White Advocacy, and the Holocaust

[William Joyce]

You can't go far on the topic of white advocacy without someone brining up the Holocaust.

Dealing with the Holocaust | The Occidental Observer - White Identity, Interests, and Culture

It is futile to focus on White advocacy alone and ignore the Jews. Quite simply, the Jews will not return the favor. You might not pick Jews as the enemy, but they will pick you. You might wish to see Jews as Whites, but Jews see themselves as a distinct people. Thus they see any nationalism but their own as a threat.

 

[Unkotare]

You reveal yourself as more and more of a pathetic fucking coward.

 

[Sunni Man]

That is a great article that everyone should read regardless of their race or ethnicity.

 

[MHunterB]

Really? What's so great about it?

 

[MHunterB]

"I am not arguing that we should avoid Holocaust revisionism because it will garner bad press. I don’t worry about such things, because we will always have bad press—until we control the press."

Do you feel it's a proper goal for any group to have, to control the press in a multicultural and multiethnic society?

In the US, it certainly appears that having a press 'controlled' by one group or another would be unConstitutional.

 

[squeeze berry]

"I am not arguing that we should avoid Holocaust revisionism because it will garner bad press. I don’t worry about such things, because we will always have bad press—until we control the press."

Do you feel it's a proper goal for any group to have, to control the press in a multicultural and multiethnic society?

In the US, it certainly appears that having a press 'controlled' by one group or another would be unConstitutional.

the author does not feel that white nationalists controlling the press will ever happen.

the author did reaveal some double standards

 

[William Joyce]

"I am not arguing that we should avoid Holocaust revisionism because it will garner bad press. I don’t worry about such things, because we will always have bad press—until we control the press."

Do you feel it's a proper goal for any group to have, to control the press in a multicultural and multiethnic society?

In the US, it certainly appears that having a press 'controlled' by one group or another would be unConstitutional.

Well, technically, that wouldn't be illegal. Right now, the press is controlled by white elite liberals, Jews and non-white racists. Do you think that's a problem?

I feel it's a proper goal for whites to advocate for their group interests, and to seek self-directed lives of peace and prosperity, unmolested by other groups. I feel it's appropriate to first take steps in the social, media, political, legal and cultural arenas to achieve that goal. That's little different from what any other group seeks. Only whites are uniquely attacked as evil bigots for even trying.

 

[Unkotare]

You're a fucking pathetic, sub-human coward.

 

[William Joyce]

I think the best position to take is to acknowledge that whites, like any other group, have acted violently toward other groups in the past.

That cannot mean we have no rights going forward.

Look at it this way:

Even criminals have rights. But whites have none? Really? Something's not right about that.

 

[Unkotare]

Go hide behind the sofa and piss yourself, coward.

 

[squeeze berry]

Go hide behind the sofa and piss yourself, coward.

umm,

guess WJ is correct.

You have no intelligent retort to his assertions.

 

[MHunterB]

The press is NOT 'controlled' by any group or combination thereof.
And control of the press by any racial or ethnic group/s would be a violation of the US Constitution.

While some aspects of the Constitution may indeed be 'amendable', the Bill of Rights is not on that list.

So, regardless of the 'white advocacy' pretense that theirs is a lawful movement - it remains unConstitutional and thus unacceptable to all true Americans of whatever race, ethnicity or religion.

 

[MHunterB]

Incidentally, the military is sworn to protect the Constitution. If the 'white person's paradise' you folks want to set up goes against the Constitution, it goes against the US.

If people want to pledge loyalty to some nonexistant 'white race', they are pledging themselves into conflict with the Constitution: they are against America exactly as much as anyone hoping to place the US under shari'a law.

 

[MHunterB]

Look at it this way:

Even criminals have rights. But whites have none? Really? Something's not right about that.

Exactly - and what's not right about that is that 'whites have no rights' is a false statement. It does not represent reality: it is nowhere near close to reality.

Your other premise - that all the rest of us think of ourselves as 'ethnicity' or 'race' first and not as 'Americans' or such - is also very far from reality. Obviously *some* people feel that way - but do they represent even a large minority of any 'race' or group - NO.

Do they represent anywhere close to a 'norm' for any such group - NO.

Do they represent an idea which is good or useful for the USA - NO.

 

[Unkotare]

Go hide behind the sofa and piss yourself, coward.

umm,

guess WJ is correct.

You have no intelligent retort to his assertions.

His "assertions" are that he is terrified of anyone who looks in any way superficially different from him (yes, he has admitted this on many occasions), and his agenda is limited to segregation and isolation. He is without question a racist coward of the lowest sort. If you are eager to associate yourself with him, good luck to ya.

 

[William Joyce]

Look at it this way:

Even criminals have rights. But whites have none? Really? Something's not right about that.

Exactly - and what's not right about that is that 'whites have no rights' is a false statement. It does not represent reality: it is nowhere near close to reality.

Your other premise - that all the rest of us think of ourselves as 'ethnicity' or 'race' first and not as 'Americans' or such - is also very far from reality.

1. Whites don't have a group right to assert their interests. Are you really denying this? If a group of white reps formed the Congressional White Caucus, do you think it would be allowed by House leadership? Or the press?

2. Most think of themselves as both. But blacks, by their own quotes, more often think of themselves as black first, American second. Who can blame them? Illegal Mexicans who join the U.S. military and die fighting overseas... sounds great, right? They request to be buried in Mexico, with a Mexican flag draping their coffin.

 

[Unkotare]

Look at it this way:

Even criminals have rights. But whites have none? Really? Something's not right about that.

Exactly - and what's not right about that is that 'whites have no rights' is a false statement. It does not represent reality: it is nowhere near close to reality.

Your other premise - that all the rest of us think of ourselves as 'ethnicity' or 'race' first and not as 'Americans' or such - is also very far from reality.

1. Whites don't have a group right to assert their interests.

Your stupidity is exceeded only by your fucking cowardice.

 

[MHunterB]

Look at it this way:

Even criminals have rights. But whites have none? Really? Something's not right about that.

Exactly - and what's not right about that is that 'whites have no rights' is a false statement. It does not represent reality: it is nowhere near close to reality.

Your other premise - that all the rest of us think of ourselves as 'ethnicity' or 'race' first and not as 'Americans' or such - is also very far from reality.

1. Whites don't have a group right to assert their interests. Are you really denying this? If a group of white reps formed the Congressional White Caucus, do you think it would be allowed by House leadership? Or the press?

2. Most think of themselves as both. But blacks, by their own quotes, more often think of themselves as black first, American second. Who can blame them? Illegal Mexicans who join the U.S. military and die fighting overseas... sounds great, right? They request to be buried in Mexico, with a Mexican flag draping their coffin.

1) That is not at all what you had said. You need to stop moving the goalposts.

IF a group of reps felt there was a need for a 'white' caucus, they could always start one. Why do you think it would be disallowed? Is it even allowed to be disallowed?

2) We've established that SOME of any given group feel that way. But it's on you to prove me wrong if you don't agree with my assessment. I am not aware that the US military is willing to accept illegals as volunteers - would you please give me your sources on that? It does not appear to be consistent with the UCMJ, etc....

 

[there4eyeM]

Did this person not get the memo?

THERE IS NO WHITE RACE

There is one race, the human race . 'Live it or live with it'.

 

[William Joyce]

Did this person not get the memo?

THERE IS NO WHITE RACE

There is one race, the human race . 'Live it or live with it'.

Ah. So... how do they decide who gets the unearned shit under affirmative action?