Perspective

The Alt-Right and the Homosexual Question — Part 3

One might be tempted to dismiss the position of Counter-Currents on the homosexual question as merely wrong-headed, ill-informed, or even amateurish. However, I believe that many of the writers there are intelligent, historiographically literate, and are probably aware that they are producing an argument with an agenda attached.

Also read: Part 1; Part 2.


Jewish Promotion of Homosexuality among non-Jews

On a related note, the accusation that hostility to homosexuality is Jewish may be regarded as a passive, or barely concealed, attack on Christianity. Again, this is not surprising in itself, but it is incongruous in the context of apparent arguments being made in favor of movement unity. Essentially, the argument put forth by Johnson is that it is wrong to critique homosexuals because that is bad for movement unity, when in fact the apologetic itself purposefully attacks Christians (a very numerically substantial element of our movement) as ‘Jewish.’ In such a manner, our erstwhile architects of unity are in fact the cause of disunity, not merely by their very presence but by the divisive nature of their own arguments. Given what we have discussed thus far, it should be clear that if we had to choose between Christians and pseudo-pagan homosexuals, our movement would be numerically, demographically, tactically, socially, and intellectually enriched by choosing the former over the latter.

We should also consider modern Jewish attitudes, and what Jews are promoting to us today, rather than what they preached to themselves thousands of years ago. It goes without saying that a people engaged in ethnic warfare would arm itself with the best tools possible while simultaneously weakening the opposing tribe. Jews chose to arm themselves with social mores designed to boost their numbers, but what they did preach to their opponents? Until the late 19th century the Jewish interaction with European culture was more or less limited to financial matters. This changed with the intrusion of the Jews into the mass media and from there the further intrusion into almost every arm of culture. If culture is understood as the way in which a nation speaks to itself about itself, then one must understand that the presence of an alien body in this process can be devastating. The Jews posed themselves as French, German, British, etc and began to speak to these peoples, not as Jews, but as one of their own. The cultural conversation thus took on a different light altogether, and with different end goals. Without realizing it, these nations were no longer speaking to themselves about themselves, but were instead being fed fabrications by outsiders — both about themselves and about the world. A nation’s dreams and aspirations became its nightmares and self-recriminations. A nation that once talked to itself about its future now talked to itself incessantly about its putatively guilty past.

As Jews flooded the medical and scientific professions in the late 19th century, they brought with them the desire to interrupt the European self-conversation about race, biology, and related subjects. One of these was homosexuality. In this area, and for the last century or more, Jewish activists have ‘distinguished’ themselves by normalizing and promoting homosexuality, and by campaigning for cultural and legal changes on behalf of homosexuals. Many of these Jewish activists originated in orthodox communities where homosexuality was outlawed, but they nevertheless preached toleration of homosexuality to non-Jews. Albert Moll (1862–1939), who would go on to be “a great influence on Freud,”1 came from a Polish Jewish merchant family and “belonged to the Jewish religious community.”2 Typical of his ethno-religious group, Moll frequently utilized his position within the field of medical psychology to form an oppositional bloc against prevailing opinions in nineteenth — and early twentieth-century non-Jewish society. Indeed, large numbers of Jews tactically ambushed several medical disciplines during this period for precisely this reason. Historian Elena Macini writes that “Jews flooded medicine at this time not only for social standing but also in an era that witnessed the efflorescence of race science, for the opportunity of self-representation. … The presence of Jews in the medical sector in general, and in race science in particular, allowed them to assert Jewish equality and very often moral superiority.”3 With Berlin as the center of German medicine, and Jews comprising one-third of doctors in the city,4 the domination and re-orientation of entire disciplines was not only feasible but disturbingly easy.

A key aspect of advocating for Jewish equality and moral superiority was the Jewish advocacy of social, racial and religious pluralism — which came to include ‘sexual pluralism.’ This position often came into conflict with non-Jewish efforts to promote Nationalism, particularly ethnically-based Nationalism, and corresponding efforts to confront social and cultural decay. A universal theme in Albert Moll’s works were arguments against German attempts to reckon with late Imperial and Weimar-era social and biological degeneration via eugenic programs. For example, in his Handbuch der Sexualwissenschaften (1911) Moll expressed the hope that mooted plans for sterilization programs would “not be implemented and that our race-improvers do not get too much influence on our legislation.” When German science in the late 1920s became concerned with degeneration and decline, gravitating even further towards eugenics, Moll preceded Boas in rejecting the findings of behavior genetics, arguing that “the fact we find so many valuable people, despite the hereditary burden, is caused by regeneration in countless cases. …  We can hardly ever say something about the condition of offspring with any certainty at all.” Moll was, therefore, the quintessential Jewish physician: political and ethnic interests were never far from his dubious practice of medicine.

Moll worked tirelessly to persuade leading non-Jewish scholars like Richard von Krafft-Ebing to reject the idea that sexual abnormality was the result of biological and psychological disorder. In Freud: Biologist of the Mind, Frank J. Sulloway writes that “Krafft-Ebing’s decision around the turn of the century to separate the doctrine of degeneration from the theory of homosexuality was in response to the thinking of his younger and more critical colleague Moll.”5 However, there is a significant reason to doubt the validity of Krafft-Ebing’s personal change of perspective given that the most pertinent, later, editions of his Psychopathia Sexualis that showcased this change were in fact edited by none other than Moll himself.

Moll’s work centered on the argument that there were alternative, valid, “identities,” and as such, he argued that homosexuality was a “valid sexual identity.”6 Whereas earlier non-Jewish psychiatrists observed “unsavory and often contemptible personal characteristics” among sexual inverts (including their tendency to be liars, their moodiness, love of gossip, and vanity and envy), Moll argued instead that “homosexual men were not corrupt, but merely womanish,”7 comprising a kind of “third sex” — a theory that would later be advanced much further by co-ethnic Magnus Hirschfeld. In Sex, Freedom and Power in Imperial Germany, 1880–1914, E.R. Dickson remarks that Moll’s theories were popularized and given substantial sympathetic coverage in Germany by the predominantly Jewish Social Democratic press during the trial of Oscar Wilde in England in 1895 (RE. the contemporary scene, see my Occidental Observer colleague Brenton Sanderson’s “Jewish media influence as decisive in creating a positive public culture of homosexuality“). Dickson writes that “public policy towards homosexuality was also one more issue Social Democrats could use to point to the hypocrisy of bourgeois sexual mores and to elaborate on their own naturalist alternative. Social Democrat Eduard Bernstein, for example, did precisely that in his reporting for German audiences on the Wilde case in London (where he was living as a journalist).”8

Even more radical than Moll was Magnus Hirschfeld (1868–1935). Like Moll, Hirschfeld came from a family of Jewish merchants and, also like Moll, he advanced theories of social and sexual behavior amounting to “the existence of fundamental irreducible sameness in human beings.”9 Unsurprisingly, Elena Macini writes that Hirschfeld’s Jewishness was “a socially and politically determinant aspect of his life.”10 A common feature of his work was the hatred he had for Christianity — a hatred both Jewish and homosexual in origin. Indeed, his critique of that religion resembled in many respects that concocted by Freud. To Hirschfeld, Christianity was “essentially sadomasochistic, delighting in the pain of ascetic self-denial.”11 Western Civilization had thus been “in the grip of anti-hedonist exaggerations for two thousand years,” thereby committing “psychic self-mutilation.”12 It was, therefore, Western society, rather than homosexuals and other outsiders, that was sick and degenerate, and Hirschfeld’s prescribed ‘cure’ was one destined to be demographically destructive — the promotion of sexual hedonism and the acceptance of a wide array of “identities” and “sexualities.”

Hirschfeld, described by Mancini as “cosmopolitan to the core,” essentially created the first homosexual “communities,” beginning in Berlin where the Hebrew “transvestite” (a term he coined) was known as “Aunt Magnesia” by the city’s perverts. Hirschfeld organized homosexuals, encouraging them to openly flaunt their predilections and to get involved in the growing campaign for “emancipation” that was developing under the auspices of the Scientific Humanitarian Committee which he had formed in 1897. Hirschfeld pioneered modern Social Justice Warrior tactics by urging celebrities and high-profile politicians to add their names in support of the campaign for “sexual equality.” Hirschfeld and his protégés also produced a vast number of books, manuscripts, papers, and pamphlets concerning sexuality, transvestitism, “transgenderism” (another Hirschfeld term) and fetishes. Hirschfeld’s Institute for Sexual Science (Institut füer Sexualwissenschaft) was the world’s first gender identity clinic and his staff performed the first known transsexual surgeries. Through the Institute for Sexual Science which he founded in 1919, Hirschfeld also documented thousands of cases of sexual inversion and further bolstered his theory of the “Third Sex.”

Despite the bankruptcy of his science, the dramatic success of the Committee at mobilizing large sectors of German and European society on behalf of homosexuals was due to Hirschfeld’s personality. Like Moll, he was an aggressive and relentless agitator. Respecting few social codes, he was the darling of the Social Democrats and the reviled enemy of Weimar conservatives (Hitler referred to Hirschfeld as “the most dangerous Jew in Germany”). By the end of the 1920s, Hirschfeld’s activism meant that Weimar Germany saw homosexuality less as a medical disorder and sign of degeneration than as a major cause célèbre. Hirschfeld’s perverse bonanza came to an end in 1933 when on May 6th Nationalist German student organizations and columns of the Hitler Youth attacked the Institute for Sexual Science. The Institute library was liquidated and its contents used in a book burning on May 10. The youths also printed and disseminated posters bearing Hirschfeld’s face complete with the caption: “Protector and Promoter of pathological sexual aberrations, also in his physical appearance probably the most disgusting of all Jewish monsters.” Hirschfeld himself had been on an international speaking tour since 1931. He lived in exile in France until he died of a heart attack in 1935. But unfortunately, this individual enjoyed significant post-humous success. In terms of theory, Hirschfeld had “subverted the notion that romantic love should be orientated toward reproduction,” arguing instead for the acceptance of homosexual lifestyles and hedonistic, non-reproductive, sexual relations in general.13

Hirschfeld’s use of the weaponized concept of love was itself a legacy of Hirschfeld’s “scientific mentor” and co-ethnic Iwan Bloch (1872–1922). Like Moll and Hirschfeld, Bloch had no background in zoology, evolutionary studies or animal behavior. Trained as a dermatologist, Bloch was also attracted to the cause of “sexual minorities” and became an ardent campaigner on their behalf. He joined with Moll and Hirschfeld in attacking the non-Jewish consensus that sexual inversion was pathological and coined the term sexualwissenschaft or sexology to give academic and medical respectability to what was essentially a Jewish intellectual reaction against non-Jewish efforts to categorize harmful social and sexual pathologies. He was also a keen promoter of perversion and pornography. He was the “discoverer” of the Marquis de Sade’s manuscript of The 120 Days of Sodom, which had been believed to be lost, and published it under the pseudonym Eugène Dühren in 1904. In 1899 he had published Marquis de Sade: His Life and Works under the same pseudonym. In 1906 he wrote The Sexual Life of Our Time in its Relations to Modern Civilization, for which he gained the praise of Sigmund Freud for attacking “bourgeois” (non-Jewish) sexual mores, attacking the perception of sexual inverts as pathological, and calling for Europeans to adopt a more pluralistic and hedonistic sexual life.

By the time Moll, Hirschfeld and Bloch had essentially co-opted and redirected the study of human sexual behavior, Jews were flooding the new “discipline” in increasing numbers. Albert Eulenberg (1840–1917), with a background in neurology and electrotherapy, began styling himself a sexologist. With Bloch and Max Marcuse (1877–1963) he co-edited the Zeitschrift fur Sexualwissenschaft  (Journal for Sexology) and with Hirschfeld, he co-founded the Berlin Society for Sexual Science and Eugenics. The eugenics aspect of the society’s name was, of course, a clever piece of deception, intended to ingratiate it with non-Jewish eugenic societies for the purposes of eventual subversion with Jewish oppositional ideas. Nor was the tactic new. Eulenberg, Hirschfeld, and Moll all claimed to be eugenicists but, like the Jewish-dominated German League for Improvement of the People and the Study of Heredity, astute Nationalists perceived the attempt at co-option from within, and all were attacked by National Socialist publisher Julius F. Lehmann as “part of a targeted subversion on the part of Berlin Jews.”14

Although Jewish sexology, and with it the promotion of homosexuality, was effectively shut down by the National Socialists, it would live on in exile, along with other poisonous doctrines, with the Frankfurt School. After the war, it would return, with Horkheimer and Adorno, to Frankfurt, where the Hirschfeld’s Institute for Sexual Science would be re-established and then led by their protégé Volkmar Sigusch (who coined the term ‘cisgender,’ now much-beloved by SJWs). From there it would spread throughout the West. Since taking on the leadership of the Institute, Sigusch has acted as a theorist and expert on social policy issues, and he has played a key role in liberalizing Germany’s laws penalizing homosexuality. Until 2006, Sigusch led Frankfurt University’s Institute for Sexual Science and its associated sexual medicine clinic. In 2005, he published Neo-sexuality: On the Cultural Change of Love and Perversion. In early March 2011, he released Searching for Sexual Freedom. Sigusch, who has done much to continue the advance of ‘sexual pluralism,’ has been described by Der Spiegel as “one of the main thinkers behind the sexual revolution of the 1960s.” Despite his non-Jewish ethnicity, these works reveal that he is the spiritual and ideological son of Moll, Bloch, Hirschfeld, and Eulenberg. Yet more reasons, perhaps, to question the argument, advanced by Counter-Currents, that “homophobia is Jewish.”

The Promotion of Homosexuality within White Nationalism

One might be tempted to dismiss the position of Counter-Currents on the homosexual question as merely wrong-headed, ill-informed, or even amateurish. However, I believe that many of the writers there are intelligent, historiographically literate, and are probably aware that they are producing an argument with an agenda attached. One of the more annoying aspects of their position, however, is that it is framed under the rubric that ‘homosexuality is beside the point.’ Even if this were true, which in terms of our demographic and social concerns it is not, Counter Currents have not stuck to their professed ‘line.’ In fact, through the publication of volumes such as James O’Meara’s The Homo and the Negro, and a number of articles acting as apologetics for homosexuality, they’ve done quite the opposite. I only very recently looked at The Homo and the Negro for the first time and was stunned at the publication, by an ostensibly Nationalist organization, of a set of writings that promotes pederasty.

In The Homo and the Negro O’Meara advances a number of arguments that should now be familiar, and with which we have already dealt with. O’Meara writes of the “futility” of the Right due to its “Judeo-Christianity.” He writes of a rampant “homophobia” (do White Nationalists now routinely use Jewish coinages like this?), which he defines as “a fear of homosexuality.” From here, O’Meara writes, apparently with the support of his publisher, that the American Right “cannot be a vehicle for the preservation and expansion of White culture since its Judeo-Christian element leads it to oppose the culture-creating and culture-sustaining element of homoeroticism.” Quite how the grooming and buggery of teenage boys in antiquity led to the creation of culture is never clearly articulated by O’Meara, though one is left with the distinct impression that he is speaking from a perspective of sexual preference rather than intellectual inquiry. Such fantasies may be assumed to lie behind his further elaboration that “the homosexual is the ideal type in a masculinist, homoerotic system.” Capping all of this nonsense is his assertion that “family values are Judaic,” and that the Right, by being hostile towards homosexuals, “deprives itself of the elitist cultural creativity of homosexuals.”

Are family values really Judaic, as O’Meara claims? Consider one example contrary to this homosexual apologetic in the form of what Tacitus said of the ancient Germans:

Their marriage code, however, is strict, and indeed no part of their manners is more praiseworthy…This they count their strongest bond of union, these their sacred mysteries, these their gods of marriage. Lest the woman should think herself to stand apart from aspirations after noble deeds and from the perils of war, she is reminded by the ceremony which inaugurates marriage that she is her husband’s partner in toil and danger, destined to suffer and to dare with him alike both in in war. The yoked oxen, the harnessed steed, the gift of arms proclaim this fact. She must live and die with the feeling that she is receiving what she must hand down to her children neither tarnished nor depreciated, what future daughters-in-law may receive, and may be so passed on to her grandchildren.

Moreover, recent DNA studies in England support previous research from the University of Oslo suggesting that Viking men were family-oriented, coming from communities where the marriage bond was strong and did not engage sexually with the women of lands they conquered. Rather it was found that Viking raiding parties were accompanied by significant numbers of women, and possibly whole families. One might also consider the ancient Brehon Law of the Irish mentioned earlier, which promoted the sanctity of the marriage bond, and reproduction within it.

Again, are family values Jewish? Perhaps only in the mind of a manipulative homosexual who wishes to cynically use ethno-nationalistic instincts and a righteous hostility towards Jews in order to advance his own agenda — by tarring everything that he himself abhors as “Jewish.” In reality, the proffered vision is a homo-nihilistic fantasy in which wholly imagined pederastic nnerbund antics take the place of the reproductive monogamous family unit as the lifeblood of the nation. O’Meara glorifies the work of Hans Blüher, a man condemned in his lifetime by Heinrich Himmler and Der Stürmer as a “notorious pederast,” who once wrote that: “In general, the greatest form of love is not between man and woman; with that there are children; that is something animalistic. The greatest form is the sublimated love between man and man. It is only from this that the greatest things in world history have come about.” O’Meara’s ideas are, ultimately, a poisonous doctrine that lowers the status of the family and reproduction in favor of a counter-productive sexual pathology. Such behavior is best described from an ethno-nationalist perspective by National Socialist theorist Reinhard Heydrich, who described the antisocial as having a natural inclination towards “disorder and subversion,” thereby “placing themselves at the disposal of the enemies of our people, and acting as a tool and weapon for their plans.”

In truth, homosexuality has been part of the demographic problem in the West. I once published on social media that society never really accepted homosexuality, but rather that society itself first became ‘homosexual’ in its traits before it could tolerate actual homosexuals. As the West became progressively more childless, promiscuous, hedonistic, and brimming with delusional self-confidence, the differences between the normal and the abnormal narrowed, and there appeared fewer reasons to continue to deny ‘equality’ to the sexual invert. As mentioned previously, Havelock Ellis observed that societies with demographic concerns will have harsh penalties for both homosexuality and abortion/infanticide. The West is in demographic free fall but, ignorant of the profound implications of this racial death, it’s people are actually in the process of indulging in a culture cultivated for their demographic assassination. Homosexuality has never been more tolerated. Abortion has never been easier and less stigmatized. Whites have never been closer to leaving the stage of history.

Promiscuity has replaced the pushchair. A glance at the modern generation of Whites of child-bearing age is sobering. Rates of sexually transmitted disease in America have never been higher. According to senior physicians, the UK is heading for a “sexual health crisis.” The same phenomenon has been reported in Australia, Canada, Ireland, France, and Germany. Meanwhile, the Gatestone Institute reports that: “Abortion has recently assumed epic proportions in countries such as Sweden or France. In France, there are 200,000 abortions a year. To put things in perspective, there are in France around 750,000 births a year. France, therefore, is aborting 20% of its babies/fetuses/embryos/cell clusters — choose according to your personal convictions — each year.” You can be sure that it isn’t French Muslims who are aborting their babies by the hundred thousand, and this perhaps explains why they’ve been telling the Archbishop of Strasbourg that “France will be theirs one day.”

In The Population Bomb (1968), the Jewish biologist Paul Ehrlich wrote that the best method to reduce population is the legalization of abortion. That was without considering the effect of birth control, or the cultural impact of tolerance of homosexuality and the Hirschfeld-derived glorification of perverted, empty, childless visions of “love.” When Europeans began to legalize both birth control and abortion 40 years ago, a few years after Roe vs. Wade (1973), the Catholic Church warned of the risk of Europe entering into a “morbid civilization.” This, of course, is the same Catholic Church likely to be denounced as “Judaic” by James O’Meara and his sponsors. In truth, and as someone raised in a Protestant home, I must concede that had the Catholic Church had more power to enforce its doctrine, Europe would still be flourishing demographically, and a mass Muslim invasion would be nothing but a nightmare never to come to fruition.

Why would O’Meara and Counter-Currents publish and promote such ideas, denigrating the family and selfishly glorifying their own preferences? Here it is necessary to confront the issue of the homosexual personality and to return to our central argument of the incompatibility of homosexuality and Alt-Right principles. As stated earlier in this essay, psychological studies indicate that homosexuals score higher than the sexually normal on traits associated with psychopathy, including higher rates of promiscuity, a greater tendency to high-risk activity, higher rates of intimate partner violence,15 low levels of impulse control, and a tendency towards bouts of exaggerated sense of self-esteem/importance. In addition, studies have found that homosexuality was 10 times more common among the men and 6 times more common among the women with borderline personality disorder (BPD) than in the general population or in a depressed control group.16 An extensive 2008 study confirmed and expanded upon these findings, arguing that “subjects with BPD were significantly more likely than comparison subjects to report homosexual or bisexual orientation and intimate same-sex relationships.”

Prior to the peaking of ‘sexual pluralism’ in the last decade, research into the homosexual personality was behind much of the stance in the United States in terms of excluding homosexuals from the military, law enforcement, and government security. It was argued that homosexuals “possessed an inordinate amount of psychopathology and character flaws such as instability, illegal conduct, dishonesty, untrustworthiness, poor teamwork, and relationship forming skills. Gay men were described as being highly strung and neurotic.”17 Combining an understanding of homosexual personality traits with homosexual apologetics produced within White Nationalism, it becomes clear that dishonesty (“homosexuality is beside the point, let’s not discuss it”) and manipulative behaviors (“hostility to homosexuality is Jewish”), and an exaggerated sense of self-esteem/importance are at least primary concerns to those wanting to steer the cause of Whites in the right direction. Evidence of the latter is surely in evidence both in O’Meara’s claim that the Right persists in depriving “itself of the elitist cultural creativity of homosexuals,” and Greg Johnson’s apparent belief that homosexuals are “real assets” to the movement because they “are intelligent and accomplished…Are freer to speak their minds because they give fewer hostages to fortune. They also have more free time and more disposable income to devote to the cause.”

Such promotions of homosexuality are inherently insidious and are proof that, consciously or not, issues of White success, particularly demographic success, are likely to always be subordinated by the homosexual in favor of theories of life or behavior which glorify or excuse his own predilections. The fact that an ostensibly nationalist writer can openly praise a pederastic author who denigrated the reproductive relationships of normal, healthy families is a sign of a degenerative rot that has developed in the corners of this movement. The toleration of such a rot has been the cause of disunity — not surprising given the apparent success of the lie that “tolerating homosexuals will increase our unity.” Quite the contrary. I have nationalist friends of many stripes, and a number of them have previously avoided aligning themselves rhetorically or materially with institutions like the National Policy Institute, or concepts such as the Alt-Right, because of an apparent tolerance of homosexuals and their apologetics. As a father of three, I have also had serious reservations about the kind of movement I am trying to raise my children in. Raising them in an environment that tolerates the open promotion of pederasty is out of the question.

This essay will cut out some of the rot, and bring clarity to some issues and questions that have been left to fester. It is largely a thankless task, and a dirty one too, but the Augean Stables must be cleansed.


References:

1 F.J. Solloway, Freud, Biologist of the Mind: Beyond the Psychoanalytic Legend (Harvard, 1979), 314-5.

2 V. Roelcke, Twentieth Century Ethics of Human Subjects Research: Historical Perspectives From Steiner Verlag (Stuttgart, 2004), 26.

3 E. Mancini, Magnus Hirschfeld and the Quest for Sexual Freedom: A History of the First International Sexual Freedom Movement (Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), 29.

4 A. Killen, Berlin Electropolis: Shock, Nerves and German Modernity (University of California Press, 2006), 63.

5 Solloway, Freud, Biologist of the Mind: Beyond the Psychoanalytic Legend (Harvard, 1979), 300.

6 E.R. Dickson, Sex, Freedom and Power in Imperial Germany, 1880-1914 (Cambridge University Press, 2014), 155.

7 Ibid, 156.

8 Ibid, 157.

9 Mancini, Magnus Hirschfeld and the Quest for Sexual Freedom, 30.

10 Ibid, 4.

11 Ibid, 160.

12 Ibid.

13 E.R. Dickson, Sex, Freedom and Power in Imperial Germany, 1880-1914 (Cambridge University Press, 2014), 7.

14 J. Glad, Future Human Evolution: Eugenics in the Twenty-First Century (Hermitage, 2006), 133.

15 Ard & Makadon. (2011).Addressing Intimate Partner Violence in Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Patients. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 26:8, 930-933.

16 Zubenko, Soloff, & Schulz (1987). Sexual practices among patients with borderline personality disorder. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 144(6), 748-752, and developed further in Reich & Zanarini (2008).Sexual Orientation and Relationship Choice in Borderline Personality Disorder over Ten Years of Prospective Follow-up. Journal of Personality Disorder, 22(6), 564-572.

17 G. Hagger-Johnson ‘Personality, Individual Differences, and LGB Psychology,’ in Clark and Peel (eds) Out in Psychology: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Queer Perspectives (Chichester: Wiley, 2007), p. 83.

Comment

357 comments

  1. Le Fox 1 October, 2017 at 03:45 Reply

    Pt. 2

    Hirschfeld’s criticism and hated of Christianity is compared to Freud, even though Freud was nowhere near as violent as Hirschfeld was. Camille Paglia has referenced the self-harming practices in Christianity, and it does have some parallels to BDSM culture, albeit without the sexual aspect. Hirschfeld, we must remember, was raped as a young teenager, and it is obvious his hatred of traditional mores – Jewish and Christian – stem from that. Moll repeatedly criticized him; he was by no means a lone wolf.

    “Hirschfeld, described by Mancini as “cosmopolitan to the core,” essentially created the first homosexual “communities,” beginning in Berlin where the Hebrew “transvestite” (a term he coined) was known as “Aunt Magnesia” by the city’s perverts.”

    Homosexual communities were in Berlin long before Hirschfeld came onto the scene, and had their own businesses, brothels, etc. The term is not Hebrew, but Latin. Mancini is cited again, but no relevant paragraph is offered.

    Hirschfeld organized homosexuals, encouraging them to openly flaunt their predilections and to get involved in the growing campaign for “emancipation” that was developing under the auspices of the Scientific Humanitarian Committee which he had formed in 1897.

    “Hirschfeld pioneered modern Social Justice Warrior tactics by urging celebrities and high-profile politicians to add their names in support of the campaign for “sexual equality.” Hirschfeld and his protégés also produced a vast number of books, manuscripts, papers, and pamphlets concerning sexuality, transvestitism, “transgenderism” (another Hirschfeld term) and fetishes.”

    What celebrities? If anything, he was catering to a class of mostly ethnic Europeans in the upper classes who shared the same tastes as him. Transgenderism as a word came from John F. Oliven, not Magnus Hirschfeld.

    “Despite the bankruptcy of his science, the dramatic success of the Committee at mobilizing large sectors of German and European society on behalf of homosexuals was due to Hirschfeld’s personality. Like Moll, he was an aggressive and relentless agitator.”
    Hirschfeld wasn’t well liked, even among Moll, and he had his detractors. Moll was far more held-back than him, as evidenced in the Moll paper which was cited but not read.

    A note on ‘Third Sexes’: transvestites already existed in Europe long before Jews arrived, and Greco-Roman statues have women with penises; intersex individuals, if you will. It isn’t new.

    You also have to ask yourself why Wiemar Germany allowed any of these institutes to spring up in the first place, unless you are willing to admit that they were complacent in it.

    “But unfortunately, this individual enjoyed significant post-humous success. In terms of theory, Hirschfeld had “subverted the notion that romantic love should be orientated toward reproduction,” arguing instead for the acceptance of homosexual lifestyles and hedonistic, non-reproductive, sexual relations in general.”

    Again, this has roots in French discussions, and Marquis de Sade is mentioned – but only passively.

    “Hirschfeld’s use of the weaponized concept of love was itself a legacy of Hirschfeld’s “scientific mentor” and co-ethnic Iwan Bloch (1872–1922). Like Moll and Hirschfeld, Bloch had no background in zoology, evolutionary studies or animal behavior. Trained as a dermatologist, Bloch was also attracted to the cause of “sexual minorities” and became an ardent campaigner on their behalf. He joined with Moll and Hirschfeld in attacking the non-Jewish consensus that sexual inversion was pathological and coined the term sexualwissenschaft or sexology to give academic and medical respectability to what was essentially a Jewish intellectual reaction against non-Jewish efforts to categorize harmful social and sexual pathologies. He was also a keen promoter of perversion and pornography.”

    Moll didn’t attack the consensus that homosexuality was pathological; he argued that it should be cured. Hirschfeld was the one who argued against it.

    Bloch, in his book ‘The Sexual Life of Our Time in its Relations to Modern Civilization’, he says that if there is a third sex, it is an aberration and a ‘monstrosity’, and of no value. He says this on pg. 13.

    On pg. 264, he writes that the homosexual and other ‘perverse manifestations’, in relation to the new marriage law crafted at the time, should be seen before a judge as a criminal trial, and should be seen by psychologists. Far from attacking bourgeois sexual mores and supplanting it with Jewish liberalism, his book discusses homosexual acts, prostitution, venereal diseases (which is hit and miss), and how it is dangerous for society. Unless a specific passage is mentioned, Bloch isn’t undermining anything, making him unlike Hirschfeld.

    Also, I noticed the copypasta from Wikipedia. Nice.

    “The eugenics aspect of the society’s name was, of course, a clever piece of deception, intended to ingratiate it with non-Jewish eugenic societies for the purposes of eventual subversion with Jewish oppositional ideas.”

    How did they intend to ingratiate it with non-Jewish eugenic societies? Moll was against eugenics, actually, according to the paper on him which Joyce did not read. Here we have a claim that isn’t backed by data or evidence; we again are to assume it is true on face-value.

    “Nor was the tactic new. Eulenberg, Hirschfeld, and Moll all claimed to be eugenicists but, like the Jewish-dominated German League for Improvement of the People and the Study of Heredity, astute Nationalists perceived the attempt at co-option from within, and all were attacked by National Socialist publisher Julius F. Lehmann as “part of a targeted subversion on the part of Berlin Jews.”

    The only source for this is John Glad. He writes that Wilhelm Weinberg was Jewish, although Weinberg is not called Jewish on Wikipedia, despite his fame. He is listed as a member of the Eugenics Society, but no source is offered. It is also said in that book a rabbi was a part of the membership, but I could not find a source for that either; no lists of official members was used in that book. Moll, mentioned in that book as being in favour of eugenics, was not in actuality. The GSP was also far-right, and why they would allow Jews to willingly subvert them is unknown.

    The Nazis did not ‘effectively’ shut down homosexuality; there were many instances of it in the higher Nazis ranks.

    Paul Ehrlich is listed as ‘Jewish’, as I suspected he would be because of his mother being ‘Rosenberg’. But Wikipedia does not list him as Jewish, when it usually is the first to state whether someone is or is not Jewish. Ehrlich’s mother, we can safely assume, is Scandinavian.

    Now, let’s consider the crux of this essay: homosexuality was never approved in European cultures, and acceptance came from Jews and Jews alone. Freud and Moll, both Jews, in writing did not approve of homosexuality and did not view it as a positive, but were written as if they supported it by the sole basis that they were part of the tribe. Frenchmen like Michel Foucault and Marquis de Sade himself, as well as the other high-level pederasts in Britain, are not mentioned at all. Joyce has deliberately excluded them.

    Say that we did remove the JQ from this issue. Would it make homosexuality go away? No. The Ancient Greeks struggled with pederasty, and there were no Jews among them. Same with the Chinese and Japanese. The acceptance of homosexuality did not occur overnight, and there had to be some form of willing acceptance on behalf of whites in order for it to bloom. Hirschfeld is listed as a problem, but Alfred Kinsey was not, and neither was John D. Rockefeller, nor Hugh Hefner. We are led to believe that Jews, and only Jews, are the cause of homosexuality and transgenderism, and without them, we’d still be living in an Aryan paradise.

    Not so. If Jews are unoriginal and conniving creatures, then they must have gotten their ideas from somewhere else. Who else but Europeans? What of the French authors during the reign of King Louis XVI, who drew pornography of his wife, Marie Antoinette, and other Princesses of the Blood to shame them? Jews weren’t top of the line back then. Boy slaves were still kept among the Romans, and in fact, the first attempted sex-reassignment surgery was NOT done by a Jew, but by a Roman – to Elagabalus.

    I still stick to my principles that this warning is too little, too late. You ignored the problem for years. Why? So you could purity spiral? This problem in the movement didn’t happen overnight, either. Someone had to do a TRS and ignore the problems from within. It’s easier to blame Jews for that, rather than acknowledge that Europeans do have some filthy tendencies that they got on their own two feet. Consider how willing they were to buy what the merchant was selling.

    Joyce cites some works, but again, he doesn’t cite paragraphs or the works written by the authors he is criticizing, even when they disagree with his conclusions. I find this problematic, and Joyce is committing the same errors he accuses Jewish ahistorical authors of. We are supposed to be better than them, and yet, I still see purity spiraling and a willingness to ignore the larger problem. Hell, even Roosh did this quicker than you! What does this say about the Pure Hwhite Aryans?

    Remember: Sweden decriminalized homosexuality when the NatSocs were in power. What does that tell you? You’re still sucking up to Richard Spencer. I won’t believe you until you actively purge them.

    Lastly, how come Judith Reisman wasn’t mentioned? Or is it because she’s one of (((them)))?

  2. Le Fox 1 October, 2017 at 03:43 Reply

    TL;DR, again:

    The beginning paragraph runs with Jews being hypocritical: what they preach to themselves is different from what they preach to others; basically, ‘Gay for thee but not for me.’

    “As Jews flooded the medical and scientific professions in the late 19th century, they brought with them the desire to interrupt the European self-conversation about race, biology, and related subjects. One of these was homosexuality. In this area, and for the last century or more, Jewish activists have ‘distinguished’ themselves by normalizing and promoting homosexuality, and by campaigning for cultural and legal changes on behalf of homosexuals.”

    Which ones? And Europe, from the Victorian Era onward, especially in France, were discussing homosexuality en masse. It was not uncommon to find gay pornography or erotica, and many high-end Europeans would go to less wealthier countries to help themselves to young boys. One of these, Baron Jacques d’ Adelsward Ferson, was not Jewish. The blog ‘Voice in the Crowd’ documents many of these men, and a lot of them do not have -berg or -stein as surnames. They are mostly Scandinavian or British.

    If we’re referring also to Franz Boas, Margaret Mead, and the rest who flipped over race-based biology, then it helps to know Boas didn’t originally say race didn’t exist, but that his female co-workers, Mead included, forced him to do it.

    We know that we can still tell race apart from bones, so Boas didn’t entirely overthrow the field.

    The cultural changes didn’t happen overnight, and again, the degeneracy of the Victorian Age and by many Britons had a huge part to play. I do recall hearing that Germany had a long history of scatology porn, which wasn’t brought on by Jews.

    “Typical of his ethno-religious group, Moll frequently utilized his position within the field of medical psychology to form an oppositional bloc against prevailing opinions in nineteenth — and early twentieth-century non-Jewish society. Indeed, large numbers of Jews tactically ambushed several medical disciplines during this period for precisely this reason.”

    We don’t know what these medical disciplines are because they aren’t mentioned. We also don’t know what the ‘prevailing opinions’ are, either. What did the prevailing opinions say, and why were they so easily attacked by Jews? Was it Christian puritanism, or something else? We don’t know, because Joyce hasn’t offered us anything.

    “Historian Elena Macini writes that “Jews flooded medicine at this time not only for social standing but also in an era that witnessed the efflorescence of race science, for the opportunity of self-representation. … The presence of Jews in the medical sector in general, and in race science in particular, allowed them to assert Jewish equality and very often moral superiority.”1 With Berlin as the center of German medicine, and Jews comprising one-third of doctors in the city,2 the domination and re-orientation of entire disciplines was not only feasible but disturbingly easy.”

    Elena Macini is cited three times, independently, in the citations, and I call this the Rachel Carson effect; it means the author uses the same source, over and over, in an attempt to make it look like as if he is read. But I digress. Page numbers are listed in the bibliography, but unless they are included within the paragraph, we can only assume that the author has added his interpretation first.

    Race science started earlier, in the 1700s, with pamphlets being started in America. Only until the 1930’s did it start to take a more ideological tint, with Noridicism taking over. But that is not the argument. The only way to find out if Jews were truly 1/3 of all doctors in Berlin is to see all the primary source records on them. Whether Mancini used them is not known.

    “For example, in his Handbuch der Sexualwissenschaften (1911) Moll expressed the hope that mooted plans for sterilization programs would “not be implemented and that our race-improvers do not get too much influence on our legislation.” When German science in the late 1920s became concerned with degeneration and decline, gravitating even further towards eugenics, Moll preceded Boas in rejecting the findings of behavior genetics, arguing that “the fact we find so many valuable people, despite the hereditary burden, is caused by regeneration in countless cases. … We can hardly ever say something about the condition of offspring with any certainty at all.” Moll was, therefore, the quintessential Jewish physician: political and ethnic interests were never far from his dubious practice of medicine.”

    Well, if you want sterilization, or eugenics, you’re going to have to promote abortion, which is later cautioned against later in the article. Moll also discussed scientific practices which included injecting prostitutes with syphilis, as well as advocating for better treatment of animals in lab experiments, which are stated directly in the paper cited. He also believed bad parenting was a problem, and that parents should be better when raising their children. The one quote where he discusses sterilization programs being suspended is raised deliberately, while the rest are discarded. Moll also said that, under sterilization law, Beethoven would have killed, as would other ‘non-social’ geniuses, or quirky ones, like Mozart.

    Moll wasn’t the ‘quintessential’ Jewish physician in that he DID bring up some objective reasons against sterilization, as well as point out scientific misconduct with people of lesser classes. Should prostitutes be injected with syphilis? Should animals be tortured while experimented upon? And second, he discusses degeneration quite a bit, and pins the blame on parents, as well. So, as Jewish physicians go, he was quite neutral.

    “Moll worked tirelessly to persuade leading non-Jewish scholars like Richard von Krafft-Ebing to reject the idea that sexual abnormality was the result of biological and psychological disorder. In Freud: Biologist of the Mind, Frank J. Sulloway writes that “Krafft-Ebing’s decision around the turn of the century to separate the doctrine of degeneration from the theory of homosexuality was in response to the thinking of his younger and more critical colleague Moll.”3 However, there is a significant reason to doubt the validity of Krafft-Ebing’s personal change of perspective given that the most pertinent, later, editions of his Psychopathia Sexualis that showcased this change were in fact edited by none other than Moll himself.”

    According to the paper cited, Moll didn’t do this at all. In fact, Moll argued against Hirschfeld for suggesting gay men do not deserve a cure, and was worried about the seduction of young men. He believed Hirschfeld would encourage more homosexuality, and not attempt to fix it. If Krafft-Ebing decided to remove degeneration from homosexuality, he did so on his own regard, and not by Moll’s decision.

    “Moll’s work centered on the argument that there were alternative, valid, “identities,” and as such, he argued that homosexuality was a “valid sexual identity.”1 Whereas earlier non-Jewish psychiatrists observed “unsavory and often contemptible personal characteristics” among sexual inverts (including their tendency to be liars, their moodiness, love of gossip, and vanity and envy), Moll argued instead that “homosexual men were not corrupt, but merely womanish,”2 comprising a kind of “third sex” — a theory that would later be advanced much further by co-ethnic Magnus Hirschfeld.”

    Let’s read what Moll actually had to say on homosexuality, from the paper cited:

    “‘A year later Moll had a paper published in Hirschfeld’s Jahrbuch für sexuelle Zwischenstufen [Yearbook for Sexual Intermediate Stages], in which he tried to argue factually against the Committee: objectivity was a rarity; people did not tend to perceive their own actions as pathological and reprehensible. When homosexuals claimed that they had always felt as they did, it had to be pointed out that everyone preferred to ‘remember what was of particular interest to him’. Something natural was not necessarily healthy. Something acquired did not necessarily make them guilty. From a medical point of view, guilt or antipathy were equally negligible, as was the question whether homosexuality was hereditary or acquired. Treatment of homosexuality was necessary because in adults it was ‘a definitely pathological phenomenon’. It was compared to malformations such as the cleft palate, therefore not to be described as morbid, but as abnormal and pathological.’”

    Obviously, he saw it as ‘identity’ not influenced by genetics, and one that was not good to society and had to be cured. It appears that Joyce has engaged in quote mining, and has ignored his own sources. A source offered in its stead is a TOO article in which Jewish media influences public opinions on homosexuality, even though whites have willingly embraced homosexuality, including Catholics and Orthodox Jews. But I digress.

    • zeitgeist2012 1 October, 2017 at 16:45 Reply

      I identify these devils as the cultural marxist Zionist/Jesuit/islamic unholy trinity working together to rob, supplant, and destroy white christian western civilization. We can’t let these new age inquisitors control the truth or the message like they are currently trying to do with the anti-white christian African and Hispanic dominated national sport teams.

      Homosexuals are not like me our you…they are unnatural self-eradicating and self-mutilating sexual perverts. A mental disorder in spite of the cultural marxist Jew shrinks pushing their phony anti-white christian mental science on the world.

      Ever hear of the counter reformation, Spanish Inquisition, crypto-Jew Jesuits/crypto-Jew Muslim hordes = Modern day inquisition or multi-cultural Marxist/Liberation theologian white protestant and Christian genocide. The end of white Christian western civilization through the Jewish Frankfurt school of cultural Marxism/Liberation theology and its sister beast the AshkeNazi Rothschild/Freudian/Sephardic Rockefeller/Jesuit Tavistock institute of mental warfare sworn enemies of white protestants and white Catholics. The ‘Latin’ universal church is just one branch of the kabbalist synagogue of Satan.

      Gay-rights activists credit Jewish cultural marxist Dr. Spitzer with removing homosexuality from the list of mental disorders in the DSM in 1973…

      What’s noteworthy about this is that the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses was not triggered by some scientific breakthrough.

      https://www.timesofisrael.com/leading-jewish-american-psychiatrist-robert-spitzer-dies-at-83/

      http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2011/10/08/homosexuality-the-mental-illness-that-went-away/

      http://www.aim.org/special-report/media-myths-of-the-homosexual-transgender-agenda/

      https://davidduke.com/jewish-supremacists-homosexuality-and-divide-and-conquer/

      Alfred Kinsey, Jewish father of the sexual revolution. Kinsey was a homosexual, a pedophile, and a madman. His staff consisted of like-minded non-professionals who were touted as ‘experts’, and his subjects polled consisted of the dregs of humanity: psychopaths, rapists, pedophiles, sexual deviants, the mentally retarded, inmates of mental institutions, and criminals of all walks of life.

      http://www.dayofshame.net/2011/04/01/alfred-kinsey-%E2%80%93-father-of-the-modern-sexual-revolution/

      https://altright.com/2017/09/27/the-alt-right-and-the-homosexual-question-part-3/#comment-3541660727

      • Le Fox 1 October, 2017 at 23:03 Reply

        “I identify these devils as the cultural marxist Zionist/Jesuit/islamic unholy trinity working together to rob, supplant, and destroy white christian western civilization. We can’t let these new age inquisitors control the truth or the message like they are currently trying to do with the anti-white christian African and Hispanic dominated national sport teams.” – OK, you don’t want the truth supplanted. That is why you are preaching to an echo chamber, and clearly, are not very experienced in this argument. Luckily, I am here to tell you.

        The Jesuits aren’t Jews; they are Christians, and are by far one of the most liberal of all the Christian sects. The Islamic sect is quite anti-Zionist, so if anything, Islam and the Alt-Right share the same ideology, albeit with different end goals.

        “Homosexuals are not like me our you…they are unnatural self-eradicating and self-mutilating sexual perverts. A mental disorder in spite of the cultural marxist Jew shrinks pushing their phony anti-white christian mental science on the world.” – Yes, and? Which phony science are we referring to?

        “Ever hear of the counter reformation, Spanish Inquisition, crypto-Jew Jesuits/crypto-Jew Muslim hordes = Modern day inquisition or multi-cultural Marxist/Liberation theologian white protestant and Christian genocide.” – Are you aware of the Reformation to begin with? Luther’s 99 theses? Hell, do you know anything about his writings? The Counter-Reformation was an attempt to return to Catholic mores.

        The Spanish Inquisition – a favourite among Alt-Righters, but the Inquisition was first and foremost a purge of corruption, Jew and non-Jew alike. It was an entirely secular institution. KevMac wrote in his book, ‘Separation and Its Discontents’, as well as his TOO articles, that the Inquisition was meant to purge only Jews from the Spanish government. Not so. And while Jews were given the chance to convert, it’s highly unlikely that the Spaniards wouldn’t have been aware of their tricks. Unless, of course, you’d like to say they’re always meant to be fooled by Jews?

        “The end of white Christian western civilization through the Jewish Frankfurt school of cultural Marxism/Liberation theology and its sister beast the AshkeNazi Rothschild/Freudian/Sephardic Rockefeller/Jesuit Tavistock institute of mental warfare sworn enemies of white protestants and white Catholics.” – Protestantism is already an enemy of Catholicism, so for you to assume they’re going to join together is false. That is what led to the Church’s split in the first place.

        The Rockefellers weren’t Jewish.

        “The ‘Latin’ universal church is just one branch of the kabbalist synagogue of Satan.” – Uh, what? Rejecting Christ is as Jewish as you can get. What are you babbling on about?

        “Gay-rights activists credit Jewish cultural marxist Dr. Spitzer with removing homosexuality from the list of mental disorders in the DSM in 1973…” – Was Spitzer Jewish? Wikipedo doesn’t say he is, and usually, it comes right out and says whether someone is or isn’t Jewish. The Times of Israel says he was, but there are no mentions of his family.

        The link you provide on ‘Behaviourism and Mental Health’ you forgot to read this post:

        http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2011/10/19/homosexuality/

        David Duke can say he is against homosexuality, but he is a stooge for Islamic Iran and is perfectly fine with Muslims and blacks.

        Kinsey, as far as I know, wasn’t Jewish. The surname is Anglo. http://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/Kinsey

        Day of Shame also says he is Jewish, but with no evidence backing it. They also quote Judith Reisman’s book, but never properly cite her.

        I can tell you’re a lad that loves to sound as if he’s got all the answers, but can’t even form a proper argument.

  3. Absurdiness Brown 29 September, 2017 at 09:21 Reply

    Alright. You’ve convinced me. By revealing my own ignorance on this issue to me. Not all gay men are monsters but I agree that the Alt-Right should not have within its ranks those who engage in this behaviour or would enable it.

    Those who would want to see themselves as Alt-Right but are gay should still be grateful of the gift of freedom present in the West and the cultural attitude of not wanting to throw them of rooftops. They can at least be rational supporters of the West, and cease white anting it.

  4. Manuel_Venator 28 September, 2017 at 22:24 Reply

    Heinrich Himmler is now considered an authority for the Altright? That quote from Hans Blüher seems false to me and does not reflect his actual Männerbund theory, which is far more complex (O’Meara got it wrong as well, but next to none original texts was ever translated) and was very influential during that time. It’s probably a misquotation or reframing from Der Stürmer (not really a reliable source). Blüher was one of the most remarkable thinkers of the Conservative Revolution, as emphasized by Armin Mohler. He also was in heavy opposition to Hirschfeld et al.

  5. genocidal_maniac 28 September, 2017 at 18:52 Reply

    Fascinating on the subject of ancient Germanic practices.

    I work in an organization where a homosexual man is in a leadership position. His “partner” is a timid little man who is very shy and whose legs are always close together like he is holding in a piss.

    Luckily, I do not directly interact with him, but others I know who have to work with him despise him.

    So I find the part about pychopathy interesting. This article will take some time for me to digest.

  6. form 28 September, 2017 at 17:52 Reply

    Hehe! Or you could have scrapped this ponderous rant, and just screeched “I HATE FAAAAAAGS!” Omg! I can’t WAIT until some of you are outed! Plenty of folks already believe Spencer is gay! I bet he’ll be the first alt-righter to get publicly exposed by one of his former boyfriends. And, then WTF will you do???

  7. Lars Helmut 28 September, 2017 at 11:33 Reply

    I smell a rat. I doubt any of the gays who support the cause are flamers, and they’re going to all be white. Some may even be married – to women. Everything about the article doesn’t make any sense: why it’s been published at a time when many have left the alt-right; what it will achieve in the struggle against white genocide. Even many of the early revisionists and ethno-nationalist figures were gays. Something fishy’s up here and it probably echoes. This Andrew Joyce character is probably white like Tara McCarthy and Weev are white.

      • Lars Helmut 28 September, 2017 at 14:38 Reply

        The author of this article is not concerned with white genocide. Who’s responsible for mass immigration? Gays? For our nations being flooded with armies of non-white fighters? Gays? Is it gays “taking the knee”? Are gays mugging your sons, mothers, wives, sisters, dads? This is all about smashing up the only community that is openly talking about who’s behind all this. You can slag the Muslims, the gays, the blacks, the Mexicans, the trannies, and all the rest of them off until the cows come home, and nothing will happen to you; slag off one particular group, which is the real enemy, and you’re getting shut down, losing your job, dragged through the courts. I’m not gay, you fucking clown, I’m concerned about my people being destroyed. I’ve not heard of this author before, he’s just appeared on the scene, and his aim is to get twits like you to turn against others who’re facing exactly the same fate. It’s how most of our nationalist movements have been rotted from the inside: infiltration. Grow the fuck up.

        • Jonathan Walsh 28 September, 2017 at 14:53 Reply

          You are a complete faggot because nobody else with a modicum of common sense likes or wants to be around them. Did you read the article? Did you read the James O’Meara bit? This is the kind of stuff they do. They push their degeneracy on anyone else and lower the quality and value of life, romance and sex in society.

          No serious Nationalist ever supported faggotry.

          • Lars Helmut 28 September, 2017 at 15:39

            Do you understand that most of our nations are fast approaching a situation where whites are minorities? Either you’re white like Jared Kushner: not white, in which case you don’t give a fuck, or you’re a closet case, or you’re just too stupid to realise what’s really going on here. To be honest, I wouldn’t mind idiots like you splintering off, because if you are actually white, you’ve got to be the silliest cunts I’ve come across to date. And anyway, just a quick look at (((Joyce’s))) list of sources will tell you where he finds the kind of “education” he’s imparting to dopes like you: they’re all Jews.

          • Jonathan Walsh 28 September, 2017 at 16:28

            Homosexuals in no way are helping White Nations. They’re white in name only, they contribute nothing positive to the White race and only bring degeneracy. You’re going to be shipped back to France faggot once we win.

          • Lars Helmut 28 September, 2017 at 16:45

            First off, I don’t live in your joke of a country, I’m English. Second, you’re absolutely clueless about how the world really works. I think you’re just ignorant, whereas I think the author of the article has a spurious agenda. It’s not good enough to say “you’ll learn,” because fools like you are ruining something good by dancing to the enemy’s tune. You’re being controlled and manipulated like SJWs are. And even if I were gay, which as I’ve already told you I’m not, what the fuck business would it be of yours what I’d do in my private life? .

          • Jonathan Walsh 28 September, 2017 at 16:29

            And James J O’Meara’s faggot book is not only full of lies but promotes homosexuality. Have you even looked into it? Or maybe you’re willing to overlook it to try and push your homosexual subversion.

  8. LyovMyshkin 28 September, 2017 at 07:17 Reply

    I’d just like to say that this has been an excellent series and a very important one. I think one of the most important ideas that needs to be pushed against is the idea that homosexuality is some essential, immutable condition. It is, from what I can ascertain, better understood as a compulsive orientation that arises out of a complex interaction of social and biological factors. Spiritual as well IMO but let’s leave that for another time.

    I tend to compare it more to a fetish. For instance, is anyone with a foot fetish ‘born that way’? Common sense dictates how ludicrous that is. These tendencies develop out of experience — with the genetic predisposition to indulge or avoid such behaviour being obviously a factor — and aren’t essential.

    That is one of the greatest mistakes we make by indulging that fantasy.

    Great work, Mr Joyce.

  9. Gubbler Chechenova 28 September, 2017 at 01:07 Reply

    Homos shouldn’t lead the movement, but if homos want to contribute ideas, images, and sounds to the movement, we should let them.

    Renaissance would have been poorer without contribution of Homo artists.

    Much of Western Literature wouldn’t exist if homos hadn’t been allowed to publish.

    Greek art and civilization owed much to homo thinkers and artists.

    One of Japan’s most potent patriots was Yukio MIshima, a homo and a great author.
    One of the great anti-communists was the homosexual Whittaker Chambers.

    Homosexuality is a deviance, and it cannot be part of Core Values. However, eccentric people have a strange and fascinating way of looking at the world. And their insights and visions may be valuable.

    It’s like neurosis. We shouldn’t celebrate it, but many creative artists and writers have been neurotic.

    So, the core of Alt Right must be healthy and normal. But interesting ideas, insights, and images can be created by homosexuals who believe in European civilization and want to defend it.

    Don’t let homos run the movement. But if homos have something valuable to contribute, accept their contribution.
    It’s like Papillon accepted help from a leper. Even the sinful and compromised can redeem themselves with heroic acts.
    Homos may be naturally stained, but even the fallen can do something noble… while the normal can do something venal and lowdown. Look at Romney and McCain. Normal men but utterly venal.

  10. unpaidpundit 27 September, 2017 at 21:43 Reply

    Andrew Joyce is like the boy with his finger in the dike (no pun intended) hoping to hold back cultural change. Studies have shown that straight people who know gay people personally are less likely to have anti-gay feelings. There are now millions of straight, white people who have interacted with openly gay people, and feel that there is no reason for gays to re-enter the closet. Joyce, and those who share his philosophy on sexual issues, are not going to change their minds.

    Now, in contrast, I am pretty sure that most white people become more racist after contact with racial diversity, but no one in academia will ever do a study to confirm my hunch.

    • craicher 27 September, 2017 at 23:31 Reply

      No really. Let them be around the homos long enough and they start to see the hedonism, the destruction, the vanity, the pride and everything else and will eventually get disgusted by them. You are talking about 20 year olds who have not lived long enough to understand.

      I worked in the service industry (full of homos) while going through college and have seen all this first hand.

      Red Ice has an interview with a woman raised by homo father. You should listen, take the red pill.

      The acceptance of homos is a passing phase of youth.

    • Daniel Friberg 28 September, 2017 at 05:05 Reply

      “Studies have shown that straight people who know gay people personally are less likely to have anti-gay feelings.”

      According to recent studies, for many people within the alt-right who’ve interacted with one of the individuals mentioned in this article, it has had the exact opposite effect. 😀

    • LyovMyshkin 28 September, 2017 at 07:08 Reply

      Oh wow! Did these studies also take into account the massive social consequences for not giving the correct answer? Like the effect we often see with support for right wing political movements at the polls and the ballot?

      What was the political orientation of the psychologists involved? Has the study been replicated?

      Also, were the subjects exposed to more information about homosexuality or was it mere personal contact? Also, did that contact with the homosexual include observing them at, say, a mass orgy?

      Also, do you think the same result would be observed if the subject was exposed to the bug chasing culture?

      “Joyce, and those who share his philosophy on sexual issues, are not going to change their minds.”

      It might help if you could make a serious argument that didn’t so closely resemble the typical ‘right side of history’ drivel that Bill Nye would enthusiastically nod his head to.

    • Captain John Charity Spring MA 4 October, 2017 at 07:52 Reply

      You miss the point. Depressing.

      An entire generation of fags died when AIDS culled them in the late 80s and early 90s. If you are around 40-50 you saw them die in front of your eyes. Nature passed judgement.

    • JohnEngelman 5 October, 2017 at 06:11 Reply

      It sounds like a cliche, but some of my best friends have been homosexuals. Homosexuals tend to have characteristics I find attractive. They tend to be intelligent and cultivated. Nevertheless, what defines them is repulsive to me.

      My friendships with homosexuals lasted because they did not tell me about their sex lives, and I did not express my feelings about homosexuality.

  11. Patrick Johnston 27 September, 2017 at 18:58 Reply

    I posted a few comments yesterday and have been following the site since it started but never really had much cause to comment so I didn’t. You can read up a little about my journey into the Alt-Right which probably mirrors that of most young guys. I had hoped it would provide the sort of community that would be good to have around as I started a family. These three pointlessly divisive essays really did peal back the proverbial carpet and the dross beneath is dark and disturbing. Who the heck would want to bring a child up influenced by some of you fruit loops who baye as much for the blood of your own white brothers as for the races and religions that would gladly see us all gone from the map. As a committed Christian I have very traditional views on marriage but no way would I want to see a society in which many of you on here or who agree with you had any influence. I hold the position on homosexuality that you’ll find in the Catechism of the Catholic Church: homosexuals are simply homosexual, homosexual sex is a sin, it can be a struggle for them, they should be celibate and we should pray for them.

    I’ll find another route to doing my bit to save the race and the awesome civilisation it has created but in order to do so I will work against the festering hate within the Alt-Right that has the real potential to do more harm than good. You want normies to get red pilled? When I show them these essays and the comments below (and I will) no sane person, no Christian and especially none of your target demographic will touch you with a barge pole. Where wisdom and unity, mutual support and sound morals are essential you offer terror, violence, vulgarity and division. As such you are anti civilisation, whatever you may tell yourselves in your increasingly hermetically sealed echo chamber.

    What the f*ck is wrong with us white people that we start something vital for our survival and then before we’re off the ground we have WN 1.0 LARPERS talking about camps and ropes. I’m out and as I said above, I’ll now be working against the movement known as the Alt-Right. I won’t be reading the immature bitchy responses so don’t bother.

    • Mikael Jackson 27 September, 2017 at 19:13 Reply

      The WN 1.0 larpers should be shamed, they’re the same people who showed up at the Charlottesville rallies with swastikas and hoods. The alt-right has to project an image more like the pre-rally torch march if it wants to move forward instead of back. Honestly these three articles were something I’d expect from Anglin’s site instead of altright.coms. This reaction is precisely why they shouldn’t have been posted. Plenty of people will feel the same way. There was a better way to say all of this, and it was a shame they didn’t take it and instead went the provocative, pointlessly irritating route.

      However I am surprised that you’re surprised by the comments section. If you post any incendiary article anywhere on the internet you’re going to get loons agreeing with you and taking things to extremes right alongside well reasoned counter-arguments. I never expected it to be otherwise. Especially here.

      • Cornelius 27 September, 2017 at 19:31 Reply

        Dealing with the White Nationalist world for close to two decades, I’ve often found that there are very few missteps or accidental strategic decisions which result in unforeseen blowback and negative consequences. I find it hard to believe that someone thought this was a great idea and the drama was just a consequence of implementing a greater strategy. To the contrary, creating drama was THE strategy. Think about it for a minute….

        Stormfront was flushed in the blink of an eye after two decades. Daily Stormer was confined to the bowels of the Internet. Other websites have been seized and banned. Many other pro-White websites and their ability to fund their websites are on life support. But someone thought this kind of divisiveness in this kind of hostile atmosphere was a brilliant move to advance this website?

        It’s NEVER an accident.

  12. Riopel 27 September, 2017 at 15:14 Reply

    Would it kill you to use White or European instead of “non-jews?”

    Fucking hell, even Alt Righters just don’t get it.

  13. David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 12:53 Reply

    I’d be interested in Richard Spencer’s views on this, but he seems only intermittently active in politics. As I’ve pointed out on Gab a number of times, he surfaces one every four or five weeks, leaving AltRight.com to Vincent Law, who could well lay claim to being the real leader of the AltRight.

    Spencer has on a number of occasions implied that he is not exercised by the gay issue, and that he wants to create a modern AltRight and not a Nazi retread. Having seen Greg Johnson’s behaviour I agree that this man seems prone to hissy fits, and the Jorjani episode showed having non-traditional groups in the AltRight and particularly trying to take it over throws up risks. But I think Andrew Joyce and people like him are also a threat to the AltRight of a different kind.

    Too many people can’t see through to the real issue, which is demographic. America can survive the odd gay bathhouse, but won’t survive mass immigration. Look, would you rather have a non-reproducing gay couple in your street, or a couple of Pakistans with 5 children in two? If you side with the straight Pakistanis – and the Muslims would approve of the death penalty for gay sex – then you have chosen national suicide already.

    Would you defend Milo against Islamic extremists? If you can’t say yes to that question, then the AltRight is likely to flounder at a time when it was presented with an opportunity to grow. Don’t be your own worst enemies: accept the opportunity to develop as a broad counter culture that has now been given to you.

    Someone was expelled for asking someone if he had ever had feelings towards another man. I don’t think it is exactly right to imply that the person he was taunting would definitely have had such feelings. But, head out of ass time here: the % of men who have had such feelings is not low. See https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/08/16/half-young-not-heterosexual/ for a British survey: only 46% of 18-24 year old young men claim to be 100% heterosexual. You could well argue that society has to create an environment that encourages those who feel a % of bisexuality in themselves to choose a non-barren, reproductive lifestyle. But in point of fact, the number of young men who will be aware of some feelings for the same sex is very large indeed – and this is ultimately an irrelevance to the core issue of preventing immigration. I think Richard Spencer realises this.

    • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 13:18 Reply

      I’m a threat to this movement because I drew attention to the promotion of pederasty within the movement.

      I’m not sure we’re in the same movement David.

        • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 14:42 Reply

          Ah I see. You’re a libertarian. We are in different movements then, or at least come from radically different ideological backgrounds. Jedem das seine.

          • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 15:44

            Well the Libertarian Alliance took a strong anti-immigration and anti-multi-culturalism line, or at least let me write dozens of articles for them in that vein. Now it has become Mises UK, I think they may have dropped much of the racial/cultural stuff, opting for boring articles on tax instead. In any case, you don’t get to declaim on whether I am AltRight or not, as there is no such membership organisation. I could just as easily see you as a SPLC plant, designed to keep the AltRight linked to bizarre neo-Nazi theories and preventing a modern and appropriate form of white nationalism from emerging. For your information, I do oppose immigration by all non-whites and favour free migration between white nations only. I’m probably to the right of you on some issues. Of course I see thta homosexuality is part of a set of issues promoting hedonism and disfavouring births, but at the same time it is a foible that a minority has always displayed and given the chance of allying with Milo et al against BLM or sitting in a group of three people clutching Nazi flags and acheiving nothing, i would encourage you to do the former. You will lose your nation if you don’t. You are in the last chance saloon. You don’t have the luxury of time. Why can’t you understand that?

          • iemand 27 September, 2017 at 18:11

            Jesus christ, the Jews are responsible and you want to ally with with Jews, how thick can you be?

            (first two minutes)

            (start from 2:25)

            (first 30 seconds)

            (watch from 6:00 till 7:40)

            (Watch till 2:40)

            (start from 2:00)

            (Watch till 4:08)

            (Best chess player ever and part Jew himself)

      • unpaidpundit 27 September, 2017 at 21:04 Reply

        In recent decades, “gay ghettos” (with “ghetto” not having the implication of poverty) have tended to develop in all major Western cities. At this point, many of these neighborhoods are no longer particularly gay because of increasing real estate prices. Greenwich Village in New York, for instance, used to be a gay ghetto. I have never heard of law enforcement targeting a gay ghetto as a nest of pederasty. If there truly were a necessary link between homosexuality and pederasty, then straight families would fear to take their children into gay neighborhoods. Obviously affluent straight families have displaced gays in places like Greenwich Village and the Castro in San Francisco, so parents of children have had no problem living with gays, as long as a significant number of gays could still afford the real estate.

      • Dark Construct 27 September, 2017 at 23:58 Reply

        You’re focusing on something that is a side issue, do we really need to give the left one more thing to make us look less attractive? Like it or not gays are always going to be part of our race in a small minority, what would you propose we do with them? Execute them because it offends your god? We should be focusing on racial issues, not on people’s sexuality. I would agree that male homosexuality isn’t healthy in comparison to heterosexuality, but as long as it isn’t promoted and people in the movement of that persuasion aren’t promoting it, then it really is a non-issue. Right now we need to be building a mass movement, every homosexual or lesbian I’ve met in this movement is fine keeping their sexuality to themselves, and are pro-traditionalist, so really, what’s the problem?

        • craicher 28 September, 2017 at 01:19 Reply

          The penalty for sodomy and pederasty in Medieval Sweden (I believe it was called triple whore) was death. Same for bestiality (tidelag). How many were tried and convicted? ZERO. Why? Because nobody did it. And that is according to a left wing activist Swedish historical fiction novel writer Jan Guillou. Even he had to admit that it is not possible that it existed and no one was ever caught or tried (imagine how little to none at all privacy one had back then).

          So no, homos and pederast will not always be with us. And once the pederasts are given their just rewards at the end of a rope their ability to reproduce by raping children will be taken from them and the numbers of homos will fall off a cliff in one generation.

    • Oscar Madison 27 September, 2017 at 14:59 Reply

      Look, would you rather have a non-reproducing gay couple in your street, or a couple of Pakistanis with 5 children instead? If you side with the straight Pakistanis – and the Muslims would approve of the death penalty for gay sex – then you have chosen national suicide already.

      Why would I choose either?

      Why would I need another counter culture full of fahgs and muzzys?

      • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 15:48 Reply

        Because the subcultures including what you term fags and muzzies are already in the US. White nationalists are not in the majority. And you need allies if you are to achieve anything at all quickly enough to stop the historic American nation becoming a minority. Be purist if you like in a Hitlerian sense -and 10 million Muslims will just walk in. That is what you will achieve. you think you’re in favour of America’s national survival? No. you’re a useful idiiot who is working for the decline. Possibly an SPLC plant just like the clown at Charlottesville with a Nazi flag.

        • Lothar von Trotha 27 September, 2017 at 16:23 Reply

          It’s a tough spot. We could a) reach out to gays because they’re threatened by Muslims, or b) reach out to Muslims because they don’t like gays. These sorts of shitty choices exist all across the spectrum, with all of them forcing us to concede one important point to focus on another, when we don’t want a wholesale LQBTQII+ society devoid of Muslims any more than a society of towelheads, devoid of gays. Both options are even worse than our present situation, as many compromises end up being, because you lose any legitimacy in standing what you actually stand for by compromising. Obviously, a cold and calculating plan to “trick” one group or another into a temporary alliance, and later say “actually we don’t like camel jockeys/fanooks” later on is the most expedient, if least honorable, sort of realpolitik way of maneuvering, but such things are difficult to pull off from tightknit conspiracies, much less broad coalition movements.

          As always, it’s “be exclusive, cling tightly to ironclad principles, and be laughably small and get nothing done,” vs. “be broader/big tent and be bigger, but lose some of your principles and still be too small and get nothing done.” The solution would obviously be “win over the masses by sticking to virtuous and necessary principles, overcome the Jews’ dishonesty with brilliant truth,” but making the slightest progress toward any such goal without the media turning the people against you by dominating the coverage, and endless drama/infighting in your own movement, has thus far proved an impossibility. It’s a tough rut, and I don’t think the greatest strategists of yore could figure out a damn thing to do about all this. I think about it constantly and tend to end up with not a single realistic idea to get us out of this downward spiral. It’s like being a South African in 1985, with modern foreknowledge of what would transpire, and being completely unable to arrest the momentum of what Denis Goldberg/Ruth First etc. brought into being for the gentiles of South Africa.

          • Cornelius 27 September, 2017 at 16:46

            Homosexuals have always been contained within White Western society. Muslims have not. White homosexuals and all the current flavors of sexual orientation and gender identity—even though they are confused and unstable—still have a biological connection to the Western world. They usually have a biological link to someone who is heterosexual, White and even pro-White. That link can often be used to find amicable solutions. Muslims generally don’t have this link.

            You’re completely missing the point of the argument. How many enemies can you simultaneously fight before it becomes a numerical impossibility to protect and preserve what you claim to be preserving? Any sane and semi-intelligent man would try to get as many supporters as possible, while lessening opposition as much as possible. The best you can hope for in a lot of cases is INDIFFERENCE. When you take that indifference and turn it into opposition, you’re making your job considerably harder. When you take support and turn it into opposition, you’re basically ensuring that you’ll run out of friends and allies long before you run out of enemies.

          • iemand 27 September, 2017 at 18:17

            Do you have any idea how many people are getting sick and tired of the lgbt+ community? do you have any idea how many people are getting sick and tired of multiculturalism? Do you have any idea of how many people are getting sick and tired of anti-white propaganda? Do you have any idea how many people are getting sick and tired of the rampant degeneracy in our Western societies?

            THOSE PEOPLE are the ones the alt right needs to reach out too, those are the ones the alt right needs to ally with. Not the degenerate homosexual multicultural hordes themselves.

          • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 21:14

            I am sick of LGBT propaganda too – and I detest the lGBT and LGBTQ words. I don’t think the AltRight can accept anyone in its ranks who wants to see the pro-gay propaganda continue. But private behaviour? Come on!

          • FinMin Taylor Swift 27 September, 2017 at 21:23

            Private behavior has the annoying habit of becoming public under the circumstances of blackmail and secret unseen cabals to the mutual benefit of degenerate subcultures. You make no argument anyone hasn’t seen before.

          • Lothar von Trotha 27 September, 2017 at 20:46

            I’m not missing the point, I’m just suggesting that if he thinks ceding ground on something we genuinely believe in, because the gays will somehow bring some big fruity legions that will provide significant assistance in vanquishing our enemies is going to happen, well….it isn’t.

            Things are looking pretty shitty either way, I would say that sticking to your guns makes the most sense if making “alliances” with groups like gays, which most of them would not agree to, isn’t going to do a goddamn thing to restore traditional gender roles or remove kebab or remove watermelon anyway.

            As I stated, gays are precisely like other groups in that they see more space for themselves if the traditional center is whittled away at. When (straight) White men fall, so these groups believe, the natural inheritors will be women, quadriplegics, cripples, clowns, Hindoos, Mohametans, i.e. the “coalition of the ascendant” in all its putrescence.

        • Crud Bonemeal 27 September, 2017 at 16:40 Reply

          Gays are 2% of the population.

          They’re not important allies.

          The defense of the historic American nation does not depend on coddling a tiny minority of old queers.

          • Crud Bonemeal 27 September, 2017 at 16:48

            Get ready for the rise of ROY MOORE NATIONALISM

            http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2017/09/27/the-rise-of-senator-roy-moore/

            We’re going to have a US senator who openly brandishes firearms at
            political rallies, who despises the SPLC who had him removed from the
            Alabama Supreme Court, who believes Christianity should inform our
            government, who has the backbone to defy federal judges, who bans
            cigarettes, drinking and profanity at his events and who believes
            homosexuality should be illegal. Aside from openly endorsing Alabama’s
            secession, it doesn’t get anymore based than that in American politics.

          • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 17:00

            I think it is quite significant that Richard Spencer and Andrew Joyce and the others have surrounded themselves with so many people who have basic cogitation problems. The gays are 2%, or in my view less, of the population. I read 1.4% somewhere and 1.8% in another source. The gay proportion of the population at large may not be statistically significant to appeal to. But we are talking about whether to allow highly moitivated and intelligent white advocates who happen to be gay to take part in the counterculture. The fact that gays at large are 2% does not mean Greg Johnson, or Jack Donovan, or Milo, or someone like Pim Fortuyn, cannot make quite significant contributions to expanding the Overton window and encouraging white identity. In their case, each of them has something to offer, and most of these are doing more than nearly everyone in this thread. They are much more than 2% of the people making a difference . And as 54% of young British men say they are not fully straight, you might find that allowing latitude allows you to connect with large numbers of young white men, much more than 2%. Crud, if you don’t understand my argument, get an IQ test. Maybe you have Negroid IQ?

          • Johnny Fascismo 27 September, 2017 at 23:28

            Yep. Not at all worth alienating the kind of people who are already sympathetic to us, who will actually show up to our rallies and will actually fight alongside us. No gays allowed!

    • Lothar von Trotha 27 September, 2017 at 16:17 Reply

      It’s pretty easy to just say “The agendas of neither Milo nor those Pakistanis represent what I want to see in my nation.” Milo is a media hound who stands for little but enriching himself by vague references to “free speech” and against “SJW’s,” his promotion of classical liberalism pushes a sort of individualism wherein one can’t set a racial or moral standard for a society because it encroaches on someone else’s freedom. Taken to its logical extent, one can’t prefer driving on one side of the road, can’t prefer any sort of standard whatsoever because everything is atomized and dependent on individual preference. One can’t possibly exclude races or behaviors because of “universal” rights (which not even Thomas Paine, much less the rest of the Founders, would support in the modern context).

      Meanwhile, one can say “I would prefer a society composed of White/European/Western people, rooted in the family and the land, focused on creating the brightest and happiest people, with a balance of individual freedom and responsibility to maintain the sorts of safe, prosperous, homogeneous, and orderly communities which are necessary for prosperity and actual progress.” This is obviously in line with the actual way to create a good society, yet neither Milo nor the Pakistanis would promote it because it doesn’t give them leeway to push their interests, so both of them can fuck off.

      • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 16:29 Reply

        “The agendas of neither Milo nor those Pakistanis represent what I want to see in my nation.” No: you don’t get to say that. Because the Alt Right is 1% of the population or less, and without allies they achieve nothing. So the choice not to ally with anyone is a choice to have a Paki/Chinese/Hispanic takeover. you can pretend you haven’t made that choice, but you have. That is why Andrew Joyce may be an SPLC plant, or is otherwise doing a good impression of one. Just like the man with the Nazi flag in Charlottesvile.

        • Lothar von Trotha 27 September, 2017 at 16:41 Reply

          Dr. Joyce has been writing excellent articles for the Occidental Observer for years, you’re doing yourself no favors by making such a ridiculous and wild accusation as that. Morris Dees, Richard Cohen, Mark Potok et al. would in no reality that has ever existed promote someone who has exposed the maleficence of the tribe in the way Dr. Joyce has, that was truly an outlandish remark.

          I do get to say that, because neither Milo nor the hypothetical Pakistanis represent what I or anyone here wants to see in our nation. What you probably meant to say is something like “you may not find them ideal, but you will have to work together on the common ground you hold with certain groups if you want to get anything done,” which may be true. That does not entail defending either of those groups were they to come to blows, in fact the most elementary strategist knows to keep his enemies fighting and wring victory out of the aftermath. Liu Bei investing Jingzhou after Sun and Cao fought at Hefei after Red Cliffs, for example.

          Being that “allying” with non-Whites to fight non-Whites will not result in a White nation any more than simply being pro-White, there is no gain from such alliances or compromises and only the loss of moral high ground. The allies we need are our own people, who need to be brought to understand what is going on. They are the only choice we have at victory, not some sort of Castlereagh/Metternich playing of one faction against another to toy with the balance.

    • unpaidpundit 27 September, 2017 at 20:48 Reply

      Furthermore, homosexuality occurs in all races. Perhaps the reason homosexuality evolved was to put the brakes on human reproduction, thereby preventing overpopulation within a society. The particularly censorious attitude towards homosexuality in the West did enter from the Old Testament. Homosexuality exists in Japan, where it was depicted in Feudal era art, just as it appeared in the art of the ancient Greeks and Romans. Non-native religions were not allowed to take hold in Japan, (at least after Buddhism made its way to the country) so I understand that modern Japanese still do not see homosexuality as a moral issue, or certainly do not become exercised about it. And, Japan’s population is shrinking, and has been for a while. The Japanese have chosen to survive as a people not by stamping out homosexuality, but by restricting immigration.

  14. Albionic American 27 September, 2017 at 12:36 Reply

    Speaking of Romans and homosexuality:

    This restored scene in Stanley Kubrick’s movie Spartacus portrays homosexuality as the practice of brutal men who want to humiliate their inferiors.

  15. Jaded Diaspora 27 September, 2017 at 12:04 Reply

    Those who argue in favor of accepting homosexuals — whether they want to believe it or not — owe their arguments to a cultural context that is actively hostile to our people.

    Had the Alt-right movement taken place earlier — even as short as twenty years ago — the homosexual question would not be nearly as controversial in our ranks. If we had dissenters at all, they would be few, or they would be silent. As recently as the 1990s there was much less expectation that homosexuality would, or even should be, accepted. While the narratives of homosexual acceptance were being propagated amongst the sexually normal by (((the usual suspects))), they had not yet taken hold in such a popular way. To use the LGBTspeak, there were still relatively few straight “allies”.

    Thus, this very debate — the very fact that we have to arbitrate on this issue — is testament to how sick our society has become. Were the engines of our society’s sexual entropy not given the gas through a massive propaganda campaign, this conversation would not be necessary. Our instinctual repulsion and shaming of homosexuals would be intact, and the homosexual’s instinctual fear of reprisal would largely disincentivize their sexually dysgenic behavior.

  16. kaarekazai 27 September, 2017 at 11:54 Reply

    Is this the home alone day for the kids at altright.com? Banning people for arguing against you when you your self go totally out of line?

    Are there any grownups here? This is the way to totally destroy this brand. We are all “right wing extremists” here. Why go totally crazy just for getting some reasonable arguments for a litle bitt of moderation?

    • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 11:57 Reply

      We’ve tolerated spam that doesn’t address the article for more than two days, and given warnings. The spammers continued with the usual nonsense “you’re christcucks, boomer closet queers etc.” Or entirely irrelevant comments, homo apologetics, or simple trolling. This is a final warning. Contribute something constructive, leave, or get banned.

      • kaarekazai 27 September, 2017 at 12:16 Reply

        I replied to your comment with your “6 commandments” and the 6. of them that i find totally destructive for our wider cause.

        Will you debate or will you just delite all the followers of this sight?

        Do you by the way think that it is ok for people to threaten fellow alt-righters with the gallows here on this tread?

        • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 12:23 Reply

          If you find it destructive to our cause to ask homosexuals to stop promoting their condition as normal or superior then you aren’t part of our cause in the first place. Final warning.

    • craicher 27 September, 2017 at 12:07 Reply

      We are not a brand of shoes or fast food; we are a movement and we seek to rule; thus, we will remove those, like homo/pedos, who subvert and destroy us and our people.

      • Cornelius 27 September, 2017 at 14:10 Reply

        Since you’re keen on the idea of removing dissent and ruling over others, then I’ll assume you have no problem when those with more money and clout(and a stronger brand) decide that removing your dissent from the Internet and destroying your ability to make money and provide for your family is just part of a process for them to keep power.

        I swear it’s almost like you’re daring someone to deep-six you and this website. You’re just a screen name who boasts about ruling over others and fantasizing about the Day of the Rope. I doubt you have much in life to lose. But some people here are a lot more than a screen name, and I assume have a lot more to lose than just their screen name being banned.

        • craicher 27 September, 2017 at 19:12 Reply

          That is what those you speak of already do. And in many nations our right to expression and organization is already limited thus our very right to exist is threatened. Therefore, yes, once we take power we return the favor in kind. I’ll speak for myself, I don’t advocate for a liberal/libertarian new order and I believe most of us here agree.

          The Day of the Rope, the Camps, the Tribunal is rhetorical yet if all things continue as (((they))) plan then it is inevitable. I am not making personal threats to anyone yet looking into my crystal ball. May you live in interesting times.

          • Aville Advocate 28 September, 2017 at 15:39

            What’s the gameplan when the alt-right goes from movement to ethnostate and those beautiful white men and women keep having beautiful white babies and, a few years down the road, Little Adolf wants to play dress-up and has zero interest in fishing? Won’t be any Jews around to blame it on. You just gonna “remove” him from the population?

          • craicher 28 September, 2017 at 16:40

            You mean the code of the warrior as we will no longer use infantile relic terms from before the Revolution like game plan. After the Revolution, the Day of the Rope, the Tribunal, The Great Purge and the Cleansing Time in that order, this will only be know in museums where we teach of the evils when ZOG ruled the world.

          • Aville Advocate 28 September, 2017 at 17:39

            Uh huh. My very honest question about what would happen to gay white children born in the alt-right ethnostate gets deleted? No contingency for that 100% certainty. Got it.

  17. Tay 27 September, 2017 at 11:23 Reply

    “When Europeans began to legalize both birth control and abortion 40
    years ago, a few years after Roe vs. Wade (1973), the Catholic Church
    warned of the risk of Europe entering into a “morbid civilization.”
    This, of course, is the same Catholic Church likely to be denounced as
    “Judaic” by James O’Meara and his sponsors. In truth, and as someone
    raised in a Protestant home, I must concede that had the Catholic Church
    had more power to enforce its doctrine, Europe would still be
    flourishing demographically, and a mass Muslim invasion would be nothing
    but a nightmare never to come to fruition.”

    No, if the Catholic Church had the power to enforce its doctrine, we’d have a much larger mass Muslim invasion as they are currently among its most relentless promoters. And if you had 80 million Europeans in Britain instead of 55 million, it would not in any way prevent the Pakistanis from coming, it would just mean more White taxpayers to extract money from. And many of the counter-factual Whites would be the stupider of the race, abortion is the one and only eugenic measure we have.

    As for the fact that they are “evolutionary dead ends,” well, how many of you are as well, single males with no plans to marry? I am. I’d bet the alt-right is one of the most single of political movements, there’s a big overlap with MGTOW, and that’s a good thing: it means we see through the feminist propaganda. Many of those most pushing this agenda are women or their beta orbiters, and one of the reasons for that is to stigmatize men who go their own way as “evolutionary dead ends” or “race traitors.”

    I still think an argument can be made against tolerance of homosexuality for other reasons, such as the data on diseases and psychopathic and other personality traits among homosexuals. But the fact that 99% of the time it is paired with apologetics for forms of Cucktianity hostile to Whites like the Catholic Church, dysgenic policies, and feminism, should give pause to anyone who mindlessly supports it on the basis of “ew fags.” Whose agenda are you promoting?

  18. Albionic American 27 September, 2017 at 10:52 Reply

    I liked Andrew Joyce’s discussion on one Alt Right podcast I listened to about the forgotten legacy of European folktales about Jews. These stories, which often portrayed Jews as abductors of white children for human sacrifices, show up all over medieval Europe for some mysterious reason, and they clearly had the function of warning white Europeans not to have any dealings with Jews.

    Jews probably appear in other guises as supernatural characters who endanger white children, like Rumpelstiltskin, the Pied Piper, the wolf in Little Red Riding-Hood and the witch in Hansel and Gretel.

    I have to wonder if the Jewish impulse to prey on white boys, especially, manifests in our time as the Jewish homosexual and pedophile.

    • LyovMyshkin 2 October, 2017 at 06:35 Reply

      My nephew and niece have a lot of modern children’s books and it’s amazing how often the theme is ‘Trust the stranger’ or ‘The scary monster down the way is actually cuddly and pretending don’t judge him’ or even ‘Never judge something by its appearance no matter how frightening it is’.

      The cultural rot goes so deep.

      • Goblin 4 October, 2017 at 17:13 Reply

        Mr Myshkin:
        I had to come down here, far from Bond turf to thank you and express my admiration.

        You did yeoman’s work on the hebrew lynch mob that infests that chan.

        You left them in complete disarray.

        Well done, my friend

        and Thanks !

        • LyovMyshkin 5 October, 2017 at 06:05 Reply

          It’s good advice. Hey BTW dude I know we’re going at it over on the other thread but I genuinely don’t have anything against you. Just like a good debate and we genuinely disagree. Hope you’re enjoying it as much as I am.

  19. LiddyLiberty 27 September, 2017 at 10:32 Reply

    I am not a very religious person. If anything, I am more of a Deist, following the thoughts of Voltaire. Something in me believes there is a God, but I don’t think he involves himself with the affairs of humanity, much less in the sexual morality, or immorality, of any one or two particular individuals. Thus, I never agreed with Christians who said homosexuals were immoral, just as I never agreed that masturbation or pre-marital sex was immoral. I have, however, changed my mind on homosexuals. Don’t get me wrong. It is not because of their sexual orientation. It is because they are stealing money from Americans. They wanted same sex marriage because they wanted government benefits, in the form of lower taxes, social security, free or subsidized health insurance (e.g., for same sex spouses of state and federal gov’t employees), etc. In other words, they wanted money. They claimed the constitution gives them a right to that money. It does not. It did not in 1787 and it was not added in 1865 when homosexuality was a criminal offense in every state in the country. They could not get what they wanted by voting, so the liberals instead decided to steal the money using the power of the government. Anybody who is reasonably objective knows that is what is happened, no matter how much they lie to claim the Constitution guarantees free money to gay people. So now gay people who marry and take that money are receiving stolen property. Regardless of your religion, everyone knows that is immoral. So now I agree with the Christians (only, for different reasons). Gay people are immoral.

  20. Albionic American 27 September, 2017 at 10:25 Reply

    The blogger agnostic argues that we can see male homosexuality as a product of boys who stop developing emotionally at the girls-are-yucky stage, though they continue to mature sexually and intellectually. Just look at how boys lack self-control regarding candy, for example; they need adults to discipline them for their own good. If you gave a five-year-old boy testosterone and access to alcohol and other recreational drugs, you would get a male homosexual.

  21. Lurker 27 September, 2017 at 09:50 Reply

    We need to come up with a new term for the pro-homo wing of the AltRight embodied by CC & company. Any suggestions? “Fag-Right” is too obvious.

  22. Iskalla 27 September, 2017 at 09:16 Reply

    There is no conclusion here. Are you proposing we aim to change our culture and attitude towards homosexuality, or that we persecute, criminalise and imprison perceived ‘deviants’? I’m sympathetic towards the former, the latter not so much. I’m just not sure it works, having visited racially homogenous, stable countries that have never implemented these measures.

    • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 09:19 Reply

      My advice to homosexuals is this:

      1. Keep your mouth shut. Don’t pretend you’re better than normal people with some “elitist cultural” nonsense. Something went wrong in the womb or your childhood. You are an evolutionary dead end.

      2. Don’t aspire to leadership.

      3. Don’t promote your condition as normal or superior.

      4. Don’t attack fellow nationalists because their religion is hostile to your condition.

      5. Stay away from our youths.

      6. If caught violating any aspect of the above conditions expect to be dealt with harshly.

      • Celestial Time 27 September, 2017 at 09:41 Reply

        Advice is what you give people to help them grow and achieve higher levels of productivity in their lives. I’m not getting that vibe. What you’re doing is simply fantasizing about attaining the power needed to shout out directives.

        • craicher 27 September, 2017 at 09:46 Reply

          No they will be laws just like the laws that our ancestors always gave us to protect children and society from criminally insane sexual deviants.

          • Celestial Time 27 September, 2017 at 09:50

            Like I said, fantasizing about attaining the power needed to shout out directives. You’re gonna go from barely being able to support yourself and this movement to implementing laws? That’s one hell of a trick considering you tend to make a lot more enemies than allies.

          • Celestial Time 27 September, 2017 at 10:22

            That sounds like a direct threat. You really shouldn’t be doing that kind of stuff.

            If you’re ever in the Nashville area you can explain to me the intricacies of Revolution and my ultimate demise on the Day of the Rope. Let me know if you need gas money.

          • craicher 27 September, 2017 at 10:26

            It is not. A statement that when we take our nations back the pedo/homos will be dealt with as it is fitting. Those that take the wrong side…the Rope.

            You are not worth going to prison over. May we meet on the battlefield or the tribunal where you will answer for your crimes after the Revolution.

          • Celestial Time 27 September, 2017 at 10:36

            I’m married and have kids. Never had a homosexual relationship or contact. But I have been with two women more than a few times, so maybe that counts as my homosexual experience.

            Again, do you need gas money to get to Nashville to personally explain to me the ultimate demise I will face when the big Revolution comes and I’m forced to atone for my sins on the Day of the Rope? I’m not good with Internet posturing. I much prefer face-to-face interactions when it comes to hashing out indifferences and misunderstandings.

          • craicher 27 September, 2017 at 10:39

            Must be a Nashville jew. Like I said, you are not worth prison over but once the final breakdown of society happens and the war is on, I will be happy to meet you.

            And I’d put money on it that you are not a Southerner.

        • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 09:55 Reply

          You’re not totally wrong. I’d like more power as much as the next man. We’re here to struggle and fight for it after all.

  23. (((Shill))) 27 September, 2017 at 08:36 Reply

    So I’ve been coming here since early this year, and I can say that this is the first time I’ve been truly disappointed with the comment section. These purity spiraling boomer faggots seriously need to sit back and ask themselves how they’ll grow this movement by attacking anyone they disagree with.

    • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 08:56 Reply

      You’re obfuscating and muddying the waters. Do you believe that homosexuals should be styling themselves as “thought leaders,” or spokesmen for White Nationalism? Are these “boomer faggots” attacking “anyone they disagree with” or merely attacking the proponents and apologists for pederasty? Clarify your own thinking before posting, attacking and demeaning your movement brothers while preaching “unity.”

      • Celestial Time 27 September, 2017 at 09:00 Reply

        Isn’t the idea of a “thought leader” in this context an obfuscation? Are you talking about someone who actively and forcefully pushes the Homosexual Agenda or someone with the talent and skills to inform, educate and organize who just so happens to be homosexual?

        • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 09:12 Reply

          Not an obfuscation at all. I think we all know who I’m referring to, and it’s already been stated in the article what he’s published.

          • Celestial Time 27 September, 2017 at 09:24

            So you wrote a 3-part article which was directed at one single person?

            Greg has been writing and speaking up for pro-White interests for a long time. Many wannabe writers and “leaders” have wormed their way through the pro-White world in the past 10-20 years. I don’t always agree with what Greg writes, but I admire anyone who can do what he does for as long as he’s been doing it, and not implode and burn out from all the White Nationalist drama.

            How long have you been doing this?

          • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 09:57

            I’ve been in or around this movement for 15 years, had my home raided and been arrested and thrown in jail for this cause. And not once did I publish pederastic trash.

          • Celestial Time 27 September, 2017 at 10:06

            I know a lot of people that have had cops come to their homes and been arrested and thrown in jail. I’ve known guys that had their homes and businesses destroyed. I’ve known guys who were assaulted. I’ve known guys who were killed. I’ve known guys who killed. I’ve known guys who simply burned out from all the drama. I’ve seen what Greg has written over the years. I’ve never really paid attention to or seen anything you’ve written.

          • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 10:52

            Don’t worry. Many have. I’m quite happy for you to pass me by and continue with your Greg admiration. Also, your own reading habits have nothing to do with the content of the article.

      • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 12:14 Reply

        Andrew Joyce, you constantly conflate homosexuality and pederasty, which are not the same thing. I’ll agree that most gay men like significantly younger men. And you also didn’t get into the fact in your article that one-third of victims of child abuse are boys, when gay men are 2% of society, which suggests gay men are 16 times more likely to commit child abuse. But still, pederasty is not the same thing as homosexuality. As I pointed out in my initial comment, gay men who try to take over nationalist organisations should expect to be rejected. E.g if Jack Donovan wanted to replace Richard Spencer, that would ring alarm bells. But still this whole discussion FORGETS the main issue: Andrew Joyce, you don’t really want a white ethno-state, do you? You would prefer to argue about homosexuality in the final few years – the LAST CHANCE – to stop Hispanics from flooding in such numbers as would destroy the country for ever. If you can’t find your way to saying “you can be gay, and can be in the Alt Right, but you have to accept there will be no gay marriage or gay adoption, and you won’t be admitted to a leadership role” and then moving on to the main issue of anti-immigration (an issue where all allies are needed), then you are choosing national suicide. I know you don’t mean to, but by diverting energy, that is what you do.

        • Johnny Fascismo 27 September, 2017 at 12:26 Reply

          Gays are irrelevant to our struggle. Their only about 2% of the population and only about 2% of gays are “on” our side. They cause more harm than their worth to us.

          • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 12:37

            I agree the raw numbers, as you say 2% of 2%, which sounds about right, are tiny. But as I stated in my first post, gay men are not normies. They are by definition not normies. That means the 2% of them that are on the Right are often prepared to say clearly what other people won’t say. Greg Johnson openly called in his NYT interview for a deportion of an entire ethnic group. I think maybe alienation from the mainstream produces a willingness among homosexuals to say “to hell with the Overton window”.

            In any case, a broad counter culture, which the Alt Right should be, should not just be a political party, but include novels, films, art criticsm, magazines and all sorts. Like a genuine subculture. And subcultures include room for more than one view, and for opposing views, and for single-issue campaigners and the like. It is simply risible to be against Milo because he likes “black cock” when he is doing more than anyone in the Alt Right on the important free speech issue. Pim Fortuyn, before he was murdered in Holland, similarly singlehandedly did more than the entire right together to orient the discussion against Islam. Andrew Joyce, what exactly has he achieved? He edits and publishes Washington Summit books, but what impact on the public consciousness has he had.

            I am not issuing an ad hominem against AJ, just pointing out the reality that a group of gays, Jews and others have done more to prepare the ground for he emergence of the AltRight than anyone on AltRight.com. Fact. Time to focus on the one real issue: immigration and multi-culturalism.

            I look for Richard Spencer’s videos on Youtube, but I also watch Ben Shapiro, Stefan Molyneux, Millennial Woes, Immortal Ideas, and Milo Yiannopoulos. Oh, and Ann Coulter. If you can’t accept a broad movement that could emerge as a entire counter culture, you have chosen failure already.

          • Johnny Fascismo 27 September, 2017 at 12:45

            I’m extremely skeptical of the big tent model as anyone who comes here regularly will tell you. 100 people on the same page, working towards the same goals, is more useful than 1000 people whose views are all over the place. Instead of fighting the enemy we end up fighting each other. If it was up to me all of the liberals who don’t like black people would be purged from the movement. Their reformers, not revolutionaries, and all they do is stand in our way. I would rather work with black nationalists than with them tbh.

        • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 12:27 Reply

          One article diverts the whole energy of our movement? It seems to me that all of the panicking has been done on the homo side. You’ve lost your minds over it. All predictable though.

        • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 12:28 Reply

          I don’t conflate homosexuality and pederasty. I provided evidence of the reliance, to a noticeable extent, of the former on the latter.

        • craicher 27 September, 2017 at 19:33 Reply

          We are confronted will all the same evil that Weimar Germany was and thus there are many issues, all related, that we must address. We have a complete world view and are not a one trick pony.

          • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 20:09

            No. You are a no trick pony. You won’t achieve anything. It is easy for the media to paint you as Nazis and you’re failing to focus on the main issue. I have made it clear that public culture has to be family oriented, and that we can’t deal with gay rights, gay marriage or gay adoption. But this poking around in bedrooms can lead nowhere good. While nearly all gay men are lost to the cause, those who are motivated and are doing good work should not be told to p**** off, as long as they accept the primacy of the family and a pro-natalist strategy.

          • craicher 27 September, 2017 at 23:06

            Right. A one issue movement is a movement. We are not in a position to influence policy as we are on the fringes but growing. What we can do is educate people to all of the issues that affect us. The article above and the two before it by Joyce is an excellent piece concerning an issue of great importance and totally related to the virus of the multicult that has infected our people and must be annihilated.

            Keep bringing us more good medicine for this disease Mr. Joyce and one day we will have the cure.

    • Crud Bonemeal 27 September, 2017 at 10:04 Reply

      There are no purity spiraling boomers here.

      There is a broad consensus among the younger, radical elements of the movement that the Alt-Right should promote healthy, adaptive behaviors among whites, not merely stand for “no blacks in my gay bathhouse nationalism”.

      AltRightDOTcom is expressing an extremely uncontroversial point of view along those lines.

      Some mysterious (lol we all know where they came from) homosexual internet defense force showed up to make a big stink about it and the regulars are arguing with them a little bit, but mostly just laughing at the whole thing.

      • (((Shill))) 27 September, 2017 at 10:11 Reply

        I love how you’ve watered down the argument of one side to “no blacks in my gay bathhouse.” Very classy. 👌🏻

      • MaxStirner 28 September, 2017 at 16:07 Reply

        What? This comment section is full of clowns advocating killing or castrating of homos. It’s almost as if you want this whole project to fail…

        Yeah, yeah, I get it. Young guys who wish to be perceived as more extreme than the next guy. A little bit like the Norwegian black metal scene.

        Maybe it’s time for adults to set the rules in here, eh?

        • Crud Bonemeal 28 September, 2017 at 22:50 Reply

          Do you not understand how humans work?

          You start off a negotiation by making your most outrageous demand, then work your way down to something reasonable.

          People are expressing the fact that they are no longer willing to tolerate open homosexuality. And especially not within our movement.

          But if you go back into the closet and stop trying to normalize it… and stay the FUCK away from children, they probably won’t actually throw you off buildings.

          • MaxStirner 29 September, 2017 at 15:02

            I do what I can to convert people in my vicinity to the Altright. I am on your side.

            We have to be smart now. All depend on us being better persons than the left.

            So when I persuade people to e.g. visit this site, I don’t want them to see comments, endorsed by the mods, that advocate killing people “after the Revolution”.

            Why? Because of the human nature, as you might say. The potential supporters will simply turn away. It is not in our interest to let fanatic adolescents represent this movement, at least not officially.

            The mods should therefore not let such comments stand, in my opinion. Surely you agree?

            Richard Spencer use to talk about doing things in the most humane way possible. We must be radical, yes, but also keep our humanity.

    • Zyzz 30 September, 2017 at 00:40 Reply

      I’d rather we not make unnecessary enemies but I think Andrew presents a well thought out, heavily research(and cited) article.

      I think we need to be able to form alliances with gays when appropriate but understand they are not us and we are not them.

  24. Peter 27 September, 2017 at 08:06 Reply

    Mr. Joyce, I would like to ask your opinion on the following questions: a man, given the choice, would he prefer to be homo or hetero? Would the majority of men prefer to be homo? Is being hetero for hetero men a sacrifice and they would rather be homo?

    • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 09:08 Reply

      There are a lot of “ifs” implied in these questions. The mental health statistics would suggest these questions are probably part of the mental troubles of homosexuals. But we are a movement for political change and not a therapy group.

      My advice to homosexuals is this:

      1. Keep your mouth shut. Don’t pretend you’re better than normal people with some “elitist cultural” nonsense. Something went wrong in the womb or your childhood. You are an evolutionary dead end.

      2. Don’t aspire to leadership.

      3. Don’t promote your condition as normal or superior.

      4. Don’t attack fellow nationalists because their religion is hostile to your condition.

      5. Stay away from our youths.

      6. If caught violating any aspect of the above conditions expect to be dealt with harshly.

      • Peter 27 September, 2017 at 09:48 Reply

        Mr. Joyce, lamentable as it may be, but you are losing of my respect. I appreciate your work on jews but your performance here is subpar (all IMO).

          • MaxStirner 28 September, 2017 at 15:56

            Well, you should at least be a little bit concerned. Have you seen the comments in here, written by those who seem to support you? We are dealing with people who are in fierce competion over who’s is the most radical. People who wish to hang the homos “after the Revolution”.

            Seriously, don’t you see the problem? I broadly agree on the homosexuality issue, but this is turning into an echo chamber for fanatics.

            I have great hopes for the Altright, but I do see a threat from within. Maybe you are simply not up for this gargantuan task…

      • kaarekazai 27 September, 2017 at 10:03 Reply

        What power are you dreaming about so that you can dictate this?
        Realism man! Do you think that this kind of threats are going to give us normy support? You sound like these fringe Maoist/Leninist puritans we had in Scandinavia in the 70s. They came to nothing and are all old bitter men now.

        Why not just promote good traditionalist values? And save your rage to the deportations of migrants or the likely soon to come RAHOWA.

        I do not like this gay propaganda either but why go full retard on the issue? Your case is fragile. You know fragile is weak. Don’t be weak.

  25. Trevor Wilson 27 September, 2017 at 08:00 Reply

    Better as you go on, and confidently discuss the topic.

    I definitely agree with that sub-heading.
    Pretty good, he understands the charlatan and doppelganger games (I am you, goyim, look how white I am, whites are terrrrrrible).
    Interesting to note the earliest mention of the third sex, and of its members being womanish homosexuals. Sadly, they weren’t just deviants, but also subversives. Makes me wish older terms of disparagement, or something like “wanton catamite” were revived.
    A good focus on the Jews despising ascetic Christianity, with its mastery over the flesh and rejection of hedonism. This battle continues to this day with all sorts of experts calling for hedonism, in line with the destabilising Jewish ideas, and actual moral Christians that aren’t degenerate trying to resist and hold out. Of course they can resist, as individuals, not so the society.

    “Hirschfeld had “subverted the notion that romantic love should be orientated toward reproduction,” arguing instead for the acceptance of homosexual lifestyles and hedonistic, non-reproductive, sexual relations in general… By the end of the 1920s, Hirschfeld’s activism meant that Weimar Germany saw homosexuality less as a medical disorder and sign of degeneration than as a major cause célèbre. Hirschfeld’s perverse bonanza came to an end in 1933 when on May 6th Nationalist German student organizations and columns of the Hitler Youth attacked the Institute for Sexual Science.”

    Remember, the Nazis were the bad guys, because they sure don’t seem it here.

  26. Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 07:26 Reply

    Note that those objecting to the article number perhaps half a dozen, but together have contributed perhaps 100 comments or more to the three parts. This is precisely what I meant by the noisy homosexual clique. All very predictable.

    • Celestial Time 27 September, 2017 at 08:24 Reply

      The irony of sliding down a slippery slope of predictable behaviors, while making it a point to claim that one particular thing is very predictable, is pretty much what I’ve come to expect from most of the intelligentsia brigade within the pro-White world.

      • craicher 27 September, 2017 at 10:54 Reply

        The fag mafia is real. There will be one very rich old one and he will have a brood of younger ones that he gives jobs or just outright keeps as concubines. Wherever fags have money and power they bring in their own much like the jews, i.e. the mafia. Like a brood of vampires.

        And if you ever go to some event with the most wealthy and important people you will find fags swarming all over the place. Half of them seeming like they don’t work yet live a life of luxury and privilege.

        They have no place amongst us.

    • Mikael Jackson 27 September, 2017 at 18:55 Reply

      I’d argue that MOST of the comments are objecting to how its being said, and the vitirol directed at like minded homosexuals that may or may not agree with the alt-right on… well, everything else.

      “You’re right but how you say it is counter-productive” is a perfectly legitimate counter-argument. It’s the same one leveled at people in the movement who insist on larping as klan members and nazis. “Yeah sure you might have good points, but no one’s going to listen to you if you talk like that or dress like that, and that hurts whatever point you’re trying to make.”

      How you say something is almost always as important as what you have to say. Something that, unfortunately, our side still has yet to take to heart. Though for very valid reasons – many will point out that when the genteel Jared Taylor gets harassed as much or more than someone like Andrew Anglin, why bother with civility? A flawed argument, but one I won’t go into here. I did find it interesting, though, that national socialism was mentioned in the article – part 2, considering that they heavily relied on largely gay stormtroopers early on before the SA was purged.

      Ultimately, there are plenty of gays that agree with us that the gay “culture” is disgusting and abhorrent (the same can be said about modern culture in general, however), that the pederasty displayed by other homosexuals is revolting, that the nuclear family is a core strength that needs to be not only upheld by actively supported by the state, and that indeed agree with us on every facet of the racial questions of the day. Why should we turn them away? Most of the ‘what we should do instead of writing articles like this’ points were made quite well by the commenter Identitarian_Ethic, I thought.

      Why on earth would any sane political movement turn away people that agree with them?

      Alienating them for the right wing equivalent of virtue signaling is pointless and counter-productive.

      The alt-right will never be a homosexual identity promoting movement, and if it ever turns out that way I’ll take a quick exit, stage right. Ditto for if the alt-right suddenly starts trying to say that jewish influence in the media hasn’t proved largely poisonous to whites. But there’s no reason not to let gays who agree with us join us, and every reason to do so for the simple fact that numbers matter.

      Bashing gays when you could promote family values instead to the same effect but without alienating allies is, pardon my language, fucking stupid.

    • Nova Morium 27 September, 2017 at 20:21 Reply

      I don’t mind……

      Let them all come……..

      They need to Hear the Truth……..

      And they need to be Deconstructed……..

      They need to Realize that they can NEVER Usurp this Movement…….

      EVER……

    • Strac5 27 September, 2017 at 22:34 Reply

      I agree with you. Homosexuality is fundamentally inconsistent and incompatible with the alt-right’s philosophy and aims. They cannot be reconciled. I was and am sympathetic to genuinely pro-white gays, but saving ourselves and future whites is more important.

      By the way, I admire your intellect. You are top notch. Thank you for all you do.

    • Aville Advocate 28 September, 2017 at 18:14 Reply

      What is your contingency for gay children born into the white ethnostate that is the alt-right endgame? (HINT: Deleting this comment doesn’t answer the question.)

    • Manuel_Venator 28 September, 2017 at 22:47 Reply

      How about the even noisier two or three shills that are policing the comment section like purity squads and are aggressively outgrouping anyone who dares to object?

  27. GENX140 27 September, 2017 at 06:38 Reply

    The main argument I hear each time from the alt right against homosexuality, is that it’s disgusting. Now try to visualize mr friberg naked fucking his gf. His ugly belly bumping against her ass. The sound of his moaning, with that deep, burp sounding voice. Now that’s disgusting. If most gays saw a video of that, it would turn them straight.
    You think I’m being rude? That’s pretty much to the level of most anti gay comments on here.

      • GENX140 27 September, 2017 at 07:03 Reply

        Dude, I just found the solution to the gay problem. Have friberg make some nude videos and everyone will change orientation.
        You’ll thank me later guys.

        • Sir Dirtbag 27 September, 2017 at 07:11 Reply

          This is the internet and most of us have overdosed on porn years ago. One thing I discovered with the porn thing is that my wife turned out to be quite the kinky little thing. More than me and bet I’m not alone there. So, anyway, don’t need to see the video; my imagination already did it for me. Thanks anyway.

          • GENX140 27 September, 2017 at 07:13

            If you’re straight, that video won’t change you, but it will make sure you’re not tempted by homosexuality. A bit like a vaccine.

  28. GENX140 27 September, 2017 at 04:59 Reply

    We should stop calling this the alt right because they think its some church where we have to follow every commandment. Friberg thinks he’s the pope and we need his benediction on everything we think and do.
    Instead just call it White Nationalism and focus on saving our race.

    • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 05:48 Reply

      I would go a step further and give it a new name altogether that hasn’t been used by Stormfront Cucktians.

      Substantially, it would need to be a movement that differentiates itself from Stormfront Cucktianity because it intends on actually achieving a different result.

      • Daniel Friberg 27 September, 2017 at 06:33 Reply

        Stop trying to reframe the discussion to “Christianity vs. Homo-tolerance”, faggot shills.

        And “Polar Girl”, you are not fooling anyone in here that you are a real girl, even though you probably like to dress up like one.

        • Sir Dirtbag 27 September, 2017 at 06:55 Reply

          How the fuck would you know if Polar Girl is a “real” girl? And what the fuck difference would it make anyway? No wait wait… ping Polar Girl: Please post a full frontal hi def pix so we can decide what difference, at this point, does it make.

        • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 06:56 Reply

          I’m not trying to frame it that way. I’ve posted months ago that the alt-right should be neutral towards homosexuality and opposed to Cucktianity but neutral towards Christians who aren’t a member of a cucked church.

          I thought the pedo ad hominem was desperately grasping for straws but saying I am a man is lols. My point would be the same if I were so there is no incentive to lie about it.

        • kaarekazai 27 September, 2017 at 08:16 Reply

          Hi Daniel. To me this is just a mystery. Can you explain? I personally de think homosexuality is repulsive and i do not at all want gay or lesbian couples to get help from IVF cliniques or surrogats to have children. I do not think that homosexuality should be equalizes with normal hetrosexual couples. And I am also disgusted by the liberal propaganda that “all types of families is normal” and that boundles sex with all its STDs and degeneracy is all good.

          But. Can you tell me. What do you think. Is homosexuality genetic/hormonal or is it learned behaviour?

          I myself think it is biological and science is pretty clear on that. Så are you with the biologists or with the sosialconstructionist leftists on this?

          Also. Why all this conspiracy theorizing? Yes some fags clearly have an agenda but shouldn’t we give the decent gays an option to side with us. Do you think it is wize to make all these individuals pluss their friends and families our enemies? Shouldn’t we at least be a litle bitt pragmatic about it? Like you know… we might soon be in a real RAHOWA in Europe and we might need a litle normy sopport?

  29. Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 04:29 Reply

    I can’t say it enough. How do you keep doing the same Stormfront fail repeatedly and expect a different result? Text book example of insanity.

    Whether gays marry or each other or go to ovens or something in between is irrelevant. What matters is the cognitive dissonance of merging yet another white racialist movement with Cucktianity and expecting a different result. Look at how that worked out for 1980s/1990s nazi skinheads who initially hostile to Cucktianity.

    • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 04:32 Reply

      Polar Girl. You are right. Of course, everyone on the Alt Right must accept the family as central to maintaining our race.

      • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 04:36 Reply

        Family is obviously needed on a personal level to produce and support more white people. What happens though when family is gay?

        The point is either way, it is a personal family decision to handle. A political movement’s job is to maintain ideological discipline and stick purely to the reason it exists.

        • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 04:40 Reply

          Well gay people are not a proper “family”. Put another way, it is a barren household arrangement that is in its own way a microcosm of what is happening to the white race. But to refuse to see that many gay men are against PC and immigration and can play a part is ridiculous. To be wary of their intentions in the movement would nevertheless be prudent (given Jonjani etc).

          • LyovMyshkin 28 September, 2017 at 07:02

            “But to refuse to see that many gay men are against PC and immigration and can play a part is ridiculous.”

            Well anyone ‘could’ play a part couldn’t they, David? Blacks ‘could’ play a part. Jews ‘could’ play a part. The fact is we don’t want or need them to because of principle. Practically speaking though the potential benefits and minute compared to the potential risks.

    • Vincent Law 27 September, 2017 at 04:34 Reply

      No point in being hostile to Christians. You are confusing hostility with exasperation from WN’s to modern day cucked Christians.

      • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 05:01 Reply

        The Pope is demanding that Visegrad and the USA open its borders and his chief cuck, Peter Sutherland makes George Soros look like Steve Bannon. Oh speaking of Soros, he economically backs Alt-right denouncing Russell Moore of the Southern Baptist Convention.

        I have listed on here how many times that Cucktians are worse than leftists and often ended up with the most thumbs up of any comment in an article for many months now.

        Sad that I know your customers better than you do.

        • Vincent Law 27 September, 2017 at 05:05 Reply

          You didn’t address my point at all. You’re probably a delusional wicca/pagan/gaia worshiper who believes that female vikings were a real thing and hate Christianity because you associate it with the patriarchy and shaving.

          • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 05:10

            An Atheist actually. I’m not with “feminists” that support Islam anymore than I am with “White Nationalists” that support Cucktianity.

            The sad era of cognitive dissonance virtue signaling. Worse than hypocrisy but hey, it is the current year.

          • Vincent Law 27 September, 2017 at 05:12

            That last sentence probably made sense in your head, but I assure you, it made little sense and didn’t impress anyone.

            Your hatred for Christians is bizarre. Most Alt-Righters want to bring them into the light, that’s all. We don’t hate them or the religion.

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 05:14

            I don’t think she is one of us. I only saw her start posting yesterday and all she has done is non-stop attack Christians and defend sodomites.

          • Vincent Law 27 September, 2017 at 05:23

            I have found that telling girls about the diseases homos carry is the most effective red-pill. It triggers their “ew, yuck, icky” instinct.

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 05:26

            Yes, but we should also point out facts about them being exceedingly violent predators who target women and children almost exclusively. Fear is an effective deterrent.

          • Vincent Law 27 September, 2017 at 09:45

            I red pilled most of my liberal friend girls on the homo question. But they were Russian so it wasn’t hard.

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 05:22

            Something a Jew would certainly celebrate. Anything that cuts off the goyim from their cultural roots pleases them.

          • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 05:15

            Speak for yourself and know your site customers better. I often get the most comments and upvotes for calling out the racial treason of Cucktians on this site for the last several months long before it was decided to sheepdog them into the Stormfront fold.

      • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 04:39 Reply

        Where did I even mention pedophilia? You are the one who thinks that Catholic priests who like boys as distantly related as possible or Mormons that like little girls as closely related as possible make good racial allies.

        • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:43 Reply

          You are defending counter currents, counter currents promotes pedophilia and uses the same arguments as NMBLA for the legalization and promotion of pedophilia, this can only mean that you fundamentally agree with their positions and the only people who would agree with such depraved filth are pedophiles.

          As for your comment about Catholic priests, less than 1% of them did anything close to pedophilia, while over 50% of all cases of pedophilia involve sodomites, who make up less than 1% of the total population.

          • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 04:48

            There is a huge difference between defending and not taking positions on issues that have little or nothing to do with the primary purpose of a movement. I do have my personal beliefs about many issues that have little or nothing to do with white racialism but it would be a foolish strategy to make them a part of a single issue political movement. Nigel Farage had the wisdom to realize that and the discipline to maintain the course. For all I know, Farage may personally despise gays but was wise not to take a position on that issue for the sake of Brexit.

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:59

            I don’t agree at all. A political party must have and promote a world view. Anything short of this is a failure at worst and a short term fix at best.

          • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 05:19

            If I get banned from a kingdom of a Jew Lord conceived via an act of divine cuckoldry, I will be grateful.

          • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 04:53

            The figure was closer to 6% of priests doing it and the rest knowing but doing nothing yet you are projecting defending NAMBLA onto me!

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:58

            You are defending Counter Currents which means that you are NMBLA as well because they are using the same exact arguments and you need to source that figure otherwise it can only be assumed that you are lying.

    • Johnny Fascismo 27 September, 2017 at 04:38 Reply

      I personally would never want to live in a white ethno-state that is pro-homosexuality and pro-atheist assholes. It is what it is.

      • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 04:43 Reply

        A white ehthno-state could be anti-gay and anti-atheist but it could not be pro-Cucktianity since that is cognitive dissonance beyond feminists supporting Islam.

        • Johnny Fascismo 27 September, 2017 at 04:48 Reply

          Apparently the scope of your historical worldview is 1960’s-present.

          There isn’t going to be any kind of white ethnostate until whites abandon the degenerate modern culture that is heavily influenced by Jewish subverters. Faggotry and Atheism are two pillars of this culture and need to be chopped down.

          • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 04:52

            Um, Jesus Christ was a Jew but worshipping him is a way to rebel against Jews? Yeah, that makes sense. Lol.

          • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 05:07

            Jews are lizards that don’t mind turning on each other. Look at Netanyahu versus Soros? You do realize that Nazi concentration camps had very few Nazis in them and that they were run by capo Jews whose job it was to keep other Jews in line.

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 05:18

            Yes, and not only did they kill him, they sadistically tortured him to death in public and utterly humiliated him. They are beasts.

          • Vincent Law 27 September, 2017 at 05:14

            Modern day Judaism as we know it was born out of Talmudism, around the 4th century AD, when the oral tradition of the elders was codified.

            Calling Jesus a modern-day Jews is incredibly misinformed.

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 05:16

            Not only is it misinformed it is incredibly dishonest. The Jews killed Jesus because he condemned the ‘traditions of the scribes and the pharisees’, which is the Talmud, and called them out. To say his movement, which was anti-Jewish from it’s very inception, is Jewish is at best ignorant and at worst deceitful. He literally called Jews his enemies and children of the devil multiple times.

          • Oscar Madison 27 September, 2017 at 05:42

            Jews had a choice, become Christians and follow jesus to the father, or remain Jews and gain death, they chose death and barabas.

            Jews denied christ as messiah and everlasting life and remain as jews.

            Jews to this day are revolutionaries against Christians, order, logos, and will remain as such until they are no more.

          • Alaric01 29 September, 2017 at 18:30

            I think he is great too, but I’m not entirely convinced by his thesis. It assumes Jew were good guys before Christ. There was plenty of classical anti-semitism.

          • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 05:17

            Every Cucktian thinks their people are the true and original Jews. Even Mormons have bizarre teachings about this.

          • Vincent Law 27 September, 2017 at 05:18

            No, otherwise they wouldn’t be funneling billions of dollars to Israel if they thought that they themselves were the Jews.

          • Vincent Law 27 September, 2017 at 05:22

            Christians don’t think they are Jews. Your point was incorrect. Your understanding of Christianity is thread-bare.

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 05:20

            No educated person believes that. You are being dishonest and using a straw-man argument to support your irrational hatred of Christianity.

      • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:45 Reply

        This basically sums up my feelings about atheists –

        “What is your oath ?” – “I vow to you, Adolf Hitler, as Führer and chancellor of the German Reich loyalty and bravery. I vow to you and to the leaders, that you set for me, absolute allegiance, till death. So help me god !”
        “So you believe in a god ?” – “Yes, I believe in a supreme being.”

        “What do you think about a man who does not believe in a god ?” – “I think he is overbearing, megalomaniac and foolish; he is not adequate for our society.”

  30. William Shock 27 September, 2017 at 03:59 Reply

    Jews seek to create division; I see Andrew Joyce is doing their job for them. When we make abortion illegal who will you be raising all the babies of deadbeat dads, drug addicts and psychopaths? Sounds rather parasitical to me. Certainly pedophilia should be banned but this crazed hysteria over homosexuality is pure projection and an embarrassment to the cause. Of course if you call it projection the hysterics will counter “That’s a Jewish Theory!” Consider however white people who deny their race and scream out about “racism” while holding guilt trips about being white.

      • William Shock 27 September, 2017 at 04:01 Reply

        Patriotic American you have already acknowledged having gay choices in your life, you therefore prove my point about projection.

        • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:03 Reply

          Typical slander from a typical Jew. I said no such thing. I said that homosexualism is a choice made by immoral degenerates and weaklings, such as yourself, and your depraved attempts at slandering me only further prove the validity of my assertions regarding your character.

          • William Shock 27 September, 2017 at 04:04

            So you deny you have had homosexual thoughts? Hardly believe that with all your Church Lady hysterics.

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:07

            It is extremely ironic how the only insult you sodomites ever seem to you use is “you must be a faggot!”.

          • William Shock 27 September, 2017 at 04:14

            Again projection, you just confirmed my analysis of you. In case you haven’t noticed you are the one calling everyone a faggot. Now I’m starting to wonder about the pedophilia part as well!

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:26

            Oh and since I am replying to you I might as well go ahead and ask – why are you defending people who promote pedophilia? Are you a pedophile? Why would you do this if you aren’t?

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:33

            You are defending people who promote pedophilia and use the same exact arguments as NMBLA. Why would you do this if you don’t support their ideas?

          • William Shock 27 September, 2017 at 04:30

            Not a pedophile, do not promote pedophilia. I ask you again have you had gay thoughts in your lifetime?

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:48

            Thank you! I can’t believe these creatures are actually promoting molesting little children, this is utterly disgusting.

          • Vincent Law 27 September, 2017 at 09:53

            He spent the better part of an hour calling the guy who objected to homos a secret homo.

            Not really an argument, or a question.

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:10

            I also find it extremely telling that you are defending homosexualism apologists who literally use the same arguments as NMBLA (which is run by a Jew!) for pederasty and boy buggering while simultaneously trying to convince us that sodomites are not all sexual predators that are dangerous to women and children. It is also telling that the only argument you can come up with is “oy vey goyim you must be a secret faggot!”.

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:23

            How exactly are you not? Counter currents defends and promotes guys like this O’Meara character, who writes books using the same exact arguments for the legalization and promotion of pedophilia as the National Man Boy Love Association, and with this in mind it logically follows that counter currents endorse his positions and approve of pedophilia and since you are defending them, and by proxy O’Meara, the only logical conclusion is that you fundamentally agree with them on these issues and the only people who would defend these evil ideas and try to promote them are pedophiles.

          • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 05:54

            I got accused of the same thing thing despite never mentioning pedophilia. It seems to be a favorite ad hominem against anyone who is against this sheepdogging to Cucktianity.

    • Joseph Curwen 27 September, 2017 at 08:47 Reply

      You are using the enemy’s argument: ‘they hate fags/dykes, so they must be fags/dykes in the closet’. Another interesting term is ‘projection’ which is a psychoanalytic term, heavily disputed in some academic circles.

      Basically, you talk like the enemy and act like the enemy. Your avatar suits you.

      • Better Dead Than Red 28 September, 2017 at 17:33 Reply

        TBH, I never understood why we are called closeted fags when we criticize fags. I am curious about this perverse mental process of casting doubt on people. Perhaps this confusion, based on past experiences or thoughts may be the source of homosexuality or, at least, its spread.

        • Joseph Curwen 28 September, 2017 at 18:30 Reply

          The root and origin of this type of arguments is the Frankfurt School (which is basically 100% jewish), which basically blends Marxism (jewish) and freudian psychoanalytic theory (again, jewish). To make a long history short, they try to pathologize all the sane instincts and impulses:

          – You are very close to your mother? You have Oedipus Complex and want to commit incest fucking her. .

          – You love your country? You are a fanatic who wants to conquer and oppress other countries.

          – You love your sister? You want to commit incest fucking her.

          Check this out:

          http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/chap5.pdf

          Reading Macdonald is a little bit dry (his works are basically academic works, so no fun there) but is very illuminating.

    • craicher 27 September, 2017 at 09:21 Reply

      Banning abortion makes women realize that sex has consequences and they become more conservative and selective; what was before the cultural revolution a good, decent loyal woman/wife and mother. The parents also become much more worried thus protective of their daughter’s sexual selection. Everything gets more and more conservative and traditional in the realm of sex and marriage and family. If birth control is banned then even more so.

      It would literally be a revolution (or a simple return to nature) in sex, family and morality.

      Of course pedo/homos like you don’t give a rat’s a…

  31. David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 03:49 Reply

    Homosexuality is definitely part of our demographic crisis. Ethnic groups like the Pakistanis in Britain have 5 children each, don’t promote homosexuality or abortion, and are simply outbreeding us. But it is worth noting the number of homosexual men – I think largely men – who are prepared to speak out against PC and immigration. They are mainly Alt-Lite, but some are further right than that. You can think of Milo. You can also think of David Starkey, the historian in the UK who regularly upsets the blacks on the BBC show Question Time. You can also cite Jack Donovan, although I think he recently “cucked” on the white nationalism issue. Why is so many gay men involved, when so many on the real Alt-Right would not accept them? I believe it ultimately comes down to the fact that homosexuals (“gay men” if you want to use the modern lingo) are not “normies”. The average “gay” is prepared to speak out against social consensus, or at least much more so than the average “straight”. This may because they’ve had a history of exploding middle-class “petty bourgeois” norms in any case. Or because their very flamboyance prevents them from simply regurgitating a false consensus. I think it’s a mistake to not allow gay men to be in the Alt-Right. At the same time, they shouldn’t be the leaders of the Alt-Right. Reading how Greg Johnson attacked Daniel Friberg and wanted Counter-Currents and not AltRight.com to be the main right, underlines the fact that there is a primadonna element to many/most gay men, and that they have the ability to be a problem for the right, particularly if they are in leadership positions, and also if/when they are denied leadership positions they feel they are entitled to, prompting “camp attacks” on leaders like Spencer and Friberg. Just as ethnic minorities would be suspect on the Right (think of Jonjani and how he flounced out), openly gay men have certain tendencies that can be poisonous to the movement. However, barring gay men altogether is absurd. For a start, how do you know who is gay? and how do you know, of the ostensibly straight men, how many of them have “experimented” with sexuality in the past? To impose a sexual orientation test for acceptance in the AltRight comes with a difficulty: there is no way to know who has done what in private.

    • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 03:52 Reply

      The alt right is about promoting the natural order and preserving the traditions and honor of our fathers and homosexualism spits in the face of all of that and thus they have no place in our movement. Surely we can sit back and let them speak out against our enemies but we must also remember that the enemy of our enemies is not necessarily our friend.

    • Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 03:52 Reply

      No one is proposing a test, or suggesting a ban is realistic. What we are suggesting is the creation of a hostile environment against homosexuals, especially those writing apologetic or promotional materials for homosexuality.

      • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 03:54 Reply

        Precisely. We cannot ban sodomites because it is difficult to know what people do in private but we can certainly make it impossible for them to exist in our movement.

        • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 04:17 Reply

          Actually, no you can’t, because the Alt Right is not a card-carrying organisation. There is no such thing as making it impossible for someone to be in the Alt Right — anyone who says he’s in, is in, because there is no application form to join the Alt Right.

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:27

            That is why I have been saying Spencer needs to start thinking about trademarking the term and making a legitimate party.

          • Sir Dirtbag 27 September, 2017 at 05:09

            Well, actually, a cool looking card would be nice. To require some kind of application or test would require that we acknowledge a governing body which, in my opinion, would be a bad idea at this point in time. For me, I don’t even go around saying I’m an alt-right member; all I ever do is try to advocate for white people the best that I can. Also, the alt-right is not the only game in town. There will be other groups forming soon too which is a good thing. When I listen to Richard Spencer these days it’s like his vision is that the alt-right is a political party. I don’t have a problem with that because there are other groups to take up the slack with white advocacy.

      • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 04:09 Reply

        The AltRight, if it is a “movement”, is not a card-carrying organisation. People join it by declaring themselves to be part of it, and not everyone claiming to be AltRight would be accepted by everyone else as a legitimate part of it. You talk of creating a hostile environment. What about people like Paul Gottfried? He’s not gay, but is a member of an ethnic group not traditionally associated with the AltRight (he’s Jewish), and yet he has done quite a bit for the Right intellectually, and is even the author of the term “AltRight”. I personally think any contributions are acceptable from anyone. if a Gottfried can make a contribution, good. If Milo/Greg Johnson/Jack Donovan can, then good too. If Jonjani can, then that’s fine too. Think also of Tree of Logic, a black woman who claims to be AltRight. You can’t stop any of them from being in the AltRight, given there is no membership card. At the same time, people from non-white ethnic groups and with non-traditional lifestyles should be held at arms length and not allowed to take over. E.g. Jonjani should have been welcomed to write for various sites, but should not have been on the board of AltRight, and so on for the others listed here. Ultimately, you can’t know who likes men in private. But in a white ethno-state, you could insist that only married with children lead the state. As an Anglican (=roughly the same as Episcopalian), you can see how the married clergy was much better than the Roman Catholics’ largely “gay” clergy…

        • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:17 Reply

          In regards to Paul Gottfried, Jews have no place in the alt right as they are anti-Aryan, and even if one of them wasn’t we must keep in mind that their Talmud and the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion teaches them that the best way to destroy opposition is to infiltrate and lead it themselves.

          As for the slander about Roman Catholic priests being sodomites, that is slander. Less than 1% of all priests have had this issue, which is statistically less than the protestant sects.

          • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 04:24

            I’m pointing to the *fact* that Paul Gottfried is an interesting man who has done quite a bit for the AltRight. Even Ben Shapiro on certain issues only does a fair bit for the AltLite – probably more than you do, Patriotic American…

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:29

            Paul Gottfried is a subversive Jew and so is Shapiro and have done nothing to promote our ideas, all they do is whine about us ‘goyim’ not doing enough to kill Moslems for Israel and how the market isn’t ‘open’ enough for subversive Jews to full take over and enslave us.

          • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 04:37

            That is simply untrue. You mischaracterise both men. They have their own points of view, and, e.g. Shapiro is a strong Zionist, but on certain issues (e.g. the transgender nonsense) he can be great. As far as opening up the market of ideas, he has done far more than you, Patriotic American. It makes sense to me to allow a broad counter-culture that is not so shallow that it allows only one point of view on everything. If Shapiro convinces people on transgender, good. If someone else makes a contribution elsewhere, that is good too. Simply resorting to lies about such people won’t achieve anything.

          • Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 04:53

            Shapiro has done nothing positive for me, he is a shill trying to co-opt our movement and steal into a leadership position so he can direct us in a more kosher direction and nothing I have said is a lie. They both promote the Zionist narrative of Islam being responsible for all of our problems despite all the evidence pointing to Jews, they both attack anyone who is pro-Aryan, they both advocate for a multicultural/multiracial society everywhere except Israel, want the U.S. and NATO to attack North Korea and Iran, the list goes on and on. They are simply zionists who throw in some obvious truths about stuff like transgenderism in order to dupe the ‘stupid goyim’.

          • iemand 27 September, 2017 at 10:57

            Shapiro is simply playing the other side, Jews always play both sides.

            This is what Hitler had to say about zionist and liberal Jews in mein kampf:

            A great movement, called Zionism, arose among them. Its aim was to assert the national character of Judaism, and the movement was strongly represented in Vienna.

            To outward appearances it seemed as if only one group of Jews championed this movement, while the great majority disapproved of it, or even repudiated it. But an investigation of the situation showed that those outward appearances were purposely misleading. These outward appearances emerged from a mist of theories which had been produced for reasons of expediency, if not for purposes of downright deception. For that part of Jewry which was styled Liberal did not disown the Zionists as if they were not members of their race but rather as brother Jews who publicly professed their faith in an unpractical way, so as to create a danger for Jewry itself.

            Thus there was no real rift in their internal solidarity.

          • Ghetto Tarzan 27 September, 2017 at 15:50

            He’s also done more warm than Patriotic American. Shapiro is only interested in Jews. He’s of no use to us. He counter-signals white identity frequently.

          • David Webb 27 September, 2017 at 16:34

            Ghetto Tarzan, are you a total clown? What I am talking about a is a broad counter culture that includes many elements and groups (and films books TV music etc) that is as deep as the leftwing culture. This means there will be single-issue people who are good on individual topics and not on others. This is to be welcomed. Shapiro is very good on some things, including transgender. If you don’t understand what I’m talking about, you don’t get to complain about low Negro IQs, as you have IQ issues yourself! Get the point I’m making.

          • Ghetto Tarzan 27 September, 2017 at 16:57

            You sound very upset. You’re sperging out here. Take a minute to calm down and formulate actual arguments.

    • Polar Girl 27 September, 2017 at 05:56 Reply

      There is more homosexuality, incest, and bestiality in the Muslim world than the west but that doesn’t stop them from breeding like rabbits.

  32. Andrew Joyce 27 September, 2017 at 03:46 Reply

    Unfortunately this piece was completed before the infiltration of a number of meetings by a gay Antifa (noticeably “young and effeminate” according to Greg Johnson, but nevertheless granted further invites from him to other gatherings). I’ll leave it to readers to chew over their own conclusions on that particular episode.

  33. Patriotic American 27 September, 2017 at 03:46 Reply

    Great article! I really enjoyed reading it. I have no idea who this James O’Meara person is and I have never read counter currents, but based on the evidence presented I can say this much without any doubt whatsoever – They are anti-Aryan and have no place in our movement. They are literally using NMBLA arguments in favor of molesting young boys and indoctrinating them into the sodomite ‘lifestyle’. These sick degenerates are evil predators and must be purged.

  34. zeitgeist2012 27 September, 2017 at 02:27 Reply

    We Removed Something You Posted

    It looks like these posts don’t follow our Community Standards.

    I looked deeply in and did not feel warm and fuzzy all over at the thought of playing Butch trying to plug the dyke with your vibrating dildo…Yikes!

    Robert Campbell Sr.

    Homosexuals are not like me our you…they are unnatural self-eradicating and self-mutilating sexual perverts. A mental disorder in spite of the cultural marxist Jew shrinks pushing their phony anti-white christian mental science on the world.

    This temporary block will last 24 hours, and you won’t be able to post on Facebook until it’s finished.

    Please keep in mind that people who repeatedly post things that aren’t allowed on Facebook may have their accounts permanently disabled.

    Gay-rights activists credit Jewish cultural marxist Dr. Spitzer with removing homosexuality from the list of mental disorders in the DSM in 1973…

    What’s noteworthy about this is that the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses was not triggered by some scientific breakthrough.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/leading-jewish-american-psychiatrist-robert-spitzer-dies-at-83/

    http://behaviorismandmentalhealth.com/2011/10/08/homosexuality-the-mental-illness-that-went-away/

    http://www.aim.org/special-report/media-myths-of-the-homosexual-transgender-agenda/

    https://davidduke.com/jewish-supremacists-homosexuality-and-divide-and-conquer/

    Alfred Kinsey, Jewish father of the sexual revolution. Kinsey was a homosexual, a pedophile, and a madman. His staff consisted of like-minded non-professionals who were touted as ‘experts’, and his subjects polled consisted of the dregs of humanity: psychopaths, rapists, pedophiles, sexual deviants, the mentally retarded, inmates of mental institutions, and criminals of all walks of life.

    http://www.dayofshame.net/2011/04/01/alfred-kinsey-%E2%80%93-father-of-the-modern-sexual-revolution/