Commenting on Counter-Currents site

[Will Williams]

Hamburger Today is a prolific commenter on C-C (#4 on the site's Top 100 Commenters), but he doesn't have much of a grasp of what "this thing of ours" is all about, and isn't prepared to debate me on the subject (though I am mere #51 on C-C's Top 100 Commenters): https://counter-currents.com/2024/08/red-pill-report/


Will Williams: August 11, 2024

Hamburger Today: August 11, 2024 We are both pro-White and our dispute is about the best way to be ‘pro-White’. However, my view is that the best way to be ‘pro-White’ even for the vanguard is to be ‘ecumenical’ and embrace all Whites, including those you think are not worth saving and those you describe as ‘White Trash’.
---

I’m not sure if you are responding to something I said, or not. It may be, but I have never used the term “White Trash” to describe our people, even trashy ones.

The National Alliance is recognized as a vanguard, or leading element in the forefront of a cause, as compared to those you value — which is not a word I use, so looked it up. They’re all yours:

ec·​u·​men·​i·​cal ˌ
1.) a: of, relating to, or representing the whole of a body of churches
b: promoting or tending toward worldwide Christian unity or cooperation
2.): worldwide or general in extent, influence, or application

—
You bring up GLR but you don’t seem to recognize that GLR’s rather flamboyant and confrontational – in short militant – approach didn’t work. Worse yet, it put pro-White activism on the fringes for two generations.
---

There was no “pro-White activism” until Commander Rockwell came on the scene in 1958 and began to expose Jewish perfidy. If you care to learn about him, order Dr. Dalton’s new edition of his last long-out-of-print book, just released last month: “White Power by George Lincoln Rockwell” at cosmotheistchurch.org ($25 plus p&h).

—
It’s possible you and I have different ideas of what ‘militant’ means, but to me its defined by a kind of ‘my way or the highway’ mentality. Maybe you don’t see it that way… Militancy is toxic… I think ‘militancy’ is bad for the movement as a whole…
---

That’s your opinion, Hamburger. Stick with radicalizing ecumenicals and leave the vanguard to those of us who have a sober understanding of militancy. I found this definition:

Militant also implies a fighting disposition but suggests not self-seeking but devotion to a cause, movement, or principle.

So, a militant vanguard, based on the Leadership Principle, as advocated by Messers. Hitler, Rockwell and Pierce, is a sound approach for organizing our racial resistance, whether you understand it or not.

No offense, HT, but judging by your criticism it is doubtful that you will ever be vanguard material. That is OK. It’s not for everyone. Those interested can read this and judge for themselves whether or not it is “toxic”: What is the National Alliance? | National Alliance (natall.com)

[Will Williams]

Mr. McCool responds to an earlier exchange he and I had, here: https://counter-currents.com/2024/07/so ... low-peril/

Will Williams: August 12, 2024

Fionn McCool: August 12, 2024 Mr Williams, Rich Houck is in all seriousness no kind of nigga but he is a man of about my age who has written much for this magazine and who I am happy to call comrade...

The comment I mention under Houck's old essay by Richard Edmonds is worth noting:

Richard Edmonds: June 11, 2019

Nationalism is a state of mind, one in which we make the choice to retake the city instead of fleeing it. It is acting on that inner voice that tells us, “These cities are ours. We built them. And we will take them back.”

To accomplish this mission, You will need to find a hero, a man with an iron will and a heart of stone.

The Russian Tsar Ivan the Terrible was one such hero. Ivan the Terrible broke the power of the Mongul, Tartar and Turkish invaders who had occupied and tyrannised Russia for centuries. At huge personal cost Ivan broke their power and freed, liberated the Russian people from an alien subjugation a hundred times worse than what we are currently experiencing.

---

Thanks for that, Fionn. I've never heard of Rich but looked at the 5-year-old essay you recommend. It's a good reminisce of healthier times past. I'm probably from his dad's generation when we lived in a more or less White world (in the racially segregated South).

I like Mr. Edmond's comment under "7/11 Nationalism" about how Ivan the Terrible dealt with the racial mess in Russia in his day.

Yes, Pierce was right, as usual: we must SEPARATE (not resegregate) from the "nigga mess."

Why did you call Rich your nigga since he's no kind if nigga??? 

[Will Williams]

Not sure what Antipodean means when he tells Hamburger Today that his approach to radicalizing our people is very Christian, but to me it means it is a silly, half-baked approach.
https://counter-currents.com/2024/08/red-pill-report/

Why not, instead, try to radicalize the 58.6% of nominally pro-White C-C poll respondents who do not identify with the Jew-spawned creed -- or for that matter try to radicalize the 35-37% of alleged U.S. citizens, who still claim to believe in Jehovah, with his ecumenical approach?


Will Williams: August 12, 2024

Antipodean: August 12, 2024 Yours is a very Christian approach HT.
---

Very!

That will serve HT well as he attempts to radicalize all those concerned White ecumenicals to racial responsibility.

However, only 41.4% [of respondents] currently identify as Christian. For comparison, 63-65% of US citizens are Christian…

[Will Williams]

Militant ecumenical Hamburger Today clarifies what he meant by the terms ecumenical and vanguard: https://counter-currents.com/2024/08/red-pill-report/ I wonder if he goes by Hamburger Today when he's trying face-to-face to recruit concerned Whites to be active in our cause?


Will Williams: August 12, 2024

Hamburger Today: August 12, 2024 I was using ‘ecumenical’ in the older sense as provided in definition (2). Christian ecumenism piggy-backs on that older, pre-Christian understanding of the word.

I’m militantly ecumenical.

As for ‘vanguard’, I use it in the older sense of ‘advancing before (the main body of the organization or army)’ which implies preparing the way for what comes after…
---

I see. You’re both ecumenical in the older, pre-Christian sense of the word, and are in the vanguard in the older sense of that word also — as in the forward element of a military operation. That should clarify for the Concerned Whites what you’re imparting to them.

Did you read What is the National Alliance? | National Alliance (natall.com)? I expect you didn’t. It’s a reasonable soft sell to concerned Whites who are looking for a long term solution to what they see happening to their world, originally written by Dr. William Pierce. It does not come off as militant, so will probably not appeal to a militant ecumenical as yourself.

[Will Williams]

Hamburger Today isn't real sure what he is, but he lifts the veil a bit on what he's not: https://counter-currents.com/2024/08/red-pill-report/

I'm not a fan of the popular red pill term and refuse to use it like I refuse to use the Ebonic term "woke." So I looked it up on dictionary.com"

What does red pill mean?
Red pill refers to (becoming enlightened to) the truth about reality, especially a truth that is difficult to accept or exposes disillusions.

Online, red pill is especially used among anti-feminist and white [sic] supremacist [sic] groups to refer to “waking up” to the truth that women and liberal politics are oppressing men and white [sic] people.

So, why cannot White folks who have been awakened to truths we've known for decades just say "enlightened to the truth about reality" instead of saying they've been red pilled?





Will Williams: August 13, 2024

Hamburger Today: August 12, 2024 I don’t believe in the Trinity … or Jesus as a savior … or original sin … or salvation through the saving grace of Jesus.
---

Finally, something we can agree on, HT. Except I believe the burden is on believers in Jesus to prove the alleged “King of the Jews” ever actually lived, not on the skeptic to prove the negative.

Our exchange has run its course. Let’s drop it. You have me thoroughly discombobulated, when yesterday you say, “Militancy is toxic,” yet today say, “I’m militantly ecumenical.”

[Will Williams]

Whites who style themselves pro-White but tolerate Jew "leaders" makes for very bad optics: https://counter-currents.com/2024/08/go ... ad-optics/

Will Williams: August 14, 2024

Kaspar Hauser: August 13, 2024 I was thinking today about why a Jew like Unz… runs a platform on which “even the most controversial opinions are given space to be discussed”. He acts like the great puppeteer in the background…
—

It’s off the topic of Mrs. Schaefer, but “Why the Jew puppeteer, Unz”? is a good question.

Multi-millionaire Ronald Keeva Unz is tolerated by those Whites who don’t mind being his puppets. I don’t go to his site on principle. He is ineligible for National Alliance membership because he is a racial Jew. Our members like it that way. “Ron Unz: Jewish Defector?” at nationalvanguard.org.

The fact that Unz is not just a Jew, but a Jew with a long history of public political activism, justifies a deep skepticism of his motives and intent… Unz implies he didn’t know about or understand Jewing until he read Shahak and MacDonald a decade ago. I don’t buy it. But even if it’s true, why did he not blow the whistle sooner? Has he only now realized that Jewing is wrong and must be stopped? Absolutely not. He’s a cold and calculating fish.

[Will Williams]

I've had enough of Mr. Hamburger. He's a good example of what we are up against. I don't respond to him for his benefit, but for others who may gain from what I put up.

What Dr. Pierce wrote in his BULLETIN commentaries to our membership is so important. The Alliance was getting away from him with all the skinheads who had recently joined and with a couple of demonstrations Bill Roper had organized with lots of not just undisciplined skinheads, but with counterdemonstrators he had also arranged. Read the NV article attached here with Dr. Pierce's comments and read between his lines:


Will Williams: August 14, 2024 at

Hamburger Today: August 13, 2024 I am familiar with NA and have read ‘What is the National Alliance?’ and consider ‘uncompromising’ as the key word in that text.

The text also makes clear that NA does not view itself as just another ‘White rights group’ because of its ‘uncompromising’ nature.

It is this ‘uncompromising’ nature that strikes me as ‘militant’, and I’d be surprised if you disagreed with that association.

I don’t think that NA should compromise on what the membership thinks is important.

But my view is that our task is different from what Dr. Pierce focused on….
—

Thanks, HT. I’m not going to keep going around and around with you, splitting hairs over different definitions of words.

Uncompromising in the context of NA’s strict ideology, simply means to not loosen the organization’s fundamental standards. Period. Other groups, unnamed, have different standards that in my view are already compromised. When you speak of our task who exactly are our? Where are your standards where I can compare them to our Alliances? Who is your leader? Surely you have a leader of your task.

Those of us who are married know that we must compromise on little things every day to “keep the peace.” My wife understands and appreciates that I hold an uncompromising hard line on NA’s sound fundamental principles.

What are the standards of our nation’s leaders, all of those Republicans and Democrats? Have they compromised on leadership of America’s founding stock? What is their ideology and program for preserving the White race? They have none. They are compromised as politicians.

When you say our task, who in Hell are you talking about? Is that the greater “big tent” White nationalist movement? The alt-right? Maybe you can point me to a document similar to “What is the National Alliance?” like “Our Task – What is it?" Will Jew-controlled Establishment leaders — all those Democrat and GOP politicians — call your task militant? Of course they will if you address the JQ and call for strict racial separation of eligible Whites from ineligibles and non-Whites.

Let us end this back and forth now, Hamburger. Enough. Others may gain a better understanding of the Alliance in this that I wrote to our members seven years ago, quoting guidance from our Founder: “Vow Not to Compromise” at nationalvanguard.org. I said;

DR. PIERCE WARNED Alliance members several times in the last few months prior to his death to stay clear of the “movement,” or at least to keep our Alliance a safe arm’s distance from it. In the January, 2002 National Alliance BULLETIN he wrote these words:

There are members who still have a fixation on something called the “movement” rather than on the Alliance. These “movement”-oriented members see the Alliance not as unique and irreplaceable, but merely as one organization among many, all working toward the same goal….

[Will Williams]

While on the subject of good vs. bad optics, comments on the awful optics of pro-Whites using a racial Jew's site as an information source are addressed here: https://counter-currents.com/2024/08/go ... ad-optics/


Will Williams: August 14, 2024

Lady Strange: August 14, 2024 [Unz’s] very writings are highly suspect: if you read them carefully – and despite the fact that they are often full of untruths – they are in a very obvious way 100% anti-White.
---

I’m reminded of something Ben Klassen said 40 years ago, before the advent of the internet: “Why pick through a barrel of rotten fruit [Unz.com] to find a good apple when Nature offers a bounty of fresh fruit for the picking in her orchards. As you say, read carefully, and with a wary eye.

—
I don’t want to get too polemical here about unz.com, since authors from this site are also published there…
---

Is that really reason enough to not criticize an anti-White multi-millionaire Jew who poses as “one of us,” especially on the JQ? Any naive or uninformed White who is new to racial politics can fall for what a racial Jew like Unz presents as “pro-White.”

Anyone can repeat pro-White truths, including a non-White like Unz with the funds to present them credibly, when, like you say — despite the fact they are often full of untruths – they are in a very obvious way 100% anti-White.

Well, not 100%, but is it any wonder that so many who are successful professional prestigenatators, adroit with sleight of hand and hocus-pocus, are kikes? “Keep your eyes on my left hand while my right hand picks your pocket.”

[Will Williams]

Scott writes a very long comment and I pick a couple of things in it to respond, while linking to some NV material to back them up: https://counter-currents.com/2024/08/go ... ad-optics/


Will Williams: August 15, 2024

Scott: August 14, 2024... Sorry for the length of these comments.
—

3,793 words according to Word Counter. That’s a lot. I couldn’t read it all.

For one who, if I’m not mistaken, has said he is not in the “movement,” you certainly know a lot of relevant “movement” facts and have met a number of revisionist types.

Revisionist historians do valuable work for us racial nationalists who can use their truths, but that does not make all of them racial nationalists since several of the revisionists have married non-Whites.

—
Paul Fromm, who respresented Ernst Zündel in latter years. As Mr. Fromm, like many good Catholics, downed endless glasses of cheap house wine, I was privileged to hear his views on these cases…
—

You were privileged, Scott, and Paul, who is in the movement and has toiled for the interests of our people in the front line for many years, deserves better than that as the foremost free speech advocate in Canada.

It doesn’t bother me or NA at all that Paul is a Christian or that he once drank cheap wine. He represented the National Alliance for years in a protracted fight in Canada where the SPLC, its Jewish collaborators and the corrupt Canadian court stole more than a $quarter million bequest willed to our Alliance by a deceased member. See: “An Honorable Man” at nationalvanguard.org. Paul summed up the case:

“Has a New Brunswick court taken us into Alice in Wonderland and the Court of the Red Queen? — The verdict is ‘guilty’; no need for a trial; now on to the sentence!”

—
Happily, Germar [Rudolf] has returned to the United States where he has nominal First Amendment protections, and he has legal U.S. residency now ─ but he has not so far been able to get his citizenship application through. Mr. Rudolf is still publishing Holo-heresies and staying out of trouble otherwise…
—

Germar has been put through the ringer and imprisoned by the thought police for telling truths about the HoloHoax. He recently was still on the lam, avoiding extradition by JOG back to prison in Germany. With heroic persistence he managed to publish the 634-page, large format work this year, available here: “Holocaust Encyclopedia – Full Color Hardback produce by Germar Rudolf” cosmotheistchurch.org) Several chapters of Germar’s definitive work on the Hoax of the 20th Century can be read online free, like this one: “Holocaust Insights 1: Absurd Tales” at nationalvanguard.org.

[Will Williams]

Fredrik doesn't care to hear about the Holocaust. He has Holocaust fatigue, but those watching the topic might care about Jew lies, so I disabuse him of his carelessness for their sake. His position is ridiculous, so I ridicule it with common sense facts: https://counter-currents.com/2024/08/go ... ad-optics/


Will Williams: August 15, 2024

Fredrik: August 14, 202 Revisionists are more obsessed with the holocaust than the jews are, it`s like a religion to them.
—

Really? WikiJews are good for one thing, at least. Searching for ‘Holocaust movies and documentaries’, With tired eyes I counted around 789, going back to 1940: “Category: The Holocaust-related lists – Wikipedia”

That doesn’t count hundreds of Holocaust museums and memorials, or hundreds of best-selling books, mostly written by “survivors,” no doubt.

I couldn’t find a listing for any movies by revisionist historian movies, much less for Holocaust denial movies, but, then, WikiJews and and their coreligionists in Hollywood don’t care about anything like that.

—
I also think they (the revisionists) overestimate the importance of the holocaust in Europe. Did it happen? Maybe, maybe not, who the hell cares?! (this should be the correct approach to the holocaust).
—

I can think of lots of things to care less about than the Jew’s elaborate Hoax of the 20th Century. The definition of holocaust is a thorough destruction involving extensive loss of life especially through fire. The Jew’s sacred holocaust story that cannot be questioned is bullshit, Fredrik. That is a fact!

If you want to learn about a real holocaust, put ‘holocaust’ in the search block at nationalvanguard.org and you’ll come up with the shocking truth in a score of articles, like this one: “Dresden: A Real Holocaust”

I remember my first Holocaust movie: “The Diary of Anne Frank (1959 film) – Wikipedia”. I was in the 6th grade and our class also had to read the strange “non-fiction” book by the same title.

The film was positively received by critics, currently holding a 81% critics rating on Rotten Tomatoes.[4] It won three Academy Awards in 1960, including Best Supporting Actress for (((Shelley Winters))). Shelley Winters later donated her Oscar to the Anne Frank Museum. In 2006, it was honored as the eighteenth most inspiring American film on the list AFI’s 100 Years.

Talk about effective propaganda for American movie-going boobs and impressionable American 6th-graders. Whew! The lovely actress Millie Perkins played mule-faced Miss Frank for effect.

The 1982 Holocaust propaganda film Sophie’s Choice played on Turner Classic Movies this weekend. I watched a few minutes before going out to grab some fresh air. Meryl Streep won an Academy Award for her role in that pack of lies.