Perspective

The Alt-Right and the Homosexual Question — Part 1

“Men of our race naturally view with contempt the creatures who, though anatomically male, find a perverse and incomprehensible satisfaction in sexual relations with one another.” — Revilo P. Oliver

Also read: Part 2; Part 3.

Introduction

The following essay is quite long — much longer than I initially intended. The reason for this is that I soon discovered that, like the Jewish Question, the Homosexual Question does not lend itself easily to soundbites, quips, rhetorical flourishes, or short blog posts. It is not intended to be comprehensive, nor is it meant to fully explain what homosexuality is, or how it originates. This essay is intended to advance the position that homosexuals should be regarded as anathema to the Alt-Right, and to the broader White Nationalist movement.

I once previously involved myself in the comments section of AltRight.com, arguing against homosexual apologetics. The response was overwhelmingly supportive, but one or two homosexual malcontents made the following accusations: first, that I was involving myself in a dispute between the editors of AltRight.com and Counter-Currents publishing; second, that I was evidently a repressed homosexual; and third, that this was somehow an attempt to boost my personal status. On the first point, I am not invested personally in the debate between AltRight.com and Counter-Currents publishing, but almost two years ago (long before the dispute) I was writing against homosexual apologetics and offered counter-arguments to at least one Counter Currents author. I deal with the bankrupt rationale behind the second accusation in the course of the essay. On the third point, my aspiration to personal status is necessarily limited by my anonymity. I aspire neither to ‘status’ nor to leadership. I am aware of the limitations of my position, and only wish to advance an argument. That such an argument might damage the credibility of others may be considered the primary reason behind accusations against me personally in this regard. Tackling this issue is likely to be largely thankless, and certainly controversial. My status may well have been better served by “sticking to the Jews,’ but as stated, status is not my objective.

This essay will not be “the last word” on the subject, but it is likely to be my last word on it.

Silencing Tactics

Within the Alt-Right, the subject of homosexuality, and more specifically homosexuals within our movement receives surprisingly little serious commentary. There are a number of professed and implied reasons for this discursive lacuna, some of which may be more complicated than first appear on the surface. At the outset it seems scarcely worth repeating that homosexuality is not a pleasant topic to discuss or explore, and nor is it in any sense straightforward, concerning as it does a variety of complexities of morality, Nature, science, politics, and ideological worldview. One of our late great thinkers, Professor Revilo P. Oliver, expressed this combination of the repellant and the complex quite clearly when he wrote in 1966: “Homosexuality is a disgusting and, in some of its aspects, recondite subject, and even the most concise summary of what is known about it would reach the dimensions of a treatise and require the use of languages other than English.” Oliver, if he were alive today, may well agree with me that this is a subject which brings little reward for the attention that might be devoted to it. However, I believe that Oliver, who lived during a time when the tide of deviant behavior had not risen as high as it is today, would also agree with me this is a subject that should be addressed occasionally, as a matter of necessity, for reasons of ideological clarity and the maintenance of morale.

The reasons most often given for avoiding the subject of homosexuality should be familiar to all readers, though this very familiarity hides a rhetorical usefulness and a lack of deeper socio-historical awareness that has permitted the entry and tolerance of a small but noisy number of homosexuals in corners of the Far Right, not just in the United States, but elsewhere. First, there is the honest but ill-considered refrain that we “don’t care what people do in their bedrooms,” which reduces to narrow absurdity a question of ethnic health, demographics, and culture. Then there are nervous and cowardly assertions from some that the issue isn’t an “obsession” for them, and therefore isn’t one that they waste their time on. Those that do, of course, are simply “protesting too much,” and there must be something suspect about them. According to this line of thinking, men ‘secure in their sexuality’ simply wouldn’t address the topic.

As someone who has devoted many years of study to the Jewish Question, this latter excuse interests me. From a movement ostensibly well-versed in the methods of psychoanalysis and the Frankfurt School, one would perhaps expect a total rejection of quack psychology and its barely-concealed uses for the advancement of interests antithetical to White advancement. The pathologizing of one’s ethnic and/or ideological opponents is presumably so well-attested that no self-respecting member of the Alt-Right or affiliated circles could entertain such mind games. In the Culture of Critique, Kevin MacDonald writes:

One way in which psychoanalysis has served specific Jewish interests is the development of theories of anti-Semitism that bear the mantle of science by deemphasizing the importance of conflicts of interest between Jews and gentiles. Although these theories vary greatly in detail — and, as typical of psychoanalytic theories generally, there is no way to empirically decide among them — within this body of theory anti-Semitism is viewed as a form of gentile psychopathology resulting from projections, repressions, and reaction formations stemming ultimately from a pathology-inducing society.

A key argument of psychoanalytic theories of anti-Semitism is that those who engage in the critique of Jews do so out of repressed jealousies that amount to a desire on the part of the anti-Semite to be Jewish. In this understanding, the anti-Semite so strongly desires to be a Jew that he secretly and subconsciously becomes an inward Jew. The fierce repression of this internal development is so strong that it further evolves into an outward, and irrational, hatred of the Jewish people. An example of this thinking can be found in Theodore Isaac Rubin’s Anti-Semitism: A Disease of the Mind (2009), in which Rubin writes:

The anti-Semite’s most buried and unconscious secret — from himself and others — is the desire to be a Jew. He wants to be free of conscience and inner coercions, and he believes that Jews are free. He too wants to be what he views as the exotic and privileged outsider. He wants to be the total and forever expatriate even as he raves about his own patriotism and nationalistic feelings and influences (91).

The Jewish interest in disseminating such an understanding of anti-Semitism among non-Jews should be patently obvious. What better way to deal with someone hostile to Jews than to convince him that his own hostility is evidence of becoming what he detests? The power of his Jewish-provoked wrath is thus turned upon himself, neutralizing him as an opponent of Jewish interests. Since the beginnings of psychoanalysis, Jewish intellectuals have focused on applying its tactically useful ‘findings’ to myriad historical contexts as part of their growing and unrelenting critique of the West. In the field of academic history, Jewish historians versed in psychoanalysis have written entire tomes in which the central argument is that Europeans persecuted ‘innocent’ Jews for centuries simply because they envied the role of Jews as God’s Chosen People, and had deep-seated desires to be Jews themselves. The late Robert Wistrich, and his Antisemitism: The Longest Hatred (1991) is a classic in this regard, though it also featured in the works of self-hating, incentivized, crypto-Marxist Whites like the late Gavin Langmuir and his History, Religion, and Antisemitism (1990).

To those with a strong enough mental constitution, this tangle of manifestly unprovable theories is little more than ridiculous — a rhetorically impressive folly, but a folly nonetheless. And, at this point, it is worth highlighting the similarities in explanations of “homophobia,” a term coined by George Weinberg but first ‘explained’ as a putative phenomenon by Sigmund Freud. Freud scholar Christine Downing explains that (just as Jewish intellectuals argue that all Europeans wanted to be Jews):

For Freud, we are all in some sense homosexuals… Freud is also persuaded that the fear of one’s denied sexual longings constitutes one of the most powerful elements in resistance to analysis…Homophobia too is seen as an expression of repressed homosexuality. Freud regards it as the individual’s attempt to reject admission of his own unconscious homosexual desires with vigorous counter-attitudes.

Perhaps even more influential than Freud in the modern era, in terms of pathologizing aversion to homosexuality, was Albert Ellis (1913–2007), the Jewish, Pittsburgh-born psychologist who argued in The American Sexual Tragedy (1954) that all men who are not homosexuals are “fetishistic” and suffer from the “delusion” that women are more fun — and hence must be treated as “victims of psychiatric illness.” The striking parallels between these Jewish explanations for hostility towards Jews and homosexuals should be obvious, along with the transparent ambition of promoting a generalized notion of ‘tolerance’ as virtuous and a sign of good mental health. However, whereas stronger mental constitutions appear to have resisted the advance of the former attempt at pathologizing opposition, I am often struck by the apparent readiness, even within our circles, of men eager to reach for Jewish explanations for why they refuse to tackle an issue of some social significance. Moreover, I find it cowardly and weak: “I can’t take a principled position on this issue because if I do then I will appear homosexual in the schema of Jewish psychological contrivance.” Perhaps it’s because I’m a married father of three, that I’m confrontational by nature, or that I find accusations of repression and secret homosexuality to be humorous as much as irritating, but such a contrivance has never worked on me, and never shall. Behind every Jewish claim that the anti-Semite ‘doth protest too much,’ lies the implication that he should stop protesting. And behind the same giggling refrain from the effeminate lies the same implication. And, in the main, the latter works, shielding the degenerate from critique from all but the most fanatical, which in turns lends perverse credence to his claim that only an ‘obsessive’ would critique his ‘way of life’ or draw attention to what he does ‘behind closed doors.’

Reasoned discussion is necessary to break this Jewish-contrived, artificial taboo, and to draw attention to some manifest realities compelling the exclusion of homosexuals from our struggling but sacred movement, and a broader reckoning with the social implications of homosexuality on a national or ethnic level. The willingness of an individual or a movement to take a stand on an issue depends on a strength of worldview. The individual who argues that we should “deal with” this or that subject first (and solely) while leaving other matters to a putative future, does not possess a worldview but a hierarchy of opponents. A worldview entails a complete vision of the world in which we now exist, and a complete vision of the world we hope to shape. Our movement, consisting as it does of often bickering circles, should at the very least be made to conform in some fashion to the world that we are striving for. A situation in which known movement homosexuals and their circles can posture as spokesmen for National Socialism or White Nationalism would be laughable were it not for the fact that it was tolerated with such lethargy by the ideologically lazy and those intimidated into silence by Jewish psychological parlor tricks. Worldview is the foundation of ideology. Ideology is the foundation of activism and morale. Clarity of worldview, and its practical expression in whatever achievable form, is non-negotiable. Just as there is no room in this movement for Jews or Africans or Pakistanis, the over-arching rationale for an exclusion of homosexuals is the fundamental incompatibility of their inclusion under our worldview.

The various reasons underlying this incompatibility may be regarded broadly under two categories: the biological implications of homosexuality (issues of disease and demographics), and the behavioral traits and personality of the homosexual (issues of personality characteristics and socio-cultural impact). It is to these categories that we now turn our attention.

Next: Part 2

Comment

188 comments

  1. Goolag Sucks 9 October, 2017 at 22:46 Reply

    EXCELLANT article. I usually do not spend much time on the HQ, but they absolutely should not be allowed in our movement.

    1. Levels of disease and degeneracy
    2. Cannot reproduce
    3. Nearly all support leftist causes
    4. “Reproduce” through molestation of children.
    5. Another strain of cultural marxism
    6. Acceptance of their degeneracy devolves into things like “Trans-Rights”
    7. Their lifestyle is an abomination and no sane person should have to accept it

  2. JohnEngelman 5 October, 2017 at 12:01 Reply

    Homosexuality is a congenital inclination rather than a behavior set. Some homosexuals are faithful to their (female) wives. Some remain virgins.

    The sexual problem facing Western civilization is that a growing percentage of people do not get married and stay married to the co-parents of their biological children.

    Children raised to adulthood by their biological parents living together in matrimony tend to have fewer problems in life than other children.

  3. Cartier McCloud 1 October, 2017 at 23:05 Reply

    In looking over all these (some self-serving) comments, the fact is that White Genocide covers all that contributes to it. The jew agenda of “normalizing,” promoting, legalizing and criminalizing opposition to such perverted sexual behavior belies the obvious: faggots cannot reproduce. As such, the more faggots are praised, protected and promoted insures that less White children will be born. Many SJW refuse to marry or have children until faggots are totally accepted as part of “normal” society. The fact that they can already marry & adopt children, only insures these children will swing their way. Anyone who wants to see what homosexuality looks like, go here:

    https://thegasmaskblog.wordpress.com/2017/05/31/gallery-of-horrors-some-people-are-dead-inside-nsfw-18/

  4. Tom Rogers 1 October, 2017 at 16:03 Reply

    Turing’s contribution has been exaggerated for propaganda purposes (much like now we see the historic contribution of obscure women in various fields exaggerated for ‘equality’).

  5. Le Fox 1 October, 2017 at 03:34 Reply

    Pt. 2

    Robert Wistrich also wrote ‘Revolutionary Jews from Marx to Trotsky’. I’m surprised this book wasn’t mentioned in the essay, although Joyce seems to have read his other works.

    Freud, as stated before, did discuss homosexuality and the other psychoanalysts believed it was something that could be fixed or changed over time. They did not believe it was inherited, and one of the psychoanalysts even did a talk with a Danish count, who was gay, and others who admitted they did not like being gay. Freud wasn’t entire useless in this regard, and he was right in many others. A few of the other analysts pointed out a casual connection between homosexuality and BDSM tendencies – but it seems Andrew Joyce didn’t want to look that far.

    Christine Downing forgets that Freud also discusses how sexual abnormalities may be present in all individuals. He doesn’t argue that all people are gay; although, if you wanted to try, same-sex behaviour is capable in all humans, whether directed by necessity or perversion. His ‘Sexual Aberrations’ is a great example:

    http://www.bartleby.com/278/1.html

    “Perhaps even more influential than Freud in the modern era, in terms of pathologizing aversion to homosexuality, was Albert Ellis (1913–2007), the Jewish, Pittsburgh-born psychologist who argued in The American Sexual Tragedy (1954) that all men who are not homosexuals are “fetishistic” and suffer from the “delusion” that women are more fun — and hence must be treated as “victims of psychiatric illness.”

    Well, no. Ellis argued that homosexuals were somewhat pathologized, but never explained why. His book, ‘Homosexuality: Its Causes and Cure’ suggested that it was something to be remedied, and he took the middle road that it was not good, or evil. His work on ‘Is Pornography Harmful to Children?’ found here:

    http://www.ep.tc/realist/47/18.html

    – again takes a middle of the road approach. Joyce could’ve capitalized on this versus what we know now, but he does not.

    The striking parallels between these Jewish explanations for hostility towards Jews and homosexuals should be obvious, along with the transparent ambition of promoting a generalized notion of ‘tolerance’ as virtuous and a sign of good mental health.

    There is a difference: homosexuals have always occupied a place in society that is either horribly degenerate, or so far above everyone else that they are exempt from criticism. Though this may sound like a carbon copy of how Jews act, Jews, for the most part, had their identity and race differentiating them; homosexuals can be anyone of any race, and so could blend into society.

    “However, whereas stronger mental constitutions appear to have resisted the advance of the former attempt at pathologizing opposition,I am often struck by the apparent readiness, even within our circles, of men eager to reach for Jewish explanations for why they refuse to tackle an issue of some social significance.”

    What stronger mental constitutions are these? And you leapt for the Jewish explanations from the get-go, Joyce. You don’t get to disavow it, now. You stick to it for some modicum of consistency. You don’t get to pull a twist and then say you’ll condemn homosexuality. That’s not how it works.

    “Moreover, I find it cowardly and weak: “I can’t take a principled position on this issue because if I do then I will appear homosexual in the schema of Jewish psychological contrivance.” Perhaps it’s because I’m a married father of three, that I’m confrontational by nature, or that I find accusations of repression and secret homosexuality to be humorous as much as irritating, but such a contrivance has never worked on me, and never shall.”

    You’re not that confrontational, Joyce. You tread the lines to an audience you know will agree; there’s no boldness there. Heck, KevMac is your Bibleman, so I don’t expect much in the way of ground-breaking journalism here.

    If accusations of homosexuality doesn’t affect you, it doesn’t affect you – so you don’t have to bring it up. But the idea that someone will be called gay because of Jew-psychology is a stretch, considering that it IS, like it or not, an unfortunate Greco-Roman tradition that has never gone away.

    “Behind every Jewish claim that the anti-Semite ‘doth protest too much,’ lies the implication that he should stop protesting. And behind the same giggling refrain from the effeminate lies the same implication. And, in the main, the latter works, shielding the degenerate from critique from all but the most fanatical, which in turns lends perverse credence to his claim that only an ‘obsessive’ would critique his ‘way of life’ or draw attention to what he does ‘behind closed doors.”

    This isn’t new, the whole ‘You must be one of me if you’re so obsessed with me’ motto. But again, how does Jewishness fit into this? What Jewish claims are we referring to? Just come right out and say it, Joyce: Jews pushed homosexuality; gentiles are victims. Am I right?

    “Reasoned discussion is necessary to break this Jewish-contrived, artificial taboo, and to draw attention to some manifest realities compelling the exclusion of homosexuals from our struggling but sacred movement, and a broader reckoning with the social implications of homosexuality on a national or ethnic level.”

    For one, it isn’t Jewish contrived as it has, and I quote Spencer, has been a part of European societies with or without Jews. Magnus Hirschfeld was not mentioned at all in this article (he is in the third part) and I would have that he would have been, since he more or less helped pioneer the gay rights movement, and was raped by his riding instructor as a teen (whether or not the instructor was Jewish, it is not known).

    Second, a lot of discussions of homosexuality came from the French, not Jews. Michel Foucault was not mentioned, nor was John Boswell. Nor any of the supporters and writers of man-boy love who were ethnic Europeans. If you want to talk about the ‘sacredness’ of your movement, you’re going to have to learn that even if you remove every Jew, that homosexual problem is still going to remain, and a refusal to address that won’t make it go away.

    “The willingness of an individual or a movement to take a stand on an issue depends on a strength of worldview. The individual who argues that we should “deal with” this or that subject first (and solely) while leaving other matters to a putative future, does not possess a worldview but a hierarchy of opponents.”

    You’re arguing now, Joyce, now, when you could have done it years ago that the Right has a gay problem? Did you wait until the doxxing of The Right Stuff to do anything about it?

    “A worldview entails a complete vision of the world in which we now exist, and a complete vision of the world we hope to shape. Our movement, consisting as it does of often bickering circles, should at the very least be made to conform in some fashion to the world that we are striving for.”

    Alright, let’s talk about this ‘complete’ vision of the world. You want – and desperately want – homosexuality to be a Jewish contrived thesis. It’s easier to blame it on that because that way, you don’t have to talk about its real effects and ultimately ignore the problems of your own community because you hold the idea that so long as you are talking about the problem, you are dealing with the problem.

    Example: Sweden, in 1944, when the National Socialists were in power, decriminalized homosexuality. What does that tell you about their future and Jewish domination then?

    “A situation in which known movement homosexuals and their circles can posture as spokesmen for National Socialism or White Nationalism would be laughable were it not for the fact that it was tolerated with such lethargy by the ideologically lazy and those intimidated into silence by Jewish psychological parlor tricks.”

    You keep talking about these parlour tricks, but like KevMac, don’t actually define them. We’re meant to assume it’s this lofty, up-in-the-air, too-smart-for-you principle in which we will conclude that we know the pushers and the end result. We point out double standards when they are just as guilty of it as we are.
    National Socialism is laughable in which it takes a movement, socialism – which in all other forms is considered Jewish – and then explained that it ISN’T Jewish because it’s not Marxist socialism, and that tacking ‘nationalism’ to the front of it will solve it. It also doesn’t explain how massive debt will be fixed, especially since the NatSocs of Germany racked up a LOT of debt. Guess they still had crypto-Jews spending their money, eh?

    Homosexuality was tolerated not because people were intimidated – though that in itself is true – but because people wanted it to be there. Europeans embraced it because it was ‘exciting’, and, honestly, Joyce, you should know Jews by now: they are reactive, not proactive.

    Now, we’re getting to the meatier bits of this essay. Let’s see what the end result is.

    Part II is much better argued, with a lot of the facts that those who looked for them know. European societal attitudes towards homosexuality is mentioned, but again, we have some curious quotes:

    “Additionally, because issues of youth protection, health, and demography are human universals, any kind of knee-jerk and uncritical rejection of something as ‘Jewish’ is precisely the kind of quasi-esoteric counter-Semitism that gives more reasoned critique a bad name.”

    Well this is a backtrack from the original thesis presented in the first part. Rejecting something as ‘Jewish’ is ‘counter Semitism?’ OK. No definitions provided, or examples, but, eh, whatever.

  6. Le Fox 1 October, 2017 at 03:30 Reply

    TL;DR

    I was directed to this series of articles from Common Filth, and felt obliged to comment. Given the recent ‘Christianity is for Cucks’ article, and the abundant ignorance of Greg Johnson’s actions, I say it is too little, too late for you to redeem yourselves. Even here, in the introduction, we see less of the homosexual problem, but more of the Jewish Question. Let’s discuss some of the finer points.

    “A key argument of psychoanalytic theories of anti-Semitism is that those who engage in the critique of Jews do so out of repressed jealousies that amount to a desire on the part of the anti-Semite to be Jewish. In this understanding, the anti-Semite so strongly desires to be a Jew that he secretly and subconsciously becomes an inward Jew. The fierce repression of this internal development is so strong that it further evolves into an outward, and irrational, hatred of the Jewish people.”

    For one, we are not discussing anti-Semitism in this article; we are discussing homosexuality. Right off the bat, we are conflating two issues, but I understand that you are going off the ‘If you hate X so much, you must be Y!’ argument.

    I’ll discuss the psychoanalytic stuff later, when it comes up. Theodore Isaac Rubin is mentioned as a matter of convenience – we know from TOO that the parentheses explain everything – and he says that anti-Semitism comes from one desperately wishing to be a Jew. It is no different than one saying that he hates blacks so much he desperately wants to be black. We know from more current studies that prejudice is as natural as ‘homophobia’.

    “The Jewish interest in disseminating such an understanding of anti-Semitism among non-Jews should be patently obvious. What better way to deal with someone hostile to Jews than to convince him that his own hostility is evidence of becoming what he detests? The power of his Jewish-provoked wrath is thus turned upon himself, neutralizing him as an opponent of Jewish interests.”

    We are led to assume that this is done to make us undermine our own conscience, so we can open our borders and our minds to depravity. Am I right? But here’s the thing: with Jews, and anti-Semitism, if you insist that the person who hates Jews so much really IS a Jew, does that not suggest that Jews are deeply hateful? I am sure they would like to disassociate themselves from that, as it’s a double negative. You can only be neutralized if you succumb to the double-think. Besides, prejudice often isn’t cured by constantly saying someone has to be ‘nice’. They often have to experience it.

    “Since the beginnings of psychoanalysis, Jewish intellectuals have focused on applying its tactically useful ‘findings’ to myriad historical contexts as part of their growing and unrelenting critique of the West. In the field of academic history, Jewish historians versed in psychoanalysis have written entire tomes in which the central argument is that Europeans persecuted ‘innocent’ Jews for centuries simply because they envied the role of Jews as God’s Chosen People, and had deep-seated desires to be Jews themselves.”

    Okay, let’s talk about the beginning of psychoanalysis. Freud, for example, wrote that homosexuality was the result of gay men having an innate fear of the vagina. He wrote that gay men viewed the vagina as a ‘thing with teeth’. He also coined ‘penis envy’, which applies to lesbians. The claim is made that Jewish psychoanalysts used their craft to undermine the West, even though Freud did not trash Greek mythology, but rightfully pointed out the Oedipus Complex and the tragedy of that work.

    Unless some heavy-handed tomes are offered, I don’t think even the most ahistorical Jewish historian viewed European anti-Semitism as a means of them wishing to be Jews, but of ‘irrational’ fears, which is the usual argument.

    “To those with a strong enough mental constitution, this tangle of manifestly unprovable theories is little more than ridiculous — a rhetorically impressive folly, but a folly nonetheless. And, at this point, it is worth highlighting the similarities in explanations of “homophobia,” a term coined by George Weinberg but first ‘explained’ as a putative phenomenon by Sigmund Freud.”

    We should talk about unprovable theories, and ‘rhetorically impressive follies’. Langmuir was nothing more than a Medieval ‘historian’ who wanted to show Christians as a bunch of anti-Semites who also couldn’t survive without their mercantile prowess. We should see his ‘manifestly unprovable theories’ as just that.

  7. BWV 28 September, 2017 at 15:45 Reply

    I think the question being worked on here isn’t whether homosexuals can be allowed to live in the ideal nation or whether they might have something to contribute to it. The issue at hand seems to be whether they can contribute to the creation of it and whether they can serve in leadership positions in that creation.

    I’d say no and no.

  8. BWV 28 September, 2017 at 15:42 Reply

    My usual retort to charges of “homophobia” is to laugh and point out that nobody is actually afraid of homosexuals; we’re only disgusted by them.

    As for homosexual Nationalists it seems unlikely you’ll ever find someone who is genuinely both. Homosexuals, now that they no longer have to hide their disgusting lifestyle choice, are eager – even desperate – to be noticed as homosexuals.

    One usually need look no deeper than their social media profile – often no deeper than their screen name itself – to discover they are homosexual. I usually explain to that group that “If the very first thing you think I need to know about you is that you’re a homosexual – I’m not interested in knowing you.”

    They are the most self-absorbed 3% of the population and as such won’t ever make worthwhile Nationalists.

  9. Saint DyRo 28 September, 2017 at 11:20 Reply

    The Resistance Movement can have absolutely ZERO: JEWS, FAGGOTS, TRANSSEXUALS, PEDOPHILES OR PEDERASTS.

    FURTHERMORE WE SHOULD STRIVE TO ELIMINATE ALL DEGENERACY FROM OUR PERSONAL LIVES. NO PORNOGRAPHY. NO DRUGS. NO PROMISCUITY. NO JEWISH GUITAR MUSIC. NO ORK HIPHOP. NO VULGAR DEFORMED ART. NO OBESITY, NO LAZINESS, NO VIDEO GAMES.

    We need a constant and eternal vigilance to root out all degeneracy from our movement.

    IF WHITES REMAIN DEGENERATE WE ARE NOT WORTH SAVING. WE MUST BE A NOBLE AND RIGHTEOUS PEOPLE.

    WE HAVE WORK TO DO.

    • RJ 29 September, 2017 at 02:00 Reply

      Stick to comedy Azz. You’re a funny old man but that scary face is the last thing we need. Every time we get a good thing going, some weirdo like you ruins it. Follow your advice & this whole thing is coming down. Go get DS back.

  10. Pepito Passado 27 September, 2017 at 23:49 Reply

    Once the women start lusting for babies, then the disease of homosexuality will slow and turn back, but first the women have to want our men… we need a war to prove valor, and the homos will be good fighters because we can de-pair them and send one to the front and make the other a reinforcement, and when the front is smashed we will still have reinforcements ready to charge to retake the body of their faggot lover.

        • Saint DyRo 28 September, 2017 at 14:08 Reply

          That would assume that they even have a use as fodder. Which they don’t. We would have to keep them alive, feed them, and arm them to get them in that situation. Useless. Instead I propose we pulverize their remains, after throwing them off rooftops, and mix the dross into lead, the mixture to be made into shrapnel for loading grapeshot cannons to mow down the hordes of migrants.

  11. Clastaschio 27 September, 2017 at 16:00 Reply

    From the above essay:

    “The individual who argues that we should “deal with” this or that subject first (and solely) while leaving other matters to a putative future, does not possess a worldview but a hierarchy of opponents. A worldview entails a complete vision of the world in which we now exist, and a complete vision of the world we hope to shape. Our movement, consisting as it does of often bickering circles, should at the very least be made to conform in some fashion to the world that we are striving for. A situation in which known movement homosexuals and their circles can posture as spokesmen for National Socialism or White Nationalism would be laughable…”

    • RJ 27 September, 2017 at 23:03 Reply

      Honestly? I thought the idea that ‘Romans weren’t REALLY gay’ was laughable.

      But yea… Picking & choosing battles doesn’t seem unreasonable to me.

  12. Lyon 27 September, 2017 at 12:53 Reply

    Andrew Joyce is to be commended for even tackling this issue! And mercifully, this was an intelligent and well written opening salvo on a central question for society going forward. While the cowardly will avoid this topic like the plague, I look forward to parts 2. and 3. And I am open to adjusting my thoughts on the issue as well. And expressing them here to, ideally, moving the dialogue forward. So please respond to my post if you have anything to add, intelligent or otherwise. Also, while I only read a handful of comments below, I decided to not go any further on those comments till I added my own initial thoughts.

    Here are a few initial observations. While the “science” is inconclusive on this issue (…and good luck getting anything objective on this contentious issue) it seems to me, from my seasoned understanding as a pro-Euro family oriented Celtic father with grown male children (…who are healthy, intelligent, athletic, moral, and independent), that there are two camps of homos: let’s label camp 1. Acquired Homosexuality (…by choice, trauma, etc.) and another camp 2. Biological Homo. The former camp is just that, “camp” or over-the-top, flaming and/or effeminate, excessively vocal, and “out of the closet” regrettably loud and proud. I don’t have a great deal of time for this group and, admitted, my not-as-yet calcified opinion on this group is, to be charitable to these broken ones, not overly sympathetic. And so I do look forward to continuing to read Pt 2 and Pt 3 of this intelligent, well-written opinion piece.

    The more problematic question is that of the seemingly straight, in-the-closet and/or quite Bio Homo, who, for all intents and purposes, decidedly does not relate in any way to the Acquired Homo group and equally finds them annoying, an embarrassment, or at best tolerates them, albeit dismissively. I have an older gay relative who is, by any objective standard, a decent and even admirable fellow. He’s very masculine as well, so no one would outwardly identify him as a gay. It wouldn’t even cross the mind of someone with the most accurate of “gay radars.” He contributes exponentially to society, other than producing the much needed future generation; and he’s even told me he would kill to be a father, like me, and would be straight if he could, but he senses he’s wired biologically the way he is. To label him a “faggot” and throw him into camp number 1. (Acquired Homo status) seems misguided.

    My admittedly somewhat unexamined stance over the years has been that there are some gay European-descent men down through the centuries that have contributed greatly to our people, they were seemingly decent members of society, and kept their sexuality private if not secret. I don’t see the necessity of having a witch hunt on this group 2. (Bio Homo). That said, I am not at all for normalizing group 1. (Acquired Homo status). And I suspect my gay relative would not be either.

    Again, I look forward to pt 2. & 3. And thanks again Andrew!

  13. Brutus of troy 26 September, 2017 at 15:48 Reply

    I made a video talking about Greg Johnson and the gay question in my previous incarnation as the devonshire fascist and I was promptly removed from youtube.
    the point is this…
    the vast majority of white nationalists don’t like them so why protect them? And if you do protect them you are in fact creating a protected minority because if nature was allowed to follow it’s course they would all be kicked out.

  14. altright_sobriquet 26 September, 2017 at 03:13 Reply

    There are many very talented homosexuals (Turing, maybe Newton, Wilde, etc.). However a disproportionately, very high number of gays – especially men – are completely degenerate.

    The Alt-right needs all of the allies it can get. Those gays who are willing to rigorously conform to the traditional ideals of the West and keep their sexual proclivities strictly private should be tolerated if not welcome. It is up to the rest of us to vigilantly enforce social norms – something which several generations of the West have failed to do.

  15. iggyauggie 26 September, 2017 at 02:14 Reply

    We can use fagotry to divide the brown people from their masters. Everyone hates fags except white people. Im not saying there arent a ton of brown perverts but they stone fags to death in brown countries. I dont care what fags do but fagotry should never be promoted

  16. xyz234 26 September, 2017 at 01:56 Reply

    Perhaps the cause of the increase in homosexuality lately has something to do with the use of hormonal contraceptives. From this article published in American Thinker:

    …”It seems that while doing his graduate work in the early 1960s, he had to do research on lab rats, which were given the synthetic hormones used in the then new birth control pills. The results, he told me, showed that the grandchildren of these lab rats would have high rates of homosexual behaviors. From what he told me, the findings were suppressed. Apparently, the powers that be wanted “the pill” to pass muster. What happened to the second generation of rats that followed was of no consequence to them…”

    Read more:
    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/09/birth_control_and_homosexuality_unintended_consequences.html

  17. craicher 26 September, 2017 at 01:54 Reply

    Night of the Long Knives 2.0 and then to the closet where you perverts belong. Then there is the issue of sodomites lusting after little boys. Look it up, it seems they nearly all do. Putin was right, don’t let these sick bastards go around screaming about how great they are and their lifestyle. Just look at a homo parade. What is that all about? Just sick degenerates.

    Now imagine this, there are many normal men out there who never have sex or relationships because they can’t find a woman. How can they live without sex and relationships yet a man who claims to be attracted to another man’s anus cannot? He has to live out his sick perversion and we have to accept and celebrate it. What illogical nonsense!

  18. JosephtheGreat 26 September, 2017 at 01:03 Reply

    The potential problem with a culture of fanatical anti-homosexuality is the tendency for “witch hunts ” to arise. A culture of anti-homosexuality can lead to an environment of fear, paranoia and apprehension. You can’t tell who is a homosexual simply by looking at them and this makes it easy for rumors and accusations to spread. I mean how many times have you seen accusations made that Richard Spencer is a homosexual? You say something like “last stand of implicit whiteness” and people interpret it wrong and now you have a mob of zealots attacking you and spreading rumors. Feverish anti-homosexuality can be just as dangerous and just as toxic as the most liberal promotion of the degeneracy. It can lead to witch hunts, suppression of speech, damnation from mere accusations, apprehension and fear of even being around someone of the same sex in worry of rumors spreading, and guilt by even the most flimsiest association. It can even ruin healthy bonds and relationships between men if the homophobia is too prevalent.

    Obviously if someone is openly homosexual and promoting it (like Milo) then it’s easy to point that person out. The problem arises when the self-appointed “witch hunters” come out to try and “find” the “secret” homosexuals in order to have them purged.

  19. JosephtheGreat 26 September, 2017 at 00:07 Reply

    There are different ways of viewing homosexuality.

    The ones with the strongest negative reactions to homosexuals view it as a crime or a sin. Something done intentionally and with malice to cause harm. To them homosexuals are similar to murderers or rapists, people who should either be jailed or killed.

    Then there are those who view homosexuality as a mental illness or a character flaw. To these people homosexuals are similar to drug addicts or alcoholics; people who need help to be cured,but not so much condemned

    Then there are those who view homosexuality as a lifestyle or culture. These people have the most liberal view of it. While they may not agree with it or practice it themselves, they don’t really have a problem with people who do. To them homosexuality is like being vegan.

    Most people in the alt right tend to be either the first or the second, with a smaller handful of others sharing the third.

  20. James OMeara 25 September, 2017 at 22:00 Reply

    We must purge out movement of these high-IQ, high-disposable income degenerates. Our movement will triumph with its army of alcohol/opiod addicted rednecks. Thanks for the hint, Jews!

    • Jaded Diaspora 25 September, 2017 at 22:12 Reply

      James, you (and a handful of others) typify precisely the kind of bitchy back-biting that make homos unfit for the movement. Even your snarky response here drips with elitist condescension: “army of alcohol/opiod addicted rednecks”. You don’t love our people you love you own ego, and your own empty hedonism.

      • James OMeara 25 September, 2017 at 23:24 Reply

        I love White, Western, Aryan culture, so yeah, I guess that makes me an “elitist.” That’s the kind of Archie Bunkerism that lets the Jew walk all over you. After all, who needs culture, as long as you obey the commands of Jew Book.

        • Jaded Diaspora 25 September, 2017 at 23:50 Reply

          You are making my point for me. I say that you do not truly love our people, you respond: “I love our culture!” You’ve attempted to claim the mantle of intellectual aristocracy, yet you feel nothing of noblesse oblige:
          “Archie Bunkerism”
          “Jew Book”
          You love the trappings of the our high culture, but you cannot scoff at the plight of our opioid addicted brothers — call my defense of them “Archie Bunkerism” — and claim to love our people. And if you do not love our people “from the richest old Thane in the county to the poorest chained serf in the field”, then what are you even doing?

    • craicher 26 September, 2017 at 01:44 Reply

      And why do so many homos have high incomes? Because they band together like a pack of bloody vampires. You homos don’t give a toss about anything but your own vanity. And on drugs, where ever there are homos there are drugs and I mean heavy drugs. You are sick people, end of story.

    • TK 4 October, 2017 at 08:47 Reply

      Yeah, a “movement” of two aged queens who are terrified of even showing their faces is going to go places, lemme tell ya!

  21. Identitarian_Ethic 25 September, 2017 at 21:09 Reply

    The problem with this topic is that instead of encouraging rational discussion, it gives a free hand to dogmatic, anti-thinkers to organize a hateful bandwagon. As the discussion goes on, the comment section will slowly begin to resemble a chat room for ISIS.

    It seems counter productive to further divide our race into subgroups. It’s especially counter productive to further push some subgroups into the arms of the System. We want the various, traditionally pro-System groups to be at odds with each other, not united against us and with the System.

    If in our future ethnostate, our culture will provide the opportunity for every citizen fulfill a great purpose. It will be a culture that encourages honor, creativity, decency, and will greatly reward those that contribute to the nation. If gays are only about 2% of our population and there are no Jewish, anti-white interest groups to use them against their own race, nobody would even notice they existed.

    • Celestial Time 26 September, 2017 at 08:34 Reply

      Simple solution, really.

      Recognize real talent & the unrealized potential of individuals, and then give those people the tools they need to grow and realize their potential. The overwhelming majority of those who contribute to these types of discussions with nothing but vitriol and regurgitated talking points about the detrimental aspects of homosexuality are doing so because they have nothing of value to add to “the movement” other than a revolving door of vitriol and regurgitated talking points. Often times they are very insecure people who will just move all of their negativity to another target whenever the conversations changes.

      People that fight for and promote White Identity are VALUABLE. People that throw out roadblocks or go out of their way to attack those fighting and promoting White Identity are DETRIMENTAL.

    • Andrew Miller 26 September, 2017 at 13:59 Reply

      Well said. Vince Law’s behavior is disgraceful and he has delegitimized Spencer’s right to lead us, since it is Spencer who gave this hateful nutjob free rein of this important site.

    • Mac Tírè 26 September, 2017 at 01:50 Reply

      Miles Mathis? You’re joking. To him everything is a conspiracy. Every celebrity death a fake: Kennedy, Monroe, Elvis, Lennon, Manson Family victims, etc. 2 of his favorite sources of info are the Jew owned companies Wikipedia and 23 andme. He used info from the latter to show that ALL the NS leadership were jews. The guy is either a disinformation agent or a nut.

  22. James OMeara 25 September, 2017 at 20:33 Reply

    If you really want to help “the Movement,” why don’t you just fuck off and kill yourself? That way we won’t have to take care of you when the actual Revolution occurs.

  23. ContraButtusThexus 25 September, 2017 at 19:07 Reply

    When your Nazi overlords are fags or tolerate fags.

    THEN

    Read this and ponder upon that your dear leaders (may) wear diapers. If not now, then soon.

    If you are a man and sodomize your wife, you are worthy of a thousand deaths.

    Spencer was lithping positively over Milo in late summer of 2016. The love of faggotry was already a source of hate for a few good white men. Effeminate men of course like to talk about getting all gussied up in period costumes like, oh, I don’t know…

    SS UNIFORMS and KLAN HOODS!

    By the grace of God, Joseph turned away and chose the better portion.

    At times, the experience was stinging and fecal. In our wish to find a
    route into manhood, we become entrapped in a cruel return to the
    infantile and to the diaper. Almost two decades after stopping such
    behavior, the most vicious joke has been on me – as today I am sometimes
    forced into adult protective undergarments. The boy who wanted to be a
    man is stuck being a baby.

    http://josephsciambra.com/surviving-gaybarely/

  24. Nova Morium 25 September, 2017 at 18:38 Reply

    A Great Idea…….

    For an Alt-Right Rally Event…….

    Let’s buy a LOAD of cheap paperback Anti-White Jewish Pseudo-Intellectual Tomes……

    And burn them in a Bonfire……

    I’ll definitely donate to this……

    FACT……

  25. Nova Morium 25 September, 2017 at 18:28 Reply

    There is a Stark Difference……

    Between…….

    Wanting to be a Part of a White Brotherhood……..

    And wanting to Fornicate with another White Man………

    To my White Brothers in the Alt-Right…….

    Don’t let Anti-White Jewish Psychoanalysis……..

    Deter us in ANY WAY…….

    We should Love Each Other………

    FACT……

  26. Dillon Francis 25 September, 2017 at 18:20 Reply

    There are cocksuckers in the alt right? If one puts on his jew psychotherapist hat perhaps one can deduce that the fags who are attracted to the alt right are fetishizing the strong male figure. They all belong in a bog or an island of their own.

    • Clark Kent 25 September, 2017 at 18:59 Reply

      So the thesis of this book is that homosexuals played a significant role in European high-culture and helped defend Western Civilization in the past? Milo-esque characters essentially.

      This is an interesting thesis, and there might be some truth to it. But these kinds of high-quality queer characters seem to be exceedingly rare. And with what good Milo brings, he is no beacon of traditionalism or true masculinity, which currently is sorely lacking. Statistics show that modern gays are more likely to have psychological problems, drug addictions, suicide, etc, than the general populations. So it’s not as if we can make the blanket statement that gays in general are civilization builders because there has been a few exceptional gays in history. If you’ve been to a gay-pride parade, you’d know that this crowd ranges from posh muscle boys to extreme degenerates.

      Hitler and Mussollini essentially created the Second Rome, and I doubt any in their ranks were nancy-boy gays. Being gay is not a pre-requisite for being intellectual, cultured, fierce, or nationalist.

      If we come upon gays that have something to offer, I agree they could be treated on a case-by-case basis. Jack Donovan has done some excellent writing helping to promote a cultural shift towards masculinity and a radical rejection of the status quo. I’ve even seen him referenced by real modern day fascists. From reading this book’s summary it isn’t clear what specific role gays should play, or how strong the arguments are. I’ve shared my thoughts, and there may be a point to what you’re saying here, but I’d need to read the book to make any really strong opinions about this.

      • Dillon Francis 25 September, 2017 at 19:16 Reply

        You probably meant to comment on the link I left to your comment. Regardless, I don’t endorse the thesis of the book. I find it funny at best. The truth is that societies and civilizations were not built by psycho-sexual deviants aka queers. The author of that book is a ‘right wing’ homo hence why he wrote the book.

        • Clark Kent 25 September, 2017 at 19:23 Reply

          I read into your post and wrote you a book report.
          Overall I’m wary of gays, and I’m glad that is the general consensus.

  27. Nova Morium 25 September, 2017 at 17:35 Reply

    If a Jew asks me why I might dislike his Tribe……

    I’ll say…..

    “Because, you’re always in my F**king Space and Face and you won’t leave me the F**k Alone”

    Jewish Behavior is the Main Cause of Anti-Semitism…….

    We in the Alt-Right are Normal and Logical White Men…….

    We don’t want to be Ruled by a Non-White Ethnocentric and Tiny Tribal Minority……..

    And if Jews can’t understand that…….

    Then, they must have their own ‘Disease of the Mind’…….

    Namely, they want to be Hated, Despised and Attacked……..

    Because that Strengthens their Ethnocentric Identity and Tribal Insularity…….

  28. Ed Edgerton 25 September, 2017 at 17:00 Reply

    One does not necessarily avoid the HQ merely to avoid the accusation of latent homosexuality. There is also the issue of choosing our battles wisely. When ideological differences can divide people who would be allies on other more important issues, the path of quiet distancing is usually preferable to open confrontation.

    I agree about the constant use of inversion in our culture. It has been going on for as long as I can remember. The argument is usually along the lines of “You are only objecting because you are insecure.” What this boils down to is “weakness is strength, strength is weakness.”

    I remember an example from the movie Quo Vadis (1951), which I watched for the first time a few years ago. At one point the heroine says to the hero something like “A real man would not try to impose his will on his wife.” Someone recommended this movie on Counter-Currents, which figures I guess.

  29. Rob O'Brien 25 September, 2017 at 16:39 Reply

    A core issue with gays and other disfunctionals, is that disfunctional people almost always resist and agitate against normality, even if only unconsciously. A quick look through the ranks of any lefty organisation or campaign group will reveal fags, disabled, ethnically mixed or foreign etc etc. This holds in any walk of life. The unconscious urge to attack what is normal and therefore better makes them corrosive and swells the ranks of the enemy. It also precludes them from any place in a movement that is seeking to reset what is normal to wholesome, decent and functional norms.
    We can’t have the bumders in our ranks, they simple corrode what is around them whether they mean to or not, it’s in their nature.

      • Rob O'Brien 25 September, 2017 at 16:58 Reply

        Simply being nationalist or pro-white isn’t enough. We aren’t any more use than the wogs or semites if we are morally corrupt and broken. If our habits and behaviours are no better than the filth then we may as well pack it in now. This movement is about reclaiming our position as the best and carrying on with that, we were only ever at our best when our morals and habits were correct.
        Traditionalist, disciplined, healthy in our bodies and minds and building a better world through the application of our superiority both culturally and physically.
        Nobodies perfect, but we must always aim to be. A movement that aims for these things cannot hobble itself with such a corrosive handicap.

          • Rob O'Brien 25 September, 2017 at 17:13

            Utterly without substance in that case. Simply being white but debasing ourselves is pointless and even counterproductive

          • kaarekazai 25 September, 2017 at 18:18

            I agree 99% With you. But it is that 1% of autism and lack of realism/pragmatism that does nothing for the cause of white ethnic nationalism and does so much damage for the support of the wider movement.

            Yes. We can be pro normal hetro Family. Pro sound sexualmorality. Pro traditional gender roles. All of that is good. We can also be pushing back retarded pervers “fagotry” like pride Marches and promotion of genderbending and just all this metro-sexual degeneracy.

            BUT… Real gay persons are not gay because of culture. It is hormonal. We must not be so hung up on it that we can not accept ordinary well behaved gay people. We have to give them a chance or they will all flock to the degenerate left. And alle of their familiy and friends will side with them.

            We can promote dignified behaviour of gays but we must give them a minimum of respect by not making them a enemy for beeing their biological selves.

    • Oscar Madison 25 September, 2017 at 20:20 Reply

      Once the (((revolutionaries))) had isef up their blacks as spear points at white norms the decided on fahgs for theor next wave of revolution as EMJ tells us fahgs are perfect Lil consumers, slaves to their passions and easily lead and manipulated. Dont need lots of money since they wont raise large families etc etc etc.

      Fahgs are against reason and the order that is logos, im down with no “movement” that pretends there is a place for them other than the bog

  30. Peter 25 September, 2017 at 16:33 Reply

    Who here believes that gays “choose” to be homo rather than just being it? You could beat me to death and I wouldn´t choose it and neither does any other hetero man. So it´s innate, so what´s the point of making a big fuss about it, like, they decided to be homo?? Like, they are homo to make some point, or so….. W T F ??

    • JohnEngelman 5 October, 2017 at 12:42 Reply

      Since at least the first grade I have been aware of romantic feelings toward girls. These eventually segued to romantic feelings about women. I have never felt that way about boys and men.

  31. kaarekazai 25 September, 2017 at 16:14 Reply

    Listen the fuck up kids! Don’t you fucking understand that we are at the most a couple decades from all out RAHOWA or maybe even bloody white genocide waged against us. We can not dictate Peoples biology. Homosexuals are born that way. WE or nobody else can do anything about the sexual orientaion of these poeple. So quit being a fucking retard and grow up!

    I am older than most of you. I am straight as a ruler and I have 3 children. Exactly 3 more than most of you. And I am married and have ACTUAL SEX With a ACTUAL WOMAN. And I have actual military training.

    So for once sitt the fuck down and listen! If you have not noticed we are a SMALL sliver of a movment of a minority amongst our own people. If we do want to save the white race and to have back our ethnostates we must not make every other white person repulse us. The autistic hangup on JQ and GAYQ is lo IQ and just retarded. Fucking retardetd. Fucking get your act together! Don’t you se how fucking degenerate you look?

    YES. Gay sex is disgusting.
    YES. Trannies have nothing to do in the military.
    YES. Gays are not normal, hetrosexual families is the normal.
    YES. We shall have more white children…… Then go fucking get Your self some children!!!!!

    But so fucking what? We need to get millions and millions of People to be ready to supporte deportations and probably we have to fight street to street, city to city and country to country in Europe or state to state in the US to get the migrants back home and to get our ethnostates back for ourselves. We are not going to win this without massive popular support.

    Don’t you understand that gays first of all is born thant way and second of all they are your brotheres, sisters (lesbians), cousins, friends and classmaits? And they are white. Either you have to get over it or you will make this tiny movment in to a sect with no hope of ever being anything important. Normal People won’t have this constant autistic bickering about gays.

    The term Alt-Right makes one think of a broad alternative to both neo-conservatism, globalist liberal capitalism, christian conservative retardism and the failed totalitarian right of pre ww2. But just degenerating to some immature autistic blend of christinanretardism and 88ers are just not getting us anywhere.

    So don’t be retarded. Grow up and focus.

    I Write this as a friend. But I have been Alt-Right/New-Right or just traditionalist-ethnonationalist for 16 years now and I could have been father of many of you so look me in the eyes when I am talking to you! This is serious!

    • Peter 25 September, 2017 at 16:42 Reply

      Great, perfect rant… I subscribe 100% to it, sad that so few have it together like this.
      Now I really just need 1 thing exlpained: how come that a guy like Andrew Joyce whom I estimate very highly for his work on unveiling jewish subversion, comes up with so strange a view on the gay question??

      • kaarekazai 25 September, 2017 at 18:43 Reply

        Mkay.. 😀

        Work hard and grow a beard and you can be awesome to. 😀

        But..

        How often do you debate normies?

        How do you plan to redpill anyone on even the simple but essential demography issue and imigration?

        If you repuls people so fast that they never get to be redpilled on the white genocide they will never lift a finger to defend their race or even their nation. So you need to be a bit more smart.

        The anti jihadist is totally autistic about islam and can not lift their view abow the Islam Question. If the Alt-Right degenerates to a bunch of autists on JQ and GayQ it only looks stupid.

        Just because a lott of gays and jews is subversive anti white male assholes it does not mean that all our problems comes from this and that thay are a cohesive group.

    • Lothar von Trotha 27 September, 2017 at 14:36 Reply

      The problem with avoiding the JQ is that you end up like Jared Taylor, making perfectly valid points about race, for decades, and falling on deaf ears. Perhaps it would be possible to alleviate our ills by simply dealing with media control, banks, neocons etc., i.e. ripping out the roots of Jewish power without mentioning Jews, but to simply ignore the problem of Jewish control altogether makes for a nigh-impossible struggle. Hence why things like Hart-Celler or media narratives continue to bamboozle the government and the people, because they don’t understand where their information is coming from, who it is intended to benefit, how it is dishonest, etc. Trying to save our people without dealing with the Jews is like continuing to gorge on food while still starving because the hookworm remains feeding, unseen.

  32. Donaldberg Trumpstein 25 September, 2017 at 15:35 Reply

    Oy Vey fellow civic nationalists!
    Remember that there are patriotic LGBT community members like Blaire White and MILO! Notice I said LGBT only, not LGBTQIATYEVC+!
    I’m so rebellious I don’t even use a 20 character acronym!
    Conservatism is the new counter culture!

    • (((Shill))) 25 September, 2017 at 16:12 Reply

      Yep. Steven Crowder, a “true conservative,” sure does enjoy inviting Blaire, a tranny, onto his show. You know, it’s funny. He claims to be one of those people who loves to bring in and do shows with people of all sides of the political spectrum, but he has yet to do any form of communication with someone who is altright. Really makes ya think.

  33. Jamal Schwartz 25 September, 2017 at 15:14 Reply

    We probably all have a hierarchy of non whites whom we dislike the most. For me, living and working in London, it is a close call between blacks and muslims. However, even though I don’t want either of these groups near me, I don’t actually have any real hatred towards them as groups per se, just that they are detrimental to what my people can achieve if we banish them. Personally, the gays are probably the lowest down on the list.

    I think of them as like any who have a mental defect/deviation; it’s a pity that they are that way. I personally don’t see the advantage of being so scornful towards them. Treat them as though they have a psychological defect to be cured. I’m in the ‘tacitly accept them, but never allow it to be promoted’ camp.

  34. GENX140 25 September, 2017 at 14:49 Reply

    I’m 100% for white identity to succeed, however when I read comments like “fags to the ovens”, I feel like I’m surrounded by muzzies.
    There is no way white identity will become mainstream with such policies.
    If you find a way to “cure” homosexuality, go for it. Until then, learn to accept that its part of nature even if it turns you off.

  35. Jaded Diaspora 25 September, 2017 at 13:53 Reply

    If homosexuals are to be involved at all in the Alt-right at all, then they must:

    I. be celibate (due to biological implications that I’m sure Joyce will discuss)
    2. reject all trappings of “gay culture”
    3. support the traditional family
    3. forego internal politics (i.e. bitch-like behavior)
    4. forego leadership positions

    That is a tall order – one that very few homosexuals could comply with – but I think that this is necessary and the homosexual in our midst who repeatedly fails on one or more of these points should be declared anathema.

    • craicher 26 September, 2017 at 02:49 Reply

      If they did all of the above they would no longer be homosexuals but just men (or women) with perverted thoughts. Having a compulsive notion to fuck a goat would not make one a goat fucker. Like imagining or dreaming of murdering people does not make one a murderer.

      But yes, that is what we should demand of them and before too long something called a homosexual would be some strange alien notion that no one would know about. There would still be some sick people around but it would be so rare that near everyone would never know them or have them in their face. Add into that if you started to hang the child molesters this would take away the means by with the homosexuals reproduce, just like the vampire bites and innocent victim. We could in the future teach our children of this diabolical world that once existed before the Revolution.

    • JohnEngelman 5 October, 2017 at 12:39 Reply

      A movement becomes powerful when it restricts itself to one or two popular issues that can be propogated with fact based and logical arguments. The more issues a movement becomes involved with the weaker it becomes. Those who agree with some of the issues but not others leave the movement.

      The strongest issue for the alt right is immigration. Immigration depresses wages and depletes the environment. The immigration of inferior races raises the crime rate along with the cost of the criminal justice and welfare systems. These assertions can be demonstrated empirically without appealing to values and concerns many people do not have.

  36. Ethan Ancabourg 25 September, 2017 at 13:35 Reply

    I am GAY and proud! I’m just NOT a homosexual. It is high time we heterosexuals reclaim the term just like Arabs should assert themselves as Semites too. I’m NOT for the institution of Sharia solutions for “LGBTQ” persons or anyone. But there is no way around it being a homosexual or an unmarried childless heterosexual is inherently selfish. Which the Objectivist in me is okay with.Yet, short of cloning, the World needs happy, healthy, heterosexual couples to reproduce. Or “breeders” as militant homosexuals calls them. No new homosexuals can be minted without heterosexuals….

    • Peter 25 September, 2017 at 17:14 Reply

      omg omg omg… yes it´s true, the existence of homos equals our dieing out! It´s arithemtically obvious isn´t it… as practically everybody is a faggot rather than chasing pussies *role-eyes* (where do these commenters live…?? on what planet does this world of theirs exist…?? )

  37. Tay 25 September, 2017 at 13:18 Reply

    Problem I have with the anti-gay stuff is that it usually comes down to two things:

    -Homosexuality goes against the Christian religion.

    -Moar Whyte babies!

    The problem I have with the first one is obvious: I am not Christian. I don’t expect Joyce to make the argument as a fellow non-Christian, but we already have Matt Parrott in these comments accusing gays of “anti-Christian propaganda.” If that’s an expellable offense, he might as well be consistent and kick atheists like me out of the movement.

    Joyce then mentions “biological” issues of “demographics,” which I believe will come down to “homosexuals are a problem because they aren’t having White children.” But if they are a problem for that reasons, why then are single males like me not a problem? They rarely condemn the single males because they are simply too many of us to purge, but this kind of argument surely does repel many from the movement. And it leads directly to apologia for feminism. Has it escaped your attention that many of those most ardent about kicking gays out of the movement are women or their beta orbiters? “Moar whyte babies” leads directly to feminism because it encourages men to get married, which requires sweeping feminism, the divorce industry, and women’s whorish behavior under the rug, dismissing it as the actions of “a small minority,” which it’s not. If “I’m not attracted to women” is not an excuse not to get married, what is?

    Some will draw a distinction between life in the ideal future and life now, arguing that while MGTOW might be a good choice now but will be immoral in the ethnostate because we’ll need to be demographically healthy there. But simply do some math: if each married couple had 3 children, you don’t need everyone to get married to have a growing population. In Israel they have 3 children each, tolerating the small proportion of the population which is gay doesn’t stop that. For that matter, having a population of heterosexual celibate monks wouldn’t stop it either: see the past thousand years of European history.

    Now, one could argue for exclusion of homosexuals from the movement for other reasons: that their behavior is simply harmful, a mental illness which spreads disease and serves no useful function. But I would argue that we should not waste our political capital on this issue, given the ease at which it will be interpreted as an attempt to force Christianity on people or condemn single men.

    • Clark Kent 25 September, 2017 at 15:10 Reply

      “But if they are a problem for that reasons, why then are single males like me not a problem?”

      MGTOWs often do get criticized for being self-absorbed layabouts, but not as much because in theory they can empathize at least to a degree with the biological interest of self-preservation and creating a future for offspring. Monks of the past were recognized favourably because they were a part of the known ascetic tradition, which often promoted values of piety, self-discipline, and education. Monks of the past could also have state-sponsored roles like transcribing documents or becoming members of the formal priestly caste.

      Homosexuals offer none of the above listed benefits, and their disorganized aimless behaviour promotes the breakdown of the virtues necessary to maintain a society. I’m sure there are examples of honourable faggots… I enjoy the writings of Oscar Wilde for example. But in serious times it’s best not to have the circus folk making a mockery of the public agenda.

      • (((Shill))) 25 September, 2017 at 18:25 Reply

        Many of the athiests I’ve met physically and on the internet are more anti-christian than many of the gays out there. I’m sure we all remember the days when left-wing New Atheism held a monopoly on youtube and many other parts of the internet. I’m getting a sense of fedora neckbeardism with this one.

    • Peter 25 September, 2017 at 17:01 Reply

      How come that an on-the-fly comment from a random commenter is vastly more intelligent than a calmly composed article of a usually excellent man like Andrew Joyce?? Bizarro-world… I don´t get it…

    • JosephtheGreat 26 September, 2017 at 00:21 Reply

      Single men are considered a problem. You probably haven’t notice this because you’re anonymous. But if you were to became any kind of leader or known person in the alt right and you are single male older than 30 with no wife or kids or even a girlfriend people will bring that up and it would become an issue for you.

  38. Nick Brown 25 September, 2017 at 12:41 Reply

    Those that defend this degeneracy I ask one thing. Are having openly homosexual males a net positive or negative to the movement? There is only one answer when looked at from just a practical standpoint. We stand for tradition and traditional family structures. Homosexuality is destructive to those ends. Period.

    • StraitlacedMissouri 27 September, 2017 at 13:28 Reply

      Thank you… WTH are they going to do aside from try to lead other young men and women that we have raised off into some sick lifestyle that will dead end our lines?!!

    • JohnEngelman 5 October, 2017 at 12:31 Reply

      Homosexuals are nor responsible for the fact that a growing percentage of heterosexuals do not get married or stay married to the co-parents of their children. Children who are not raised by their biological parents living together in matrimony tend to have many more problems in life.

      The only strong opinion I have about homosexuality is that I am glad I am not that way.

  39. -- 25 September, 2017 at 11:59 Reply

    It’s unfortunate because many homosexuals, being lifelong misfits and, after all, white men able to think logically, become race realists and Jew realists. So they are allies in a narrow sense. A couple around the edges, who kept quiet about their disorder, would not be a major problem. But since the (((cult marxists))) are forcing us to deal directly with aberrant lifestyles, and are also creating untold numbers of artificial homosexuals, a line must be drawn.

  40. Halford Mackinder 25 September, 2017 at 11:55 Reply

    There’s a question about this? Homosexuality belongs in one of two places. In the closet, or in a hole in the ground. If you can’t keep it in one place, society should make sure to put it in the other.

  41. Travis LeBlanc 25 September, 2017 at 11:53 Reply

    Is there any evidence that anyone’s homosexuality has ever adversely affected the movement? What episodes can you point to where someone being gay has caused problems for the movement?

    If you can not point to any specific episodes, then yes, people are entirely within their rights to question your motives up to and including you being a closet fag. Why worry about theoretical problems that may or may not arise in the future when we have real problems requiring immediate attention? Assuming that you are not a huge closet fag, that is? Why DOES that subject cross your mind if it has never been an issue in the past?

    Getting involved in white nationalism is high risk behavior so it stands to reason that a disproportionate numbers of the people in it are going to be high risk personalities. I would not be surprised in the slightest if many well-respected Alt Right personalities have some major skeletons in their closet. Taking a hardline stance like this sets the movement to be rocked by scandal after scandal after scandal.
    I’m just being realistic.

    Another thing is that, the average person is more degenerate and has more secrets than people care to admit. Blame the Jews all you want for degeneracy but we are the race that produced the Marquis de Sade, Lord Byron, and Oscar Wilde.
    There will always be SOME degeneracy. There will always be some people cheating on their spouses, there will always be some demand from prostitutes, and there will always be some fags floating around.

      • Peter 25 September, 2017 at 17:39 Reply

        omg yes Greg Johnson is the worst ! He does so much more harm than good. Oh yes ! Aren´t we lucky to know that so we can avoid him and purge him. Then our situation will be better.

      • Identitarian_Ethic 25 September, 2017 at 20:57 Reply

        Greg Johnson does seem to be quite problematic, but blaming his issues on his alleged sexuality isn’t a good excuse. What about all of the people with similar problems that are heterosexual? What’s their excuse? There are plenty of toxic people in our movement and almost zero homosexuals.

    • -- 25 September, 2017 at 12:21 Reply

      The reason a line must be drawn is that homosexuality (etc) is epidemic today due to Jewish social engineering. If this was an age in which homosexuality, as both a practice and a lifestyle, was hardly known to normal people, a couple of fags here or there would hardly be worth mentioning. The danger is that the alt-right, just by virtue of being a fledgling movement needing to fill ranks, will become a hangout for all the tortured deviants created by modern Weimar culture.

      • Lothar von Trotha 27 September, 2017 at 14:44 Reply

        I think this is the bulk of the issue right now. Even before the civil rights movement, blacks were a problem, but they were incited and weaponized and have been a much bigger problem ever since. Homosexuality has certain problems for society by its very essence, but most of the damage it’s currently doing is because of the politicization and weaponization of it as yet another “oppressed group” being used to undermine traditional pillars of society. Gays had a subversive character before the “sexologists” and sexual revolutions came, but that character has intensified and become explicitly hostile to “heteronormativity,” as they call it, since then. The bare minimum that should be done regarding gays is to turn that around to where the family, heterosexuality etc. are upheld as the standard and the source of societal pride, with some sort of moral fortification that prevents snark and potshots from subverting that standard. That last part has always been tricky in the kind of world where a Lenny Bruce can come along and make little jabs, ending up with the blatant sort of nation-wrecking of Sarah Silverman or Amy Schumer. Other than “Kill ’em all!” or similar over-the-top solutions, we haven’t done a great job of coming up with solutions to keep certain things like traditional values as sacred and “un-underminable.”

    • Joseph Curwen 25 September, 2017 at 13:59 Reply

      Frank Collin: fag, jew and a pederast.

      Eustace Mullins: fag and pederast.

      Matt Koehl: fag and pederast.

      Ben Klassen: fag, possibly jewish and a pederast.

      Do you want more examples? I have a lot more.

      By the way, your raimbow is showing, I suggest sites Huffington Post and Cosmo for your next comments.

      • Identitarian_Ethic 26 September, 2017 at 10:20 Reply

        None of those people were ever part of our movement, and I can’t believe you even tried to include Frank Collin. Over half are now dead and gone.

        We are an entirely new movement than whatever that “movement” of the old days was. This movement is real.

  42. genocidal_maniac 25 September, 2017 at 11:48 Reply

    Okay this article is disappointing.

    Because it is not an article about homosexuals. It is an article about Jews.

    Homosexuality is something that is unknowable to a degree. I believe that people choose to be homosexual. I think it really says something about a person who is homosexual. He is who he is. He is also a damaged person who isn’t to be fully trusted.

  43. Pedro Mitre 25 September, 2017 at 11:46 Reply

    …a small but noisy number of homosexuals in corners of the Far Right, not just in the United States, but elsewhere.

    YES !

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4e7a7b05dfd9171bee372372db9d7144b99e58953c8657f9c4089f4d4b60c5af.jpg
    “The madame and her powerful gay counselor”

    Phillippot is gone, but now…

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c792fc3810d8f2484966e4e9d87d210446ba0e9be0791ebbd0cd9cc02e86b334.jpg
    “The old man and his political lesbian partner ”

  44. William Krapek 25 September, 2017 at 11:32 Reply

    Oh well. Sayonara alt-right. I did try. I desperately needed you and the gay community to stop acting like insane maniacs and work together and fight for the survival of Western Civilization.

    But I see the handwriting on the wall. DACA will pass. The Mexicans and Muslims the flood in. All is lost.

    Christ Almighty. I have nowhere to turn. What did I do to deserve being burdened with such idiots?

  45. Pedro Mitre 25 September, 2017 at 11:32 Reply

    When I knew the “alt-right” about 2 years ago, I thought I had finally found what I have been waiting for so long. A movement that understands that the most important thing is all whites coming together to protect their valuable genetic heritage. The name “hipster racist” would be an honor.
    But now I’ve seen that Richard’s “movement” is a new package for the same product. The old stormfront.com now is altright.com ! The “white trash” have now only a new adress. Matt Parrot is here to celebrate ;))
    Fortunately, really different things are occurring. Great men like Jared Taylor, Peter Brimelow, Greg Johnson or Steve Sailer, will continue to produce valuable content, regardless of the name “alt-right”.

  46. reverend leo 25 September, 2017 at 09:11 Reply

    Have you looked at the work of E Michael Jones? Libido Dominandi particularly. YouTube on Cincinnati Ballet is a good intro.

  47. Joseph Curwen 25 September, 2017 at 09:07 Reply

    This is one of the lines that White Nationalists should write on stone: NO FAGS ALLOWED. Period. End of story. Male/female homosexuality is both a mental problem and a perversion and thus should not be promoted nor tolerated.

    A fag/dyke (does matter if he/she ‘sympathize’ with White Nationalism) will always be a fag/dyke first, siding with the enemy and against their racial brothers and sisters when they have to choose between his race and his perversion. Just look at the uebermanly (LOL) faggot Donovan who after years promoting himself and his stupid and homoerotic ideas (and selling his books to gullible betas looking for a ‘male’ role model) between the White Nationalist movement he denounced the movement as a “bunch of white trash and losers”.

    • Andrew Miller 25 September, 2017 at 09:59 Reply

      When so many WNs engage in this hateful, unnuanced rhetoric towards homosexuals, it’s no surprise that many homosexuals choose self-preservation.

      A mature understanding of homosexuality requires some degree of reciprocity. Homosexuals should be willing to “keep it on the low,” as the negros say. They must be discreet and understand that they will never be leaders in the movement.

      Heterosexuals, in turn, must offer basic respect for the dignity of homosexuals: a respect that is sorely lacking in your comment.

      If your main goal is to solipsistically indulge your sadistic hatred towards homosexuals, then you’re doing well. But if your goal is to further white racial interests, then it is extremely counterproductive to issue a blanket condemnation of a diverse group, many of whom would be more than willing to use their surplus time and money to put their race ahead of their desires as long as they were offered a minimal amount of respect and tolerance in return.

          • Brutus of troy 26 September, 2017 at 15:59

            Gay Mafia! I’ll say something else… when my channel got shut down I complained to Millennial woes about it and he laughed at me and said there is no gay mafia…
            then…
            when he was asking who wanted to be interviewed for millenial yule he told me he cant interview me because i made fun of his faggot friend Greg.
            That’s how this group dynamic works….
            If you have a protected minority they will be at the top of the hierarchy and they will push those who oppose them to the side….
            its amazing this has to be pointed out to a movement which bases itself on an understanding of group dynamics

          • Vincent Law 26 September, 2017 at 16:46

            gays trade sexual favors for advancement at the expense of heteros who are left out. hence the gay mafia, yes.

      • Joseph Curwen 25 September, 2017 at 10:47 Reply

        First, you are taking for granted the basic premise of the enemy’s Gender Theory, that is that homosexuality is just a matter of choice, as normal as choosing vanilla icecream over chocolate icecream. However, it is not, homosexuality (both male and female) is both a mental problem and a perversion.

        Second, you are taking for granted that somehow without homosexuals the ‘movement’ couldn’t progress and make achievements. Since when we need homosexuals to secure the existence of our people and a future for white children? how many homos are fighting for the movement? how many homos have fight for the movement?

        Third, you are asking for ‘tolerance’ for mental problems and perversions. Why should we tolerate mental problems and perversions? So then we should participate in some’Pride’ March then because we are ‘intolerant’? We should tolerate then men putting false breasts, cutting their dicks off and dressing like women?? We should tolerate women who cut their breasts off and dress like men??

        Fourth, are ‘White Nationalist fags/dykes’ [sic] using their free time and money in order to secure the existence of our people and a future for white children? Where? How? show me at least one example of this illustrious fags/dykes working for our cause.

        You are in the wrong place, you should join some NGO who fights for the rights of the opressed and victimized LBGTIZLKUT and against the evil whiteheteropatriarchcisgender people. WN is not a place for you faggot.

      • Johnny Fascismo 25 September, 2017 at 12:11 Reply

        “it’s no surprise that many homosexuals choose self-preservation.”

        And thats the crux of the issue. They put their degenerate sexual vices at the centrepoint of their personal identity. Their always faggots first. Their a subversive element in our society who undermine the traditional family unit and make a mockery of our religious beliefs. If anything the Alt-Right is too lenient on the homo question.

        • John Cross 26 September, 2017 at 02:59 Reply

          And why do you think that is? Because we reject them, regardless of them being decent people who could contribute or not. So they become nihilistic, hate themselves, and then become more degenerate. If they are pro-traditionalism, then they are more likely to not engage in degeneracy and promiscuity. You can’t claim that you love your group imo, and then reject some of them for having a defect that they can’t help.

          I don’t think homosexuality should be celebrated in the movement, and definitely not promoted in any way, but I don’t think someone’s sexuality should be something we focus on. Andrew Joyce is a catholic, so I think he’s likely more motivated by his religious beliefs too.

          • Johnny Fascismo 26 September, 2017 at 03:11

            “You can’t claim that you love your group imo, and then reject some of them for having a defect that they can’t help.”

            Nonsense. You might love your garden, but you still pull out the weeds and other undesirable eyesores.

          • John Cross 26 September, 2017 at 03:19

            I’m talking about something they can’t help, I’m all for rejecting people for things they can help, but do anyway. I’m a bit split on this issue though anyway, I think we need to have a measured view and approach to it though. There’s no way to cure homosexuality as of yet, and condemning people harshly for something that they were born with, that doesn’t directly harm others doesn’t sit too well with me.

          • Johnny Fascismo 26 September, 2017 at 03:47

            It’s a negative element in the culture and drags the rest of the group through the mud when it is permitted and even celebrated. They should keep it in the closet or they don’t get a job and become social pariahs. I’m not saying we have blackshirts kicking in the doors of suspected homos and putting them to the the firing squad, but gay pride parades shouldn’t be a thing that happens in any healthy society. Public acts of indecency should be punished. This is how homo’s were handeled for centuries and it worked.

            The whole “they can’t help it” argument is weak to me. Alcoholism is also often genetic. You don’t see Alcoholics having pride parades, and those who abuse alcohol in a public space get drunk tanked. Control your urges, or there are consequences for immoral and irresponsible behaviour. This is how a civilized society maintains civility. Don’t like it? Move to the woods.

          • BWV 28 September, 2017 at 15:49

            Yeah, they can “help it.”

            It is a choice they make, usually based on faulty upbringing. Even if they cannot find their way back to being normal – they can recognize the destructive nature of homosexuality and choose celibacy.

      • (((Shill))) 25 September, 2017 at 16:09 Reply

        “Sadistic hatred towards homosexuals” That’s a bold statement. People here are disgusted by the extreme degeneracy openly conducted by gays in our current society. We see the effect they have. Yeah I’m sure there are exceptions to the rule, but we don’t see any real benefit to having them in society. They’re very manipulative and are just as destructive as some (((other people))) we know. Some here hate gays, sure, but many are simply wary of the effect they have when given power. People don’t hate someone for no reason. Hatred is bred through experiences.

      • Sam Cru 26 September, 2017 at 14:21 Reply

        If I find out that you’re a homo then you aren’t “keeping it on the low”. You want flamboyancy just like every other flaming homo out there.

        “…many of whom would be more than willing to use their surplus time and money to put their race ahead of their desires…” If you put your race ahead of your desires then you wouldn’t be a homo. Homos don’t have babies.

      • Veruschka 30 September, 2017 at 20:29 Reply

        I agree. There have always been, and always will be, men and women who are homosexually inclined. Some have even made invaluable contributions to Western civilisation.

        I also agree with the leadership/spokesman/movement representative exclusion.

        To actively bar this small fraction of the population in the AR or even a future ethnostate requires a delusional understanding of human nature.

        A “down-low” policy and an universal understanding that they do fall short of the ideal so keep yourself to yourself in this regard, would ensure they behave discreetly and with outward dignity, and without expressed “pride” in their defect because, hey, shit happens and the fairer sex does not excite them for whatever reason.

        Otherwise, what, will there be a “purge” and a Gestapo for queers idk.

    • Paul Rain 25 September, 2017 at 12:11 Reply

      Female homosexuality is irrelevant, like all professed female sexuality. Corrective rape is the only African technology that works.

    • Tom Rogers 1 October, 2017 at 14:44 Reply

      On this point, I would concur. Homosexuals, like women, cannot be considered politically reliable. This can and will result in dilemmas for us: some individual homosexuals, like some individual women, have exceptional abilities and can be an asset, but in my view, they should all be regarded with caution and the exceptions – if any – should be few and far between.

      What’s really happening here is that we are going through that inevitable and very painful process of re-learning the old wisdom that our boomer parents rejected and abandoned and, as youths under their influence, that we dismissed as mere bigotry. It’s a humiliating swim back to the Truth through cold waters.

  48. Matt Parrott 25 September, 2017 at 09:05 Reply

    My eternal instinct to empathize and attempt to be an altruist has pulled me over the years to try to find some way to excuse the homosexual nationalist. I ask myself, “What if I were a sexual queer? Would I not still be a sincere nationalist despite that?”

    I’ve tried to construct this artifice of there being the “good ones” and the “bad ones.”

    Every time, I’ve been made an ass of as they repeatedly prove to be more of a self-amused and ambitious tightly wound clique of men who vehemently pursue a fixed anti-Christian, anti-family agenda than what I would like to imagine; decent men struggling with a specific incurable psychopathology. Part of it is perhaps on account of what draws homosexuals into nationalism and what that entails for their priorities. For them, it’s an attractive opportunity to gentrify their social and sexual circles, to revive implicitly white and rigorously elitist nineties buggery against a push for diversity, feminism, and social egalitarianism leveling gay subcultures.

    I suppose that theoretically there could be some who genuinely belong in our movement. But most of them still belong in a bog.

    • Myghal Josep 25 September, 2017 at 12:31 Reply

      Unfortunately I think there is an inherent contradiction in the hypothetical question “What if I were mentally ill, what would I think then?”. Perhaps the question of whether or not a pathological defect in ones innate desires perforce alters ones values, prevents one from knowing good, and then upholding good, isn’t definitively settled, but it sure doesn’t look good from where I’m standing. And besides, a vanguard like the alt-right doesn’t really need pure quantity, it needs quality. Let the scum clog up and incapacitate the left that it is always drawn to.

    • Dragdar 26 September, 2017 at 06:32 Reply

      It’s is thoroughly diabolical is what it is. NO QUARTER TO BE GIVEN, YOU WILL BE GIVEN NONE!

      Not only the total expulsion of sodomy is necessary but also the complete and total
      annihilation of pornographic and immodest material and media. No trousers and other men’s clothing on women, no prostitute clothing and certainly men older than 12 years should not to be seen wearing shorts and tshirts as they have stepped into adulthood. You think this is strict? It’s in accord with Natural Law is what is is. You think Sharia is barbaric, sure it is, but it’s also the ape of the real thing as it proceeds from contempt, crassness, envy and brutality.

      Sodomy comes after idolatry, adultery, sensuality and gluttony of every sort. It’s a punishment, the devil dims their intelligence to such an extent they are worse than brute beasts.
      The Black race ought not to be considered subhuman merely because its appearance is less appealing, that is a demand of sanity first and foremost, but a sodomite is easily MANIFESTLY worse than a beast and a predator of the innocent. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/59c5a672fe8359a7b6d2c1155388c266794d97408089a721b1d44397059a93a0.png

  49. Vincent Law 25 September, 2017 at 08:54 Reply

    Thank you for finally sticking it to the faggots, Andrew. Many of us are nauseated and repulsed by them and have had to bite our tongues for too long. I look forward to Part 2.

    • Andrew Miller 25 September, 2017 at 10:02 Reply

      Hiring someone as immature as you was unbelievably foolish on Richard’s part. If he doesn’t fire you immediately, he will permanently disqualify himself as a legitimate leader in our movement.

      • Crud Bonemeal 25 September, 2017 at 18:07 Reply

        Studies show that disgust is the most conservative emotion

        And it is strongly correlated to anti-immigrant sentiments

        • GENX140 25 September, 2017 at 19:02 Reply

          If i imagine most people naked, having sex, I find them disgusting also, but I don’t want them sent into an oven. As for immigrants, I don’t want them gone because of disgust, but because I want my race to survive. I thought this was meant to be an intellectual debate, based on reason, not some silly emotions. Why not ban ugly people too?

    • StraitlacedMissouri 27 September, 2017 at 13:14 Reply

      Why can’t they just f off?! Don’t they have 6,000,000 people that love and cater to them. They have to be in everything and force everyone to be cool with poop pushing. They make me want to hurl!

    • JohnEngelman 5 October, 2017 at 12:18 Reply

      I have always felt a visceral disgust with homosexuality. Nevertheless, I see that feeling as a fact about me, rather than a truth about the universe.

      I have had friends who were homosexuals. They had other characteristics I find attractive in men: they were intelligent, sensitive and cultivated. The friendships lasted because there were topics we did not discuss.

      When I told a homosexual friend, “I don’t mind saying this. I am glad I am not a homosexual,”

      He replied, “I am glad too. As sensitive as you are (he probably meant psychologically vulnerable) it would really be a problem.”

      When a homosexual became a little too friendly to me in a bar I made a joke of it and said, “You are too young and pretty for an old cuss like me. Go to a bar where men like you turn heads.”