Commenting on Counter-Currents site

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 5325
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Commenting on Counter-Currents site

Post by Will Williams » Tue Apr 22, 2025 11:05 am

My comment above to Peter Quint did finally appear on C-C, properly formatted: https://counter-currents.com/2025/04/we ... e-we-suck/


Will Williams: April 21, 2025
Peter Quint: April 21, 2025 Was [Ebert] a white or a jew?
---


“Roger Ebert was not Jewish. The famous film critic was one-half of the movie reviewing team of Siskel and Ebert with the late Gene Siskel, who was Jewish.”

Though Ebert was Catholic, Siskel was Jewish, and just after Siskel died in 1999, Ebert eulogized him for the Chicago Sun-Times, recounting a conversation they had after a speaking appearance at the Harvard Law School Film Society:

…Gene said, “The importance of Judaism isn’t simply theological, or, in the minds of some Jews, necessarily theological at all. It is that we have stayed together and respected these things for thousands of years, and so it is important that we continue.” ...Source: The Jewish Journal: Roger Ebert’s religion

White Catholics do not think in terms of “staying together [as a race] for thousands of years, respecting these things, and continue…] In fact, they foolishly worship the Jews’ otherwordly tribal deity.
If Whites insist on participating in "social media," do so on ours, not (((theirs))). Like us on WhiteBiocentrism.com; follow us on NationalVanguard.org. ᛉ

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 5325
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Commenting on Counter-Currents site

Post by Will Williams » Tue Apr 22, 2025 11:16 am

Kim is a regular commenter at C-C and closer to the NA POV than are others there: https://counter-currents.com/2025/04/we ... e-we-suck/



Will Williams:April 22, 2025
Kim: April 21, 2025 I’d describe Roger Ebert, the anti-White male Hollywood film critic, as not a Jew, but most definitely, Jew-ish…
---


You’ve got that right. The profession of film critic is heavy with Jews who give cover to their Tribe’s dominence of Hollywood. That Roger married the Negress “Chaz’ confirms that he lost any claim to be a White man.

[Edit: I couldn't post this image to C-C, but can post it here at WB where it says "a 1,000words."]
Image

I don’t know if author Neal Gabler is a Jew, but he sure blew the cover off of the dirty little secret of Jews founding and running Hollywood with his 1989 book An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood



I do miss my personal experience in a moderate/conservative (at the time) strong White Catholic neighborhood. There are many dormant former Catholics out there who are principled, anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-divorce, & just perhaps… pro-White European. Some, like me, have already ditched multi-culti Maryland for WV.
---


There certainly are many “dormant” Catholics, like the “dormant” Presbyterians I grew up around in our White neighborhood in the then racially segregated South. More White former Christians will become more intelligent as we have. ;o}

Smart decision to ditch multi-culti Maryland for still mostly White, salubrious WV.
If Whites insist on participating in "social media," do so on ours, not (((theirs))). Like us on WhiteBiocentrism.com; follow us on NationalVanguard.org. ᛉ

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 5325
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Commenting on Counter-Currents site

Post by Will Williams » Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:05 pm

Scott may be the most long-winded C-C commentator, but usually makes interesting ones, covering multiple topics. This one was so long and impossible to unpack so I cherry-picked a couple of things he'd said -- reposting this week;s ADV as well as today's Today in History.: https://counter-currents.com/2025/03/re ... oel-davis/


Will Williams: April 25, 2025
Scott: March 25, 2025 >> The first issue I want to address is National Socialist nordicism and chauvinism. Trying to deny or minimize the Third Reich’s treatment of the conquered Slavs is a lost cause. It was a stupid policy that made enemies of people who should have been friends. However, it was never sustainable. <<
---

Scott, I suppose you were quoting someone else there by placing those carets. Consider this from this week’s ADV broadcast: Month of the Leader 2025, part 1 | National Vanguard . Kevin Strom noted:

“As for pan-Aryanism, Hitler’s change in attitude from his earlier disparagement of Slavs and his focus on Germans only has been well-chronicled in James Harting’s excellent article: Hitler and the Slavs in Historical Perspective | National Vanguard. He says in part:”

…Historically, Hitler’s view of the Slavic peoples was contentious and adversarial. It is not difficult to find hostile and aggressive remarks concerning the Slavs in both Hitler’s formal writings as well as in his informal discussions. In Mein Kampf, he ascribes his youthful awakening as a folkish nationalist to the ethnic struggles that he himself experienced between the Slavic Czechs and the Germans within the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

Hitler’s mature attitude towards the Slavs, however, especially after 1938 or 1939, evolved and became nuanced. He recognized, for example, that there were large segments of the Czech and Slovenian Slavic peoples that were racially valuable, and he eagerly anticipated incorporating them into his postwar Greater Germanic Reich. In other words, he felt that not all Slavs were created equal.

Contemporary National Socialists view Adolf Hitler as the symbolic leader of the whole of the Aryan race. I, personally, believe that this conception of Hitler is correct and I embrace it enthusiastically. In Mein Kampf and elsewhere, Hitler spoke repeatedly about the fundamental, trans-national unity of the Aryan race, and specifically about the pan-Aryan nature of the struggle against international Jewry.

. . . Increasingly as the War went on, Hitler found himself as the de facto head of all of the Aryan peoples of Europe, and not just of the Germans or of the Germanics. Indeed, from the historical perspective that we now enjoy, we can see that despite being at war with Great Britain, it was Hitler who had the best long term interests of the British people at heart, and not the drunken Jewish cat’s paw Winston Churchill, who proved to be the true gravedigger of the British Empire.

By the end of the War, Hitler had come to realize that his historical role had expanded far beyond that of simply being the chancellor of the German Reich. In his Political Testament, written immediately before his death, he spoke of himself in the role of the defender of the “European children of the Aryan nations.”
---
Now it is a Hate Crime just to use the term Holocaust in any other context beside the sacred drama of the Jews. That is what passes for History these days…
---

How true! In the racisl struggle Jewry has the big battalions with its control of mass media, academia, Madison Avenue, “our” political process, etc., etc. Fact.

I had the TV on a day or so ago on C-CPAN and caught this unbelievable love fest: Holocaust Days of Remembrance Ceremony | Video | C-SPAN.org One may view it there, and can read the text of Mr. Eisenstadt’s speeech — so full of lies!


I found Mr. Joel Davis to be highly intelligent and his case to be clearly and soberly stated.
---

Like here:

The essence of National Socialism is the good of the nation being elevated above any individual interest. It is this total reevaluation of every aspect of social and political life according to the racial purity, spiritual unity, moral health and military strength of the nation that makes National Socialism the taking of the nationalist idea to its (ideo)logical conclusion.

The core principles of National Socialism were derived by distinguishing the nationalist idea from everything in European thought philosophically incompatible with it. The foundations for the nationalist idea were discovered to be biological racialism, folkishness, social organicism, anti-egalitarianism, and the existential view of life as struggle. The implications of the nationalist idea were subsequently discovered to be the necessity for proactive programs of dictatorship, militarism, antisemitism, eugenics, cultural hygiene, “the abolition of the thraldom of interest”, nationalisation of finance, full employment and autarky.

National Socialists locate the foundational source for the spirit and culture of a people in race. They therefore located in the foundation of the German spirit and culture in the racial stock, in the blood of the German people. Hence the embrace of policies of racial exclusion and eugenics, to maximise the blood purity of the German people and with it their purity of spirit and coherence of culture. This foundation makes it utterly impervious to any and all subversions of national identity from what it most fundamentally is – a community of blood…
* * * * *
It might be a good time to remember William Joyce, born this day, 24 April, 1906 in Brooklyn, New York.:

American-born writer, orator, and racial patriot of Irish and English descent, who attained fame broadcasting as “Lord Haw Haw” over German shortwave radio transmitters during World War 2. After the war, in an outrageous miscarriage of justice, Joyce is hung by the British for “treason” despite the fact that he was not a British citizen. His last words:
“In death as in life, I defy the Jews who caused this last war, and I defy the power of darkness which they represent. I warn the British people against the crushing imperialism of the Soviet Union. May Britain be great once again and in the hour of the greatest danger in the West may the swastika be raised from the dust, crowned with the words – ‘You have conquered nevertheless.’ I am proud to die for my ideals and I am sorry for the sons of Britain who have died without knowing why.”
If Whites insist on participating in "social media," do so on ours, not (((theirs))). Like us on WhiteBiocentrism.com; follow us on NationalVanguard.org. ᛉ

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 5325
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Commenting on Counter-Currents site

Post by Will Williams » Thu Apr 24, 2025 9:27 pm

I continue to try to radicalize those at C-C, but most there are still mired in right-wing, conservative nonsense: https://counter-currents.com/2025/04/sh ... o-college/ Nothing can shake them off that fence better than the words of Dr. Pierce from 1976, if they will pay attention to his wisdom.



Will Williams: April 25, 2025
Morality Squad: April 24, 2025 …Right Wing guys have always been more likely to date non-White women than Leftist guys’… Also, let’s not forget that RW and WN are two different things that overlap somewhat.
---

So-called Right Wing guys who “date” non-White women are lost to serious racial separatists. So are so-called Leftist guys who would do the same. Dr. Pierce explained to his National Alliance members nearly 50 years ago why NA is neither right-wing nor left-wing, and still isn’t today, in his classic speech: Our Cause | National Vanguard

…I’m sure that one of the difficulties people have in trying to understand us is that they can’t figure out quite how to categorize us. They’re accustomed to putting everything they encounter in life into little, mental pigeonholes labeled right-wing, left-wing, communist, racist, and so on. And once they’ve done that, they think they understand the thing.

Now the trouble is that we don’t quite fit any of the customary pigeonholes. And that is because the doctrine of the National Alliance, the truth for which we stand, is not just a rehash of old and familiar ideas but is really something new to Americans.

Perhaps the best way to approach an understanding of the Alliance is to start by getting rid of some of the most troublesome pigeonholes altogether. That is, by pointing out what we are not. We are not, as many people tend to assume at first, either a conservative or a right-wing group. And I’m not just trying to be cute when I say that. I’m not just trying to emphasize that we are a special right-wing group or a better right-wing group. In fact, our truth has very little in common with most right-wing creeds. We’re not interested, for example, in restoring the Constitution. The Constitution, written 200 years ago, served a certain purpose well for a time. But that time is now passed. Nor was its purpose the same as our purpose today. We’re not interested in states’ rights, in restoring the former sovereignty of the individual states. We do not believe, as our conservative friends do, that a strong and centralized government is an evil in itself. It is, in fact, a necessity in overcoming many of the obstacles which lie ahead of us as a people.

What else is dear to the hearts of right-wingers? Do we want to restore prayer and Bible reading to the public schools? Hardly. Anti-fluoridation? Nonsense. Income tax? Abortion? Pornography? Well, we may sympathize more with the right-wing position on these issues than we do with the left-wing position, but they are still only peripheral issues for us. They are not the reason why we are here. They are not the things we are prepared to die for.

There are, in fact, several issues on which we are closer to what would ordinarily be considered the left-wing or liberal position than we are to the conservative or right-wing position. One of these issues is the ecology issue: the protection of our natural environment, the elimination of pollution, and the protection of wildlife. And there are also other issues in which we are closer to the liberals than to the conservatives, although I doubt that we agree with them completely on any issue; just as we seldom, if ever, agree completely with the right-wing on any issue.

The reason for the lack of complete agreement, when there seems to be approximate agreement, with either the right or the left is that our position on every issue is derived from an underlying view of the world which is fundamentally different from those of either the right or the left. That is, to the extent that they have any underlying philosophy at all. Often there is none, and a great many people who identify themselves as liberals, conservatives, or moderates simply have an assortment of views on various issues which are not related to any common idea, purpose, or philosophy.

Before we turn to a positive look at the Alliance, let me inject just a few more negatives…

Read more about Our Cause at the link above. If you then consider yourself a right-winger, the National Alliance is probably not for you.
Image
If Whites insist on participating in "social media," do so on ours, not (((theirs))). Like us on WhiteBiocentrism.com; follow us on NationalVanguard.org. ᛉ

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 5325
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Commenting on Counter-Currents site

Post by Will Williams » Fri Apr 25, 2025 7:05 pm

Our race will be much better off when the great majority of our daughters who choose to go to college, then get on a "career path," instead marry a White man and raise the next generation of White loyalists: https://counter-currents.com/2025/04/sh ... o-college/
Image

Will Williams: April 26, 2025
Lord Shang: April 25, 2025 [b]Separation[/b] is the only answer – to everything. Sadly, that’s not on the table at the moment, but it must be forever kept uppermost in our minds as the goal…
---

Thank you, Lord. For serious White racial separatists separation is “on the table” and everything else — all compromises and half-measures — are not. Ours may not be a big table now, but it is the best table for those Whites who are eligiblle to be seated.

It starts with the individual and his family, then to their community and beyond, It is doable and not complicated. A general plan: What is the National Alliance? | National Alliance

Mississippi Governor and U.S. Senator Theodore Bilbo wrote the book Take Your Choice Separation or Mongrelization in 1947. He realized that segregation was not enough and invoked considerable opposition from his fellow Southerners because of his demand that physical geographical separation was the only way to preserve Western Civilization.
“If we choose any plan short of the physical separation of the races, we are in effect adopting the scheme of amalgamation of the races. Any student of racial history knows that if the Negroes remain in the United States, the last American will be an octoroon or a mongrel . . . If the Negroes are not removed, this condition may come about in three to five hundred years: The fact that it will come sooner or later is a certainty.”
At the increased rate that amalgamation of Whites with non-Whites has been going in America, Bilbo’s 1947 estimate of 300-500 years is way off.

It’s too late to preserve Western Civilization, but to determined separatists it is not to late to preserve the White race.
If Whites insist on participating in "social media," do so on ours, not (((theirs))). Like us on WhiteBiocentrism.com; follow us on NationalVanguard.org. ᛉ

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 5325
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Commenting on Counter-Currents site

Post by Will Williams » Fri Apr 25, 2025 8:14 pm

Negro author Lipton Matthews writes a credible piece for Counter-Currents: https://counter-currents.com/2025/04/th ... le-savage/ He will not be writing for us. We have White authors who can handle any subject he writes about and do a better job, through loyal White eyes.



Will Williams: April 26, 2025
Mr. Matthews:  ...The sooner we discard the myth of the noble savage, the easier we can replace it with something far more valuable: truth. Not the truth of myth or metaphor, but of complex, uncomfortable and liberating facts.
---

Biological truths to be precise: liberating  racial facts.

Good essay. The author's kinsmen will not be pleased with it, and he still will not be eligible for National Alliance membership.

Dr. Pierce reviewed Mr. Goodrich's shocking Scalp Dance about "noble savages":

...When a group of Indians spotted a wagon train of such prospective settlers unaccompanied by soldiers or experienced scouts, they would approach with smiles and other indications of friendly intent, sometimes waving a white flag. Almost certainly there were good Christian souls in those wagon trains who told their husbands, “Put away your rifle, you fool! Can’t you see that they’re friendly? If you’re holding a rifle, that will just provoke them.” When the Indians got close enough to evaluate the situation fully, they either would strike immediately or mix with the prospective settlers and wait for the opportune moment to begin cutting throats and taking scalps. Then, after a day or so of amusing themselves raping the White women and listening to the screams of the White men staked out on the ground with a small fire burning at their crotches, they would move on and leave the scraps for the wolves and coyotes. Such fools soon enough were weeded out of those Whites who settled in the plains and survived Indian attacks, but there seemed to be an inexhaustible supply of them back East, where the preachers continued pumping new heads full of dangerous nonsense. It’s really too bad that the preachers and other propagandists of the “noble savage” school didn’t head west themselves to try out their ideas on real savages.

Scalp Dance: Indian Warfare on the High Plains, 1865-1879. – Cosmotheism 

Drawing heavily from diaries, letters, and memoirs from American Plains settlers, historian Thomas Goodrich weaves a spellbinding tale of life and death on the prairie, told in the timeless words of the participants themselves. Scalp Dance is a powerful, unforgettable epic that shatters modern myths. Within its pages, the reader will find a truthful account of Indian warfare as it occurred.
If Whites insist on participating in "social media," do so on ours, not (((theirs))). Like us on WhiteBiocentrism.com; follow us on NationalVanguard.org. ᛉ

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 5325
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Commenting on Counter-Currents site

Post by Will Williams » Fri Apr 25, 2025 9:15 pm

Lots of fans of movies at Counter-Currents, so I agree with one there who who is not: https://counter-currents.com/2025/04/i- ... t-have-to/



Will Williams: April 26, 2025
James Kirkpatrick: April 25, 2025 ...I gave up watching movies years ago, and sure as hell gave up Netflix movies.
---

I’m with you. New movies all seem to promote non-Whites, race-mixing, LQT, or something I have no interest in. Never seen Netflix since we could rent movies from them through snail mail 20 or so years ago.

I watched The Adventures of Robin Hood with Errol Flynn the other night. Movies these days cannot match that 1938 classic with its $2 million budget. Call me an ol’ fogey, but a favorite movie of mine is the 1987 Danish film, Babette’s Feast.

DeNiro is a POS.
If Whites insist on participating in "social media," do so on ours, not (((theirs))). Like us on WhiteBiocentrism.com; follow us on NationalVanguard.org. ᛉ

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 5325
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Commenting on Counter-Currents site

Post by Will Williams » Sun Apr 27, 2025 8:23 pm

A good discussion on a worthwhile topic: https://counter-currents.com/2025/04/wh ... r-friends/ I have my own opinion, as usual, and make it known, using a lesson from Dr. Pierce, as usual. :D And throw in my own experience with authoritarian former soldiers who, if told by their Commander-in-Chief, Biden, to round up racist Whites, they may do just that -- even though they are White.



Will Williams: April 28, 2025
Bilbo: April 26, 2025 Billionaire Jews are basically super dopey White people at this point and many of them don’t count.
---

Faulty premise. Jews will never become White, even should they accrue billion$.

I agree with Greg Johnson that James has written a good essay about cops and GIs, especially this part:
[W]e’ve been living under Jewish hegemony, as Jews have freely colonized the highest positions in the capitalist West with their superior networking, careerist, and money-handling instincts… About a third or a quarter of billionaires in the US are Jews, and they fiercely bat way above their level in terms of political influence. In a sense, the Jews won WWII, and everyone else lost it…
As for why so many cops & GIs “are not our friends,” lot of cops are former military and have been conditioned to follow orders, or are authoritarian, according to this definition from Miriam Webster;
Authoritarian means favoring blind submission to authority. It is an adjective that describes a person or regime that is demanding that people obey completely and refusing to allow them freedom to act as they wish. An authoritarian regime is characterized by or favoring absolute obedience to authority, as against individual freedom. Authoritarian people tend to tell other people what to do in a peremptory or arrogant manner.

Of course that description doesn’t fit with all cop or with all soldiers. People generally don’t join the military to so they can order others around or deny others their individual freedom, but they come to realize that once in uniform they must follow orders, right or wrong. And with the authoritarian type soldier who goes into law enforcement, that rule generally applies.

Dr. Pierce had an interesting take on authoritarianism 25 years ago, derived from his experience in analysing the hate mail he received. It fits with this discussion: Authoritarianism and Oz | National Vanguard

...Roughly half of all the hate mail I receive is explicitly Christian in some way. And if we look only at the mail from White haters, and don’t even consider the letters from Jews, the Christian hate mail may run as high as 60 per cent. So what does that mean? Does that mean that there is something inherent in Christian doctrine which is responsible?

I don’t think so, because 50 or 60 years ago most people who considered themselves Christians were not advocates of the policies the Jews are pushing today. One of my tentative conclusions, after studying a large number of these hate letters with Biblical references or some other Christian slant to them, is that what the writers have in common is a compulsion to think, speak, and behave in an approved manner. Most of these Christian hate letters come from people who are not very sophisticated and not well educated, judging from the ways in which they use the English language.
Of course, that doesn’t mean that the people who hate us are all uneducated and unsophisticated. I also receive some hate letters from people who at least think that they are quite sophisticated. Whereas the Christians will tell me that I am going to hell because God hates people who criticize the Jews and then will cite some Bible verse to prove it, the sophisticates — really, pseudo-sophisticates — will sneer at me and tell me how stupid I am because I can’t get it through my thick skull that all people are equal, that the color of a person’s skin has nothing to do with his intelligence or creativity or anything else. And they also will cite some authority to prove their point — not the Bible, but something they have seen on television or learned in class.

And of course, there are other sorts of hate letters. There are hate letters from the Birch Society types, who tell me that I am a communist because I am a racist and racism is a form of collectivism, just like communism. And these folks also will quote some authority to prove their point.

When I back away from all of these individual hate letters, when I don’t think about their individual differences but instead look for common elements, what I see is authoritarianism. I see haters who are angry at me because I’m not marching in lockstep with them toward the precipice. Perhaps I’m misusing the word “authoritarianism.” Perhaps other people have a different meaning in mind for the word than I do. I remember that back during the 1960s and 1970s the Jews used the term “authoritarian” as a pejorative. They used it to refer to people who stood in the way of their remaking of America.

The Jews called the people who objected to their pro-Viet Cong demonstrations “authoritarians.” They called people who were not in sympathy with their so-called “civil rights” revolution “authoritarians.” They called people who refused to adjust their moral standards to the new standards the Jews were pushing “authoritarians.” In the 1960s and 1970s an authoritarian was an old-fashioned, not-very-bright person who frowned on the use of LSD and marijuana by high school kids. An authoritarian was a flag-waving Bible-thumper who deplored the changes in sexual mores the Jews were pushing and thought people who burned their draft cards ought to be sent to jail. An authoritarian was an inflexible, humorless, narrow-minded person: a bigot, a hater, a racist, an anti-Semite. He was an Archie Bunker. He was the sort of person who told a hippie to get a haircut and find a job. The Jews made hundreds of Hollywood films during that period in which the villain was an authoritarian.

Now, back during the 1960s I was trying to figure out what was going on. I didn’t pay much attention to the psychology of it at that time, but I did notice the type of people the Jews were complaining about and denouncing as “authoritarians,” the Archie Bunker type. I certainly wasn’t on the Jews’ side of what was happening then, but I can’t say that I was on the authoritarian side either. I thought that the authoritarians were a little too uptight in their sexual attitudes, for example. I didn’t have much sympathy with their Biblical arguments or their Constitutional arguments for opposing the changes the Jews were pushing. My impression was that their resistance to the Jews wasn’t guided by much in the way of reason.

The Jews don’t complain much about authoritarians these days. They don’t bother to ridicule them the way they used to. Archie Bunker did his job and is now in retirement. But as I have been trying to understand the motivations of the people who send me hate letters today, I keep having flashbacks to the 1960s and 1970s, when I saw White Americans standing on street corners and yelling at college students of the Bill Clinton stripe who were marching down the street carrying Viet Cong flags. They would shout things like, “Go to Hanoi, you commie bastard!” The idea that keeps coming to my mind is that the people who were shouting that in the 1960s are the same sort of people who are sending me hate mail today.

I was a lot closer to agreeing with the 1960s-style authoritarians than I am to agreeing with those of the 1990s style. The 1960s authoritarians may not have been very bright, and they were wrong about some things. For example, most of the American college students marching for the Viet Cong in the 1960s weren’t really communists; they were just shallow, spoiled, irresponsible, trendy brats doing what had been made fashionable on their campuses by the Jews. But those 1960s-style authoritarians were not basically destructive. They were not dangerous to our civilization or to our race. They were just pretty much thoughtless defenders of the status quo, defenders of what they had been taught was right and proper.

Today’s authoritarians are a different matter. Their psychology may be the same as that of the 1960s authoritarians — and like the authoritarians of 30 years ago they also aren’t very bright — but their cause is deadly. The 1990s authoritarians are out to destroy our civilization and our race, because they have been taught that that’s the right and proper thing to do…

Read Pierce’s conclusion on the subject at the link, and some more about my own experience dealing with a bunch of authoritarian White American “veterans of foreign wars (VFW yahoos)” — some of whom were fellow former Green Beret Aryan Alpha males: An Experience with the VFW | National Vanguard
If Whites insist on participating in "social media," do so on ours, not (((theirs))). Like us on WhiteBiocentrism.com; follow us on NationalVanguard.org. ᛉ

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 5325
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Commenting on Counter-Currents site

Post by Will Williams » Mon Apr 28, 2025 3:21 pm

I don't approve of the term "right-wing" to describe NS or NA, and have explained why several times, quoting Dr. Pierce's "Our Cause" speech from 50 years ago. But Greg and others persist in saying we are "Right-wing": https://counter-currents.com/2025/04/co ... -martinez/
Even WikiJews explain right-wing as a big tent, and an obsolete term:
Right-wing politics are considered the counterpart to left-wing politics, and the left–right political spectrum is the most common political spectrum.[16] The right includes social conservatives and fiscal conservatives,[17][18][19] as well as right-libertarians. "Right" and "right-wing" have been variously used as compliments and pejoratives describing neoliberal, conservative, and fascist economic and social ideas.[20]




Will Williams: April 28, 2025
Greg Johnson, quoting someone: April 26, 2025 “It doesn’t take Russian propaganda to get independent-minded people on the Right to root for Putin.”

I would love to hear Peinovich, Conte, or Striker comment honestly on this, but they are so twisted they have to screw their jackboots on in the morning.
---

I don’t know about “independent-minded people on the [so-called] Right.”

I’m independent-minded and not at all what is identified by many C-Cers with the outdated, obsolete term “the Right.” Neither is ethnic Russian nationalist NA member Wolf Stoner who explained here on C-C last year that an American racist like David Duke was mistakenly pro-Putin: Stranger Danger: Part 2

I am glad to see the shifting trend among western nationalist-conservative auditory. The number of Putinists is decreasing. The undeniable facts of Kremlin’s genocidal anti-White policies become ever more evident for all to see… The remaining die-hard supporters of Putin among western nationalists (such as David Duke and Mark Collett) get into an ever more untenable position. How to square up their ideas with increasingly anti-White neo-Soviet rhetoric of the Russian leadership? What about the use of Negro soldiers by the Russian army? I stopped listening David Duke’s show back in 2022; I couldn’t endure anymore his insane and utterly illogical Putinism; therefore, I don’t know what he says now. But it is hard for him to acknowledge his grave mistake. Now he is a hostage of this mistake. Such an inglorious conclusion for his previous service for the White race.

Greg, I cannot speak to the three men you name. Are they former alt-righters? I pay attention to what Wolf has to say about Putin, not to those you say are “twisted,” or to that troll, What’s His Name, who was attacking Wolf here and promoting Putin here and on other western sites, because he could
.
If Whites insist on participating in "social media," do so on ours, not (((theirs))). Like us on WhiteBiocentrism.com; follow us on NationalVanguard.org. ᛉ

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 5325
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Commenting on Counter-Currents site

Post by Will Williams » Mon Apr 28, 2025 7:38 pm

I will continue to harp on C-C about one of my pet peeves, supposedly pro-White individuals talking like niggers, repeating their word "woke": https://counter-currents.com/2025/04/wo ... -politics/



Will Williams: April 29, 2025
Devon: April 28, 2025 Fat Lindsay only maintains this “Woke Right” nonsense by blocking anyone who offers logical rebuttals to his arguments.

He would happily have these accounts banned altogether on X if he could…

---

Never heard of Fatty and do not care what he has to say. He’ll never block me anywhere, but should he ever hike up on National Vanguard or White Biocentrism with his nonsense, I’ll block him.

Fact: “woke” is an Ebonic term coined by anti-White Blacks in the 1940s and sould never be repeated by a racially loyal White who has an ounce of self-respect. It’s bad English grammer for one thing. We may have awakened to something, but we will never have woke to it. Our side can simply use the term Politically Correct to say the same things the niggers meant by saying woke.
If Whites insist on participating in "social media," do so on ours, not (((theirs))). Like us on WhiteBiocentrism.com; follow us on NationalVanguard.org. ᛉ

Post Reply