Why Tommy Robinson Is an Idiot In the Wrong - by Julie Lake
Comments:2
Posted by Why Greg Johnson Does’t Support Tommy on Mon, 28 May 2018 11:39 | #
3
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 28 May 2018 15:12 | # Greg mistakes three separate trials for an “on-going trial”. Manifestly, later trials do not belong to earlier trials, or else there could be no innocence before proven guilty. One John Piggott offered the following reading at Spiked! this morning: http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/we-have-to-stop-saying-asian-grooming-gangs/21422
4
Posted by John Pig-guts on Tue, 29 May 2018 00:44 | # Limp-wristed faggot Greg Johnson is just interested in protecting his fellow pedophiles. 5
Posted by Counter-Queers on Tue, 29 May 2018 08:08 | # CC, Greg Johnson may be derided as an elitist right-wing snob, with attendant disingenuousness and naivete; and he is certainly a queer - but a pedophile? Probably not. If not for the context (a CC comment) it would be a serious accusation. Nevertheless, the right wing ranking of homosexuality as a problem right up there with White genocide is tedious and tiresome stupidity that should make one eager to leave the right-wing behind - it was David Lane’s advice to leave the right wing behind in their bizarre conspiracy theories and Jesus communities. People who make a big issue out of queers, pro or con, are absurd - what percentage of the population are they? And what percentage of male homos there are, well, then don’t go to the goddamn queer bars, and be glad that there are more women for you. As for the lesbians, be glad that they are not rewarding groids, YKW and other assholes with their treasure or having babies with them… 6
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 29 May 2018 09:14 | # You don’t have to stoop to CC’s Stormfront level ... “groids, YKW and other assholes” is not fitting. CC is beyond help, as you intimate; and seems to regard coherent and useful thinking, of which he is exceptionally capable, as some sign of unacceptably non-Hitlerian advocacy. In a sense, he represents much of what is wrong with American WN, which is that fully capable people reduce themselves to the level of the mob instead of stepping up to reform, re-shape, and direct it. The cause may be a loss of real belief in the possibilities of the movement. In any case, into the vacuum has stepped the Alt-Right and its Jewish video artistes. 7
Posted by DanielS on Thu, 31 May 2018 05:20 | # GW, let me try to examine your comment within the light of the highest criteria: Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 29 May 2018 04:14 | #
While “stooping” is a pejorative term, let me appreciate the fact that you want discourse at Majorityrights to occur in an elevated register so that its parsings of issues related to the protection and fostering of our peoples are not confused with emotive and brute, prejudicial shorthand that can have our cause written-off just as efficiently by our antagonists as “ignorance”, and allow them to continue to mislead people who ought to be sympathetic rather to the moral virtue of our cause. Now then, I have not been to Stormfront in years, and never more than a few times, quite briefly. The site just never spoke to me, but then again, that is why I am on board with your wanting to establish difference from them - it is a well chosen point of departure. Although I must say, with regard to cussing and epithets, Stormfront’s central figures - Don Black and David Duke, don’t allow it on their discussion board and David Duke was even behind something called “The New Orleans Protocol” which proscribed such speech. Prominent friends of American WN and the Stormtroopers Kevin MacDonald and Tom Sunic have also sought to proscribe such language as advancing negative, skinhead, if not low-brow stereotypes in pejorative association with White/European advocacy. I never agreed with the universalizing of that rule, and I will explain why below. I can agree, however, that discourse in higher register, free of profanity and epithets ought to be the rule here at Majorityrights, basically for two reasons: 1) European laws (although, believe it or not, a few comments recently, could even be problematic in America, despite the first Amendment). Having said that, these laws should be looked upon as a fact, even if not necessarily correct. There is an Alinsky-like aspect to these laws prohibiting the use of epithets which is to force Whites/Europeans to live up to a destructive universalism that was our predominant guiding rule structure through the epoch of modernity. That is, this universalism has been weaponized against us to where you can’t even call a spade a spade, can’t name its difference. As Sunic would say, this is going to then move directly through processes and self censorship about noticing differences - some stark differences not articulated, but especially subtle ones that may need to be drawn out. 2) Basically, we do want to not only display, but actually conduct our inquiry in a register that will allow for subtle parsing, untrammeled by the bullying of “common sense” or merely accepted, unconsidered habits and traditions. Having said that, I respect that as a rule, not as something that should never be deviated from according to circumstance - it is only the general circumstance of pernicious European law that prevents me from exercising that discretion of deviating from the rule where appropriate. Which brings me to a point of disagreement with regard to your use of the word, “fitting.” Is it “fitting” to address a Captainchaos type with the kind of social eloquence that one might recommend of a suitor courting an heiress as she strokes her French poodle in the front salon? Is it “fitting” of our cause to participate in the modernist, universalizing rational blindness that’s been fostered by the YKW, that would dismiss the urgency of a CC and his circumstance as “vulgar”? “Don’t shout in emergency, CC, don’t be emphatic that you and yours are being stabbed, killed, raped by *******! Don’t signal their group pattern and your group pattern in a clear call to the emergency so that people may have the straight rule structured difference, clear and unambiguous to separate and protect themselves - They are not the same, they are goddamn *******!” “No, CC. Be nice or Greg Johnson will ban you from his courtly salon - that is where you wanted to go for help against ******* if you found that his sister in the other parlor wasn’t worth the trouble and would just as soon **** *******.” While I must respect your concern for European (and American) law, right or wrong, I’m afraid, GW, that you may also be expressing a habit of modernist universalizing. To be competent in post modernity means to be able to see differences in circumstances, particular people and cultures, so that they can be coordinated with. In order to coordinate with a CC, I may “stoop” - I would say, rather, “adjust” - to interface his circumstances and concerns in their qualitative legitimacy, his reality. And not run rough shod over coordination in narcissistic assumption that everyone should be concerned first and foremost with my received and preferred mannerly register and decorum at all times - despite the dark gauntlet that threatens the politely oblivious. That brings me to a concern that still being in the habit of Modernity, you are still treating conceptual frameworks - specifically, the concept of post modernity - as a found object and assuming (narcissistically is a hard word, but I don’t mean it hard, its what modernity prescribes - “we are all pretty much the same in our being, thinking and motives”) that those people, like Jordan Peterson, Camille Paglia, Foucault, Derrida, the YKW and legions of their misguided college social studies students. . define “post modernity” properly ...“we have no say, no social constructionist agency.” Should we be able to snap back to “higher” register where indeed appropriate, as in the rule of MR, knowing how intelligent that CC is, in order to compel him to come up to his and our normal level? Yes. Inability to do that would not be competent within post modernity either; and I would not be taking responsibility for the possibility of aiding and abetting some dubious commentary by CC, as if he/we lacked agency and capacity to adjust intelligently. Furthermore, if speaking with sufficient decorum were your only concern, then YOU would be the shallow one, lacking in appropriately substantive concern. But I believe, rather, that your critical stance toward Stormfront - along with the American demographic that Don Black and David Duke cater-to with it - how they pander, make excuses, never seriously criticizing Hitler and “the greatest stories never told” about him, does show you to be substantive in your concern, and making a post modern distinction between a culture - An American culture which can be extremely negative - and that is all the more reason to get post modernity right, so that we can make use of its option to invoke traditional ethnocentrism, with its recognition that there are OTHER cultures/peoples with different ways of life, that require different rules of dealing with them so that we don’t get clobbered in the naivete of assuming they are just like us, with the same motives - as modernity would largely assume in premise. That Stormfront panders to America’s White demographic which is largely German/Irish, and less sympathetic to the Allied side in WWII is clear. CC would fall in that demographic, but just the fact that he comes here means that he is capable of the White post modern sophistication to recognize that these are different circumstances, that both of us honestly look upon Germany and Germans as our brother nation and people - we care for them and their distinct sovereignty as we care for all European nations - we seek to coordinate with them as such - coordination is something that (White) post modernity facilitates, while modernity takes for granted that it will run rough shod over coordination with other cultures/national differences. .....
When you say CC is beyond help, I believe you say that with a bit of humor (I don’t want to say irony, because Rorty is another butcher of the post modern concept - its not all about “irony”, it is rather about making clear distinctions). True, CC probably will not stop trying to break the rules of decency and respect, will not stop trying to upset and provoke, but one nevertheless observes an intelligent man who basically shares our concerns. I’m not saying that when push comes to shove, he might not go a way that’s counter productive to our capacity to coordinate our interests, but that’s not here and now, that’s not because he has the nerve to be irreverent toward movement luminaries such as Bowery and Greg Johnson.
Yes, he is exceptionally capable and he is wrestling with a problem that I’ve observed and a project for its correction, which is that Euroman has been overly given to self transcendenece - which corresponds with self sacrifice for the sake of ever more pseudo intellectualism - thus, how to integrate self assertion and real intelligence, real intelligence with regard to ethnonationalism ...Not by saying one should Never use profanity and epithets. However, coming back to substance, I agree with you that following Hitler is not the answer either; and I believe that CC’s perspective is difficult in that he experiences the American PC onslaught with the anti-Hitler thing right on top of him - so, without an angular perspective, lacking perspective, he pushes right back - “No!, Hitler was basically good, true and innocent.” The hope is that he or his type will see that we can appreciate that Hitler was intelligent, that he had somethings right, and that we like and appreciate the German people. We do. Hopefully the Stormfront panderers, and those under-informed boomer mavens who foster an internet bubble community of Hitler apologists among the millennials, hopefully we will be able to overcome their misguiding line which says that to be anti-Hitler is to be anti-German. Because the reverse is true. We care about Germans and their sovereign nation(s) whereas Hitler, in his devotion to scientism of natural struggle in might makes right, placed that scientistic, “natural” fallacy above the German people (let alone the rest of Europe). We are against Hitler because on balance he was bad for European peoples, including the Germans, and markedly bad for the coordination among Europeans, here and in diaspora; and in coordination with most other peoples (except those who really hate Jews and don’t really care about how many Whites get killed in his program). I believe tarring White Nationalism (and I mean WN as terms independent of “what it means” according to Ramzpaul, “1.0”, Stormfront, DailyStormer or whomever), just White (the genus European to include their diaspora and nationalism, i.e., ethno nationalism) with Nazism is certainly something that our enemies would want to do and that is why, for example, they’ve enlisted shabbos goy Jim Goad to have a talk with nubie “red pilled” Patrick Little, to draw out his appreciation and apologia for Hitler…and thus divert and derail his would be platform into one far more counter productive to White interests. It is a typical Duke Stormfront perspective: Only the Jews are a problem - that view justifies Hitler, who was “really ok, understandable in his motives then, misunderstood; nobody else, not blacks or anybody else is a big problem.”
Again, I am afraid that here, you are treating “American WN” as a found object, which means, “objectively”, like “post modernity”, treating it like what the YKW and reactionaries say it means. We must not let YKW or the reactionaries they inspire define our terms - or naively treat them as if they are objectively found objects. No, going Bowery and just getting into pure scientific empiricism because (((they))) “always” win with their words and their hermeneutics is not the answer - If we let them, they will twist these words and yank us all around, encourage reactionaries to do that as well… Like Ramzpaul: In his recent discussion with “Comfygirl”, he denounced “WN 1.0” because of its association with 14/88. He’s against 14/88; well so am I. But I’m not against 14. David Lane’s friend, TT Metzger and TT sidekick, “Ghostwolfradioman” demonstrated that you can advocate just the 14 - while rejecting Lane’s enshrinement of the “88” ... These Americans learned from earlier mistakes in White advocacy. They are not WN 1.0. TT, despite being half German, of course caring for his German people, recognized that Hitler idealization is wrong, bad for them and bad for the cooperation of White people. As I would say that Hitler’s 88 words held the scientistic fallacy:
It is philosophically lame. It may be inspirational to low brow types, the same kind who’d be snookerd in by Christianity, but it is philosophically incompetent and dangerous in its non-human linearity - that was born out indeed - unfortunately. The fourteen words of David Lane, on the other hand? Yes, I like them. I like the second version too, being so superficial as to be inspired by pretty White women as I am. But then, the 14 Words do not only inspire White men, they tend to work for women too, as in the blonde fox who beamed smiles at me in Dragon club when I wore my jacket there.
I began this comment with the statement that I wanted to set your concerns in the light of the highest criteria. Believing that is so, I have come here and brought the best in the resource missing to White/European ethnonational advocacy and the theory of how that is to be conducted.
There is no vacuum here, at MR, only awaiting one of your participation in the theory that has been extended to valance your concerns and highest aspirations as to how they are to be parsed…. For the lack of this acknowledgement, however, as one might remain in modernist reaction, accepting Jewish definition and those who react to them as wielding accurate terminology and concepts that have been objectively found and described without Jewish and deracinating purposes…there has been a vacuum… Deliberately the voice of MR has been quieted ..they hope that reaction will be instigated once again, its beginnings in scientist reaction will win the day as “revolutionary” “new possibilities”.... That it will stay in and join the Alt Right along with their Jewish cohorts against “The Left”... 8
Posted by DanielS on Thu, 31 May 2018 06:03 | # I am concerned that for your reaction, your vendetta against Jewish and liberal academia, being outside of the academic loop as you’ve been, your competitive business model oblivious to that, has tended to blind you - but hopefully not forever, GW, to the important, good, differences that I bring to bear on theory and practice of ethnonationalism. I have a tinge of paranoia enough about your competitiveness, vendetta, perhaps a bit of English pride, that this comment of yours was an indirect trivialization of my 14 Words post, as something that was “stooping” to American Stormfront levels…. For the possibility of that misconception it is important to observe that some people, Americans, do make a distinction between 14 and 88 ...and it is important to not let the YKW and their flunkies like Ramzpaul put them back together. You have been correct to hold fast to emergentism and the sort of teleology that it directs - I have learned as anyone who has paid attention here has learned from your steadfast - it is deep. However, I must say in my defense, that my view was never mutually exclusive to this - in fact, it would see opposition to emergentism as Cartesian. And, on the other hand, your treating emergentism as ex nihlo a-priori and even mutually exclusive to interaction, let alone interactive and social construction is Cartesian, and simply mistaken - probably born of reaction to and resentment of Jewish and liberal academic distortion, abuse and misrepresentation of post modern social concepts. As opposed to cultivating the corrective resource that I’ve brought here at Majorityrights, they (the Alt Right) join in reactive perspection to argue against “the left” - and that is to be a foolishly misguided reactionary of the kind who are coming out of their Duke/KM coddled bubbles, nubies who’ve been maneuvered by Jews mainly (and their right wing White attaches’) into arguing against the social organization and unionization in response (reaction) to distortions of those concepts - e.g., (((Frame Games))) is pushing hard against these “lefty social justice warriors” ...after all, who wants the goyim to unionize on behalf of social justice now that the Jews are so firmly perched in the seven or nine power niches atop the world?.... Speaking of that, I will be having more to say about (((Framegames))) and his talks with those functioning in the realm of White advocacy, including JF Gariepy - his 138 I.Q.is looking to be not good enough. 9
Posted by Tommy Tard on Fri, 01 Jun 2018 17:52 | # MR has long ago belled the cat on Tommy Robinson - here, for one example.
But just for a refresher course on his dubious credentials:
10
Posted by Tommy Tards on Fri, 01 Jun 2018 18:18 | #
11
Posted by Marlene Guest on Fri, 01 Jun 2018 18:47 | #
12
Posted by mancinblack on Fri, 01 Jun 2018 20:13 | # Hananya Naftali was appointed Benjamin Netanyahu’s “deputy social media adviser” in April. Naftali describes himself as “a Jew who loves Jesus” (don’t they all?) A few days ago Mr Naftali deleted Tweets from his feed in support of Tommy Robinson - “Free Tommy Robinson” (with every pack of Krembo?*) he Tweeted. “He has done nothing wrong and it is right to express his freedom of speech #FreeTommy #FreeTommyRobinson”. However, earlier Tweets, dating from March, in support of Robinson remain on his feed. 13
Posted by Bibi's Christian Zionist Media Evangel on Sat, 02 Jun 2018 09:22 | #
14
Posted by mancinblack on Sat, 02 Jun 2018 12:31 | # Who in their right mind would name their son Topaz? “I thought I told you to name the boy after the mensch who played Tevye in Fiddler on the Roof?” Topaz Luk sounds like a synth-pop band from the 80’s. “Topaz Luk on tour with Depeche Mode” sounds about right (lol) 15
Posted by ROTHERHAM on Sun, 10 Jun 2018 22:09 | #
16
Posted by Ezra & Tommy on Thu, 28 Jun 2018 22:03 | # Further proof Tommy Robinson is a fraud: https://www.counter-currents.com/2018/06/further-proof-tommy-robinson-is-a-fraud/ 17
Posted by FreeTommy rallies orchestrated by YKW on Sat, 14 Jul 2018 09:40 | #
18
Posted by "Dracula", "Bully" and "Beastie" on Sat, 20 Oct 2018 15:48 | #
19
Posted by Nigel Farage on Wed, 05 Dec 2018 06:26 | # 20
Posted by Tommy Robinson's crew on Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:56 | # 21
Posted by Collett & "Secret Sources" on Tommy Robinson on Wed, 11 Dec 2019 23:53 | # 22
Posted by Tommy Fraudulence on Fri, 14 Feb 2020 19:51 | # Tommy Robinson fake news story debunked by Belmarsh Prison governor Post a comment:
Next entry: The Trial of Jeremy Bedford-Turner, May, 2018
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA Nations
|
Posted by Muhammed Lubovitch on Mon, 28 May 2018 02:38 | #