It’s your flagrant manner, rather.

    • Agree: W
    • Replies: @HeebHunter
  137. Anon[680] • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    What really made the Modern West was the fusion of neo-paganism(that sparked creativity in the arts and Hellenistic approach to logic and science) and Christian prophecy. The ‘problem'(if it is a problem) with paganism is it lacks a unified vision of the universe and the future. According to paganism, there are many gods, therefore there is no single direction to history but a contest of competing forces, like with the gods in THE ILIAD. In contrast, Christian monotheism says there is one force, God, that leads history to fulfill a certain prophecy. Thus, the Christian mindset is more committed to a linear theory of progress. Now, Christianity alone could mean Byzantine enervation or Medieval ascetism that hardly moves history forward. But when fused with neo-pagan creativity and spark, the combination could open new horizons.

    Wasnt the materialistic monism of presocratics an abstract version of the oneness of god that supered the politeistic conception from the very begining of the greek writting history? Or their pitagorean sucuccesors that saw the begining present as future as a deterministic force guided by mere numbers?

    In the reinassance it was the neoplatonic school the one who gained strenght and represented the platonic demiurgue ​as the ultimate creator later on represented as the masonic eye of omniscience in your usa dollars.

    I think there are two phases first the materialist monism of presocratics much more deterministic that tried to understand reality and derive it to one ultimate material reality and second the spiritual monism of platonism much more sensible to model and rebuilt the reality itself , is this era when the conception of tabula rasa was born , is the moment when humanity have enought acumulated knowloadgue to built the conception of tabula rasa itself and throw that knowloadgue see itself capable of progresion as an active force of the world.

    • Replies: @Presocratic
  138. Anon[680] • Disclaimer says:

    the world would be better without a spaniard cop dogs like you , thats for sure .

  139. Anon[229] • Disclaimer says:

    Silly me! I misread the title. I was expecting the antidote to the Talmudist J Brain Snatcher poison shot!!

  140. @V. K. Ovelund

    If you can’ take the truth, just go back to the mainstream and get the vax and swallow whatever they force-feed you, like a good little goy. Maybe some M2 money will go your way if you are a good golem.

    “Mr. Unz isn’t censoring. The uncensored have a responsibility in return to show more restraint.”

    Funny how you are reacting like a liberal. The “subject” of the attack doesn’t even care, but the huwhite libs are always there to “protect” the oppressed. People like YOU are the reason for the ongoing Hoax. The truth is the truth, no matter who and how it is represented.

    “Sorry” for the attack, but I’m sick of your lot. Ron Unz fucking hosts the Daily Stormer here. Butthurt triggered snowflakes can go to CNN/Fox.

  141. @Alrenous

    So you have nothing of substance to say in response.

    You want to bash Christianity but can’t explain how White countries will keep having children when the data is clear that secularism lowers their birth rates.

    Attacking Christianity makes sense from the anti-White or Marxist perspective since secularism serves their best interest.

    From an anti-globalist perspective it is nothing but mental masturbation at best and counter productive at worst.

    • Replies: @Alrenous
  142. @nokangaroos

    Hillel founded Rabbinical Judaism by authoring the clause Jews imposed upon goyim debtors by which the debtor waived his Mosaic Law right to jubilee debt forgiveness thereby hyper powering JewUsury making debts permanent instead of cyclical, linearly continuous in time rather than circularly self terminating.

    It was over a century later that God chose to manifest in human form as Jesus to read publicly Isaiah 61 (Luke 4:16-30) in declaring reestablishment of the unconditional periodic debt clean slates of Mosaic Law, thereby voiding Rabbinical Judaism.

    That history has been lost leaving people today wondering why the Jew so relentlessly hates whitey proactively when the reason is for being the descendant of Christendom.

    • Thanks: Mefobills, nokangaroos
  143. @Anon

    I think both you and Priss Factor have overlooked Max Weber’s thesis in his classic The Protestant Work Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism that the Protestant (Calvinist) world view specifically was a necessary condition for the development of modernity and specifically modern investment-based and mass production capitalism. That world view emphasized among other things asceticism, delayed gratification, and the duty of hard work, and ruled out legitimation of knowledge by appeals to authority (the Catholic papacy). In contrast to Catholicism, the duties of asceticism and work were extended to lay members of the Church, and not just the clerics. To be sure, Weber recognized that this was not a sufficient condition for the development of capitalism. Empirical science, legal protections for private property, the creation of capital accounting, and the development of a bureaucracy to administer the law were also essential to its development.

  144. @mr tennent

    having been all but immolated in Hitler’s [non-existent] ovens, they have risen again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and their kingdom shall have no end! No, most Jews are not waiting for the Messiah.

    Utterly brilliant – Bravo !!

    I should be clear and say “most [religious] Jews are not pretend they are waiting for the Messiah”.

  145. Your highest loyalty can be to words or blood. When white people give their highest loyalty to words, they brown out. It doesn’t matter what the words are.

  146. Anonymous[522] • Disclaimer says:

    To all the cucks (you know who you are): it is certainly true that someone who doesn’t practice proper hygiene or engages in risky behavior deserves some blame for getting infected by a virus. But surely it doesn’t follow that we should ignore the role of the virus in causing illness.

  147. Caruthers says:

    No genuine white nationalism, with a goal of “saving” European peoples and Western civilization, is consistent with the current massive level of Jewish power, dominance, and privilege, and the tribal, ethnocentric, racially-oriented, supremacist ends which these serve.

    Little progress has heretofore been made in resisting this demonic golem. But a refusal to join the fight on these grounds is not a strategy; it is traitorous and abject surrender.

  148. Slave morality in all its forms is bad for white people.
    Doesn’t matter if it’s slave morality in one race (national socialism, Christian identity) or slave morality among all races (Christianity, leftism, globalism).

  149. R2b says:

    How about rewriting this piece, make it shorter and rational.
    As it stands now, its not worthy of detailed critique, as many parts is just a morass of concepts.
    Or shall we conclude everything the writer express in the end, that Christianity is a bimillenial Jewish psyop, as the essence of his message?
    What a booring article, and how untimely, once again a text here presented!
    It really is trash and lowers the status of this site, going remarkably downwards by many pieces.

  150. @RJ Macready

    I would rather say that they have taken a “misinterpretation” of the Christ route. In fact, this has been my belief for over, oh, around forty years now. They forget about the part how ” then making a whip of cords, he went into the temple and…….”.etc. That’s a part of the reality of Christianity too. Too many milquetoast teachers of Christianity, with too much influence, for too long. I could give many more examples of this misinterpretation of Christianity..

  151. anon[307] • Disclaimer says:

    james lawrence is a funny guy…like bill cosby…sad.

    platonic dialogue

    james lawrence: you see jews are just a scapegoat for european elites and the heresy that is protestantism. my dear sir, america is jewish. we’re hardly an alien power.

    mugabe: jamie, may i call you “hymie”, (the spanish pronunciation)? the mahatma said it best via an an american gentile screenwriter.

    james lawrence: my rabbi told me there were no eurogoyim in the BGI study.

    magnus wins. (((nepo))) didn’t win a single game. sad.

  152. @Levi

    I would rather say that they have taken a “misinterpretation” of the Christ route. In fact, this has been my belief for over, oh, around forty years now. They forget about the part how ” then making a whip of cords, he went into the temple and…….”.etc. That’s a part of the reality of Christianity too. Too many milquetoast teachers of Christianity, with too much influence, for too long.

  153. Is the writer another Jew in disguise doing the old divide and conquer routine? I like EMJ and KmcD because both have courage. Their boats are headed in the same direction of culture no matter what.

  154. @Robert Dolan

    They rule because of who their father is just as Jesus taught. What is this ephemeral life to eternity?

  155. @Priss Factor

    So, what’s to be done about this vicious cycle?

    • Replies: @Anon
  156. Seraphim says:
    @Marcion was Right

    The only correct assertion is that the ‘Aryan myth’ originates in the medium of German humanism of 16th century combined with the anti-Catholic stance of Lutheranism. They have been enthralled by the description of the pure virtues of ancient ‘Germans’, contrasted with the ‘Roman’ corruption and decadence, given by Tacitus in his long forgotten but just rediscovered book ‘De origine et situ Germanorum’ and served as the foundation myth of the developing German nationalism, with all attendant myths of their ‘ethnic purity’ contrasted with the ‘degenerescence’ of the ‘Romans’, Gauls, Slavs, of the ‘master race’ entrusted with the ‘mission’ to ‘regenerate’ Europe ‘purifying’ it with fire and sword and ‘Kultur’. It should be needless to say that the fathers of German nationalism had no idea of the ‘Aryans’. For sure, no one on the Right does know about this.

  157. Anon[218] • Disclaimer says:

    IDEALISM , LEGITIMACY AND PROGRESS those are the three key concepts

    – Break free of the narrow deterministic conception of the jared taylor crew .

    reconquer the idea of progress , let your imagination fly free and imagine a future that inspire the next generations to conquer the unconquerable the same way julio verne inspired the next generation to built what was only a phantasy in his days or the nietzschean ubermensch inspired the perfectionament of the german race as a whole , an identity built in a never ending process to achieve perfection against the forces of chaos that want to degrade humanity to lowest common denominator

    – built a founding myth that conect past present and future giving our people trascendent conection and an ideal of what they are destined to be rooted in ancient myth that give legitimacy to our aspiration.

    – built a dualistic worldview of the history where we stand against the forces of chaos and jews are one of the many avatar in the long journey to the achieve unity and perfection

    Thats should be a good start

    • Replies: @Liosnagcat
  158. @Anon

    Reconquering ideas, building myths, constructing worldviews. . . really? I was hoping for something a bit more pragmatic.

  159. @lydia

    I can tell by his face that he is annoyed by the nature of the world and thinks that lying is the only way out. Race doesn’t exist but is seemingly everywhere. Sure pal.

    He lacks confidence compared to Taylor. He has the worried look of the controlling leftist that is unnerved by having to explain himself. As with leftists he would censor the internet if he could and scrub away the opposition.

    Thanks for the links but I can smell a neocon or Con Incster a mile away.

    They have the aura of a bottom rung car salesmen.

    I also wasn’t surprised to read that he is an ex-hippie. He is drawn to completely rejecting reality for the sake of his ego.

    I could support a plan involving the Catholic Church but combining it with race denial is not the answer. How does one explain away global inequality in that context? Why should we not take in millions of Africans if race doesn’t exist? Someone like Jones would hasten the decline of the US into the third world and the left would return again with “solutions” for fixing race. Jones and other race deniers should be banished to Haiti where they can build their utopias.

  160. @Marcion was Right

    Semitism is unnatural to the occident? Oh please. You are all the same. The shape of your noses being the only difference.

    • Replies: @anon
  161. anon[747] • Disclaimer says:

    they are all “Caucasoid” after all. it would be wise for Mongoloids to unite as one, we are viewed as one anyway, might as well turn that into power….

  162. Ned Kelly says:

    Jews rule… And have for a very long time

  163. Druid55 says:

    I wonder if this guy is Irish, at least in part. A million words of blather!!

  164. Ned kelly says:

    I am wrong! Jew Don’t Rule! Oy vey! How could I be so wrong? I have defamed a whole inocent people! The same kind of nutjobs That say things like this are the same crazies who say Jews control Hollywood! Can you get any more delusional than that? Hollywood has been around for a hundred years…. Thousands and thousands of books have been writen about it. Millions of magazine articles. Documentaries….etc. Here we are in the freest most open society in the history of the world! If it was true that Jews control Hollywood then it of course be common knowledge… Widely acknowledge and descussed. It would be completely impossable to keep such a thing secret… for a hundred years!

  165. lydia says:

    Look at the wealth that true Christians have been to European and American and even Russian culture and hope for everyone:

    A classic written by a 17th-century Puritan, John Bunyan, in a prison cell, The Pilgrim’s Progress is an allegory of the beginning, progression, and conclusion of the true Christian life.

    Rich in Biblical theology, it tells the story of the trials, temptations, and triumphs of a man named Christian in his pilgrimage from the City of Destruction to the Celestial City and eternal life. Many of the events we read include universal tales about human struggles through hardship with which anyone can identify.

    Places through which we follow Christian in his pilgrimage include the Delectable Mountains, Hill of Difficulty, Palace Beautiful (an allegory of the local Christian congregation), Slough of Despond, Doubting Castle, Valley of Humiliation, Hill Clear, Vanity Fair, Valley of the Shadow of Death, By-Path Meadow, the dangerous Enchanted Ground, and River of Death amongst others.

    Sin makes this world a dry and weary land. The road to the Celestial City is always an ascent (Psalm 24:3). The Pilgrim’s Progress encourages me that by God’s grace, albeit whichever valleys through which I may pass, whatever slough into which I may have fallen, whatever rivers to ford, or whichever Hill of Difficulty I may climb in the journey . . . my Guide is ever watchful, my Deliverer unfailing, and faithful in keeping His people that they would persevere till they arrive home at the Celestial City—that glorious, Heavenly City built not by the hands of man—a City whose Builder and Maker is God (2 Cor. 5:1; Heb. 11:9-10).

    J. C. Ryle wrote in his Knots Untied: “I doubt not that the one volume of ‘Pilgrim’s Progress,’—written by a man who knew hardly any book but his Bible, and was ignorant of Greek and Latin,—will prove in the last day to have done more for the benefit of the world, than all the works of the schoolmen put together.”

    It nice to turn to Bunyan after Paradise Lost or even the Memoirs of the Life of Colonel Hutchinson and to read something written by somebody who was literate, but in comparison hardly educated but no less engaged and swept up by the spirit of their times. The still small voice of a member of a minor religious group of low social status has carried along way through the English language. It is testament too to the power of the Bible in the imagination and how what are really alien and remote narratives can be, have been and no doubt are, taken on and continually reused in diverse times and places to explain peoples sense of themselves and their place in the world.

  166. Druid55 says:
    @Jon Chance

    Obvious you’ve never read the “ Koran”!

  167. Druid55 says:
    @Robert Dolan

    Exactly. It all started after the yehud attacked the arabs because they saw an opportunity in 1967, as admitted by generals. Then massive propaganda and H lies to get the western idiots onside

  168. Druid55 says:
    @Dave Bowman

    It’s the usual “baffle them with bullshite strategy!

  169. Acton says:

    I do agree that the empirical approach is superior to the approach taken by Jones. Although I would love to see more systematized data, I do think there is validity to basic pattern recognition, and one pattern I’ve noticed is the non-black people celebrating when bad things happen to white people, such as in Waukesha, are almost always Jews. The professors who call for abolishing whiteness are almost always Jews. I do not know what to make of it. But from a practical standpoint it’s like knowing how much more statistically likely a pitbull is to attack you or your family. Recognizing them and being aware of their dangers is a benefit

  170. anon[551] • Disclaimer says:

    know that salvation is for all…eventually…even for the devil himself.

    know that the mary shit is NOT the roman church’s heresy…

    ἀποκατάστᾰσις, Apocatastasis, is the truth.

    as j-l marion says, the God that is becomes the God that loves…

    ego sum qui sum becomes deus caritas est

    omnia vincit amor

    …so to say.

    • Replies: @Dave Bowman
  171. Druid says:
    @Robert Dolan

    And NEPOTISM! They choose only each other in universities, etc., and train their own once there. Therefore, even the mediocre stupid ones among them improve, get into positions of power, and the cycle continues. Massive nepotism. I’ve experienced this personally

  172. Ned kelly says:
    @Robert Dolan

    Yes, if you think Jews are a people of genius, take a trip to Israel. Does that country even have a university… That anyone has heard of? Yet, some how at least a quarter of students at elite universities are Jewish! One can guess what the percentage of faculty is Jewish. I always find it hilarious when Israelis try to excuse their low test score with outrageous racism and bigotry. “Those dirty mizrahi dragging us down” But with your excalted gene pool there should be at least one Einstein in every illegal Settlement…

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    , @simple mind
  173. Leo B says:

    You must understand, the leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians…
    Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

    Oops a well-known FAKE quote of Solzhenitsyn. Discussed here a few months ago in details.

  174. anon[416] • Disclaimer says:

    The (historically uninformed) equation of the Jews with the people of Israel, as if these were synonyms, skews the factual basis of the argument — by design. Thank you very little, Calvin.

  175. @Smith

    “Joseph is the man—and Utah is where truth resides !” says Ogden Nash.

  176. @anon

    You are a cretin.

    Please leave. You are lowering the average IQ of this forum.

  177. @frankie p

    The guy is just another Nathan Confas

    He probably IS Nathan Cofnas.

  178. Seraphim says:
    @Ned kelly

    There are ten universities and 53 colleges in Israel.
    Here are a few of them:
    Technion – Israel Institute of Technology (IIT) – 1912
    Hebrew University of Jerusalem (HUJI) – 1918
    Bar-Ilan University (BIU) – 1955
    Tel Aviv University (TAU) – 1956
    University of Haifa (HU) – 1963

    • Replies: @Ned kelly
  179. My simple minded view is that clever Jews have long been valuable assets for any given group of simple-minded “elites”; with the added bonus that they can be readily identified and “thrown under the bus” in the event of some large scale misfortune or calamity.

    Ta Da?

    • Replies: @simple mind
  180. @g8way

    Hannukah is extremely conservative and the harbinger of Christianity, it is mentioned in the New Testament as the “Festival of Lights in Jerusalem”. It was the divinely inspired war against faggoty naked Greek pagans in favor of foundational family values, a real redneck revolution against a homosexual regime.

    Purim is much the same, just as the Exodus was the living manifestation of how God chose Israel to be His people on the earth. The empires will rise and fall, but Israel will remain forever, and all nations will join with the 12 Tribe Commonwealth together.

    24In that day shall Israel be the third with Egypt and with Assyria, even a blessing in the midst of the land: 25Whom the LORD of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyriathe work of my hands , and Israel mine inheritance.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  181. @Levi

    The Roman Catholic church is Satan itself, a false Babylonian corruption starting with the Simon Magus (the false Peter) and idolosing a false Jesus. This was warned of in the New Testament, that a “great conspiracy” was afoot and to beware those teaching a false messiah.

  182. geokat62 says:
    @simple mind

    It was the divinely inspired war against faggoty naked Greek pagans in favor of foundational family values, a real redneck revolution against a homosexual regime.

    Divinely inspired war? More like a civil war…

    Excerpt from, Hanukkah, or Why We Celebrate a Civil War:

    We may not like to think of our joyous Hanukkah festival in such dismal terms, but the revolt of the Maccabees was not against the Greeks, as Hanukkah children songs describe, but against our own rogue brothers. It was a civil war. For at least the first year of the revolt, the fighting hardly targeted Seleucid soldiers. The majority of fighting took place between the Maccabees, as the Hasmoneans and their troops were called, and the Mityavnim—Jews who espoused the Hellenistic culture or converted into the pagan Greek belief system. Only much later, after the Mityavnim were defeated, did the Seleucid armies join them in an attempt to crush the Maccabees.

    • Replies: @simple mind
  183. Ned kelly says:

    Like I said: schools nobody ever heard of… Seraphim? What’s that? Is that like a cross between Sephardi and a Mizrahim? Not that there’s much of a difference…
    But you keep applying for those fine Israeli institutions—someday you will overcome! You don’t have to be just an Ars your entire life ….

    • Replies: @simple mind
  184. @Liosnagcat

    For a “workable strategy” they sure managed to unwork it in about 10 years time, and the thousand year reich lasted all of one decade.

    It’s the Germans who were gulled into fighting, not the other way around.

  185. @Ned kelly

    Why would you compare the universities of a small country founded about 50 years ago with giant continental federation like Europe or the USA?? This is what you wingnuts can’t seem to grasp, “Israel” is just a sliver of land at the edge of the Levant. Tell us about all the important universities of





    The inner ring of Saturn

  186. @geokat62

    How does that make it less inspired?? It was a revolution against Greek faggotry

    • Replies: @geokat62
  187. geokat62 says:
    @simple mind

    It was a revolution against Greek faggotry

    Lol! Greek civilisation was all about promoting the good, the beautiful, the true.

    Jewish Supremacists are all about pushing the inverse of this… the evil, the ugly, the lie.

    Need proof?

    Dr. Rachel Levine is the first female four-star admiral in the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps’ history.
    No such thing existed in Ancient Greece.

    • Replies: @simple mind
  188. @Ned kelly

    They’re obviously smart enough to outwit you, and that’s that really matters right?

  189. @geokat62

    Something weirdly homosexual definitely existed in the Greek Imperial age, and everybody knows that “Greek” was something gay and faggoty (not the Greek people of today one way or another). The lusted after boys and like to wrestle naked, so there’s that. It was “gay” in the Roman sense, which is the age old sin.

    If you think “Rachel Levine” has anything to do with Judah Maccabee, you are about 2500 years off the calendar. Obviously a swarm of trannies didn’t overthrow the Seleucid rulers, stop playing stupid word games that we all know are bullshit. If it helps any, they weren’t really “Greeks”, but Syrians. Names change over time to mean different things.

  190. There’s not a lot for me to add to this thread. I can see that all the usual nutjobs are out in force, but they seem to have realised that EMJ is on a whole new level, and declined the task of defending his crackpot book. Maybe it’s mean-spirited of me, but I can’t help but point out that KMac considers EMJ very much worthy of his attention, although he dismissed Part 1 of this post on grounds of its anti-Darwinism and said he wouldn’t write a proper response unless I got it into an academic journal.

    Anyway, I was working on a Part 3, but it got lost in the garbage-heap that is Google Blogger and I think that’s probably for the best. I wanted to warn people off the most compelling and seductive delusions on the Dissident Right, in the hope that we could avoid repeating the tragedy of the Alt-Right, and that is what I have done in these three posts. There is really not much point in my going on to critique Aryan Faustianism, Esoteric Hitlerism, Apollonism, Cosmotheism, etc. at length, because none of these cults have gained fanatical converts in the same way as White Nationalism and the Jewpill.

    All the same, by way of keeping my promise of a conclusion and bringing this train of thought to a stop, I’ve appended the gist of Jewpill Part 3 in the form of a “Postscript” to the original post at Affirmative Right. It extends the “degenerate religion” theory to modern conservatism, and by extension to most of the Dissident Right. All readers are invited to check it out here:

    • Replies: @geokat62
  191. Alrenous says: • Website
    @John Johnson


    Let’s talk about something interesting instead.

    Christianity isn’t exactly Marxist, but it is egalitarian. Egalitarianism is the religion of Envy. Oops.

    Christianity also has this fun thing which I’ve lost the exact passage for: demons are obsessed with domination. The actual cosmic law is free will (also passages for this, if you want; the Bible is not 100% error). But wait, who bangs on and on about being a LORD? Huh, that would be Yeshua. Probably shouldn’t straight-up admit to be a demon. (See also: just put a fence around the damn Tree, you negligent bastard. Omniscient my ass.)

    Reality is rather Daoist. There is nothing that is only light-sided, and anything claiming to be one-sided is almost certainly a devil. At best, a wrathful god of severity who judges you to be particularly unworthy.

    Anyone who can be a Christ has exactly equal opportunity to be Antichrist. Who was the Antichrist, who ushered in the age of Apocalypse? That would be Yeshua.
    Who created Satan? That would be Yeshua. Christ was always, also, Antichrist.
    (This goes both ways of course – once you realize there’s a 0% chance Yeshua is the Creator God, you are almost as valid if you say Satan created Yeshua.)

    So, you can define “cult” fairly easily.


    Look at any of those “watch out for cults!” lists – you can find dozens of them on google with a single search. Flip it around into a to-do list. What are we doing here? We’re exploiting personality disorders, particularly narcissism. E.g. expectations of unreasonable intimacy such as love bombing.

    Christianity is a cult. You join if you have a severe personality disorder, or if you’re violently or socially forced into it. (If you have a healthy mind but all 99 of your neighbours are Christian, you kind of have to go along to get along.) The history of Christian conversion is almost purely violent. They exploit the feeble minded and then seize gatekeepers to wield state coercion (render unto Kaisar, anyone?) to terrorize the peasants into submitting. As you would expect from someone who says I am LORD every 30 seconds.

    Christianity likes burning books, unlike most religions. Like any cult of crazies, it is weak and rightly afraid of the truth. Infirm mind == infirm religion.

    Of course the previous religions were, by process of elimination, even weaker. If you get mugged by a raving lunatic you dun fukt up. It’s not hard to figure out what they did wrong. Two critical mistakes. (I will not explain.) Though, as per Plato, this is not to be unexpected. There are not seven major virtues, but three: wisdom, courage, and fidelity. Aristocracies have all three, timeocracy lacks wisdom, plutocracy lacks wisdom and courage, and in reality democracy isn’t real instead you skip straight to tyranny, which lacks all three.

    Obviously a people who have embraced all three deadly sins is going to get wrecked. They are going to mismanage their religions. To say democratic man has feet of clay is to slander clay.

    Since Christianity’s core converts are all narcissists, it becomes a religion of narcissism. Personnel is policy. Chicken and egg: it is egalitarian because narcissists are egalitarian, or is it narcissist because narcissists join to get reinforcement for their egalitarianism? You can work it out, but it’s not a cost-effective investigation.

    Narcissism is egalitarian because narcissists see everyone else as copies of themselves. Anyone who appears greater is faking (“nothing of substance”) or cheating (Marxism). Narcissists see everyone else as copies of themselves because they’re actually looking inward and projecting. They can only see themselves.

    Narcissists lack any reasonable boundaries. They invade your space because they can’t recognize your space as anything but their own space. Likewise, you can invade their space without them really noticing anything. As long as you invade with narcissistic supply in-hand, they will welcome you and they become childishly easy to manipulate. You don’t really have to build trust with a narcissist, you can just kind of run up and bump chests and they’re okay with it. Cults exploit this. (And you should too – if you have to deal with a narcissist.)

    Notice this is also “individualism.” If everyone can be treated the same – there is no local vs. stranger, no good customer vs. throw them out, no family vs. outsider – that’s egalitarian. The Catholics deliberately launched an individualism eugenics campaign, because the clans offered nonzero resistance. It worked. Haha, owned.

    I low-key think Yeshua came to punish Europeans for a future sin. He was hardly omniscient but for a great spirit, planning a couple thousand years in advance is child’s play. Perhaps he punished them severely enough that he managed to head off the sin – and it was worth it.

    Either that or he was just kind of a rat bastard. Would I wish Christianity on my worst enemy? Not sure, it’s a close one. I prefer outright annihilation. Direct annihilation is responsible; Christianity attempts to be irresponsible. No, Yeshua didn’t bodily rise from the dead. Don’t be stupid. Physics is a higher god than Yeshua. Shit, probably Sol is a higher god than Yeshua, but admittedly my investigation is far from complete.

    P.S. Descartes was right. I’ve validated nearly every one of his conclusions.

    I wonder if johnson is blinding repeating rhetoric he’s just heard before? I could respond of course, but he failed to grasp what I said originally, and the best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour.

    Frankly I think this is dishonest. The spelling and grammar is bad enough for sub-90 IQ, meaning this is instead anti-intellectualism masquerading as intellectualism. A clever piece of Satanism…if you buy the frame.

    (Neat, Satanists don’t like me. I have the correct enemies.)

    The point is this: my hypothesis is that this wang has no idea what I said. The disproof would be to re-phrase something that I said, ideally showing the actual logical cross-bracing. I think he doesn’t want to have any idea what I said, because it threatens his weak ego.

    Can’t wake up someone pretending to be asleep.
    If you wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty and the pig likes it.

  192. Jett Rucker says: • Website

    WHAT could this writer mean with the parenthetic, “(very logic!)”?
    For inability to imagine any sensate answer, I stopped reading this article.

  193. Bert33 says:

    Um, sounds great, seat of christendom held by anti-christians, or something. But, what happens when Iran says, “let there be light”, and hangs a ‘star’ over Jerusalem, with accompanying supersonic thermal shockwave? Because that day may be coming, so whoever or whatever you pray to, better start working up some words…

  194. @John Johnson

    I haven’t been engaged in reading masturbatorial drivel to this extent lasting some 6 minutes, in a long time.

    Although my reading comprehension is tested at being equivalent to a professor’s, I could barely understand this article. It baffles with bullshit, it’s an exercise in sophism.

    Please publish no more articles by JAMES LAWRENCE. Thank you.

  195. anon[390] • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    After all, what distinguished the West from the Rest? West accepted and even accelerated changes, revolutions in so many areas. This dichotomy also applies to the Christian West and Christian East, especially Byzantium. While the former grew and grew, the latter declined and fell under the Ottoman Muslims. If Christian logos is a sure formula of truth and power, why did Byzantium fail? It was far more ‘theocratic’ than the Christian West that broke free of Medievalism and gained much from neo-paganism of the Renaissance. What really made the Modern West was the fusion of neo-paganism(that sparked creativity in the arts and Hellenistic approach to logic and science) and Christian prophecy.

    On this topic.. here is what is being taught by an Orthodox Church in Oklahoma.

    (starting at 49:45)

    Check it out, really. What he says is the reason the West had a Renaissance in the first place is because they looted it during the Fourth Crusade on Constantinople. Books/Thought, Art, and the money to finance it and that Plato and Augustine kept the West stagnant for 1000 years. That Aquinas brought them back by bringing in Aristotle and that north of the Alps, they remained stagnant because the art offended their puritan-ish sensibilities.

    I’m not knowledgeable enough of all this to know if he’s full of shit or not. I’d appreciate someone not partisan to the Ortho’Bro Brigade to chime in on this.

    Afterward he goes in to talking about how the Southern States in America was pro-Monarchy.

  196. Ocko says:

    Jesus said that ‘the kingdom of God is in us’. Most people search for God outside themselves and thus they will never get any answer from there.

    So, one has to go inside to search for the kingdom of God. If a jew is doing that, he most likely won’t get anywhere.

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 James Lawrence Comments via RSS
How America was neoconned into World War IV
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Shouldn't they recuse themselves when dealing with the Middle East?
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism