The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 PodcastsGregory Hood Archive
Heidi Beirich Cancels Generation Identity
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Martin Sellner (Credit Image: © Michael Gruber/APA Picturedesk via ZUMA Press)

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
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
Something Here
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Around the country, violent crime and vandalism are on the rise, and the Black Lives Matter movement incites violence. However, Twitter and YouTube are not censoring BLM; they promote it. Instead, Twitter recently banned more than 50 accounts associated with Generation Identity (GI) in Europe, both of organizations and of individuals, especially in Germany and Austria. One of the primary targets was the Austrian Identitarian activist Martin Sellner, whose YouTube channel was also deleted soon after the Twitter purge. This probably happened at the bidding of two former SPLC employees.

Heidi Beirich, formerly of the Southern Poverty Law Center, recently started the “Global Project Against Hate and Extremism” (GPAHE). She and GPAHE co-founder Wendy Via recently wrote a report called “Generation Identity: International Nationalist Movement Spreading On Twitter And YouTube.” It is weak, even for agitprop. It directly — and ridiculously — compares Generation Identity to ISIS. It wants the identitarian movement to be recognized “as a driver of terrorism at the same level as Islamic terrorism.” This means tech companies must take “immediate steps to deplatform all Identitarian material.” That is exactly what happened.

The notion that white advocacy is terrorism is widely circulated nonsense. The Anti-Defamation League’s “Extremist Terrorism” report, for example, is laughable. GPAHE’s report says there have been “six mass attacks since October 2018” worldwide that it blames in the identitarian movement. This is absurd.

One was an October 2019 attack in Halle, Germany, by a man who tried to shoot up a synagogue. When he could not get through the door, he shot two Germans passing by. He had no links of any kind to GI or the German New Right, nor did he refer to them anywhere in his brief manifesto. In February 2020, a man in Hanau attacked two hookah bars and killed nine people; then he killed his mother and himself. He wrote a non-political manifesto that was clearly the work of a madman. In Germany, both shootings were used to blame the populist party Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) for spreading “hate.” GI was only a secondary target.

Even one right-wing attack is too many, but it’s silly to compare a few shootings around the world over a two-year period to ISIS, which established de facto sovereignty over a vast territory — but that’s what the report does: “It would be inconceivable for social media platforms to allow ISIS propaganda to spread and grow unchecked, but that is exactly what is happening with Identitarianism.” So, where’s the terrorism? GPAHE relies heavily on Christchurch shooter Brenton Tarrant’s opposition to “The Great Replacement” — the dispossession of whites in their homelands. The report calls it a “racist conspiracy theory,” even though countless articles and books have noted the rapid and unprecedented demographic change in the Western world. Leftists, including Joy Reid, Zerlina Maxwell, and Stacey Abrams openly celebrate it. Even if we never mentioned it again, the GPAHE’s progressive allies would continue to crow about our steady dispossession.

The authors seem to think the Christchuch shooter would never have learned about The Great Replacement and would never have killed anyone but for the wicked machinations of Martin Sellner and other identitarians. GPAHE even claims Brenton Tarrant learned about the United Nations’ Migration Compact — which promotes Third-World immigration into white countries — from Generation Identity. The Compact, just like population change in the West, was no secret and was widely debated. Why not blame the New York Times? But somehow, GI inspires “white supremacist killers” and is building “a movement whose ideas are linked directly to terrorism and the building of an international white supremacist network.”

The report cannot find a single act of terrorism or even violence committed or encouraged by any leader or member of an identitarian group. The closest GPAHE gets is a donation the Christchurch shooter made to Martin Sellner a year before his attack. Is Mr. Sellner expected to read the mind of everyone who supports him and predict his future actions? We might as well hold Bernie Sanders responsible for a supporter who shot at Republican congressmen. Let’s ban the Democratic Socialists of America as a terrorist group. It is absurd to hold Mr. Sellner responsible for the actions of people in other countries.

Astonishingly, GPAHE uses examples of state repression against Martin Sellner and Generation Identity as an argument for further repression. It cites the American, British, and German governments’ actions against Mr. Sellner and Generation Identity. The authors note approvingly that the Trump Administration even denied Mr. Sellner a visa to come marry his now-wife, Brittany Pettibone, on American soil.

There is plenty of name-dropping in the report. David Duke, Richard Spencer, Alain de Benoist, Jared Taylor, and Patrick Casey all make appearances. They and others are lumped together as Identitarians and thus linked to terrorism. The report concludes by praising tech company repression of ISIS propaganda, and frets about the “double standard” of failing to muzzle Generation Identity.

Double standard? Antifa and blacks attack whites, shoot police, flout pandemic safety measures, riot and loot — often explicitly under the banner of Black Lives Matter. BLM doesn’t just enjoy a platform; it gets corporate sponsorship.

Martin Sellner has written a brilliant response to this “report.” He points out that he has never inspired or advocated violence. Instead, he writes, “Our ‘crime’ is that we name and criticize current population policies.” He also warns that Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and other big tech companies “have achieved a monopoly,” and bans make it impossible to reach large audiences. He notes that once a dissident figure has built up a channel with a considerable following, he will invariably be shut down on preposterous pretexts. Taking legal action against this is almost completely fruitless. Mr. Sellner reminds us of the power wielded by these companies:

Being deplatformed has a similar effect on your own media reach as a ban on the use of motorways, trains, and airplanes has on your travel range. Those who are banned from using the crucial means of transportation will not get very far. These platforms are important, and anyone who denies this is lying to himself. Any dissident has only a precarious existence on them. When the globalist apparatus targets a movement, person, or publisher, its digital existence turns to dust.

The censorship is even more insidious because activists can build a base on mainstream platforms before it is suddenly snatched away, creating “censorship shock.” The brief moment of mainstream toleration also prevents formation of “strong alternative platforms for dissidents that could create their own network effect.“ Even if a dissident network could be formed, payment processors would try to shut it down.

Mr. Sellner predicts future repression:

If the attack is strong, bank accounts disappear, web hosts give you the boot, and Google stops indexing your site. I am convinced that if the pressure against Generation Identity and me were to continue, we would lose all current digital alternatives.

The opponent’s rule is total. There is no real independent space within it, only different degrees of repression and tolerance. Everyone on the Right is aware of the power of this hostile public sphere. They hope that a protected niche will survive as long as possible, but any dissident who still has a PayPal account or bank account, is sold on Amazon, or is on Twitter and YouTube is only tolerated. He has no right to be there.

What is the solution? While Mr. Sellner holds out hope for blockchain-built alternative platforms, he suggests a medium-term “guerilla” strategy:

What does this “guerrilla state” mean? The dissident cannot keep a bank account permanently. He always needs 3-4 bank accounts as a “reserve.” With an eye to alternative technologies, he must constantly integrate the latest developments and test their suitability in the information war. He has to be prepared to lose his platform regularly along with the followers he has built up. He has to get used to this fact and accept that there is no place where he can settle down permanently.

Any alternative, from Telegram to BitChute, can be considered only temporary. You cannot be bound to them. You use something as long as you can. When it is no longer possible and you are “discovered,” you move on. Life as a digital guerrilla is necessarily uncomfortable. A tent is not an apartment.

This also means greater demands on followers. It will be harder to reach ordinary people. Instead of hoping to convert the masses, Mr. Sellner suggests creating a “critical mass” through “organized and political resistance work.” He compares our situation to that of anti-Communists in East Germany, who always had to be on the move, working politically, but still outside the system. Mr. Sellner also warns that as more dissidents see every means of expression closed to them, their frustration could lead to dangerous outbursts. He wonders if this is not something our opponents secretly hope for — even as they piously declare themselves horrified by political violence.

We have more legal freedom in the United States, but not much more real freedom. Barring a last-minute, desperate reversal, President Trump and the GOP will not force Big Tech to allow free speech. They might fail even if they tried. And Twitter showed yesterday that it can’t even protect the accounts of its most prominent users. Someone hacked several accounts, including those of Bill Gates, Joe Biden, and even Barack Obama. World leaders use Twitter to announce and promote policies. As Mike Cernovich said, hacks like this could start a war. This is far more dangerous than someone tweeting statistics about population change.

Why should tech oligarchs control access to information? Why does Heidi Beirich get to decide who can and cannot use the platform? It’s because our rulers are anti-white. The double standards are obvious, the arguments weak, the tactics crude. The mask is off. There is no “free world.” And censorship is the crudest way of admitting that our opponents cannot refute our arguments.

Those who incite violence direct it against us. Our opponents are not playing fair or living up to supposed democratic ideals. We must follow Mr. Sellner’s example and understand that we are struggling against an entire System. The struggle will be hard, but whites everywhere will find joy in it. We have a duty and a mission. We are part of a global struggle for our freedom and self-determination.

(Republished from American Renaissance by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 13 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. R.C. says:

    But no one is allowed to speak of Daily Stormer.

  2. I was shocked at first– to think that Miss Bivalve of all people would join me on my lonely, quixotic quest to rid the world of bogus “generation” labels– greatest, silent, boomer, X, Y, Z, mil, etc– as a less-entertaining offshoot of astrology.

    But, no, Generation Identity is a real thing.

  3. anon[533] • Disclaimer says:

    I read a blogger who done a sort of background on Heidi. She hails from Southern California in her formative years in the 1970s and early 80s. Tom Metzger’s son attended the same school. She claimed there were a lot of young men into the skinhead stuff growing up, and that set her socio-political path. The blogger (wish I could remember the blogs name) noted that Heidi’s mother was an ethnic German who grew up during the de-nazification period in postwar Germany, and probably really imbibed the psycho-shaming that was inflicted on that defeated people. There were posters of holocaust victims with writing on the poster directed to the reader stating (paraphrasing here) that the pictures were the fault of the German people, et cetera, for supporting the Nazis. The blogger suggested Heidi might have been a kind of unintentional blowback from her mother’s childhood contact with the denazification propaganda, and coming into contact with some skinheads in her own formative years, felt the urge to make sure she done something about it.

    Whatever the case, Heidi obviously despises white people. She is well-paid to do so (always a good place to look for motivation). She is childless at 52 and I think unmarried. I would look for her to remain on the warpath against the existence of white people for the rest of her life, as to do anything else would be kinda admitting much of her life has been spent in error. Most folks dont do that. She will advocate for our genocide until she draws her last breath. As overweight as she has been, that will probably be about 20 more years. The only “atta girls” she is going to get is from fellow travellers on the extreme left. All she lives for I imagine.

  4. There’s unrest in American cities every summer, for good reason, but most years the media hides it. This year is different as Soros has decided to fund a group of agents provocateurs to attempt to replace Trump, on the theory that Trump won’t be able to meet the challenge. Thus, the media has done a 180 and is playing up the dissent.

    • Replies: @vinteuil
  5. Taking legal action against this is almost completely fruitless. Mr. Sellner reminds us of the power wielded by these companies:

    Yep, but a well reasoned complaint to the FCC about misuse of §230, which they adjudicate under their regulatory powers over common carriers, might be worth looking at. At some point they are going to have to get off their posteriors.

  6. @anon

    She claimed there were a lot of young men into the skinhead stuff growing up, and that set her socio-political path.

    IOW, she is a political sociopath.

  7. “International nationalist movement” sounds like a contradiction in terms… well, it would have sounded like one before the idea that words have meanings was itself canceled.

  8. KenH says:

    I believe Heidi Beirich is at least half Jewish. I’ve noticed that the Jewish left has issued directives to label all white indentitarians as violent extremists and to compare us to ISIS. Even shitlord Chris Wray of the FBI compared white identitarians (“white supremacists”) to ISIS a few months back and that is now a common theme in some circles of federal law enforcement.

    Wray even had the nerve to claim, with a straight face, in the midst of nationwide BLM and antifa rioting, looting and violence that killed and injured dozens and destroyed over 500 million dollars in property that “white supremacists” were still a bigger national threat. Strangely, it was the SPLC who had to throw cold water on the idea that elements of the so called far right were involved in the rioting.

    At any rate the message is that pro-white speech leads to violent extremism. Therefore, pro-whites should be deprived of free speech on the internet and even in the public square (see UtR rally in 2017).

    The Jewish led radical left and establishment’s war against pro-whites on the internet is evidence that the pro-white right underestimated the value of internet activism while the anti-whites recognized the potential that it provided us to change the narrative in our favor. They rightly believed that pro-white internet activism helped elect Donald Trump in 2016 while some on our side had claimed we “maxed out” the internet.

    Many of the leaders of the alt-right came to the conclusion that the cause couldn’t move forward and reach the next level unless they were holding silly rallies on college campuses and in cities to stroke the egos of some of those in leadership positions.

  9. Rich says:

    The East German comparison is a good one. We’re still a little ahead of the defeated East Germans, but the Communists are gaining strength every day. The Nazis were able to defeat them in the streets of Germany in the late 20s and early 30s through brute force and common sense. The Right needs to create an independent platform that can’t be controlled by billionaire enemies of Whites. Our arguments are better and our cause is just, but being right doesn’t mean victory is assured.

  10. Angharad says:
    @anon

    Beirich is a JEW. Period.

  11. vinteuil says:
    @obwandiyag

    There’s unrest in American cities every summer, for good reason, but most years the media hides it. This year is different as Soros has decided to fund a group of agents provocateurs to attempt to replace Trump, on the theory that Trump won’t be able to meet the challenge.

    You’re not black. You’re not even blackish.

  12. Seraphim says:

    For the background read “Secure Tolerance”: the Jewish Plan to Permanently Silence the West”, by Andrew Joyce on this site (15 July).

  13. @anon

    I used to write a paid fortnightly column for about a decade for an organization named by Ms B as a “hate group” and took issue with her on it. She “responded” with boilerplate. One who has seen photos of her is unsurprised that she remains unmarried. I seem to remember reading that she is part of the alphabet soup group with regards to “gender”, but whether or not that is true is not for me to say.

    This essay was very useful with respect to providing historical information of which I was unaware. Bravo to both the writer and to Mr Sellner.

    Curiously, I wrote a comment on another site with many of the same ideas. I’m a great fan of subsidiarity, strongly believe that the powers that be in the media and such must now be regarded as hostiles with seriously ill intent and that some sort of underground resistance (they’re not stealing that word and getting away with it!) must be mounted just as has been done in the past when oppressors overreach. And somehow, some way, the financial chicanery that supports them must be stopped, as in work toward a viable alternative to privately owned central banks holding monopolies ´that have control of the currencies of the nations.

    I plan to learn as much as I can about Mr. Sellner and his work and see if Generation Identity has affiliates in Latin America. This old geezer is getting motivated to rise up from his chair and do something! The people openly and actively attempting to (and largely succeeding in) oppress folks of European descent need to be not only passively opposed but stopped.

Current Commenter
says:

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 Gregory Hood Comments via RSS