There are few sites active on the international White Nationalist/Revolutionary Nationalist scene that have provoked me to thought more than this one. None did more to open my eyes to the necessity of building a new philosophical worldview if we wanted to succeed in our struggle. This idea that we must first present a moral and philosophical alternative to the ills of modernity is not new.  It is a reiteration of an argument that the French New Right, for example, has been trying to make since the ‘70’s with questionable success and while being the victim of periodic witch-hunts.

Now, there’s also an element of narcissism at play as I’m in agreement with Guessedworker, in particular, on all important issues and I feel an uncanny kinship of spirit. But, that being said, since I’ve done a 180 degree turn on the J.Q. some people who’ve known me have suffered a “whiplash” (to quote Hunter Wallace). I’ve been called a Jew lover, a race traitor, and accused of being romantically involved with a Jewish woman.

There’s absolutely no doubt in my mind that anti-Semitism is a political loser and no longer a potent organizing force in the western world. I’ve come to the conclusion that only a Right friendly to the Jewish community and Israel can succeed in the western political arena; a Right that admits Jews and places them in positions of authority; a Right that welcomes Jews in a tangible effort to show them that they must not fear the Right. I don’t believe that the Right will gain any traction without first abandoning anti-Semitism, Holocaust-denial, anti-Zionism, or National Socialist nostalgia. All these points are not only completely irrelevant but an insurmountable stumbling block to success.

READ MORE...

Jim Giles interviewed James Bowery a couple of days ago on Radio Free Mississippi. The primary territory is the conflict between Jewish interests and the Enlightenment values of truth and freedom—conflict as exemplified by the hostility of Jews toward the laboratory of the states to found discourse on experimentation rather than argumentation. It is 1 hour 48 minutes.

Jim Giles interviewed me a couple of days ago on Radio Free Mississippi.  The primary territory is the conflict between Jewish interests and the Enlightenment values of truth and freedom—conflict as exemplified by the hostility of Jews toward the laboratory of the states to found discourse on experimentation rather than argumentation.  It is 1 hour 48 minutes.

It is available in Majority Radio as well as Radio Free Mississippi.

The Linder interview, which took place on Tuesday afternoon, is now on the Radio Page.  It is long, having been closely edited as such so it would make a single podcast, and I hope quite stimulating.

I’m pleased to see that Alex has answered a couple of questions on the earlier thread, which I did not raise with him in our conversation.

A long and winding conversation, as much as an interview, with Alex Linder. One hour seventeen minutes long, in fact. File size 35.2MB.

I’ve written enough about political economy here in the past to provide those interested with some background for what is to follow:  A political platform alternative to the citizen’s dividend that rides the current discontent by State governments in the US to directly devolve Federal programs to the States via a populist takeover of the House of Representatives.

READ MORE...

Tomorrow morning Central Time I’ll be interviewing Alex Linder.  The shape of the discussion is pretty well set, but I would be interested to know if readers have their own questions they would like to see asked.

If such questions differ from what I already have planned, and providing they are productive, of course, I’ll find some time to ask them.

The three hundred or more delegates to the BNP Conference in Wigan have voted overwhelmingly to commit the party to the leadership’s policy of remaining within the law, remaining a party able to fight elections, and admitting non-whites to membership.  Nick Griffin’s own amendments were accepted.  It is thought this means that sub-groups will be formed to house the non-white applicants.

Does the membership change mean that the party has lost its fourteen-word soul?  Or is it merely a cosmetic and inevitable stratagem to satisfy the requirements of British law?  Or is it, in fact, a golden opportunity for the party to advance its cause by the very laws that the Establishment has used to persecute it?

Here’s Lee Barnes with the upside:

The issue is ... where now for the ‘anti-fascists’ ?

For the general public, who believe their lies, the constant scream of ‘racists’ and ‘nazis’ is the primary weapon in the arsenal of the anti-BNP coalition. But that weapon is now rendered defunct. They cannot call the BNP ‘racist’ anymore as we will have many non-white members joining. They can’t call the BNP ‘nazi’ anymore as our new non-white members are obviously not nazis. They can’t call the BNP ‘racist’ anymore either as non-whites will be joining. Therefore the whole tactics and strategy of the Far Left and the media has to change - but how ?

They haven’t got a clue.

Lee goes on to claim that the membership change is “a political revolution”:

READ MORE...