Posted by DanielS on Monday, 28 October 2019 05:00.
My first impression of Richard Houck was negative because he was attempting to make the case that America was on the wrong side of World War II.
This argument is destructive because it reconstructs a misframing of events that misleads susceptible White American demographics into a framework that pits European peoples against one another.
Isn’t that the point of this frame, you may ask? No brothers wars?
Not if you are honest about Hitler’s war mongering imperialism, his disposition to not value the lives of neighbouring nations, and if you honestly understand those nations’ positions.
If you do care about these things and the truth be known, you don’t suggest that America was on the wrong side but that Hitler was largely to blame for initiating an unnecessary war, catastrophic of itself and catastrophic in an ongoing way beyond, in its implications, stigmatizing with ostensible warrant to prohibit European peoples from rightful prejudice, discrimination and thus, racial self defense.
But while Houck and his interviewer in this case, J.F. Gariepy, are not penetrating enough to think outside of the Jewish box - “Nazis or Jews” and “White identity is right wing and purely objective while non and anti White identity is left and concerned with relative social group interests” - in the name of fairness, I must say that Houck does articulate a kind of social compassion for our people which bespeaks a left ethnonationalist position in this talk.
