White Nationalism FAQ


There seems to be a bit of confusion lately over White nationalism, on Twitter and elsewhere. All too often, I see the same misconceptions parroted and read the same questions or critiques over and over again, with only a hundred or so characters to try to respond with. It gets tiring tbh, fam. With that in mind, I wanted to create a simple Q&A style reference post about White nationalism as I personally interpret it, which I hope you goys will find useful in your outreach efforts and ideological formation. If not, have at it in the comments. And with that, the bait is set.

What is White nationalism?

White nationalism is the idea that the nation-state should exist or be brought into existence on the basis of race, for our purposes, the White race. The White race consists of the indigenous gentile peoples of Europe and those who migrated to her settler colonies around the world. Acknowledging that identity is inherent to all in-groups, White nationalists assert that a multiracial society leads to a multitude of identity-derived problems which are best solved by separating these groups as much as possible. This is especially true when one race is faced with demographic destruction in its own country while the others stand to gain. Majority rule means the majority will rule.

White nationalism serves as an expedient method of providing security and space for White people to survive and raise families in, and the family unit is the building block of civilization. This is crucial considering that the most basic impulse of any organism is survival, and the current configuration of many White majority societies around the world is such that they will become White minority societies in our lifetimes. With that in mind, White nationalism is not an ideology of negation or hostility, but one of self-advocacy and collective interest in the face of those threats.

What about European nationalism(s)? Being White isn’t enough to warrant unity between Portugal and Ukraine.

On the Continent, yes, the basis for nationalism is different. There are long-established peoples with divergent histories, cultures, politics, etc. One’s ethnicity lines up with one’s nation almost exactly, with few exceptions, such as in Britain and Spain. In fact, the examples of Britain and Spain show that national unions have the potential to work, but with a greater amount of friction than otherwise. What holds across all of these nation-states is that they are White in terms of race. Hence, there is no incompatibility between the theory of White nationalism and its most obvious expression in Europe, which is that of the European nation-state.

What about Pan-Europeanism? Is that what White nationalists want?

Some do. I personally think a federated Europe of nations will not work and would prefer a sort of sacrosanct alliance that deals with external threats only, and allows each nation-state to manage its own affairs to the degree that it can without chafing against the others. In a federated Europe, much like the European Union we have now, it is obvious to all parties that one nation is the most powerful and the others are strung along; this fuels resentment and resistance. Additionally, the centralization and un-accountability of the EU makes it a powerful tool for exporting degeneracy; something a confederation is at less risk of due due to decentralization and the autonomy of its parts. If one  unit goes bad, it has less power to spread it to the rest if they are compartmentalized behind borders and different administration.

If Brussels had its way, every country in the EU would take in as many Afro-Islamic colonists as it decreed. In the EU today, it is indeed the more nationalistic countries such as Poland and Hungary that resist multiculturalism and race-suicide the most and the federation that encourages those harms. Could a racially conscious Pan-European superstate work? Maybe. But that’s not a core goal of White nationalism in my opinion. More important is to secure any territory anywhere in Europe or the settler colonies where Whites can regulate their own affairs and exist without facing forced minoritization and extinction thereafter.

The United States doesn’t have a ethnic national identity like European countries do, it is a product of immigration. What national unity is there between Irish- and German-Americans, for example, if you reject Pan-Europeanism?

I believe there is a national identity, just a different kind. In European settler colonies like the United States, there are few ethnic differences between the components of the European-derived or White population after generations of mixture and co-inhabitation. While millions and millions of people claim different European national ancestries and sometimes several at the same time, it is highly LARPy to suggest an nth-generation Irish-American or German-American is actually an Irish person or a German person. They are native-born, English-speaking, White people of mixed ethnic origins, or what I like to call Anglo-Americans. A foreign-born European American who natively speaks his non-English ancestral tongue is another story, but those are in the minority and are extremely likely to be assimilated.

Another issue to consider is that these hyphenated identities largely exist in reaction to multiculturalism and the anti-white bias of our elite social, academic, and public institutions. Prior to the ascendancy of New Left in the 1960s, “American” was simply understood to mean a White person, domestically and abroad, as the country was nearly 90% White and immigration had been severely restricted for two generations. But under the new paradigm of Whiteness as original sin, positive identification with Whiteness becomes a uncomfortable position. By claiming one or more ancestral European nationality as their primary identity rather than “White,” one can try to special-snowflake their way out of being labelled and criticized as White. The joke is on them though. ((((Noel Ignatiev)))) and his ilk don’t honestly think Irish- or Italian-Americans are non-white; the thesis is that they became White. We are in this together, potato goy.

These European ancestries, furthermore, can be found across the country. While some areas are more concentrated than others, every county in America almost definitely has Irish, German, and English descended people. What largely dominates in the United States more than European ancestry/ancestries alone in terms of identification are regional cultures (e.g. Northeast, South, Appalachia, Midwest) which have their roots in the founding European settler population(s), historical events, and the social, natural, and political environment of each area. These differences, while significant, are not substantial enough to warrant separation in most cases since there is a common language, history, and shared racial origin that facilitates integration and assimilation across regional lines. With that in mind, Anglo-American nationalism is thus a very plausible implementation of the ideal of White nationalism in the context of the United States and the settler colonial experience.


Isn’t the United States too racially diverse for White nationalism to work?

Yeah and Algeria had too many Frenchmen, Italians, and Sephardim for Algerian nationalism to work. Just kidding, the West allows nationalism when the nation in question is non-white. Europeans had to leave most of Africa and Asia en masse during decolonization. Look, some people are going to have to go home. Some people might even have new homelands created for them. Personally I think the United States ought to be partitioned into ethnostates and multi-ethnic countries, or could face a Soviet-style collapse one day. It sounds distant now, but it’s not impossible. You just need a new paradigm.

What about ethnic and racial minorities?

My perspective is as follows: 1.) most people live where they do because of economic incentives, and 2.) there has never been a totally homogeneous society larger than a village. These truths have consequences. First of all, if people came to the United States or Europe for shekels, they can be persuaded, convinced, and if need be cajoled into leaving, for shekels. And we don’t care where they go, because as White nationalists our first duty is to our own people (which is how most of the non-Western world behaves, mind you). There is an old Arab proverb that goes something like, “me against my brother, me and my brother against my cousin, me and my cousin against the world.” You get the idea; we have to take care of our own. We could pay countries to receive emigrants like Australia does with its neighbors in order to redirect kebab boat people away from their continent. If we’re nice we could even pay people outright to go somewhere else as part of a colonization scheme (and you will find minority radicals who agree with this). We could also reduce their credit and employment opportunities to provide more incentives if need be, though that would be considered mean.

I think any one of these strategies or a combination of would result in most non-white people leaving, for perhaps their native countries or elsewhere in the colored world, which could no doubt benefit from an influx of Western educated and skilled migrants, or even unskilled labor. Our capitalists certainly thought importing them was a good idea. Who does this leave behind? Probably very few minorities (who are also potentially assimilable due to reduced numbers and their active decision to stay behind) and/or minorities who are relevant to diplomacy or business with foreign countries. Would it be unthinkable for a White nationalist state to have a 10-15% minority population in its ports or larger cities? No, it would be a regular country. And it goes without saying that they would be here on terms of good behavior and cordiality. Nothing less would be rationally tolerated.

Did you just say there would be minorities in a White ethnostate? REEEEEEEEEE!

Well, probably. A 90% White country with non-white immigration banned sounds like a really good deal to be honest. Unless we want to be landlocked into the Midwest with no routes to Europe or Oceania, there will be minorities (even the Midwest has those actually). And such demographics would be temporary, because I guarantee you whatever circumstances led to the creation of White nation-states in North America, Europe, and/or Oceania would also lead to White immigration to those states. For comparison, the United States actually became Whiter over the 19th century by a similar process, with the predominately black non-white population losing share to the influx of Europeans. This was brought to a halt by the 1965 ((((Hart-Celler Act)))), which got rid of the quota system favoring immigration from Britain, Ireland, and Germany. Since then the United States has become increasingly colored, due to majority non-white immigration over the last few decades. You won’t get what you want overnight; even the left knows this.


Is White nationalism the same thing as Nazism/fascism?

I must confess that I am not very well-versed in the minutia of Nazism/fascism. But the simple answer is an emphatic no, they are not the same thing. Nazism, or national socialism, is a particular brand of totalitarian ultra-nationalistic right-wing populism that thrived in interwar Germany and Austria until the end of WWII. In practice, the Nazis set about helotizing other (non-German) nations, making it a kind of imperialism as well, and posited that the Nordic sub-race of the White race was the master race. None of this is inherent to White nationalism. Fascism is distinct from both White nationalism and Nazism, though closer to the latter but with less emphasis on Germany. Our opponents, out of malice, laziness, or both, automatically equate anything right-wing with Nazism/fascism anyway, so keep that in mind when you hear these terms lumped together. There are people who consider themselves both White nationalists and Nazis/fascists (the so-called 1488ers), but these are not the same thing, and one does not require the other.


This is something entirely different.

What about the Jews? Can’t you cool it with the anti-Semitic remarks?

Greg Johnson has the most straightforward take on the Jewish Question that I have read:

The Jewish question is not distinct from ethnonationalism. It is ethnonationalism applied to Jews. Thus no ethnonationalist is entitled to abstain from it. Once one recognizes that Jews are a distinct people, the ethnonationalist solution to the Jewish question is Jewish nationalism, i.e., Zionism.

Of course, as is well-understood on the alt-right, contrary to anything ((((Milo)))) has to say:

The disproportionate influence of an elite Jewish minority in Western societies has been a net negative. Jews, who have a three thousand year history of regulating their communities to be as insular as possible among the nations whose territory they dwell in have a consistent pattern of promoting the interests of their own ethnoreligious minority at the expense of the majority nation.

Jews are history’s original tribalists, and they have their own well-fortified ethnostate, complete with border fences and majoritarian immigration policies. That so many political Jews oppose border control in the West and support anti-majority policies is a telling form of hypocrisy. But it doesn’t have to be this way. They too can go home. That is what nationalism is all about.

This all seems very future-oriented. We clearly don’t have any power to make policy decisions. What are White nationalists supposed to do right now?

This is a widely debated topic and different people propose different solutions. I am of the opinion that the most important avenues of attack for us are media and culture, not the political process or forming a party. In the United States, a White nationalist party would have to compete against the rigid two-party system. Furthermore, anyone running against a White nationalist candidate for office would essentially be given a blank check by the occupying powers to fund their campaign.

The strategy I prefer is metapolitical. Our ideas are the truth and we must evangelize our truth to our people through social, cultural, and literary means. This is how nationalism came to dominate societies before the victory of materialism over tribalism during the World Wars, and we in the 21st century are aided in our struggle by new media platforms that are decentralized and instantaneous. When the idea of White nationalism has taken root among enough of our people, the potential to demand, demonstrate, and act will be superior to what it currently is.

One interesting contemporary model that can be found overseas is in Egypt. Since the end of colonialism, Egyptian society has re-Islamicized away from what was a secular and ((((cosmopolitan)))) social order. This was not done through political parties, but institutions like the Muslim Brotherhood, which provides its members and their families with media, services, and camaraderie. We aren’t there yet. But we do have media and meet-ups. We are trying to build meatspace connections and new social realities. What is the relevance between our situations, value judgments about Islam aside? In the West, we seek to regain the racial consciousness that once reigned, just as Muslim societies have tried to reassert their traditional religious principles. Our identity is suppressed by political correctness and the influence of ((((postwar German-American academics)))), just as their religion was suppressed by foreign conquerors. We can undo our situation, and we need to do it by changing minds.

I wouldn’t be able to fully answer this question, however, without recommending that you send us some shekels. Hosting costs money. And the more we have the more we can expand our outreach and improve the quality and quantity of our materials. It’s better than buying dildos or video game DLC. It’s an investment in the future of White nationalist media and promoting racial consciousness.

Oh and of course, get in shape, get skilled, and try to work on the whole “future for White children” thing. This entire project is all pointless if our resident EMT has to drive your bariatric ass to the hospital at age 35 because you became fused to your swivel chair after marathoning chinese cartoons. Don’t be the last man, be the first of a new line.

This entry was posted in America, Ideology, Meta and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

50 Responses to White Nationalism FAQ

  1. I imagine if I could travel back in time to the Founding Fathers in the Continental Congress, they would find the question of White Nationalism ridiculous. America was founded as a White Nation and only Whites would EVER BE ALLOWED CITIZENSHIP. Anyone who says White Nationalism is ridiculous or that America is a “proposition nation” should be seen as an enemy. Splitting up America is an unnecessary waste of time. No non-White can possibly survive here with the possible exception of Far Eastern Orientals. These inferior creatures will forever raid and trouble you unless they are disposed of permanently. Their “racist” and “slavery reparations” are just crappy excuses for stealing food from you. They are hopelessly inferior. These Stone Age Living Fossils have no place in the 21st Century. All the real scientists who understand natural selection realize they will eventually be extinct.


    • You summed that up PERFECTLY! Especially with the orientals. I was in Japan in October and the business and industry over there is absolutely phenomenal. No crime, smart people.


  2. Pingback: Lawrence Murray, "White Nationalism FAQ" | Counter-Currents Publishing

  3. “Nazism, or national socialism, is a particular brand of totalitarian ultra-nationalistic right-wing populism that thrived in interwar Germany and Austria until the end of WWII.”

    ^ National-Socialism rejects labels such as right-wing and left-wing to describe itself, takes from each, and transcends both.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I get that argument. From the vantage point of the current year, national socialism is very right-wing though.


      • Simon says:

        Whatever system is running this site, it wouldn’t let me reply to your comment. I’d suggest you switch to disqus. Why you didn’t start with that in the first place, I have no idea.

        I do hope you’re not resorting to that predictable “go kill yourself faggot” response. It’s an angry, reflexive remark that does not deserve a response, even though Benatar himself has come up with several good ones.


      • Disqus doesn’t work with the free version of wordpress.

        And the logical conclusion is to an hero if you think humanity should cease.


    • 0jr says:

      I do not like zionazis but I believe that they were more liberal (eg. less facsist )than the commie zionist bolshevik jews who were meglomanical genocidal butchers


  4. Pingback: White Nationalism FAQ | Rifleman III Journal

  5. Simon says:

    Any chance you and I could have a discussion on anti-natalism? Every other alt-right site has a zero tolerance policy against me and my views.


    • That’s because voluntary extinction is incompatible with civilization.


      • Simon says:

        You work from the assumption that civilisation, and human existence itself, is a good thing. Anti-natalism is a challenge to such default modes of thinking that almost all people operate from. You also work from the assumption that civilisation is eternal and everlasting, which it assuredly is not. I sincerely doubt that humanity will survive another thousand years on this planet, let alone the next billion. In his interview with Counter Currents, Chip Smith says,

        “I’m not blind to the romance of human achievement. If I were, I wouldn’t bother publishing books, and my reading list would start and stop with instruction manuals. But the Greater Good always strikes me as being a cunt-hair shy of the Greater God, and I lack the imagination to believe in either. Such abstract objects of concern that could be enthroned above the intractable reality of forced mortal suffering can be better understood, I think, as distractions – or as secular iterations of the transcendental temptation. In his book Confessions of an Antinatalist, Jim Crawford discusses some of the escape strategies that people deploy to avoid confronting the prospect that the universe might reduce to so much useless malignancy, and he makes the important point that stories of trans-generational “survival” – whether of races, nations, culture, humanity, or even knowledge – are really stories of vicarious (that is to say, fake) survival. If you’re in thrall to the romance of the long march, there’s little I can say to dash your enthusiasm. You should be aware, however, that the soldiers you conscript for the grand mission may not share your sense of adventure, and are sure to die in battle.”


      • If human existence is a bad thing, why are we having this conversation? Shouldn’t you have taken that idea to its logical conclusion in your own affairs? Do you see why you got banned yet?


  6. There is a criticism to be made of the Nazis if you wish, but to repeat enemy propaganda about them when you have a big BLACK SUN as your intro image is kind of hard to reconcile. .

    The NS were the first to combine the science of race with nationalism. They were the ones who brought European nationalism away from the clerical and monarch restorationist and into the 20th century war. Any racial nationalist group is inevitably NS, or if you’re afraid of it, will be labeled as Nazis, because they are the ones who ushered in the mystique of blood and the political thesis that the Jew is our perpetual racial enemy (which you concur with).

    Bashing Hitler and the Nazis doesn’t win you any brownie points with Jews or conservatives, it just confuses people who see you spouting NS ideas and photoshopping the black sun on the statue of liberty (wtf) . Not necessary to do that at all, and it is very necessary to read up on the experiences of Goebbels and Hitler in their revolution, because they are far more relevant to our struggle today than anything the various intellectuals have been writing.


    • The graphic has gotten people’s attention, so on that front I am satisfied.

      Anti-jewish or counter-semitic ideology also predates national socialism. By a lot.

      As for “bashing” there are valid critiques of national socialism from a White nationalist perspective, and I am sure you are aware of how toxic “Nazi” branding is. My angle is to avoid using it.


      • There’s two Nationalsocialisms. There is the self-described American Nazism, that is mostly paleo-conservatism that focuses on pure externalities intended to shock people into listening (George Lincoln Rockwell, who was actually quite brilliant, but was not 100% correct in his strategy), and then there are the people who grasp the core of the ideology and the real world blueprints the Germans left us. It would be criminal to throw them out just because some people use their imagery to clown around.

        The NSDAP is by far the most relevant nationalist development in contemporary Western history, and whether you like it or not, we’re inheriting their battle standards in this new historical cycle. They triumphed in a climate that is remarkably similar to what we’re going through today. In fact, the very same Jews they defeated and overthrew in Germany (Frankfurt school, Magnus Hirschfeld, etc) came to the US and engineered the problems we’re suffering from here today!

        Trying to create a political movement based on being white and nothing else is not something you can create a substantial full political movement around. Nationalsocialism is important because it taught people how to think and perceive, IE , how to engage with Jews and the self-destructive ideological undercurrents they have subtly raised us with.

        NS was basically the restoration and renaissance of Greco-Roman Western civilization, which I assume is what you want, beyond just preserving America as a white majority state. We need to struggle with internal contradictions of the country that led to us becoming the Evil mongrel Empire we are today.


      • Racial counter-Semitism is not that old. It was first theorized, ironically, by a “leftist” named Wilhelm Marr in the middle 19th century, who posited that destructive Jewish behavior was inherited rather than religious.

        Basically, it was the Germans who developed a formula for de-Judaizing their country and ushering in 12 years of incredible triumphs in culture, technology and human development. It’s beyond reasonable doubt that without the de-Jewing of Germany, the world would not know the names Heidegger, Jung, Breker, Egk, etc, not to mention the incredible creativity and inventions of the Third reich era.

        The last real creative period of the West was Third Reich Germany. Almost all new developments are based or influenced by developments from this era. They were obviously onto something, don’t throw them under the bus, because the Jews won’t EVER stop calling you a Nazi anyway. Their problem with us isn’t our ideas, it’s our existence.


      • The thoughtcrime is already done. My angle isn’t about a softer approach for our jewish culture censors but to Whites today, who by and large are not that sympathetic to Nazism.


      • I think what Golden Dawn is doing in Greece is important when looking at bringing the public over to NS. Golden Dawn isn’t full of Hitler LARPers , but they are Nationalsocialists, and they don’t attack Hitler or the Nazis. If anything, they have convinced millions of every day Greeks, who have been raised to be prejudiced against NS, that they were the good guys and the torch barers of Hellenism (they were).

        You don’t have to bring up Hitler right away to people you meet, or even dwell on it. But my point stands: NS is the only proven way out, and the fogeys trying to repackage Paleo-Conservatism as “New Right” will realize that sooner or later.

        Liked by 1 person

    • One last thing, average people aren’t nearly as anti-Nazi as the media wants us to think. Many people have a surprisingly nuanced opinion of Hitler, and if you show them the mountains of evidence that the Holocaust is a bald faced lie, that nuanced opinion actually becomes pro over time. Which is why “holocaust denial” is illegal in Europe, while denying the Armenian genocide is perfectly acceptable.

      People like NS: the aesthetics, the nobility, the values, the discipline, the prosperity. The only thing stopping people from embracing it is the 6 million Jews atrocity propaganda, which is why contrary to what the “New Right” people say, we need to attack this myth with all the great facts that have been uncovered by archivists, engineers, historians chemists, etc in the last 30 years proving it is a political lie.


  7. Pingback: Hail Polarization | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  8. ulysses642 says:

    Hey this is Ulysses from DailyStormer. I’m a regular commenter over there. I’ve noticed your writing lately, and you seem to be getting better all the time.

    One thing to keep in mind with NSDAP and the supposed “Master Race” thing is that Hitler didn’t see the Nordic sub-type as better or “superior” in any normative or value-judgement sort of way. When you read the literature you’ll find that what they actually believed was something like the following:

    Nordics with their blonde hair, blue eyes, high intelligence and various other attributes are the genetic core of our race. If you tried to define what a White person is, you would go through a process of abstraction, refining away every trait that wasn’t absolutely pure, i.e. wasn’t uniquely and exclusively identified as White. That is if you continued refining the White geno- and pheno-type to its most elemental and differentiated form you would end up with a Nordic. Just like if you tried to define the purest nigger you’d end up with a silverback gorilla in the Congo.

    I’m not Nordic myself, I have brown hair but still recognize that they are the fountain of our race. If every European were killed in some nuclear catastrophe, you could repopulate our race with just a few Nordic families. You couldn’t do that with any other sub-type.

    Hitler wasn’t Nordic but he rightly recognized that they have more recessive genes than any other sub-type of our race, and because of that they needed the utmost protection by the state from genetic contamination. We don’t make the mistake of many others who equate genetic recessive with weakness. That’s the trap niggers fall into and it’s why their arguments for being superior sound so asinine to an intelligent person. Many of the finest qualities in human beings are genetically recessive traits.

    Nordics represent the purest quintessence of our race, they’re a valuable genetic resource that must be safeguarded, just as we would try to protect any beautiful and rare species, only this one is all the more special to us seeing as it relates directly to who we are and forms a sort of nucleus of our race. They are a precious gem in our crown. Which is why Jews hate Nordics more than any other branch of our Folk, and why the Scandinavian countries are highest on their list to destroy. Planet earth is the battle ground of an epic racial struggle that has been taking place since the primordial beginning of life on this planet. One could even speculate that this process transcends earth itself. Perhaps it is a cosmic, spiritual struggle, but I won’t go into the more esoteric stuff of the SS right now.

    To wrap this up, it doesn’t mean Nordics are better or superior to any other sub-type– it simply means they’re the original stock of our vineyard which needs to be secured by every member of our race who makes it his duty to protect the Völk from our enemies. This is a task the average White person in Ukraine or Portugal has no interest in nor is qualified for. But WN’s are the elite of our race like the Schutzstaffel in their day. So it falls upon us to carry the torch and guard the flame of our race so it continues to shine as long as this world lasts.


    • Thanks I appreciate it.

      Yeah I see what your perspective is here. I will admit that NS is not my expertise nor it something I really evangelize for though. I think it is a hard sell for people, especially at a time when race consciousness in the West is extremely poor. That is really my main focus in most of what I write, to raise this consciousness. I suppose there will be people who can go from zero to eighty-eight but it’s not my target.

      I will say that I have started looking into the literature and history recently, since it does keep coming up. But Trump is largely the dominant discussion topic and reference for now, so I aim to build off of him for as long as he is relevent.


  9. Destroy Israel says:

    The reason the White Nation isn’t pro-Nazi is because the Nazis basically only killed Europeans. The national-consciousness of the White Nation was much stronger immediately before and after WW2. The White Nation decided to join in the attack on Germany because Germany was trying to turn other European Nations into their own personal niggers.

    For all the Neo-Nazi rhetoric supporting the Nazis, it is the Nazis who killed more Europeans than any other power on Earth ever has.

    Moreover, the Nazi line on Jews is not just wrong, it is the Zionist line. The Ashkenazi Jew is a European. This the Nazis even implicitly admitted when they let over 150,000 Jews into their own military. In fact, they gave the Jews of Germany tons of time to escape, and ended up only killing a little over 200,000 of them by the end.

    The Nazis even denied the existence of the White Nation. See their pamphlet Europe and America: Failures in Building an American People


    This is probably the most profound attack on the White Nation thesis ever written that I am aware, as it doesn’t try to deny the existence of Nations as a category, but tries to deny English-speaking Europeans in North America really constitute a Nation.

    Authentic White Nationalism is not compatible with Nazism. Nazism has proved itself historically an enemy of European people. The Nazis killed more Europeans than any other power in existence.

    I believe that, more often than not, most ideologies are the exact opposite of what they espouse to be. This is because they are constructed in a way to encode themselves into people who spent too much time trying to deny the ideology. Just think about it for a moment: Nazis wanted to enslave Slavs, to turn them into Euro-niggers. Nazis affirmed the non-European identity of the Ashkenazi Jew, thus confirming the Zionist idea. Nazis killed more Europeans than any other group on Earth. The Nazi denied the existence of the White Nation in North America.

    Nazism is an anti-European ideology masquerading as a pro-European one. It really only makes this part of the ideology public in order to better their own standing with the non-European world. They say all the mean stuff publicly, and say to the non-European “Look at the apes, they eat it up!” This is why you can find Nazi supporters amongst all kinds of non-white people. They look at what Hitler did and say to themselves “Look how many white people Hitler killed! Europe needs another one of them!”

    The White Nation helped to destroy Nazism as a duty to Europe. Only after WW2, did the Zionist Occupation Government come to power, and we see the beginning of the total enslavement to Jewery that has been going on for the last 70 years. The Nazis even helped to create that god damn thing called Israel, with even people inside the Nazi party rejecting the idea of helping the Jews set up a base of operations in Palestine.


    • kerry owens says:

      First of all,Hitler took the Germans off the jew Gold Standard and replaced it with a barter system concerning world trade,he modeled it after Gottfried Feder’s economic design ,basically it was backed by good and services with minimal monies involved,just enough to cover the needs of the working class. Hitler never wanted war ,he only wanted to repatriate parts of Germany that were given away to allied nations during the Versailles Treaty because of atrocities, being committed against the German peoples residing in former German territories.If after all exhausted diplomacy on part of Hitler’s efforts to reunite German people under old territorial lines ,forced him to react with force against aggressors that were hell bent on war , Washington and Britain’s instigation’s are due in part because he messed with the international bankers bread and butter,”compounded interest”. I don’t know where you got the notion that Hitler wanted to make “niggers” out of the rest of Europe,if anything he saw it as freeing the rest of Europe from the chains of jewish usury that enslaved them and relegated them to “nigger” status.As far as him being complicit with forming the nation of Israel then yes,he wanted to rid Europe of the jewish problem so he facilitated their removal to Palestine via German ships, no shame there. Your comment about him being responsible for more European deaths than anyone else is also not true,Stalin is,and by a long shot.Hitler deaths can be attributed to casualties of war,Stalin’s were out and out intentional murders as well as casualties of the war. We can also see the jews philosophy at work here,in “Lincolns Negro Policy” a book written by Earnest Sevier Cox, on page 17,British jew, Lord Melchett advises that a selective age of males (21 yrs of age) removed from the population annually will reduce that population to half in 20 yrs. and in 40 yrs. will reduce it to around 14%. I may be taking it a bit out of context however,the principle is the same when you look at WW1 & WW2 and how close they were fought and all the lives that were lost, in the millions ,and will never be replaced. World wide white population at around 1900 showed whites at 34% of the population ,it is down to about 8-9 % and dropping drastically.When you consider white woman of child bearing age to be at only 2% of the population and even less when you take Lesbianism and miscegenation into consideration.If you believe for one moment that Hitler intentionally led his fellow countrymen to the slaughter, you’re mistaken, his was a defensive war from day one ,on all fronts , it was survival ,he never stood a chance against International jewry , and for daring to buck the system he and Germany both would suffer,and even to this day. Was it ego thinking he could out smart Rothschild who was financing both sides as he’s done in most wars in the west ,maybe ,however it may be ,at least in the eyes of many frustrated whites,he will always be the one with balls enough to challenge ,and with some success try and defeat our nemesis .


  10. Pingback: Obama to Europe: Do as You are Told | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  11. Pingback: Facebook is the Nuclear ICBM of Metapolitical Warfare | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  12. Pingback: Netanyahu: Iran Making Holocaust Cartoons While Planning a New Holocaust – aladdinsmiraclelamp

  13. Pingback: Identity Politics are Ripping Us Apart? For You | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  14. Pingback: Donning a Popular Face: How the Alt-Right is Winning the Meme War | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  15. Pingback: On Normies | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  16. Pingback: White Nationalism FAQ | BlackSun Radio

  17. Pingback: Lawrence Murray, "Donning a Popular Face: How the Alt-Right is Winning the Meme War" | Counter-Currents Publishing

  18. Pingback: Survival or Union: The European Question | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  19. Pingback: America’s Consensus Pronounced Dead | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  20. Pingback: Mapping the Rising Tide | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  21. Pingback: Esoteric Kekism, or Kek as a Bodhisattva of Racial Enlightenment | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  22. Pingback: Could White Advocacy Exist in a Multi-Ethnic Society? | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  23. Pingback: Clinton’s Full-Court Press against the Alt-Right | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  24. Pingback: From a Chat to Metapolitics: A Journey in Thought, Part 2 | The Occidental Observer - White Identity, Interests, and Culture

  25. Pingback: Esoteric Kekism is a Religion of Peace | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  26. Pingback: The Wall Just Got Ten Memes Higher | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  27. Pingback: Milo’s Alt-Right | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  28. Pingback: The Right Style Guide | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  29. Pingback: National Duterteism | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  30. Pingback: Antebellum Dindu Adventure: The Birth of a Nation | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  31. Pingback: Lawrence Murray, "Antebellum Dindu Adventure: The Birth of a Nation (2016)" | Counter-Currents Publishing

  32. Pingback: Antebellum Dindu Adventure: The Birth of a Nation – murderbymedia3

  33. Pingback: What Will Become of the Empire? Visions of Late Modernity in United States | ATLANTIC CENTURION

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s