Forever Deplorably Yours

An open letter from the Editor-in-Chief of Arktos Media.

To the Philosophy Faculty and Graduate Students of Stony Brook University,

On December 5th the Leiter Report, the leading blog in academic philosophy (famous for its departmental rankings), featured a post by Brian Leiter himself libelously describing me as a “NeoNazi” and identifying the New Jersey Institute of Technology as my workplace and the State University of New York at Stony Brook as the institution that granted me a PhD. I am still on the Stony Brook Philosophy Department graduate student list serve (you forgot to unsubscribe me when I graduated), so I regularly receive student representative notes from faculty meetings. In a meeting held on December 7th, an unidentified person (the only unidentified person in the transcript) asserts that a PhD alumnus “is involved with the Aryan White Supremacist movement” and announces that there will be a review of my dissertation research preceding a possible public statement disavowing me. The claimant concluded after watching “a couple” of my videos (I currently have 23, in English and Persian, on my YouTube playlist: that “they are appropriately described as Aryan White Supremacist.” While I am not named in these notes, I am eventually named by a current graduate student later in the email thread that begins with an upload of the faculty meeting notes, where the statement “many people are concerned” also suggests that I have already been widely slandered and defamed. Here are images of all of the relevant posts and messages.




What disturbs me the most is that in attendance at this meeting were two internal readers of my dissertation (Edward S. Casey and Megan Craig), as well as three other professors I studied under during my four years in the department (Clyde Lee Miller, Harvey Cormier) – including the current department chair (Mary Rawlinson). These five people, well at least four of them (I did not have much interaction with Mary) came to know me well enough that they should find such claims incredible and, at the very least, I ought to have received a private email or phone call from them (they all have my contact information) before they held a meeting declaring that they are preparing to publicly denounce me and possibly attempt to revoke my doctoral degree. I am appalled by this irresponsibility and lack of integrity on the part of my former professors, and I demand an apology. That ought to be the kind of public statement made and should the department decide to denounce or disavow me despite this warning, I can imagine a libel suit against the State University of New York that would become a crusade for the cause of academic freedom that, perhaps after a number of appeals, ends in a spectacular victory at the United States Supreme Court under the Trump Administration.

An evaluation of my full body of writings ( and video interviews in the public domain – including and especially my book Prometheus and Atlas – would never support Leiter’s defamation or your slanderous attack on my character. I have never understood what “Neo” is supposed to mean in the context of “NeoNazi”, other than an evocation of Hollywood depictions of “skin head” militiamen. A National Socialist is a National Socialist. Martin Heidegger, the greatest philosopher of the 20th century, was a National Socialist. I am not one, even if I have argued, rightly (in my October Stockholm speech), that National Socialist Germany was the only political regime to seriously consider the implications of mainstream scientific recognition and widespread cultivation of those latent human capacities hitherto marginalized as “paranormal.” To put my relationship to National Socialism in the language of the Left, since most of my accusers fancy themselves of that political persuasion, to call me a National Socialist is like calling someone a Stalinist simply because he is a Marxist. A Trotskyite would certainly be defamed by such an epithet, and would be rightly outraged to be subjected to that kind of slander. I am not any kind of nationalist.

Even if I am a strong supporter of the Iranian nationalist opposition to the Islamic Republic, which not incidentally is where my discourse of Aryan identity comes from, it is because I see a resurgence of the humanitarian legacy of Zarathustra and Cyrus the Great as a tremendous benefit for shaping the world order of the 21st century. When I speak of the Aryan heritage it is in affirmation of the millions of Iranians who spontaneously made a pilgrimage to the tomb of Cyrus the Great on October 29th of this year and last, chanting slogans such as “We are Aryans, we don’t worship Arabs!” and “Our Aryan Cyrus, Your honor is our honor!” Predictably, the lying international press did not give this mass demonstration and harbinger of the overthrow of Islam in Iran (not just as a political system, but as a religious ideology) the media coverage that it deserved.

Why? Because making sense out of the discourse of Aryan identity in Iran violates your false narrative that white colonialists have always oppressed non-whites, when in fact the worst genocide in history was committed by mindlessly murderous non-whites against a humanitarian and progressive civilization produced by Caucasians. It requires recognizing the genocide of the “Aryan Empire” (Iran Shahr in middle Persian, Aryana Khashatra in ancient Persian) at the hands of waves of non-whites who were savage and sadistic conquerors; not only the Arabs, but also the Asiatic Turks and Mongols who zealously embraced and reimposed Islam after decimating half of Iran’s population and subjecting the other half to forced miscegenation. This catastrophe took place just when Iranians were on the brink of gaining their independence from the Arabian Caliphate that parasitically passed off Iranian cultural achievements as their own (your so-called ‘Islamic’ Golden Age) by forcing persecuted and oppressed scholars to write in Arabic (rather than their native Persian). I’ve studied Iran for more than 20 years. In fact, I almost sought a doctorate in Iranian Studies rather than in Philosophy, and much of my support for the Alt-Right’s struggle to prevent another white genocide (this time in Europe) is based on an understanding of the first and greatest genocide of whites.

It makes no more sense to equate my views with those of Richard Spencer (let alone Adolf Hitler) simply because he patted me on the back on stage for a minute than it does to claim that Barack Obama is a Wahhabi responsible for all of Saudi Arabia’s routinely inhuman barbarity because he knelt and kissed the Saudi King’s hand or sheepishly accepted a medal from him.

In fact, the latter is far more evidence of Obama being an Islamic fundamentalist traitor than my interaction with Spencer is evidence supporting any description of me as an “Aryan White Supremacist” or “NeoNazi.” Even Richard Spencer cannot be fairly described in these terms, let alone myself. You make it seem as if we are supporters of that terribly confused and grotesquely misnamed ‘Aryan Nations’ terrorist group. That is more absurd than if one were to conflate any supporter of the state of Israel with a militant Zionist.

I might also add that, while I am extremely critical of those who unthinkingly embrace the diabolically manipulative Abrahamic religious tradition, as Nietzsche was, I am certainly not an “anti-semite”. Thinkers of Jewish descent have been among the deepest influences on my worldview and among my closest confidants: Henri Bergson, Franz Kafka (I have written an entire unpublished manuscript on Kafka), Leo Strauss, and Jeffrey Mishlove. And before anyone adds insult to injury by hurling the epithet “NeoCon” at me, I am not a Neoconservative in any way, shape, or form. I loathe them and consider their geopolitics a disgrace to the subtlety of Professor Strauss – especially his interpretations of classical thinkers such as Plato and Aristotle and his esoteric understanding of the dialectical relationship between Athens and Jerusalem.

The hundreds of hyper-intellectual millennials that I encountered at the 2016 National Policy Institute conference this November, where I was representing Arktos Media as a book distributor, included a number of Jews that I had the pleasure of spending more time with than anyone else over the weekend. In fact, three of them were among the seven (yes it was only seven!) people out of the three hundred attendees who were caught on film or in photographs giving the “Hail Victory!” Roman salute. The Atlantic’s smuggled footage was shot from two camera angles and spliced in order to make it appear otherwise, which, frankly, is more evidence in favor of Richard Spencer’s legitimate use of the term lügenpresse. The young folks that I spent time with are Jewish adherents of Fascism, like some of Benito Mussolini’s staunchest and closest supporters during his early years (in the 1920s) when his vision most extensively overlapped with that of Italian Futurism.

By your logic, and Brian Leiter’s, according to which I am a “Neo Nazi White Supremacist”, it would be fitting to refer to Jean-Paul Sartre as “that Maoist philosopher” who endorsed a tyrant responsible for mass killings that dwarf those of Hitler by far. Why not “that Shiite terrorist Michel Foucault”, after all his support for the Islamist takeover of Iran in 1979 – which has resulted in the horrific oppression of my fatherland for the past 35 years – extended to characterizing the horrendously inhumane and tyrannical Ayatollah Khomeini as “the Spirit of a World Without Spirit.” By the way, my outrage at Foucault for this political move on his part did not stop me from extensively drawing from his archeology of knowledge in developing the core thesis of Prometheus and Atlas. He is one of a number of radical leftist thinkers that I enter into a deep dialogue with. Paul Feyerabend is another. Their contributions were essential to developing my core concepts of the Spectral Revolution and Mercurial Hermeneutics, concepts which I’m afraid are evidently far beyond your grasp.

Politics is complicated, and political philosophy applied in the midst of the concrete revolutionary situations of a given society is even more complex. I am the Editor-in-Chief of the leading press of the New Right or Alt-Right. I am also a leading member of the Iranian Renaissance movement. These movements are connected by an Indo-European philosophical tradition that extends back through Heidegger and the Kyoto School to Nietzsche, Schelling, Hegel, Bruno, Suhrawardi, Plato, Aristotle, Heraclitus, Gautama Buddha, and Zarathustra. This Aryan heritage has roots in the Earth that are thousands of years old and the branches of its tree will grow through distant star systems. My intellectual project, which has barely entered its first phase with Prometheus and Atlas, is being carefully crafted with a view to the next 10,000 years of human evolution. To imagine that you can label my thought “NeoNazi” or “White Supremacist” and then file me away in your prison of prefab and facile categorizations is delusional and it only demonstrates your own spiritual poverty.

The Alt-Right is here to stay and, more than anyone else affiliated with it, I am encouraging dialog both within the movement and with serious and unconventional thinkers outside of it. The idiot in the Stony Brook Faculty meeting who concluded on the basis of watching “a couple” of my videos that I am such and such, somehow failed to notice or did not care to watch the nine interviews that I have done with Jeffrey Mishlove for his new Thinking Allowed television series. The overwhelming majority of the people that Jeffrey has interviewed on his programs could be described as leaning far to the left socially and politically. At no point did anyone in the Alt-Right who discovered Jeffrey’s program through watching my interviews ever complain that I was associating with people who are ideologically problematic. In fact, many people on the Alt-Right have become followers of the New Thinking Allowed on account of the programs that Jeffrey and I did together. Leiter and the Stony Brook Faculty also did not stop to watch my interviews with the leader(s) of the Iranian Renaissance. I know that half of these are in Persian, but the other half are in English. A young thinker in the Alt-Right was so drawn in by this aspect of my work that he started learning the Persian language, whereas my accusers acted as if these videos do not exist. All they saw was what they wanted to see and hear, and they even distorted that: a couple of appearances at Alt-Right and Identitarian conferences. My experience over the course of the past year has been that the Alt-Right, by and large, is far more tolerant and open minded than the Left. You just cemented that impression.

One of the key points of my very brief speech at NPI 2016 was that as Editor-in-Chief of Arktos I intend to increase the dialectical tension between the already exceptionally wide range of thinkers published by our press. We publish people who have nothing less than diametrically opposed viewpoints. For example, I am currently editing Alexander Dugin. Although we have common points of departure in the ontology of Martin Heidegger and the political theory of Carl Schmitt, our interpretations and developments of these thinkers could not be more sharply opposed. If Dugin were to read Prometheus and Atlas, he would probably consider me the incarnation of the coming Anti-Christ that he evokes in his books. Still, I find his writing interesting and constructively outside the box of the entrenched and dead-ended establishment ideology that you are so intent to safeguard. You are the totalitarian thought police and soma dispensers. I am a futurist, and a revolutionary.

Forever deplorably yours,

Jason Reza Jorjani, PhD
Editor-in-Chief, Arktos Media

Jason Reza Jorjani
Jason Reza Jorjani, PhD, is an Iranian-American and native New Yorker of Persian and northern European descent. After receiving his BA and MA at New York University, he completed his doctorate in Philosophy at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. Jorjani currently teaches courses on Science, Technology, and Society (STS) and the history of Iran as a full-time faculty member at the New Jersey Institute of Technology. He is a professional member of the Society for Scientific Exploration (SSE) and also works with the Iranian Renaissance, an organization dedicated to bringing about a cultural revolution in Greater Iran on the basis of the pre-Islamic Persian heritage. His first book, Prometheus and Atlas, was published by Arktos in 2016 and went on to win the Book Award from the Parapsychological Association. has done numerous interviews, and delivered invited international lectures, on various subjects.


  • Fantastic article! I am currently writing my PhD though I am far to terrified to even tell you which country it is in, let alone which university. I would have loved to have produced research under a supervisor like you, rather than spend years fabricating lies to pass my degrees. One of these days I want to strike the beast from within, but I am biding my time.

    It is terrifying to hear that a revocation of my PhD might be on the cards in the future. That knowledge makes it rather difficult to find the motivation to continue right now since it might just be stripped away, but fuck it.

    If my efforts even have a superficial impact against the facade of thought policing, number skewing, and white genocidal mania that has gripped the Western world, it will all have been worth it.

    I wish there were some way for academics/students to secretly organize in order to discuss altright/neoreactionary ideas, and perhaps even find sympathetic colleagues in the same institution. Perhaps that is worth looking into?

  • Incredible article. As a descendant of Greeks, it pains me to see that my ancestral homeland was obviously affected by a massive muslim invasion that resulted in the stereotypical “modern Greek physique” that is phenotypically Turkish: brown eyes & hair. The original greeks had blue eyes & blonde hair. It’s obscene that the same leftists who promote ‘diversity’ envision a mocha-colored mix that has no diversity.

    Regardless, Iran could be an immensely powerful aryan nation without the shackles of Islam and the demonic Ayatollah, who peddles influence and terrorist endorsements for the only vibrant markets that Muslims have ever created (excluding slaves) — oil. Truly disturbing.

    I’m sure your leftist colleagues would endorse Khamenei purely on the basis that he is part of the “minority faith” of Islam (which is extremely short-sighted, as when one looks globally, Islam it is one of the most populous faiths in the world). I wonder how many heads would explode if your narrative ever became popular: “Save the Aryans from Muslim oppression” haha…. Though it’s not really a new narrative in history.

    Remember the Gates of Vienna! Remember Charles Martel! Remember El Cid! Remember Ferdinand & Isabella!

  • Some has-been has called Mr. Jorjani a “white supremacist”? What does that mean? What does that phrase mean “White Supremacist”?

  • reposting from dailynous

    Tom Davies · December 18, 2016 at 6:37 am
    I work in comparative Indo-European philology and ancient Greek philosophy. My research resembles some of Jorjani’s hobby-horses: I have argued, and continue to argue, that inherited Indo-European beliefs, along with contact from the Near East, had a significant impact on the development of early Greek philosophy. So I feel a sort of personal responsibility to point out, publicly and in detail, that Jorjani has no idea what he’s talking about. I don’t just mean in the sense that Jorjani is a white supremacist who believes the psychic inhabitants of Atlantis built the pyramids with the power of their minds ( I mean that Jorjani backs up his racist views with linguistic and historical claims which are demonstrably wrong. I don’t know why a desire for race-based fascist autocracy so often links hands with an interest in classical antiquity, nor how parasitic intellectuals, no matter how desperate, can bring themselves to make their living shilling a travesty of scholarship to neo-Nazis. But I do believe that in times like these it must be made very clear that voices like Jorjani’s are not fringe because their ideas frighten the establishment–they are fringe because people like him are very bad at what they pretend to do.

    Jorjani is an awful, incompetent historian. Despite his extensive reliance on ancient evidence, he betrays no critical capacities for assessing ancient texts. His lectures are littered with offhand repetitions of scraps from fictionalized ancient biographies (e.g. “Plato was a member of the Pythagorean order,” “Pythagoras spent a decade in Persia”); he relies uncritically for almost all his information about Persian history on the highly unreliable Herodotus; he takes Plato at his word that the story of Atlantis is a literal record of a secret book written by Solon. His dating of the Avestan Gathas is a good example of this method. Against a sea of historico-linguistic evidence that the Gathas of Zarathustra were composed sometime between 1500 and 700 BC, he instead takes the word of a few Greek authors who guess that Zarathustra lived 6000 years before Plato. How would anybody in ancient Greece know what was happening in the Near East six millennia before their own time? Doesn’t matter: for Jorjani, the question of reliability ends with the invocation of ancient authority.

    One of his major claims is that contact with Persia revolutionized “the Homeric culture of Greece, which remained static for many centuries before the contact between the Persians and the Greeks” ( Now, it’s stupid enough to think that the world depicted in the Homeric poems reflects the world of its authors (who explicitly affirm that they are depicting a distant past)–but it takes a special kind of ignorance to claim that Greek culture remained static before Persian contact. The centuries prior to the Persian conquest of Greek Ionia (547 BC) saw the discovery of iron metallurgy, the adoption of alphabetic writing and the invention of vocalic characters, increased trade, the spread of panhellenic festivals such as the Olympics, and the rise of the city-states that would be the main players in Greek history to the time of Alexander. This was not a static period in Greek history: the whole culture was radically transformed in the centuries before the Persian Wars.

    Jorjani’s jaw-dropping failures as a linguist are set beautifully against the blithe confidence of his pronouncements. He bases one argument on his belief that the Norse god Týr’s name is related to Persian “tir,” “arrow” ( But Týr is from Proto-Germanic *Tīwaz, which comes in turn from Proto-Indo-European *deiwós, “god”; while Persian “tir” derives from the Old Persian word for “pointy,” “tigra”–not related to *deiwós in any way. Down falls the argument. Jorjani also thinks the word “hero” comes from “eros” ( It’s hard to convey how amateur an error this is. Greek ἥρως starts with an ‘h’ sound, like our “hero.” Aspirates in Greek come from sibilants in the ancestor language: most words starting with an ‘h’ in Greek once started with an ‘s’. Since Greek ἔρως/eros doesn’t start with an ‘h’ sound, it didn’t once start with ‘s’, and so can’t be related to ἥρως/hēros, much less derived from it according to an unparalleled morphological transformation that Jorjani made up in his head. Nobody with minimal training in historical linguistics could make these kinds of mistakes.

    Even in the field he regards as his specialty–Iranian Studies–his knowledge consists mainly of Iranian nationalist propaganda. Jorjani asserts, repeatedly, that the Persian Empire abolished slavery ( Unfortunately, there is abundant evidence that Persian nobles owned slaves in conquered territories throughout the duration of the empire. These include records from Persepolis showing that at the height of Darius the Great’s reign, the imperial family relied on more than 20 000 indentured workers, paying them nothing but subsistence portions of grain. Jorjani’s similar claim that the Persian Empire was humane in its treatment of the conquered is equally silly. You can read Darius the Great’s own words for yourself on the Behistun Inscription. Here is how he brags of treating a Median rebel: “I cut off his nose, his ears, and his tongue, and I put out one eye, and he was kept in fetters at my palace entrance, and all the people beheld him. Then did I crucify him in Ecbatana; and the men who were his foremost followers, those at Ecbatana within the fortress, I flayed and hung out their hides, stuffed with straw.”

    People on the alt-right are increasingly trying to win respect for their reactionary beliefs by appeals to the classical past (see here: They are aided in this endeavour by scabs like Jorjani, who sell them pseudo-respectable pseudo-history, placing their parochial, 21st-century political neuroses in a cardboard Grand Tradition: they convince basement brownshirts that their impotent rage is a volley in a great world-historical battle, the noble Aryan race against the barbarian horde for the spirit of the world. Jorjani’s game is presenting himself as an erudite, cosmopolitan, scholarly voice in support of Aryan supremacy; the well-dressed, well-spoken philosopher of the white nationalist movement. But nearly everything he says is false or misleading. He has read enough to toss names and facts around, but he hasn’t developed the skills necessary to sort the plausible from the risible, to detect and guard himself against false information, or to admit to himself where the facts conflict with his views. His idée fixe compels him to scholarly industry but not to scholarly integrity. He sucks up information–good and bad, true and false–and spits back whatever supports the cause. By shackling his intellect and eloquence to the worst desires of the mob, he perhaps believes that he has taken it by the reins. In reality he is a mechanical advocatus, who will permit any claim, no matter how unreliable or ridiculous, to pass through his brain and out of his mouth, so long as it furthers the agenda of the ignorant racists who are his primary audience. He has spent enormous intellectual effort in service of the basest and cruelest inclinations of people even dumber than he is. It’s hard to imagine a more degrading fate for a philosopher.

  • Is jason Jewish? I ask because he has a pro Jewish platfore, he’s from New YTork and it is common to disguise Jewishness with other identification marks and by his own admission, he hung out with Jews that did the hail Hitler deal. Was it preplanned by the three Jews to cause a ruckous? Also, Friberg is Jewish, the CEO of Arktos

  • Quite interesting. A new turn in a field (academic philosophy) badly in need of something — anything!! — to stir the pot? Hadn’t heard of Jason Reza Jorjani till the other day (surprise, surprise). Hope to learn more, including his take on Paul Feyerabend (on whom I wrote my MA thesis, back in the day …)

  • The irony is that Jason really, really isn’t one of us. He doesn’t want to secure the existence of our people and a future for white children. He is not even a fellow traveler; he is just a LARPer who thinks he is a zoroastrian Magi, who likes to watch anime and jerking off to Heidegger books, like so many ‘intellectuals” here.

    BTW, Heidegger was not a Nationalsocialist. Yes, he was a card carrying party member, but he fucked Arendt, what kind of Nationalsocialist have sex with jews?

  • This post has three problems. First, no one says anything about your degree being revoked in those minutes, and you are actually the one who made public the contents of private conversations.

    Second, your own sense of self-importance is suffocating. A doctoral degree, publishing experience, and even political leadership are great accomplishments, but your language suggests that you think yourself, or at least your own thoughts, to represent a sort of second coming. A little humility, perhaps, would make your outrage seem less theatrical (i.e. intended to rile up others more than to convince your opponents of their wrong doing). It also would make your defense more convincing if it were not also an act of self-promotion through an account of how well-read and well-versed you are. Heidegger is a great thinker, sure, but he was also a Nazi sympathizer.

    Third, and most importantly, it doesn’t seem that you have totally avoided the criticism of having problematic viewpoints that raise up the Aryan race and come at the cost of potential violence (ideologically or physically) to other races or religions. You say you have met a few Jewish people (do you need a pat on the back for that?) as evidence of your not being a traditional Nazi, but it seems that you have simply found another scapegoat to act as evil incarnate: Islam. Transferring racist sentiment that justifies violent backlash against a perceived ethnic threat does not change the fact that, in your view, it is white people against the world. And that seems to have been the worry in the first place.

    • “problematic viewpoints that raise up the Aryan race and come at the cost of potential violence (ideologically or physically) to other races or religions.”

      And then you call Islam a scapegoat? Potential violence by Europeans is evidently far, far worse than actual Islamic violence, per Mohammed.

    • “Second, your own sense of self-importance is suffocating. A doctoral degree, publishing experience, and even political leadership are great accomplishments, but your language suggests that you think yourself, or at least your own thoughts, to represent a sort of second coming.”

      This is merely conjecture and not a matter of fact. Interpretations are to be taken as just that – interpretations.

      “A little humility, perhaps, would make your outrage seem less theatrical (i.e. intended to rile up others more than to convince your opponents of their wrong doing). It also would make your defense more convincing if it were not also an act of self-promotion through an account of how well-read and well-versed you are. Heidegger is a great thinker, sure, but he was also a Nazi sympathizer.”

      And Marx killed millions with his ideology being the basis for despotic regimes under Mao, Lenin, Stalin, the Khmer Rouge etc. No one seriously holds individuals who analyze Marx to be endorsing those views prima facie. And your despicable claim that humility over outrage in the face of threats which have the effect of ending careers and result in irreversible defamation are more illuminating of your own character than anything else.

      “Third, and most importantly, it doesn’t seem that you have totally avoided the criticism of having problematic viewpoints that raise up the Aryan race and come at the cost of potential violence (ideologically or physically) to other races or religions. You say you have met a few Jewish people (do you need a pat on the back for that?) as evidence of your not being a traditional Nazi, but it seems that you have simply found another scapegoat to act as evil incarnate: Islam. Transferring racist sentiment that justifies violent backlash against a perceived ethnic threat does not change the fact that, in your view, it is white people against the world. And that seems to have been the worry in the first place.”

      This is a wonderful exposition on why claims of White privilege and transitional justice are morally and practically dangerous. Such a shame you don’t extend such an exposition to Dr. Jorjani. But then, when your claims are founded on hypocrisy it should come as no surprise that hypocrisy is evidently observable in further rhetorical flourishes.

      • It’s true that through the holocaust myth, any association with Hitler is sold as a deal breaker and perhaps a reason to set the record straight and defend a great representative of the aryan race

    • NC…Can you do no better than flatulent character assignation? Perhaps a course in composition might serve you. Most community colleges offer one. You could possibly be qualify for a minority scholarship program.

  • Surely this was to be expected, right?

    Boggles the mind.

    Is it really productive for Arktos, and the Alt-Right in general, to get involved in these academic squabbles?

    I suppose that’s what you get when you put an academic in charge.

  • I see what you are saying about this Leiter fellow, but it seems like the righteous indignation might be misplaced about your alma mater…it seems like those are private discussions that you yourself are posting publicly and possibly exaggerating in importance. There is no mention of revoking degrees, and there is nothing I would read as a “declaration” of any sort of preparations in the part of the minutes you quote. If every discussion is taken to be a declaration, then free discourse is indeed in trouble.

    Just be careful that the millennial tendency to overblow small slights doesn’t become a habit for you, as well. I think it is your racial essentialist position that people are reading as “Aryan White supremacism”. Surely you don’t deny that position.

      • I like how he’s linking the Jew desired war with Iran, and let’s be clear, Jews are the master Abrahamites, with Identarian, good for us politics. Is that intellectual “new-speak”?

    • A paranoid, apophetic narcissist can easily believe not only in nonsense about “parapsychology” and the mystical, hidden powers of his own “Aryan race,” but also that someone pondering making a statement about him after looking over his dissertation amounts to a threat to revoke his PhD degree.

      • persecution sells credentials. He is giving whites a reason to fight Iran for Jews. That’s all he’s here to do and I assume Arktos, whose CEO is Jewish is in lock step

  • Still, your language is only revolutionary. I see no creativity in the alt right. Maybe creativity comes with Alt right 2.0. Somehow I doubt it. It’s possible to control the outcome of a forest fire. Sure, set the fire burn the underbrush and ensure ecological longevity and a healthy forest. I doubt if your words could control the outcome of a revolution. You’re libel to burn the whole forest down. Sustainable change is not revolutionary in essence, rather it is creative. Sustainable enlightenment is not the result of revolutionary excisive action. Sustainable enlightenment is the result of integral creativity. Right Jason?

    • Um… Isn’t the issue that he actually got handed a degree without his professors actually doing a critical reading of his work and holding him fully accountable for the implications of his thought (otherwise this wouldn’t be news to them)? And doesn’t he confirm that by safeguarding the legitimacy of his degree with costly legal threats? The only way to “buy” a PhD is to financially threaten your department into agreeing that your claim about Hitler’s paranormal powers (somehow) isn’t Nazi propaganda.

      • This speaks more to the actions of his doctoral committee than it does for himself. And, assuming you haven’t read his doctoral thesis or his now published book, you ought to refrain from making statements about the content of his work.

  • Excellently stated. Of course, they are the architects of their own destruction and the more they attempt to excise those willing to admit reality the more they will drive those excised seeking something more meaningful and stimulating.

    And outlets such as RightOn and Arktos will be there to take them in and let them flourish like they never could on a place like Brian Lieter’s (LOL) blog.

    Nature abhors a vacuum. And they’re creating the vacuum with which we (those willing to admit reality) will come to fill.

  • Well said Jason. I discovered your work from New Thinking Allowed and was really pleasantly surprised to catch you on stage at NPI!

Leave a Reply