My number has come up for one of his famous roasts, with a long and growing thread dedicated to evaluating me: Matt Parrott, AmRen Censorship, CMS Gatekeeping. I do fail to meet his purity standards, and he was bound to figure that out sooner or later, and I was resigned to suffer this rite of passage in silence. I have, after all, fraternized with Jews and non-Whites to various extents in the past and am liable to do so again.

I’m responding despite my better judgment for two reasons: Linder makes some claims which are wrong enough to be refuted and asks some questions which are important enough to answer…

Is Matt Parrott a “Holocaust” Affirmer?

This is pretty much true. While I know that it has been exaggerated and exploited for political and cultural gain I do believe that Jewish non-combatants were systematically persecuted and killed in a manner that meets the UN’s definition of genocide. I believe it was both morally and tactically wrong to do so, and I believe it’s tactically misguided to actively engage this issue in contemporary outreach efforts through “historical revisionist” efforts.

I’ve more completely elaborated on my position in this old piece at OD: Holocaust Denial as Strategic Buffoonery.

Of course, this doesn’t mean we should abide the brainwashing and blood libel which comes shrink-wrapped with the “Holocaust”. There were plenty of other genocides in the 20th century, and the Jewish people can and should be held accountable for the genocides they helped orchestrate. Their lies and exaggerations should be thrown back in their faces. Holding the very people who defeated NS accountable for exaggerated parodies of the crimes they committed is the height of chutzpah, and shouldn’t be tolerated.

Critically evaluating the “Holocaust” is poor strategy when it comes to reaching persuadables, but historians have every right to study whatever they want and arrive at whatever conclusions they come to. They should be defended from physical and legal threats against them when they do so. Those who are angry at me for being “soft” on the “Holohoax” should note that I hosted David Irving in my apartment because anti-White thugs were throwing bricks through the windows of his venues and making physical threats against him. While I continue to refrain from dredging up WWII trivia, I will also continue to defend the rights of those who choose to do so—and not only with mere words.

Does Matt Parrott Censor People Who Name the Jews?

With the exception of a commenter named Jupiter (who isn’t even critical of Jews), I haven’t deleted any comments which weren’t clearly misaligned with the editorial policies of the site in question. In the case of my relatively brief tenure as an AmRen moderator, this did indeed involve deleting comments critical of Jewry. While I’m not a “moderator” at TOO, I have from time to time “cleaned up the comments”. This has exclusively consisted of removing comments which are obsessively repetitive, incoherent, vulgar, or spam.

There is indeed a value judgment that goes into such decisions, something every comment moderator is familiar with. After all, one man’s “vulgar” is another man’s “frank”. Incoherent people can’t help being incoherent, and I may well be incoherent relative to more coherent folks. My only advice here is to save copies of your comments locally and go directly to the site’s editor with the comment which was “moderated” if you feel you’ve been inappropriately censored.

While imaginations get carried away, “rogue moderators” exist and moderators who are either intentionally or unintentionally making decisions which are incompatible with the editorial policy happen. Moderators come and go, and they’re often anonymous “volunteers” who haven’t revealed themselves to the commenting community. The active moderator may not be who you think it is, and more often than not, the comment merely landed in the “Pending” bucket and will be posted when the moderator gets around to sifting through the bucket.

If you’re angry about the site’s editorial policy itself, such as AmRen’s decision to be welcoming to Jews, then that’s not really between you and the moderator. That’s between you and the site. It’s not a secret that criticizing Jews is unwelcome there, and I’m baffled that people spend the time to write something that’s foreordained to get deleted, then become angry when the inevitable occurs.

Regarding my own brief tenure as an AmRen moderator, my moderation of anti-Jewish comments was not due to a principled rejection of anti-Jewish comments but due to a principled acceptance of the terms of my “employment”. I was just following orders. While I both approve of criticizing Jewry and do plenty of it myself, I support sites and projects which choose not to do so from time to time. Having myself passed through a phase where I was not aware of the scope and nature of the Jewish Problem, I see the value in maintaining an array of discursive spaces—including those I’m not entirely in agreement with.

Pearson’s Law: Any organization that does not overtly and explicitly exclude jews will in time be subverted and taken over by them.

I believe this is true, presuming of course that the organization in question matters. Until that happens, the organization can still be a useful vehicle. Any bread which is left out will in time become moldy, but one can still enjoy a slice of it while it’s still edible. There can and should be an inner party which overtly and explicitly excludes not only Jews but everybody else who adheres to a separate tribe or tradition.

Until such an organization exists and is viable, those attempting to move forward have no choice but to rely on the vehicles that exist—and do their best to try to steer them in the right direction. That’s not really a sustainable solution, and what we really need is an organization which exists and is viable. Having come of age after National Alliance imploded, I haven’t had much choice but to try to do the best with what we’ve got.

Linder: “I have to wonder at the naivete of MacDonald, as I’ve mentioned many times before, in not understanding why Jared Taylor would completely ignore the causative role of jews in bringing about the 1965 immigration revolution, and shift the blame entirely onto Kennedy and da libruls. And at least one person is accusing Parrott of doing the same thing.”

I’ve directly named the Jew on the subject of American immigration policy repeatedly. For example, I posed the question about the 1965 immigration act and followed it up with a link to MacDonald’s comprehensive analysis here. Last year, I wrote the following…

Americans have consistently voted for restricting immigration, even legal immigration, to no avail. The lax laws themselves were imposed on an unwilling nation by a Jewish elite hellbent on weakening our traditional White American ethnonational foundation. I recommend that you read Professor Kevin MacDonald’s Culture of Critique for a complete analysis of this well-documented usurpation.

Note how every step of the way, Linder makes assumptions about my positions then carelessly extrapolates from those assumptions.

Linder: Yeah…so what we’re seeing is the Polished Turd is insinuated through the various foundations and sites and publications of the Regnery family. And some of his associates, like apparently Parrott is, move freely between the posers at alt-right, and some of the more WN sites like KM’s site(s). What does it mean? I don’t know, beyond the fact that whatever real WN leadership exists in this warren is not observing the principle of excluding jews and jew-excusers.

I’m neither a Jew nor a Jew-excuser. I’ve extensively criticized Jews as a movement and specific Jews engaged in anti-White behavior repeatedly, on a variety of sites and in a variety of contexts.

Hadding: Parrott is one of these people who thinks that what’s wrong with Jews is that they didn’t accept Christianity. They are “Pharisees.”

Jews are by definition a different tribe and ethnic nation from my tribe and ethnic nation. The final bottom line for me is that I’m an ethnic nationalist and while I can and will ally with and cooperate with those who belong to different nations, only Americans of overwhelmingly European descent can—as a matter of identity—be my comrades. Jews are unique in their hostility to us, and I do believe that religious differences partially explain that, but the core issue is that of identity, not religion.

Linder: Who are “we” anyway? Would Parrott exclude jews from that we? 

“We” are Christians, pagans, and skeptics in America who are of overwhelmingly European descent. That’s my “tribe”, as I define it. My ethnonational tribe is not inclusive of Jews.

Linder: The only thing to observe is that VNN, or at least my approach, is principled and non-hypocritical, whereas the opposite is true for the Parrotts and people they work for: they are unprincipled, AND they are intolerant while pretending to tolerate different approaches.

I’ve not bothered VNN. Evidently, Linder barely knew I existed until recently, so his attempts to frame me as attempting to attack him or VNN are baseless. While Linder would like to believe that I object to his having principles, my reason for avoiding him and his site has to do with his hobby of attacking pro-White activists. His ready, fire, aim approach to enforcing anti-Jewish orthodoxy includes—as has been demonstrated here—gathering up every accusation out there (including a good share which are tangential to his principles), then throwing them and seeing what sticks.

Linder: Lindbergh couldn’t win with 90% of the public on his side, a reputation that no amount of jew-controlled mass media could destroy, and a more civilized, intelligent public. Yet in a truly dumbass maneuver, A3P resurrects this political loser and puts him on their banner. Every indication is thereby given: we won’t fight if it gets dirty. We’re gentlemen here. We’re polite. We won’t bite or gouge in the clinch. We’re content to lose and say, gosh darn it, we sure gave it the old college try, we did. Parrott is, far as I can tell, 100% suffused with this mentality, and the proof is the lies he helps the jews further about ‘the’ ‘Holocaust.’ 

I won’t back down and haven’t backed down. Being a gentleman isn’t about adhering to a self-destructive protocol. Being a gentleman requires that one defend his family and country at all costs—by any means necessary. What does it take? Childish epithets make us look stupid and play into the frame our enemies have constructed. If shouting “nigger” was what it took to secure a future for our children, I would shout it with all my heart.

It’s not. I’m trying to deliver a message when I write and speak publicly, to an audience which is conditioned to be repulsed by certain keywords. You make a case that it’s necessary to assert social dominance through refusing to accept their taboos. This is superficially plausible, but I believe there are ways to demonstrate fearlessness and confidence which don’t carry the risk of striking the target audience as pathological and pathetic.

My strategy is polarization, and that begins by attacking conservatives, not mixing them. It would be interesting to see someone who disagrees explain why I’m wrong, but I don’t expect that to happen.

I’ll take a crack at it…

I do not believe that VNN has the institutional maturity necessary to benefit from polarizing the discourse. Virtually everybody who’s trying to balance between the two stools at this stage is going to retreat to the opposing side or retreat from the fight altogether. The net effect is a general weakening of the pro-White and Jew-wise faction with each attack.

In theory, it seems like a sensible strategy. In practice, it results in a chilling effect on White Advocacy, with those who are still invested to some degree in the current system being forced prematurely to stand on either a sturdy evil stool or on a wobbly broken VNN stool. Anybody who either tactically or ideologically fails to pull off a singular leap from the anti-White stool to the pro-White and Jew-wise VNN-approved stool will be in the line of fire from both sides.

Actually, it’s even worse than that. You even target those who are solidly in our pro-White and Jew-wise camp like KMac for petty reasons which have nothing to do with your cherished “principles”.

What if the NSM does have the right approach, and the Reggies don’t?

I don’t bash the NSM. The few times I’ve mentioned them in passing, I’ve noted that they are indeed taking street-level advocacy seriously.

What this ilk ignores is that every single day our children are hectored in public school with lessons about or based on jewish lies about what Germans did to them in WWII.

This can be challenged with a handful of simple talking points which serve to reject the centrality and gravity of the episode rather than hugging the tar baby.

WN should ATTRACT, not appeal. We should not appeal to what we can do for people, but attract them to our supermodel cause. Of course it’s in their petty interests, but that aint the main point – the glorious stuff is – bossing our own country, living the way WE want to live. The very biggest things, not the small stuff that is the staple of democratic pandering.

We should both make appeals and be attractive, though I agree that being attractive is more important than appealing to base considerations. I also agree that abiding by firm principles is essential to winning admiration. You tirelessly strive to frame this as a matter of you being a big tragic martyr for your principles while the rest of us are unprincipled. I also have principles, they’re just slightly different.

Namely, I’m willing to consider Jews and non-Whites allies but not comrades (and only at arm’s length) if they genuinely respect me and my people (defined as non-Jewish Americans of overwhelmingly European descent). I’m also willing to ride along in a vehicle which doesn’t explicitly exclude Jews and/or non-Whites if that vehicle is heading in a pro-White direction if that’s the only vehicle available in the situation.

So when a prince of paper like Parrott acts all cocky, I feel the echo. Because we now know, and I had long suspected, that Turner was employed by the enemy. I don’t actually have the same feeling about Parrott, but after seeing that comment, the question is now open in my mind.

I have an extensive record of street activism, directly confronting antifa and standing my ground with an explicitly pro-White message to large crowds of non-White protesters. Does Linder have a straight face when he contrasts me with himself and concludes that I’m the scribbler? He’s now speculating that I’m a government asset for no other reason than that I got a bit bold for a spell in one thread? Does he have a straight face when he does that while acting like I’m the one who’s somehow mistreating him?

The bottom line is this: WN will not begin to be serious until they begin to place blame for their failure to organize on their enemies’ successful suppression, subversion, and undermining of their groups and men. Believe it, Mattsy. If they can take down a great man like Lindbergh, they can just maybe handle a putz in porkpie like Parrott.

It’s a fedora, and I don’t believe I’m invincible.

Bibliography

As is the case with all my crank notions, I encourage you to shoot it down.

“Patterns” are the building blocks of human thought, and humans are overclocked for pattern recognition. Not only are we capable of detecting very subtle patterns that arrive via our senses, we’re even prone to detecting patterns where none exist. Whether it’s the “man on the moon”, the Virgin Mary on a grilled cheese sandwich, or numerological and astrological nonsense, our appetite for patterns is a voracious one, one that often outstrips supply.

The word “appetite” is operative, as our circuitry is apparently designed to reward the recognition of patterns. In its evolutionarily ideal form, this manifests as not only “learning”, but learning things that improve one’s chances of survival and reproduction. But just as the dog’s reproductive instincts can be misdirected toward the human leg and the human’s digestive instincts can be misdirected toward McDonald’s, this “educational instinct” can be misdirected toward humor.

The wave of euphoria overcoming a person laughing is the body’s way of rewarding the recognition of a pattern. From personal experience, I can attest that I often find myself grinning warmly or even chuckling when reading a line of political commentary that’s neither “funny” nor intended to be “funny”. While I rarely burst out in laughter when I comprehend something insightful, I often cackle with glee when I have a breakthrough or an epiphany.

(Discerning whether this is due to the common thread of pattern recognition running through both humor and learning or whether this is due to the impending madness of a psychologically troubled blogger is an assignment for the reader.)

Humans have been selected very intensely for the capacity to learn, but they must have also been selected very intensely for the compulsion to learn. No other creature’s survival depends as singularly on pattern recognition as ours. According to this model, our neurochemistry would reward us more acutely than it rewards any other creature, thus resolving one of the greater riddles of humor: Why only humans laugh.

Humor’s utility as a social bonding tool is tertiary. Mutually indulging in pleasure-inducing behavior promotes and enhances socialization. We go through the trouble of making others laugh for the same reason we make others meals, and we feign laughter in a social context even when the pattern is unremarkable for the same reason we feign satisfaction while eating unremarkable meals prepared by social partners (sorry, hun…).

The general mechanism of the physical act of laughter isn’t explained by this theory, though the theory points in the direction of a distinct class of stereotyped convulsive reactions to intense stimulation. Especially hungry people often experience convulsive waves of pleasure when feasting, often accompanied by audible moans and groans. Humans orgasming experience similarly spasmodic movements and make similarly nonsensical noises, with the sexual orgasm being perhaps the closest in nature to the act of laughter.

The Sorcerer’s Apprentice

See the allegory? The old wizard knew how to keep a country stable, and not let the magic out of control. Like a ruling elite that fleeces it’s herd, but doesn’t slaughter it.

The WASPs fleeced us but didn’t slaughter us. The new YKW masters let the magic (the brooms symbolize non-whites reproducing) get out of control and “flood” (with broom immigration and water) the country, making it unlivable and massively out of control. Creating a population and demographic emergency (of brooms).

But Mickey is incompetent and his schemes fail, and the wizard has to come back and clean up after him. And at the end, Mickey goes a slinkin’ on out of there in shame.

My degree in literature wasn’t for nothing now, was it? LOL.

I thought maybe if those nice African refugee boys who beat up a 12 year old New Hampshire girl just got a little holy water sprinkled on their foreheads, they’d see the error of their ways and spend the rest of their life repenting!

Someone better tell Catholic charities! Christian magic doesn’t seem to work on Africans!

The boys are refugees brought over from Kenya and Ethiopia. It makes me question if we are providing these children with proper coping skills for a healthy transition. Also, is it safe for these students to be held back to due to language barriers leaving such a great age difference between students. I can’t imagine the rage these boys must be harvesting inside to attack a girl so brutally.

The arguments between my daughter and these boys started with a couple of the boys asking Morgan to be their girlfriend. When Morgan turned them down, they retaliated by calling her names like “fat ho, lesbian b**ch, c**t, etc…” this goes on for about a month before the first assault on the bus occurs.

Some good comments:

Patricia said…

I completely agree with Bruce (above). Teachers & administrators are hired to teach and to protect our children but their main concern is their salary and benefits package. Unfortunately until we are able to get competent people in the school system we have to worry that our children are recieving a proper education and apparently.. proper protection.
Due to the politics of the school system nowadays the administrators at your school are probably patting themselves on the back for getting these refugees into their classrooms.. at the risk of what? Our own children’s safety? We all have to be so friggin PC that we’re now putting our kids at risk at SCHOOL just to get some sort of ‘kudos’ for including African refugees and probably meeting some sort of quota. The principal over there probably failed to do anything in the first place due to risk of being slapped with a lawsuit for taking harsher action against these refugees. Where are our priorities?
Get it together people.
February 20, 2011 9:13 AM

Nepos Libertas said…

Dear Danielle,

What happened to your daughter is a victim of race relations.

I have learned that the attackers are the refugees from Africa continent. In other words, Negro. Congloid.

I learned that the reason for the attack is because your daughter refused their advance, as in “boyfriend-girlfriend” relationship. She is too young to date, which is wholly inappropriate for her age.

Negro boys came from Africa to impose their savage ways on native White American citizens, courtesy of “diversity” and “Third World refugee” program.

If the attack took place in the segregated South of the 1950′s, it is a certainty the savages will receive the justice like what happened to Emmitt Till.

Contrary to myth, Emmitt did not just whistle at a White woman. He visited the shop only to accost the White female clerk by grabbing her hand and asked, wanna date? His younger relatives had warned him before not to misbehave, and when they saw what he did in the shop, they departed immediately. Emmitt came from Chicago. White woman was scared and called her husband. The rest is history.

Danielle, you must become racially conscious. Black people’s hatred of White people is immeasurable. Since the de-segregation and civil rights in the 1960′s, Negro become ever more bold in their attacks on White victims.

I suggest enrolling your daughter in martial arts class for self-defense so she will fight back against the savages that are placed to attack White victims, courtesy of liberal policy that the more diversity to terrorize and displace White people in the area, the better.

The callous and cowardly responses by the principal and others reflect their true cowardice, because it is all about political correctness. They see the Negro attack on White children as “boys will be boys” and laugh it off. They don’t think it’s a big deal.

I suggest withdrawing your daughter to home-school, if she has the will and discipline to complete educational goals towards a G.E.D. when she is a teenager.

Multiculturalism undermines America to the point of destruction. New Hampshire is yet another state to fall victim to multiculturalism, with the Communists’ jester that non-white attack and violation of White people is “just cause,” and ignore the ramification of race relations.

Protect your daughter by rebuking the cowardly principal and other “public servants” who fail their duty to protect children from bullying and violence and enrolling her in martial arts class that will develop her confidence and strength to protect herself from the evil.
February 21, 2011 3:18 PM

R. Scott said…

Those feral savages have constant war wired into their DNA.

Does not anyone dare upset the sacred cow (modern day superstition)of multiculturalism.

This is madness.

If those Kenyan children of warriors hadn’t been in your state they would not have been punching your beautiful daughter!

I blame the political tyrants who bring these little feral beasts among an otherwise peaceful white population at the expense fo innocent white children. And the idiot parent’s who cannot seem to find the courage to identify the 800 lb gorilla in the room.

This systematic genocide of white folks has got to stop!
February 21, 2011 5:38 PM

ydewet said…

Mam, I am saddened by what happened to your daughter, its endemic of the sick society we live in today, which does not deal fair or even equal to people of European descent. What truly saddens me here is the continuous influx of 3rd world wonders who cannot contribute in the slightest way to your economy or culture whilst England, as the rest of Europe comfortably forgets its European sons and daughters stuck in Zimbabwe and South Africa also being tormented by the Africans. Instead of welcoming them back with open arms, your government has chosen to embrace, uneducated, uncivilized and non-assimilating species to enhance your culture. Your government is to blame…, you the English citizens can fix it. Time to stand up, before you also have to flee your country.
February 22, 2011 4:26 AM
neuwerldistrust said…

It’s a racial issue, stop tip-toeing around that. Multiculturalism has failed and your daughter is a victim of it. Call it what it really is. These kids should have never been brought over to the country in the first place. Maybe you will wake up when you are the minority. Anyway, I wish your daughter well, the best thing you can do for her is to get her some self-defense lessons.
February 22, 2011 7:25 AM

Doesn’t this remind you of a certain Kipling poem?

THE WRATH OF THE AWAKENED SAXON
by Rudyard Kipling

It was not part of their blood,
It came to them very late,
With long arrears to make good,
When the Saxon began to hate.

It was not suddently bred.
It will not swiftly abate.
Through the chilled years ahead,
When Time shall count from the date
That the Saxon began to hate.