Majorityrights News > Category: U.S. Politics

As one comes to expect of Dannis, this is an intelligent discussion centering largely on the recent Youtube purges.

However, despite my appeals, Dennis still does not make a distinction between our would-be left and their left, an international, anti-White, YKW directed left, which are social “unionionizations” of sorts, in “coalition”, so the rule structuring stories go, against a would-be White unionization, a White left ethnonationalism.

It is an important mistake; there are significant reasons why YKW want us to identify “the left” as the enemy and by reaction, for White identity to be right wing and liberal.

Whereas in the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s and 90’s blacks and women were the PC victim groups most flamboyantly promoted by YKW, now promotional advocacy of the third major PC victim union in coalition, gays, is being stepped-up. And they are succeeding to get the right to over react to this red cape (or rainbow cape, as it were).

It is not that the campaign and marketing of gay pride is a good thing for Whites, and there is a good argument aired by Dennis - an 8 minute video by Vertigo Politics Now, called, “the last White man” discussing how gays are ideal model consumers for the corporate agenda….and of course we don’t want homosexuality encouraged, especially not for those whose inborn nature could go either way…

Nevertheless, we must be careful, particularly regarding clever arguments like this, that would get us wrapped-up in reaction, chasing after the red caping, er rainbow caping, of YKW anti-White coalition building. ...like feminism and black advocacy as unions in YKW directed hands, it is important rather, for Whites to not react into right wing anti-social unionization altogether, against the compassion for our reasonable and accountable marginals and non ideal forms that it would allow for, and consider instead social organization to be a strictly non-White thing, as YKW has weaponized it against Whites and would have us believe is THE “left.”

A danger, of course, in being heavy handed in reaction to what is maybe about 2% of the population, is that as Whites react to the YKW rainbow caping, in right wing idealism of gender differentiation and into militant anti-queerism; try to imagine the pressure on teenage White boys to do utterly stupid and self destructive things in order to prove that they are not gay…

..and try to get the social point that the YKW have misrepresented and misdirected in their gross distortions, that most people are not ultra masculine or ultra feminine - they occupy a normal range which should not be made to feel queer, call it normal pride, if you will.

In service of reconstructing White social systemic homeostasis, it is important not to react, become overly fixated in chase after the red capes, black power, feminist capes, rainbow capes as the YKW wave them against us in great exaggeration and distortion of the concept of working-hypothesis of social unionization (which would include ethnonationalism); right wing reactions that seek warrant beyond the social realm, above nature or below human nature, become inherently unstable for their lack of social accountability and correction - as the social unionization would otherwise sustain.

Ignore Lana’s idiotic use of the YKW supplied “enemy term”, i.e., “Leftists”, and replace it with the correct term, “Liberals” and it is otherwise a good critique of Lauren Southern’s ((())) “Borderless.”

Lana’s inclination to get suckered into a right wing position is probably a significant reason why Red Ice has been spared the recent Youtube purge so far.

(((Lauren Southern))) equipped with gas mask, helmet and protective eye goggles, ready for the “surprise attack” from anti-fa.

And as far as Lauren Southern (Simonsen) goes, Majorityrights has long seen her game as kosher.

Related at Majorityrights:

Hardly The Battle of Cable Street: What Berkeley Doesn’t Mean

The right is infamous for getting people swept-up and lured into mistakes.

(102:47) Richard Spencer: In terms of the Alt Lite, I can only imagine that a lot of them are waking up to this obvious reality

(102:59) Charles: I think they are. (((Lauren Southern))), I think, just made a video saying that it’s time to fight back.

(103:07) Richard Spencer: Yeah

Or is it rather unite and conquer?

......unite right wing reactionaries against “the left” (don’t be so “divisive” as to “punch right”) and conquer (erstwhile White/ethnonational social systemic homeostasis)?

With Majorityrights having recently been taken off of the WN/news aggregate site formerly known as “the White Right Hub” and now the “Goebbels Report” after MR had the nerve to question the wisdom of their promoting “The Greatest Story Never Told” in the name of White morale and unity? as it features wholesale lies from Goebbels - e.g., that Poles killed 58,000 German civilians interwar - in order to “justify” invasion of Poland…the question comes into relief again:

What part is Regnery playing in promoting the socially disorganizing right wing identity among Whites in their reaction to affliction? and is a Germanic/Jewish element among Regnery using this to promote divide and conquer among Whites?

What begs these questions?

Following MR having called-out the White Right Hub for featuring this highly inaccurate and destructive propaganda, they did replace the feature (“Greatest Story Never Told”), with a headline of a Polish woman who had a child with a black, who then, typically, abandoned her.

A comment appeared on MR - “LOL, you (DanielS) were being trolled and didn’t even realize it.”

This is quite Jewy. I cannot imagine mocking Germans for their mudsharks. And it casts suspicion on this spirit of unity that these right wingers claim to be promoting and how I am the one supposedly sowing discord.

Not long after, none other than Regnery’s pet, Richard Spencer, was being featured atop The Goebbels Report…

...tagging along on this occasion was a new luminary in the Regnery right wing tentosphere, Josh Neal, who, in turn, is apparently being encouraged to bring along other nubies on the WN scene, like Richard Houck, to play the same old Regnery German/Jewish game of pandering to the White American demographic in their reaction.

Regnery is apparently sponsoring much of the dubious right wing White identity - such as Richard Spencer’s NPI and Mike Enoch’s TRS.

Norvin tells me that a character going by the nom de plume of “Privada” is acting as a producer (gate-keeper) for those going on (what I’m guessing is) the Rengery approved circuit.

Related at Majorityrights:

On The Regnery Circus Big-Tent-O-Sphere, Featuring Richard Spencer as its Ring-Master

Regnery and Spencer, central umbrellas in the Regnery Tentosphere. Richard Thpenther thays, “If you’re not right on “the PQ” (Polish question), we’re going to purge you from thith movement” - (((Alternative Right))).

Regnery Publishing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Regnery Publishing is a conservative book publisher based in Washington, D.C. An imprint of Salem Media Group, it is led by president Marji Ross. The company was founded by Henry Regnery in 1947.[3][4][5]

Regnery has published books by authors such as former Republican Party chairman Haley Barbour, Ann Coulter, Sarah Palin, former Speaker of the United States House of Representatives Newt Gingrich, columnist Michelle Malkin, Robert Spencer, pundit David Horowitz, Vice President Mike Pence and his family and Barbara Olson.

Again, Regnery is known to sponsor many right wing projects, including those that “White Nationalists” are involved in, apparently sponsoring TRS (see here, here and here as to why that’s particularly dubious) in addition to Spencer’s NPI (among the manifold dubiousness of that outfit, for example, here).

Below are samples from the most recent tweet to tweets not far down the line (even though some of the dates are old) from Regnery president, Marj Ross, indicating a kosher aesthetic.

Marji Ross on Twitter:

Marji Ross Retweeted

Dave Sussman, Whiskey Politics
‏
@DavidSussman
20 Dec 2018

.@Regnery inspires new authors! Learn how to get published, catch up on 2018’s best books & what’s upcoming in 2019 as Marji Ross joins me at #WhiskeyPolitics.
Produced by Praemonitus Communications @6foot2inhiheels.
@SebGorka @VP @AnnCoulter @YouTube

Ep. 156 - Marji Ross with Regnery Press
Regnery’s gift to budding authors: How to get published. Marji Ross, President and Publisher at Regnery Press shares with Dave Sussman her favorite books of ...

.....

Sebastian Gorka DrG
‏
Verified account

@SebGorka
2 Oct 2018
More
The Great One has spoken.

Thank you @marklevinshow!

        One week today:

https://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Fight-Recovering-Americas/dp/162157640X …

 

https://twitter.com/SebGorka/status/1047169524175437825

.....

Marji Ross
‏
@MRossRegnery
30 Aug 2016

As many of you know, in my spare time, I’m a football nut. If you love #NFL, check it out https://www.amazon.com/Are-Ready-Some-Football-2016/dp/1535150858/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1472579189&sr=8-1&keywords=are+you+ready+for+some+football+book ….

.....

Shellie Blum
‏

@shellieblum
9 Jun 2016
More
Replying to @MRossRegnery
@Regnery @oreillyfactor You did a great job! It’s nice 2 hear someone in the traditional Publishing World be authentic! #books

0 replies 2 retweets 1 like
Reply   Retweet 2   Like 1   Direct message

....

Marji Ross
‏

@MRossRegnery
26 Apr 2016
More
Meeting with the incredibly talented and beautiful #Stacey Dash to plan the launch of her upcoming Regnery book!

Alexandra Levine talks with Dave Sussman:

Alexandra Levine with ‘Jews for Trump’ discusses Trump, Israel & being a Conservative Jew

(((Alexandra Levine and Dave Sussman))) an act featured by the The Regnery Circus

..................................................

Paul Gottfried, Gilad Atzmon and David Cole Stein are three ready examples of Jews who are taking the kind of right wing and philo-Germanic perspective that is characteristic of the Regnery circus (even if Stein and Atzmon are not published by Regnery, they are common as “the good Jews” among Regnery discourse-promotional circuits).

Buchanan, Gottfried and Spencer. Along with President Reagan, Buchanan is a descendant of (((Frank Meyers))) “fusionism” (Judeo-Christianity + Enlightenment objectivism), so too Paul Gottfried; and Gottfried, a German Jew, tends to see “the bad Jews as Slavic”; of high relevance, Gottfried’s fear of intersectionality against “The Left” had him call for damage control misdirection against a White Left ethnonational response to Jews in their ascendance to unprecedented hegemony circa 2008, calling for a Paleoconservatism 2.0, an Alternative Right, which Richard Spencer took up - a tentosphere of right wing reactionaries now usually being called “the dissident right” after Spencer and his Alt-Right brand name were predictably steered into destruction.

   
David Cole-Stein, adversary of “The Left”, supported early holocaust revisionist efforts, a proud German-Jew who detests Slavic Jews.

   
Atzmon, philo-Germanic, anti-Zionist
...offering some insider critique of Jewish power and influence
(probably as semi conscious damage control)
but otherwise basically a liberal.

Related at Majorityrights:

Kristol>NeoCon>Meyer>Paleocon> Gottfried>Francis>NPI> Gottfried>AltRight/lite> Paleocon>Bannon>Trump

Richard Thpenther’s (((Altright tentosphere))): “PQ” (Polish question), Goldstein’s false opposition

On The Regnery Circus Big-Tent-O-Sphere, Featuring Richard Spencer as its Ring-Master

From whence comes the eclecticism of the alternative right big tent concept.

The Alternative-Right’s big tent, would additionally include the Jews for some unknown reason.

The alternative right’s big tent, already too inclusive - includes Jews as well

Big Tent quartermasters faced with fresh spate of pro-Jewish pandering from Donald Trump.

Unite the Right Charlottesville: successful neocon/liberal operation forces wedge against paleo-Cohn

Related at Majorityrights: Stuxnet, the most sophisticated piece of malware ever seen, devised for just one specific target.

Related at Majorityrights: As Kumiko Predicted: Bolton appointed to Alt-Lite/Right/Trump Admin coalition w Israel. Next up Iran.

Related at Majorityrights: John (((1/8th))) Bolton.

The Lies Will Try to Live (but they’re not White, they’re Jewish), Abrahamic universalism and interchangeability at work through a Christian woman with mixed race kids and a Mulatto...

At 16:42: Ruth, a.k.a., “Vivian Veritas” a.k.a. The Truth Will Live” (the lies will try to live, but they’re not White, they’re Jewish), refers to Melchy Zedek in the chat for friendly prompting. I had been suspicious of Melchy Zedek ever since I undertook to discuss the DNA Nations and disentangle Jewish language games (notably against “the left”) with Ecce Lux, and Melchy immediately tried to argue against it and propose Christianity instead. Maybe I misunderstand Melchy and he has good but naive intentions…

Anyway, (((Ruth))), a.k.a., “Vivian Veritas” a.k.a. The Truth Will Live”, says at 16:42:

“Well Melchy said in that chat and this is funny because I was actually going to mention it…. he mentioned MTV.

And it’s funny, because I was actually going to mention Brittany Spears.

It’s kinda funny, I didn’t realize until recently, how actually controversial Brittany Spears was kind of first coming onto the scene…

..and actually like, I went back and watched some of her videos….

like some of the early ones are actually petty tame.”

It is so predictable that Ruth would say that (didn’t you just know she would say that? ....“pretty tame”).

... Brittany Spears going on about how her loneliness is killing her and passively acting like she can’t help herself as a giant black guy slam-dunks a basketball…

Vivian (Ruth) adds, “I don’t think religion should be about your people (race)”...

Related at Majorityrights:

The Lies Will Try To Live But They’re Not White, They’re Jewish

Woes Yule gift for HuWhites of (((DissidentRight))): crayons, coloring book, color the enemy, “Left”

John Bolton spearheading P.N.A.C. and going to show that even (((1/8th))) can be toxic.

Journalist Explains John Bolton’s Push For ‘Aggressive Use’ Of American Power

NPR, 2 May 2019: New Yorker writer Dexter Filkins says President Trump’s current national security adviser is a hawk who sees America as “a colossus operating anywhere it wants.”

TERRY GROSS, HOST: This is FRESH AIR. I’m Terry Gross. President Trump’s national security adviser John Bolton is known as a tough-talking hawk. A new article about him in The New Yorker is titled “John Bolton On The Warpath.” My guest is the author, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Dexter Filkins, who’s a staff writer for the magazine. He’s joined us many times on the show, dating back to when he covered the war in Iraq.

Bolton is President Trump’s third national security adviser, after Generals Michael Flynn and H.R. McMaster. Trump was familiar with Bolton’s views because Bolton had made hundreds of appearances on Fox News as a guest, and then as a paid commentator. On Fox, he’d advocated for military strikes on Iranian training camps and for forced regime change in North Korea. Earlier in Bolton’s career, he served in the George W. Bush administration as undersecretary of state for arms control and international security affairs and as U.N. ambassador. He advocated for the invasion of Iraq and told Filkins he still thinks the decision to overthrow Saddam Hussein was correct.

Dexter Filkins, welcome back to FRESH AIR. So as you point out in the piece, the Trump administration has no permanent secretary of defense, no secretary of homeland security, no ambassador to the U.N. What does it mean in terms of the power John Bolton has now in his role as national security adviser?

DEXTER FILKINS: Well, the national security adviser, just by virtue of the geography of that job - it’s in the West Wing. It’s right down the hall from the Oval Office. It’s an incredibly powerful position. You know, Bolton sees the president every morning. He sees him or he talks to him in the evening. It’s just, the proximity of that job to the presidency gives the occupant of that job just an enormous amount of power. So just on its face, you know, you’re in the pole position there. But I think in this administration because, you know, it’s a revolving door in the rest of the government pretty much all the time - Jim Mattis, the secretary of defense, he’s gone. There hasn’t been - no replacement has been named so there’s an acting secretary of defense. There’s no ambassador to the United Nations. There’s no secretary for homeland security.

So it’s just kind of a big vacuum. I think it’s fair to say that makes his job even bigger and gives him even more influence than you would ordinarily have. So I think in that administration, when you’re talking about foreign policy, you’re basically talking about John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, and that’s it.

GROSS: And are they on the same page on most things, Pompeo and Bolton?

FILKINS: I think so. I had a funny conversation about Pompeo and Bolton together with an unnamed Western diplomat who knows them both. And they said, look, you know, Pompeo is really only interested in what Trump is interested in. So you can’t really sit down and talk about the world with him. Bolton, on the other hand, you can talk about anything. You can talk about aid programs in Africa, and he’s well-briefed. He knows about it. But Pompeo has a much more political outlook.

GROSS: So you’re saying Pompeo is there to amplify Trump’s views. Bolton has very strong views of his own.

FILKINS: Yes, he does.

GROSS: So the title of your piece is “John Bolton On The Warpath.” I know he’s a hawk. Does the piece imply that he’s going to lead us into war?

FILKINS: No, but I think it fairly raises a lot of questions. And I think the basis of the piece is this, which I was kind of surprised to find - this divergence of world views between Bolton, on the one hand, who’s been a hawk his whole life. He’s for aggressive use of American power. He’s advocated bombing North Korea. He’s advocated bombing Iran. And then on the other hand, to the extent that President Trump has a world view, it is he wants to stay home. It’s America first. He’s pretty close to being an isolationist. He doesn’t want to - you know, he doesn’t want to partake in this kind of entire international architecture that was set up after the Second World War, whether it’s the World Trade Organization, or NATO or EU. He doesn’t want to pay for any of that stuff, and he doesn’t want to get involved.

So Trump, I think it’s fair to say, doesn’t really want to launch new military operations. They do not see eye to eye on things. I tried to kind of, you know, figure out what it is they talk about when they get together (laughter) for that reason.

GROSS: If Trump and Bolton have such opposing world views when it comes to the possibility of military intervention or war, why would Trump choose him? Why did he choose him?

FILKINS: Well, I think there’s - that’s a really good question. I think there’s two reasons for that. One is that, you know, I think he’s, Bolton, is kind of emotionally appealing to Trump. You know, Bolton was a very highly paid analyst on Fox News. He was on there few times a week. One of the revelations is - for me was I got to look at Mr. Bolton’s financial disclosure, which you’re required to submit for a job like that. And yeah, there was lots of stuff in there. So I think he was being paid $600,000 a year - this is just part of his income, but - $600,000 a year to be on Fox. And so every night, he’s banging away, talking tough. And I think that appeals emotionally to Trump. He’s like, he’s a tough guy. Plus he just sees him all the time. ‘Cause they didn’t really know each other very well.

I think the other reason is there were - H.R. McMaster had been the national security adviser before John Bolton. And there was a kind of a pretty large group of Trump allies who had decided that McMaster had to go. They didn’t like him. They thought he wasn’t supportive enough of Israel and of, you know, the current leadership there. And so they pushed him out. I mean, I think it’s fair to say they lobbied very hard to get him out, and they worked pretty hard to get Bolton in. So I think it was a confluence of those two things.

GROSS: What did Bolton advocate for as a highly paid commentator on Fox News?

FILKINS: (Laughter). Well, he, as I mentioned, he - and I went through a lot of stuff that he said on the air. And, you know, I think he’s finding - I should say, before I answer that question - I think he’s finding, you know, it’s a little different when you’re in power, as opposed to being out of power. But on Fox, talking tough - strike North Korea, if necessary, before they acquire an ICBM capability. Strike Iran in various, you know, various ways and in various contexts. That’s, like, at a minimum. And support Israel in its kind of what I think is a covert or actually pretty hot war that’s going on with Iran and Syria.

So really aggressive use of American power. But I think even more than that, not just - you know, not just dropping bombs. I think that Bolton’s worldview is he’s extremely skeptical of international agreements, whether they’re treaties or, again, the whole kind of architecture that was built by the United States over the past 70 years. You know, whether it’s NATO, or the EU, or the U.N. or the World Trade Organization, all those things which, you know, that’s the world we live in. And he is - and these are, you know, treaties and commitments, and bilateral agreements, multilateral agreements. He’s deeply skeptical of all those things. And he says, essentially, in - he has said this on Fox News, but he’s been very articulate about it in his writing, which is, every time you sign a treaty or a multilateral agreement, you give up a little bit of your sovereignty. And so I think he sees - his view of America is as a kind of colossus operating unilaterally wherever it wants. And, you know, if you pick up friends along the way, great. But they’re not going to be your friends for long. ‘Cause there’s no such things as friends in the international system. There’s only interests. And only interests endure. And so don’t get sentimental about it. Just carry on. And I think that it’s a very unsentimental view of the world that he OK. But Trump fell in love with…

READ MORE...

From Age of Treason Blogspot:

“The Tautology of Jewing”

Captainchaos
23 APRIL 2019 AT 11:46 PM
Why is commenting disabled on the new post?

Tanstaafl
24 APRIL 2019 AT 1:56 AM
Unintentional. Fixed now.

....

And from Majorityrights:

Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 01 May 2019 23:06 | # 3

Daniel Sperglord and Mangina-in-black enjoy pounding each other’s gay asses!

DanielS:

Captainchaos, while you are trying to deride mancinblack as effeminate for supporting me and MR, why don’t you instead question the wisdom of those who expect Whites to drop all concerns for every other antagonism to our system and attack the ‘pathogen’  ....markedly, it is not going to help us to separate and achieve autonomy from the pathogen if we do not also address our naive susceptibility to the pathogen or deliberate, traitorous introduction of it to our system that happens typically through vulnerabilities and entry by liberal/right wing thin or even pseudo warranted objectivism; also typically a reaction to the contradictory language games that YKW are playing in order to keep our people associated with the right, its rational blindness, mystification, confusion, short shrift of social accountability (viz. even to our people) and with it, disruption of our social systemic homeostasis? - obviously one of the chief aims of the pathogen is to break through systemic defense. Thus, it is obviously valid and important to look at our system and its vulnerabilities.

In short, it is going to be hard to take-on an enemy full throttle while you’ve got people confused, thinking you’re doing wrong, or naively “clearly” thinking that you are wrong because they are abiding by right wing/liberal (their lefts are our liberalism, rupturing our unionization when pitted against our bounds) language games, or outright stabbing us in the back because right wing pseudo objectivity serves to “excuse” why it is that they take the liberties or pay-offs afforded, and “why” we are getting destroyed in their abiding language games as “just a fact of nature” that they have no part in aiding and abetting.

I’ve been looking at this problem since the early 90s, and started to bring it to a double entry with the YKW as the chief problems to our social systemic homeostasis in 2009 ..and have been cultivating it since.

Now, regarding “pathological altruism” (the Taylor, MacDonald thing, circa, what? 2011? I never paid much attention to it) I only suggested that it may have been their naive attempt, even a misdirected attempt to look at our part, as it would likely be (misdirected), still caught up in right wing objectivism by its very means of “description and diagnosis”, but to suggest that I was part of misdirection and not taking the YKW seriously enough because I also believe it is necessary to address vulnerabilities and other antagonism (which will usually lead to their being organized to imposition upon us by YKW, true), and the fact that I recognize serious errors in Hitler’s philosophy and regime (misdirected and misdirecting headlong into disaster for Europeans, as his right wing premises would), are things that I, and Majorityrights, deserve credit for in service of European peoples, not harassment and denunciation.

And isn’t it a perfect example, wouldn’t Trump’s vanity just have him lap-up objectivist flattery and have the YKW walk right into his system, knocking his daughter up, directing his campaign to undo the Iran Deal, get him elected, and move right into Oval Office meetings to set his administration’s agenda?