Paul Kersey, Against Hazony, and Other News

Various issues.

Another defeat.

RWW determined Thompson’s identity partly through a forensic voice test on audio recordings and partly through emails and testimony provided by Katie McHugh, a former far-right insider and Breitbart writer.

The series of events seems to be that first that budding Joan of Arc Katie McHugh provided the information leading to the identity of “Kersey” - apparently initially through tweets several months ago - that was then confirmed by the “forensic voice test on audio recordings.”  How else would they know who to compare the “Kersey” recordings to if they first didn’t have the information from McHugh? 

So:

1. It’s not immediately clear what benefits there are in having these very helpful Joan of Arcs involved in White racial activism. The White Knighters (many of whom are homosexual and whose only experience with women consists of competing with them for sexual access to “hot men”) will say that men behave badly, similar to McHugh, as well. Quite right, but in that case there is the compensation that men actually accomplish things – the accounting, the balancing of the books, comes out in their favor.  What women do we balance McHugh with? Some e-thots grifting money online from thirsty beta male Alt Righters?  Who?  What do they accomplish?  Going on "movement" blog threads to whine about "misogyny?" What?

2. For both men and women, the “movement” is too quick to trust people and quickly put folks in positions of authority and inner knowledge (at least if they derive from the north of Vienna and the West of Berlin – even micks are acceptable). There is no reason for an empty vessel like McHugh to ever had been in a position to have any knowledge about the “movement” whatsoever.

3. A pseudonymous activist like “Kersey” should not have been doing podcasts with his real voice; at minimum, some voice-changing software should have been used.  That’s not a 100% guarantee, but it’s better than a 0% guarantee. Once Thompson was identified, matching the voices was simple.

Truly mean.  After all, we all have to get infected so as not to hurt the feelings of diseased Orientals.  

After this insipid review, we see some useful comments.  This person usefully critiques Hazony,and I’ll add some brief fisking of Hazony’s lies:

He is open about rejecting “race-based politics”, and he defines a nation as “…an actual people with a particular cultural inheritance, bound by ties of mutual loyalty”,…

Culture.  That’s very good.  Likely we can find several million Black Africans willing to accept Jewish “culture” as the price for living in Israel, and enjoying Israel’s relatively high standard of living.  No doubt that they will be a fine addition to the Jewish nation and I hope, and expect, that Hazony will be a strong proponent of bringing in, say, ten million Nigerians to live as Jewish Israelis, with, of course, full, unqualified, intermarriage and assimilation.

…adding that it is “a far greater and better thing than the bogus, pseudo-scientific construct that the race nerds hope to replace it with”…

Ad hominem about “race nerds” does not alter the fact that there are clear genetic and phenotypic differences between continental population groups (i.e., races) and that denial of that constitutes actual “pseudoscience.”

… — which is to say, anybody can become part of it by accepting its culture. Since he rejects race, he must also reject ethnicity, logically following, as that stems from race, and if he rejects the idea of a Negro not being able to be (an equal) part of a White nation (as “race-based politics” suggest), then a nation’s “cohesiveness” can’t be ethnic either.

This should apply then to Israel.  See above.

He argues in an article, that this “cohesiveness” is a shared bond, that is, culture, but again, he rejects race (and logically therefore, ethnicity), as part of this equation. He mocks the idea of White Nationalism in petty and disingenuous ways, saying “no ‘white’ nation is found in any history book. 

If “White” is used as a shorthand for “European” than, yes, there are European nations in history books and, indeed, a “European Union” is currently extant.  More to the point, ‘Whites” do not require the permission of Hazony – or any other such Middle Easterner – to identify as they please, including on an “European” (i.e., “White”) basis.  

There is no distinctive ‘white’ language, religion or cultural inheritance. 

European, Western.

The idea that ‘whites’ are a nation is just so much make-believe.”

Excuse me, you Jewish retard, a nationalist can be one who wishes to form a new nation out of a people that currently do not have one based on the specific identity in question.  Or are Basque nationalists a figment of the imagination?

 — but of course Whites are not one single “nation”, however, White nations are, by definition, White, and it’s a foundational characteristic. Something he thinks we shouldn’t focus on.

Whites can identity and form nations however they damn please, and they do not require the permission of Levantines.

In his view a race-based nation is just about “the quality of genes” and “skin color”, and reminds us that “race politics brought about the murder of millions in Europe, while in America it produced slavery, civil war and a legacy of domestic unease — and occasional violence”.

And Jewish Marxism resulted  in “the murder of millions in Europe” – maybe we shouldn’t be listening to Jewish ideologues?

So again, I don’t see how his version of nationalism is, down the road, any better than civic nationalism that requires assimilation, acceptance of “a common cultural inheritance, especially a distinctive language and religion”, with “bonds of mutual loyalty”. At the end, this can only result in a multiracial society, like that of the United States, which, I believe, would be ideal for him (for the gentiles): a mono-cultural mixed-race populace waving the same flag.

It is also important that his entire life is focused on Zionism and pursuing Jewish interests, and since he doesn’t care about Whites as such (following his non-racial direction, White nations would cease to exist), I believe he simply wants to make sure the new rise of nationalism (e.g. Trump, migrant crisis in Europe) is a non-racial one that is good for the Jews (think pro-Israel MAGAtardism). After all, he said before that “The nationalist turn in Western politics presents an immense opening for Christian-Jewish partnership in the public sphere”

The same applies to HBD and the HBD takeover of White racial activism.

This is correct.  How does that differ from Jewish HBD I wonder?

So, let’s criticize Napoleon for having some scattered non-European soldiers, but we'll ignore this,  right?  “Movement” hypocrites.

Come now, what’s good for the Austrian goose should be good for the Corsican gander.