Reacting to my recent post about the Net Left basically refusing to link to me (I don’t necessarily give a damn really, and most of the folks who would show up I would probably have to ban sooner or later from the Comments), Lafayette Sennacherib posted the comment below, which I am posting.
And they are such hypocrites about this ‘no platform for fascists’ bit (It also includes no platform for anyone who claims that Jews have anything to do with Israel). Take the British Leftie bloggers (I don’t know the US ones apart from the mindnumbingly pompous Jewish agent Louis Proyect) Socialist Unity (Andy Newman) or Lenin’s Tomb: They would bar you for life for linking to David Duke, but both link to Harry’s Place.
Now, David Duke opposed the war in Iraq and advocates nothing more extreme than racial separatism (which I disagree with), like black leader Louis Farrakhan, and pointedly dissociates himself from White Supremacism (of course he is a racist but…).
Harry’s Place on the other hand, claims to be Left (‘humanitarian’, ‘decent’ left – you know the rest), but is a blatant Jewish race-hate site, hosting the most vile anti-Islam and anti-Arab filth, masses of it and constantly; and they supported, justified and lied to support and enable, advocated for the US policies that have so far killed at least 3 million (US arming of Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war, the Gulf war, the sanctions, the Iraq invasion, the ongoing genocide in Palestine), and deprived the whole of Iraq and Palestine of education, healthcare and adequate food and housing.
The Harry’s Place lot are as guilty of this as Goebbels and Streicher were for Hitler’s sins. But the Lefties have no problem linking to HP; many of them post there regularly; and they allow the vile pervert David T. (who runs the shithole) and others to post on their own blogs. So what has David Duke (or Robert Lindsay) done to compare with this? Who have they killed?
Chomsky, in his essay which was used (without his permission) for the intro to one of Robert Faurisson (Holocaust revisionist), in his defense of Faurisson’s free speech talked about the ‘Left’s’ “… ongoing commitment to totalitarian and Stalinist practices…” [ ok, I disagree with him about Stalin]. They’re no different now.
They are committed to a top-down vanguardist structure, where the leaders (unelected and mostly Jews of course) decide what can be said. This is exactly the opposite of ‘the working class in power’ that they claim to want; it is the opposite of the effective, informed democracy that most of us would like to see.
These weirdo Trots and the career bureaucrat trade unionists who still call themselves Communists – these are not a ‘Left’; as Chomsky (again) said, “The Leninists have done nothing in recent years but disrupt populist movements.” That’s it. Dishearten and discourage. Mystify, bewilder and bore.
These people are an obstacle standing between the working class and an effective Left movement. There can be no doubt whatsoever that they are infiltrated to the point that their policies are effectively decided (or at least vetoed) by the secret security services of the capitalist states and the Zionists of course.
Beyond their pale is where you want to be.
I don’t necessarily agree with everything he says here, but there are many good posts.
First, Proyect is not a Jewish agent; instead, he’s Jewish, 500 years kosher as I see it.
Duke is definitely a White Supremacist, and I don’t like his type one bit. He’s one nasty piece of work. All these White nationalists are White Supremacists in one way or another. There are a few who think that Northeast Asians are better than Whites, but that’s a rare bird. The racial separatist impulse is automatically based on supremacism, which is one reason I can’t stand any racial separatism.
For a case in point, look at Zionism. A racial separatist system. Let’s look at some more: Apartheid, Jim Crow, sundown laws, restrictive covenants, redlining, ethnic cleansing, “population transfers.” This is where racial separatism leads, right into the sewer. Think about it. Racial supremacism must logically lead to either apartheid, expulsion or extermination. There are no other alternatives; that’s the only road it can head down.
That said, I have nothing but contempt for any of the individuals above, and by the way, Louis Proyect has also pre-emptively banned me from his Marxist Mailing List, even though I’ve never applied to join. If I ever do, I’m already pre-banned. The banning grounds were that I’m a racist and a fascist.
And it’s true that the British Net Left has apparently banned links to me under some “no platform for fascism” crap.
This fascist stuff cracks me up. I hate fascists. I’m a fascist? What the Hell, man?
9 thoughts on “Beyond The Pale Is Where You Want To Be”
If Whites really have been supreme, what’s wrong with being a White supremacist? I see a distinction between wanting to be supreme over others versus the belief that one’s race is superior.
I have not found any evidence that White nationalists want to be supreme over others. Has anyone? I am curious. They all seem to say they want their own ethnostate, like Israel….
On the other hand, White nationalists, like other ethnic activists, tend to believe that our race us superior (In many ways I agree).
Of course, this is the argument of all supremacists everywhere, racial, ethnic and otherwise. We really are superior, and therefore our supremacism is rational and even good. And often, not only are we superior, but we can prove it, dammit.
The fact that all the supremacists say they are superior means that all but one of them is lying. To me, that means that the whole theory is shit. Furthermore, on moral grounds alone, all supremacist IS shit.
Via Steve Sailer via Lawrence Auster, check this police report out:
A lot of people are googling the Gates case right now…
Anyway, to reinforce my point, there seems to be a different standard applied to jews and white gentiles; any white gentile showing the slightest deviation is sent forever to weep and wail and gnash his teeth in outer darkness (biblical reference), whereas every manner of bending over backwards will be attempted to avoid calling a jew a fascist. Why’s that, I wonder?
It’s considered to be really mean to call a Jew a fascist. It’s so rude. After what the Nazis did to them, to call them Nazis, it’s seen as totally outrageous and offensive. Besides, one of the favorite games of anti-Semites, Nazis and fascists is to *call Jews Nazis and fascists*.
RL:”After what the Nazis did to them, to call them Nazis, it’s seen as totally outrageous and offensive.”
Who cares what is considered “totally outrageous and offensive”? All that matters is what is TRUE – please put the PCness aside, you’re more intelligent than that.
Isn’t the Jewish state (Israel) basically a National Socialist nation? Yes, it certainly is. Israel (the Jewish state) is clearly not a “Nazi state” though, as the word “Nazi” refers specifically to German National Socialists. However, Israel is certainly a nation which is reminiscent of National Socialist Germany – Israel is fanatically ethno-nationalistic (‘Zionism’ for Jews is basically the same as ‘Aryanism’ for Nordics) as well as MUCH more socialistic than many people realize…but of course Israel, which has now become the ’51st state of the USA,’ is basically a welfare-dependent territory almost entirely reliant upon American taxpayers along with the Jew-run FED for its day-to-day functioning and survival. As such the Jewish nation of Israel remains as typically parasitic as the individual Jews which make up its populace and thus cannot be considered as completely representative of National Socialism – however, Israel is governed by and organized around a very corrupt (i.e., Jewish) variant of NS.
I think you might be right. Israel is National Socialism for Jews in some ways anyway. It’s one of the closest things to a national socialist state in the world today.
Just because an ideology involves nationalism and socialism, it doesn’t automatically follow it’s nationalsocialism or fascism. A key component in fascism is the rejection of parliamentarism in the name of “true democracy”, in practice leading to authoritarian rule. Israel on the contrary has been a parliamentary democracy since the very beginning, ruling it out as an example of “fascist regime”. That’s not to mean that I’m not critical of Israel, since I am, and think it’s status as a Jewish State is untenable in the long term, if it strives to be democratic. But being critical of Zionism won’t lead me to oversimplify its nature, since that’s neither honest nor useful.