Print this post Print this post

New Host!  
Matthew Heimbach: Thoughts & Observations

60:26 / 137 words

[jwplayer file=”″ streamer=”rtmp://” provider=”rtmp” duration=”3626″]

To download the mp3, right-click here and choose “save link as.”

To subscribe to our podcasts, click here.

Matthew Heimbach is a Senior at Towson University in Maryland, and the founder of Towson’s White Student Union.

Welcome, Matt!

Topics discussed:

  • Hurricane Sandy, disaster preparedness, and the lack of community in today’s America compared with the America of one or two generation ago.
  • The 2012 Elections, and how our leaders betray us time and time again.
  • Cultural decadence, “men” who become “women,” the Piss Christ, and other manifestations of America’s lack of cohesion.
  • What the West and the South have in common.
  • Demographic displacement and the Balkanization of America, and the plight of Whites in South Africa and the former Rhodesia.
  • Nationalist movements in Europe and what we can learn from them.



This entry was posted in Counter-Currents Radio and tagged , , , , , , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. Ben Ross
    Posted November 29, 2012 at 4:24 pm | Permalink

    Fantastic show, Matt.

    Hard to determine from the introductory show with Greg Johnson just how well versed you were in the post-Western cultural narrative, but suffice it to say that I was mightily impressed with the follow up, prompting eager acknowledgement of your snug fit with counter-currents contemporaries, at the pinnacle of White advocacy thought and discussion.

    Just a quick note on Christ’s parable about “turning the other cheek” …

    The turning of the other cheek was means through which those in the lower castes might either shame or attain equal standing with their supposed betters, and an example of what we might term today practical politics.

    As I understand it, the law in such parts as Christ was resident in those times held that those in higher castes were, at least somewhat arbitrarily, permitted to issue a single backhanded strike with their right hand against any person in a lower caste who had irked them. Presenting the left cheek subsequent to having been struck on the right presented the belligerent with a dilemma. Either they could transgress the law by deploying their left “unclean” hand against the witting victim, or they could deploy a forehand strike with their right hand, customarily signifying that the stricken was one’s equal.

    The turning of the other cheek was therefore an act of defiance, presenting an aggressor with two unpalatable choices should they determine upon further violence.

    The adage of “going the extra mile for one’s enemy” has similar underpinnings, in that by going beyond that which was legally stipulated as fair trespass would result in penalty for the one ordering assistance.

    The overarching theme seems to be that when one has demonstrated that he or she is capable of understanding and adapting to law and its oftentimes arbitrary impositions, one is likely to engender sufficient unease in the unduly anointed to, if not revoke such charters as sustain their position, at least make one’s self more trouble than is worth the while bothering you.

    The best article I have read on the subject is here, but the writing on this topic has become somewhat voluminous the past few years (see Wikipedia’s “literal meaning” of turn the other cheek, for example):

  2. Erfow
    Posted November 23, 2012 at 12:34 am | Permalink


  3. Gregor
    Posted November 8, 2012 at 8:16 pm | Permalink

    I can’t believe this Matt Heimbach is a young man, and still in college no less. His rhetorical style and the substance of his discourse are much HIGHER QUALITY than that of most of the people who TEACH at colleges. Bravo Mr. Heimbach!

    I can only hope he will create podcasts which those of us in college towns can then use to burn CD’s, and distribute them to students who might want to “sign on” to this cause.

    Mr. Heimbach, IMHO you have quite a future in the cause for our people. Please let me know how I can support you … the folks at C-C Radio know how to contact me.

  4. Posted November 8, 2012 at 8:03 pm | Permalink

    Howdy everyone I just wanted to thank you for your support and for listening in. Feel free to email me questions or items you would like me to discuss at [email protected]. I hope to address all of your questions/concerns/ and a wide variety of topics. I hope this finds everyone well. Deo Vindice -Matthew Heimbach

  5. Posted November 8, 2012 at 12:37 am | Permalink

    Matthew, who is that English speaker in between the breaks of your podcast?

    • UFASP
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 2:36 am | Permalink

      That is the late Jonathan Bowden. I think it’s safe to say his name carries a lot of weight within our movement.

      Counter-Currents has added these little bumpers of him speaking during the breaks on all of their radio programs, as far as I can tell.

      There are some amazing videos of Mr. Bowden up on You Tube. I highly recommend!

  6. Erfow
    Posted November 7, 2012 at 8:37 pm | Permalink

    Welcome to the network. A good show.

    First, I admire your efforts to establish a WSU at Towson college and your successfully flushing out the white hating Negros and liberals who unified to deny you and other whites equal rights for whites in exercising freedom of association and freedom of speech. It’s nice when these rabid haters can be forced openly to deny whites the same rights they exercise for themselves in their own BSUs, congressional black caucuses, etc.

    Forcing them publicly to oppose white racial equality exposes their malice, denies them the moral high ground and energizes our people at the same time. A great tactic we have to more extensively use at all levels.

    Second, I think your portrayal of the anti-white massacres in South Africa as a precursor for anti-white massacres in the US may be exaggerated.

    In the US, Mexicans, not blacks, are the next dominate race and Mexicans don’t have the same homicidal hatred of whites (“Gringos”) as blacks. They just don’t. Moreover, Mexicans passionately do hate blacks, openly call them “niggers” and are actively ethnically cleansing blacks, at least in metropolitan Southern California, where Mexican populations are expanding and where black populations are contracting. Now these two feuding races are waging a political turf war over city council district border lines and the challenge of concentrating enough black votes in one area in order to assure continued black city counsel representation. In addition, Mexican gang bangers regularly kill blacks and kill their children and black/brown race riots in high schools are common occurrences, even though largely suppressed by the So Cal media.

    At some point a line of demarcation will have to be drawn between these two groups because the Mexicans are smarter, better organized and more murderous. Still, if Los Angeles is any indication, Blacks will fare poorly at Mexican hands and this may eliminate the black problem over time.

    Blacks are incredibly stupid. Notwithstanding open Mexican hostility, both in word and deed, blacks rhapsodize about the partnership of “people of color” against the hated white man. It hasn’t occurred to blacks that American whites, against whom they use the club of “white guilt,” are their best friends, unlike Mexicans who have no historic guilt or sense of obligation to them, and hate them more than any whites. When whites are displaced by Mexicans, as in So Cal, blacks find themselves competing for power against a superior rival against whom they have no moral edge in the negotiations. Competing interracially for political power, patronage, public benefits and “turf”, Mexicans have a different attitude toward black history: “We Mexicans didn’t enslave you. If you think you’re owed something for slavery and Jim Crow, you take it up with the white man, not us.”

    By their alliance with illegal alien hordes, blacks have stupidly replaced the craven, groveling white man with the cynical, homicidal Mexicans, who have less use for blacks than we do. Personally, I think black Americans might better have cast their lot with white Americans against illegal alien Mexicans, instead of the other way around, but obviously hating whites is more important to them than surviving the brown tidal wave.

    I do not mean to minimize the future danger of anti-white massacre by any of these savages or the importance of owning guns and separating ourselves, when possible. I just think there’s a slightly different dimension to anti-white violence here than in South Africa.

    • bluegrass
      Posted November 8, 2012 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

      I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment. The problem I see however is that though I envy the pure-ethnocentrism of the Hispanics against their black rivals, whenever they do ethnically cleanse blacks from their neighborhoods the first places the blacks run to are………..White neighborhoods.

      Not only does this decrease the safety of Whites, decrease their property values, and open up the possibility of miscegenation, it keeps the race issue in America still the same tired Black-White historical liberal dichotomy. It means we keep re-fighting the same battles, in the same liberal narrative, with the same likely outcomes: none of which advance White interests. This occurs while Hispanics, Chinese, Arabs and Koreans keep their homogenous neighborhoods and ultimately stay out of the “race” question. Unlike blacks, who dominate the racial narrative of America, the other burgeoning non-White groups are lobbed into the “immigration” question by the MSM, but in reality their position is as racial as anyone’s. America will never find a way to somehow meld the : A. intense Asian ethnocentrism (they view blacks practically as Animals) B. Hispanic caste system. C. White privilege-black dysfunction narrative.

      This is why I ridicule the “I HATE NIIGGERRZ” side of White Nationalism: It fulfills the stereotypes developed against our movement, it fits well into the liberal P.C. historical narrative, and it keeps black racial identity focusing on fighting whitey. Instead we could save time and resources redirecting the racial animus of Blacks towards Hispanics and Asians.

      • Erfow
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 5:00 pm | Permalink

        “…redirecting the racial animus of Blacks toward s Hispanics and Asians.”

        Nice try. Blacks already hate Asians and Hispanics. During the Rodney King Riots of 1992, blacks targeted Korean businesses for destruction. Hispanics use Black people and their children for target practice when they’re ethnically cleansing black neighborhoods.

        What more do you think we could do to arouse “Black animus” against Hispanics if shooting black children is not enough? What else is left?

        Several years ago the media covered a local Black vs. Hispanic race riot at a local high school and they put one black girl on the air who said: “We should not fight each other but should join against the white man.”

        Blacks are stupid, violent and malicious. There is no way to appease them and any attempt at “outreach” is doomed.

      • Ben Ross
        Posted November 29, 2012 at 5:36 pm | Permalink

        Very well said. It doesn’t hurt out to point out just how Africans are viewed amongst the various peoples: with derision at best, while generally scorned; and that the kindest, or at least the most practically benevolent, appraisal has always originated within the European peoples.

        Jews, Arabs and Chinese utterly despise them, and I know from personal experience that exposing this well-understood-if-loathe-to-be-admitted-to fact fast takes the wind out of the sails of even the most ardent black militant.

        The fact is that when White can no longer be cogently viewed as enemy #1 by dint of blacks being forced to admit to the fact they’re otherwise universally hated, we get to throw a monkey off of our back that’s been literally killing us while those who’ve profited through our slander us are thrown to the proverbial wolves.

  7. Posted November 7, 2012 at 11:41 am | Permalink

    Great job Matt. I look forward to listening to more of your shows.

  8. Jon
    Posted November 7, 2012 at 5:45 am | Permalink

    This is great news! Nice to have a fellow Marylander on board.

  9. Posted November 7, 2012 at 5:22 am | Permalink

    I’m glad to see Matthew Heimbach on Counter Currents Radio!

    • Posted November 7, 2012 at 6:01 am | Permalink

      Even though I fundamentally disagree with his Chrisianity-fetish. Christianity, other than being a sickening philosophy, was the Islam of the past. My Nordic ancestors were slaughtered if they didn’t convert to the cult of the Jewish hippie.

      • UFASP
        Posted November 7, 2012 at 6:36 pm | Permalink

        What’s actually funny is that Islam in the past was not really how we think of Islam today. (At least not totally and in some very important respects it seems to have been a different animal.) The Wahhabi sects that Westerns think of as being synonymous with Islam have gained so much traction in recent years (in response to the fall of the Ottoman Empire and Western encroachment) seem to me to be the Islam version of Christianity’s puritans. That’s not to say that I’m not happy Charles Martel and Jan Sobieski kicked those brown-skins out of white homelands with a glorious blow.

        But yes, I am like you in the sense that I am no (active) friend of Christianity. However, I think those of us that think along these lines need to try as best as we can to put all that behind us in the interest of saving our race (which requires unity) so long as the Christians in the movement, like Mr. Heimbach, have the right piss and vinegar on the inside that all too many Christians seem to lack. I will say that the more we emphasize race and culture, and the less we emphasize religion itself, the less convoluted our talk of a serious white ethnostate will seem.

        I still say that Nazi Germany had the most sane policy on religion that I think I’ve come across with respect to Christian ethics and their inherent slave morality. There were attempts to reform it (“positive Christianity”) by the likes of Alfred Rosenberg, if I’m not mistaken. Though making Jesus into an Aryan as some reformers have sought to do does strike me as pretty childish. (That’s actually a huge understatement!) However, the National Socialist leadership generally seemed content to just let Christianity be and pay homage to its contributions to European art and identity while emphasizing the importance of the Volk above the moralistic theology and worshiping a Christ on a cross. And, of course, many were Catholics. But Catholicism is probably the least poisonous version of Christianity, no offense to any Protestant readers.

        But nice start, here, Mr. Heimbach. I’m glad they have given you a radio program here. Keep doing what you’re doing.

      • Erfow
        Posted November 7, 2012 at 6:55 pm | Permalink

        Interesting assessment of Christianity.

      • Posted November 8, 2012 at 2:56 am | Permalink

        Well, my problem with Christianity is basically Nietzschean.

        Metaphysically, Christianity is just wrong – all it’s myths have been proven wrong every time they have collided with scientific discovery.

        So Christianity is now a philosophy, and as a philosophy it’s bad – really bad. The core teachings of Christ is loving your enemy, turn the other cheek and the negations of the natural beauty.

        I don’t see white nationalists using the Christian philosophy as a tool for securing their homelands, I see white nationalists succeeding in spite of that.

      • Posted November 8, 2012 at 9:46 am | Permalink


        Metaphysically, Christianity is just wrong – all it’s myths have been proven wrong every time they have collided with scientific discovery.

        There’s a confusing conflation, especially in the American context, between Christian traditionalism, conservatism, and literalism. The notion that we should read the Bible as an astrology, biology, and genetics textbook despite a growing body of knowledge flatly contradicting literal interpretations of it, or that the faith is the Bible alone, sola scriptura, is a modern invention. The book cannot be understood outside of the tradition that it’s a seamless part of, a tradition in which bishops debated and discussed the books and letters available to them and arrived at a best guess of the most important and sacred text available to them.

        Decoupled from an initiatic priesthood, Christianity can only either spiral in the direction of the market or rigid literalism. The problem is that those outside of the tradition who aren’t clinging to the literal text are unmoored both from the literal interpretation of Noah’s Flood and the parts which arm them against Modernity. The Amish refusal to use electricity is surely a literalist absurdity, but the spiritual and demographic abundance speak for themselves.

        Aside from Catholic, Orthodox, and LDS Christians, the only ones who aren’t being transformed into Christian Zionism or megachurch monstrosities are a subset of the ones who insist that we rode around on dinosaurs. With those two and a half exceptions which are capable of transcending the problem, Christianity must either go full retard or go extinct.

        So Christianity is now a philosophy, and as a philosophy it’s bad – really bad. The core teachings of Christ is loving your enemy, turn the other cheek and the negations of the natural beauty.

        Christ’s gospel is the ultimate resolution of both Modernity and the Jewish Question. Greed, lust, pride, envy, and fear of pain and humiliation are how we’re subverted and defeated. Even if we instigated a Linderite antisemitic racialist regime tomorrow, that regime would be subverted, perverted, and inverted in short order if the people were not armed against those vices.

        In Evolian terms, Christ’s message and martyrdom are a concise and compelling demonstration of final victory against all odds in the outer war by relentlessly waging the inner war. I can’t find the quote right now, but Codreanu also touches on this paradigm in his For My Legionaries.

        If slave morality and ressentiment were problems of the early church, I believe they’re problems that Germanic influences resolved. Europe’s pagan tribes were only defeated by the Christians after they had fully absorbed a martial ethos and vitality. The final product, European Christianity, is a creed capable of defeating the most fearsome warriors in the world at their own game while being highly resistant to Jewish subversion.

        I don’t see white nationalists using the Christian philosophy as a tool for securing their homelands, I see white nationalists succeeding in spite of that.

        I believe those who are seeking spirituality in Europe’s pre-Christian traditions are closer to authentic Christianity than those who call themselves Christians while worshipping and fearing the unreformed and unrepentant Pharisees who Christ waged his outer war against. I don’t care how frequently you attend church or how many psalms you’ve memorized, if you’re loyal to the Pharisees, the ultimate and eternal enemies of Christ, then you’re doing it wrong.

        While I’ll defend and explain my position when the subject comes up, I understand that the onus is ultimately on us to demonstrate that Christianity can be what we say it can be. Skeptics and adherents of European folk traditions have my respect and I vividly understand where they’re coming from. I understand and agree with them more than I do with contemporary “Christians”.

        In White Nationalist history, Christianity has been associated with “mainstreaming”, compromise, and milquetoast efforts to emulate and infiltrate bourgeoisie consumerist American culture. I can’t speak for Heimbach, but what I’m talking about is something that’s more at home with Evola, Codreanu, G.L. Rockwell, and Counter-Currents than it is with the neighborhood nondenominational “come as you are” McChurch with its prosperity gospel and its African mission trips.

      • Sandy
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 2:58 pm | Permalink

        Rune; But we do – So Christianity is now a philosophy, and as a philosophy it’s bad – really bad. The core teachings of Christ is loving your enemy, turn the other cheek and the negations of the natural beauty. – love our enemy. Our enemy is our fellow lost White Man. We love them by preaching to them the message of our faith and we turn the other cheek when they show signs of repentance and coming back to the fold; our White Republic. We even lay down (some of it anyway) our life blood to pay for this site!

      • kilroy
        Posted November 8, 2012 at 9:33 pm | Permalink

        I just wanted to commend Matt Parrot’s defence of Christianity, and explanation of how it relates to our nationalist struggle. This is a really crucial thing for us. 2000 years ago, Jesus gave us fair warning; “beware of the leaven of the pharisees, which is hypocrisy”.No one can sum things up in this way like Jesus.
        There is no reason that there should be any kind of antagonism between christians and pagans in the nationalist and traditionalist movements. In the age of the microchip we can’t really be truly religious in the way people once were. We can safely read and learn from both traditions. Wagner and Tolkien, probably the most famous modern popularizers of “paganism”, both considered themselves christians.

      • Steven Smythe
        Posted November 10, 2012 at 4:27 pm | Permalink

        And a good thing too. They were savages. The Church civilised them.

    • Posted November 9, 2012 at 5:08 am | Permalink

      You said it best, when you said:
      “I believe those who are seeking spirituality in Europe’s pre-Christian traditions are closer to authentic Christianity than those who call themselves Christians”
      What you are defending is traditionalism, nor Christianity.

      Christ, in Luke 6:29, said:
      “And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also.”

      And in Matthew 6:34 he tells his disciples:
      “Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.”

      Matthew 19:29:
      “And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.”

      Is this really the kind of teacher you want to base a nationalist movement on? Weakness, the mindset, that the only thing that matters is today and that you should abandon your family.

      As I started off by saying: Christianity is an alien philosophy. It was introduced by torture, slaughter and degradation of traditional values. It manifested itself though monasteries and self hate. Excuse me, but if you accept the one, you have to accept the rest.

      • kilroy
        Posted November 9, 2012 at 2:28 pm | Permalink

        Jesus also said “I came not to bring peace but a sword”.
        He scourged the money changers in the temple. You cannot read the New Testament without realizing that this was a very powerful and confrontational figure. The quotes you give you are taking literally and out of context. What they mean to me is that one must be willing to make sacrifices and be willing to stand out courageously for principle, to be without vindictiveness or craven conformism. Jesus’ style is enigmatic and is based on paradox.

    Kindle Subscription
  • Our Titles

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics


    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Forever and Ever

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Tyr, Vol. 4


    The Node

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Asatru: A Native European Spirituality

    The Prison Notes



    The Lost Philosopher

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace