Print this post Print this post

Scandza Forum Fundraiser
Announcement Update & Registration

875 words

“Fróði Midjord’s Scandza Forum is one of Europe’s most important identitarian metapolitical gatherings, providing fellowship and networking to those who attend and powerful ideas to those watching on the world-wide web. I am continually impressed by the Scandza Forum’s commitment to quality and attention to detail.” — Greg Johnson, Counter-Currents

Scandza Forum is a courageous organization that brings the best and most powerful identitarian ideas to increasingly appreciative audiences. I have the highest respect for what Fróði Midjord has achieved.” — Jared Taylor, American Renaissance

“Europe is the sick man of the modern world. The Scandza Forum is part of the cure. Because universities no longer fulfil their role as providers of objective knowledge, international fora of concerned citizens and scientists like the Scandza Forum are absolutely necessary.” — Helmuth Nyborg, Professor Emeritus of Psychology

“Dear Fróði, I am proud of you and I am moved by your dedication. You must understand that I have been active [as a nationalist] since 1982 … and I have seen all kinds of examples of cowardice and opportunism, but at [the Scandza Forum] I found hope and courage…” — Swedish university professor

“Attending Scandza reaffirmed my belief that more and more of our people are becoming aware of what is wrong with our societies, and realizing that nationalism is the solution.” — Alex Roberts, engineer from Britain

“Scandza Forum is a true highlight in terms of events and a great way to meet and network with like-minded people. Highly recommended.” — Marcus Follin, “The Golden One,” author and content creator

“The Scandza Forum is the most well-run Dissident Right conference in Europe, providing a platform for identitarians and conservatives to meet, exchange ideas, and hear speeches from the movement’s best thinkers.” — Millennial Woes, cultural commentator and speaker

I have participated in several Scandza Forum events over the years. They are always very stimulating, informative, and well run, and I wish it continued success. The Scandza Forum is an important institution on the side of White interests, and I encourage people to support it in whatever way possible.” — Kevin MacDonald, Professor Emeritus of Psychology

“The Scandza Forum is a brilliant way to meet intelligent people who care about the future of the West, as well as to learn about all of the latest Red-pilled academic research. Superbly organized by a based Viking called Fróði (who has somehow traveled forward in time), you will “eat, drink and be merry,” surrounded by people who, like you, want to ensure that tomorrow civilization does not die.” — Dr. Edward Dutton, The Jolly Heretic, Independent Researcher

Many people, even on the Right, claim that race doesn’t really exist. 

E. Michael Jones has a Ph.D. in American Literature, is the author of numerous books dealing with the downfall of the West, is a prominent spokesman for Catholicism, and has a huge following on the Right.

When I heard interviews with him where he said things like “race is a fiction,” that only Christianity can explain the massive differences between Europe and Africa, and that language alone defines ethnicity, I immediately wanted to invite him to a debate at one of my events, because these are some astonishing claims! 

And who better to debate him than Jared Taylor?

Both men have accepted my invitation to fly in and do a live debate at the next Scandza Forum, May 2nd, on the topic: “Is race an important reality or a fiction?” This will be one of the most anticipated debates of the decade! The promo video for the debate has reached almost 30,000 views on Twitter and Youtube, and the comments are just on fire!

Because our hostile elite has prevented Jared Taylor from traveling in the Schengen Area, this Scandza Forum will take place in Zagreb, Croatia, and Tom Sunic will be giving us a welcoming speech in his hometown. 

Additional speakers include Greg Johnson, Edward Dutton, Millennial Woes, and Fróði Midjord

Croatia is beautiful in May and this is the perfect opportunity for an early and much-needed vacation. But this event can only happen with your help!

***

Organizing an event like this takes both hard work and funding. The costs we need to cover include:

  • A large conference venue
  • Travel expenses 
  • Accommodations 
  • Transportation
  • Technical equipment

These events never break even without the help of donations, even on our home turf. Ticket sales don’t cover all expenses, and organizing the conference in a new country will mean even more expenses. 

Even if you can’t make it to the event yourself, we will be filming the speeches and putting them online.

When the bad guys try to silence us, e.g. by preventing Jared Taylor from speaking at our events, it is more important than ever that we stand our ground and use our freedom of speech in public.

This debate is sure to become a classic that people talk about for years to come. So, support the fundraiser, share our promotion videos, and sign up for the event! (Remember that participants will be vetted, as usual.)

If you want to help the continued work of the Scandza Forum and make sure that we can make this event happen, there are two main ways you can send us donations:

Credit card

Follow this link to send us a safe credit card donation. Note that the payment processor does not allow us to receive transactions under $10.

Cryptocurrency:

Bitcoin: 1DKQ4NR88y4DK7khE4xFmvBxQFUyw6ZLC3

Ethereum: 0x3a6D6A69260cF733c32AB51E1C83B8f39c48dc4A

If you prefer some other method for supporting us, please send me an email: [email protected]

I want to thank you in advance for supporting our work and I hope to see you all in Zagreb!

 

 

56 Comments

  1. Tom Kauko
    Posted February 20, 2020 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

    Hello Everyone,

    So how exactly, for a ‘normie’ with similar spirit, to register for this event – I live in Budapest, so not too far?
    Kind regards

    Tom

  2. Phil
    Posted February 16, 2020 at 10:17 pm | Permalink

    Kevin MacDonald debating Jones would be more interesting because they could talk about you know who but have a very different approach. If MacDonald is going, he should debate Jones too or at least have a discussion on stage.

  3. Chairman Meow
    Posted February 2, 2020 at 10:54 pm | Permalink

    I’m fairly new to all this. My view for what it’s worth…
    Jones is wrong on race but his overall strategy is a winner.
    Identify and focus mainly on the chameleon parasite that’s destroying America from within. Remove this parasites influence from media, finance and Government. Then and only then will the decision making of our politicians become more rational, leading to a resumption of a natural order. In short, Remove the parasite, you’ll be surprised how quickly all the other issues take care of themselves.

    • Dazz
      Posted February 8, 2020 at 10:21 am | Permalink

      It’s typical for newcomers to only see the (((parasite))) while failing to see the preceding centuries from at least the Enlightenment (and personally since Plato for me) leading to this moment…the flaw comes within, the eternal outsider just attaches itself to whatever benefits it.

      From Julius Evola:

      “One must, however, take another point into account: we cannot make Jews the sole and sufficient cause of all global subversion — as some extremists would — except by acknowledging our humiliating inferiority to them. The Jews would then be more powerful than the Aryan world, which is supposedly “in order” and in full possession of its faculties? This is nonsense. Jewish subversion was only possible because non-Jewish humanity had already developed processes of degeneration and disintegration: the Jewish element was grafted onto these processes, with the spirit, instincts and methods that are typical of it. The Jewish element merely accelerated those degenerative processes to the point of exasperation, taking them to a point they would not have achieved as quickly on their own.”

      https://www.counter-currents.com/2015/07/racism-and-anti-semitism/

  4. Informant
    Posted January 31, 2020 at 10:23 pm | Permalink

    If you really want to psyche out Jones, cite that the protestant Catholic split was fundamentally Nordic versus Mediterranean. Nordic protestantism has less hierarchy, more autonomy, and more male-dominated figures of the old testment. It is more like the Aryan religion. Catholicism has more of a shared female/male pantheon of Mary and the Saints. The first farmers in Europe had earth mother figurines and according to Giambutas were not as male dominated. They were also more neotenous and thus feminine in some ways. There is less Aryan (steppe) ancestry in mediterranean/Catholic countries too, averaging 25% instead of 40-50% in protestant Europe. Just look at the Hawk st am study. Catholicism also has Mary and saints as intercessors, much as one would get a patron or godfather, whereas protestants have more of a focus on individual reputation. Puritans took that to an extreme. Individualism is a northern European / Aryan thing. Is religion really all that universal?

    https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Distribution-of-the-Yamnaya-genetic-component-in-the-populations-of-Europe-data-taken_fig2_318751121

    https://www.pewforum.org/2017/08/31/five-centuries-after-reformation-catholic-protestant-divide-in-western-europe-has-faded/pf_08-31-17_europe-reformation-00-01/

    • Informant
      Posted February 2, 2020 at 10:19 am | Permalink

      Sorry, “Hawk st am” should read “Haak et al”

  5. Informant
    Posted January 31, 2020 at 9:38 pm | Permalink

    This is a tip for Taylor.

    Jones is going to say race is artificial because the Greeks don’t have a word for it. Jones is going to say ethnicity is real because the Greeks had the word ethnos. It makes no sense, I know, but the way you defeat him thoroughly is to cite culture gene coevolution or the idea that genes coevolve with culture. For example, the Baju fisherman in Indonesia evolved larger spleens which enable more red blood cells which enable them to be underwater longer than any human. Their culture was fishing in a warm tropical environment where it made sense to swim underwater, and the good swimmers outbred the bad ones.

    Races can adopt universalist religions like Catholicism but may show different aptitude for following them based on different evolutionary history. Still, they can all go through the motions well enough. However, they cannot all hold their breath as long as the Baju, nor can they compose classical music at the same rates, create a culture of advancing math and science, etc. Jones should know that universalist religion isn’t all there is to life, and he is conflating culture with universalist religion.

    If different races live together, then because of strong phenotypic differences, they cannot occupy their natural bell curve position for status and turn on each other. The best thing is for them to live apart. Jones has lauded Catholic ethnic churches. We want to go beyond just ethnic churches to different countries.

    Jones wants everyone to be Catholic. The best way for different races to be Catholic is to be segregated. Blacks were culturally more similar to whites when they were less integrated prior to the civil rights era, having the same names and religion. Only after desegregation did they adopt Islam and funny names. They did this because it was a way of staying separate and maintaining status when they couldn’t get it in white society. There wouldn’t be a need for this if they were segregated. Haiti is very Catholic and all black. There is no need for the nation of Islam there because everyone is black and not living under white domination. If Jones wants blacks to be Catholic, the best way is in an all black society, which is best realized in an all black country.

    Jones probably has a lot of non-white followers, however, so he must kotow to them, so expect a lot of equivocation and misdirection.

    • D.M.
      Posted February 8, 2020 at 8:12 am | Permalink

      If that’s his argument, it’s a logical howler. If some ancient people didn’t have a word for ‘pendulum’ does it follow that pendulums don’t exist? Furthermore, if only those entities exist for which we always had names, we could never discover any new entity.

    • Franklin Ryckaert
      Posted February 8, 2020 at 8:59 am | Permalink

      “…Jones is going to say race is artificial because the Greeks don’t have a word for it…”

      This is what the Oxford Classical Dictionary says :

      The word genos was widely and variously used in Greek of all periods to denote ‘species’, ‘genus’, ‘sort’, ‘category’, ‘birth’, ‘kin’, ‘race’, ‘lineage’, ‘family’, ‘generation’, ‘posterity’, etc.

  6. White Pride
    Posted January 31, 2020 at 7:43 pm | Permalink

    The big question for Jones is, if Catholicism has been falling for 1500 years, since the Protestant looting operation began, and continues to fail catastrophically in the face of Judiasation, with so much death and slaughter of European descended ethnicities, in the face of 500 years of this catastrophic failure, how then can Catholicism be considered an effective strategy?
    The critique is that Catholicism/Christianity is fundamentally weak. It has no effective mechanism of defense of it’s practitioners, no warrior spirit, no doctrine of self-preservation in the face of all myriad of aggressive and subversive tactics from the likes it Jews and others.
    In short, how has Christianity not failed its practitioners? Ethnic annihilation is not an acceptable outcome for a worthwhile religion.

    • White Pride
      Posted January 31, 2020 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

      Edit “500 years” not “1500”.

      Edit “..the likes *of* Jews..”

  7. Lord Shang
    Posted January 31, 2020 at 3:14 am | Permalink

    I love TOO and TOQ, but I absolutely favor the AR approach. 100%, not a doubt in my mind. I have read many of your articles, so I know when I’m outclassed in relevant knowledge. Drawing correct conclusions is another matter.

    The JQ is a complete tactical as well as strategic loser, esp in America, assuming the goal is to preserve the white race and advance its genetic interests. You will agree the white man is being bullied or hit from all sides. If a very tough man is being attacked by four men, what is the order of defense he should pursue (if possible – in the real world this is almost a purely ‘armchair’ exercise, as things virtually never work out in practice as in theory, plus exigent considerations are usually overwhelming)? As a general rule, he should try to take down the second weakest guy first as rapidly as possible (“with one punch”), and then the second strongest, if he can do it, so that what he’s left with is the strongest and the weakest, which can be close to “mano a mano”.

    This is a very imperfect analogy to our racial war, I know. But I contend that the JQ is Euroman’s toughest issue by far; that is, the toughest issue about which to try to achieve clarity in our people’s minds. Someone much more learned than I could easily pen an entire TOQ article elucidating the reasons why this is so. Here are a few:

    1. VISCERALITY

    The postmodern Left, which I find far more despicable than its laborite/socialist predecessor (and within racial and national boundaries, I support private property and freedom of enterprise), seems at bottom to be a utopian movement based on the denial of biological reality. I used to think denial of race was the ultimate biological denialism, but I was wrong: these purest of egalitarian ideologues now even deny sexual dimorphism.

    We on the Right know that race and sex are real and statistically meaningful. We know that the races evolved under competitive selectional pressures, and that the ability to recognize in/out group distinctions played a key role in this very evolution. Any proto-human tribes which behaved in the ethnomasochistic and pathologically altruistic way of contemporary whites would have been driven to extinction (via either extermination or capture + amalgamation). We on the Right therefore know that ‘diversity’ is unnatural, and that racial tension and friction is the normal state of affairs where different races and even ethnic groups share the same territory and democratic polity.

    Beyond this, it is perfectly clear that the living races are unequal in modal ability and temperament, and thus, unsurprisingly, in behavior, too. It is also obvious that whites are, overall, the world’s best race, especially in terms of ethics and the particular moral virtues. It is even more blindingly obvious that most of the other races (blacks, Semitic Muslims, visibly nonwhite Latinos, various First Nations peoples) are, by our standards, savage, unregenerate, uncontributory, and mostly unlikeable.

    And yet, SO MANY OF OUR PEOPLE CANNOT EVEN SEEM TO ACCEPT THESE BLATANT FACTS, or, if they do, act in a politically logical way based upon them. From this fact I deduce the following:

    It should be easier to get people to see the truth about, say, blacks (or Muslim immigrants), than about Jews. This is because the former behave in such viscerally disgusting ways, igniting friend/foe distinctions even in the face of brainwashing, especially compared to the latter, whose behavioral defects are often much harder to detect. Does it make sense to struggle to reach the highest fruit, when there is so much that is so low hanging? If we can barely get a hearing about why we shouldn’t be importing Muslims, some percentage of whom invariably will become terrorists in our own country (a concept easy for even very unsophisticated people to grasp), does it make sense to pursue JQ awakening, given that there are so many successful Jews everywhere around us, many making highly visible contributions to our societies?

    2. PRIORITIZATION

    The Right’s resources are painfully limited at the very historical moment when our race is demographically shrinking, both absolutely, and especially relative to the Euro-Do-Gooder-created Third World Population Explosion. How should we allot our White Preservationist resources?

    Imagine a secret White Nationalist US Senator. Obviously, his time should be devoted to fighting for white interests, and not promoting Israeli-Palestinian peace talks; trying to obtain funding for a manned mission to Mars; contesting the SCOTUS decision in Obergefell (“same sex marriage”); or boosting transportation expenditures. But should he focus his energy on fighting a) affirmative action, or b) legal immigration? Clearly, (b) would be more fruitful in the long run. If we reduce or end immigration, we might one day win on affirmative action, too. But if we fail to stop the immigration invasion, we will ultimately fail to win anything.

    For the Racial Right, then, what is more important, either intellectually or politically: exposing and then explaining the machinations of Jewry, or uncovering and then explaining the harm caused by immigration? The harm caused by immigration is easier to recognize than that of Jewry, and much easier to remedy. There are many arguments against immigration that do not implicate race (or, for us, white racial interests) at all, and which are thus far more acceptable to excessivly individualistic and overly racially altruistic whites than group evolutionary theory applied to Jewish-Gentile relations. And, in theory, we can easily stop immigration. Even if there is a widespread JQ awakening, what practical actions exactly follow? What can we do? I am not a Nazi, but I note that even Hitler could not strike out directly against the Jews, given the higher general ethicality of the white race. He had to “accomplish” what he did under the cover of total war.

    3. PSYCHOLOGY

    Jews seem closer to whites (look “whiter”) than do nonwhites. Modal Jewish “neighborhood” behavior is far closer to whites than is that of nonwhites. Jews are vastly more integrated into white lives and spaces than are nonwhites, even today. Indeed, apart from difficult-to-perceive anti-white-interests Jewish ethnic activism, many Jews lead visibly exemplary lives, being vastly overrepresented at the highest levels of professional attainment. Therefore, if getting whites to accept racial reality is difficult (due, I think, to some evolutionary defect or maladaptation in the collective white genome), even when dealing with such grossly unwhite-behaving groups as blacks, how is it thought to be easier to get whites to accept negative Jewish group behavioral realities – especially after all the nonstop Holocaust propaganda spread across virtually the entire lives of most people today (including myself, far into my 50s)?

    4. PERSONAL CONCERNS AND COMPLICATIONS

    Finally, and related to #3, is the issue of personal relations, and especially, the relations of the “cognitive elites”. Contrary to diversity propaganda, most whites – especially professionally upper class ones (liberal as well as conservative, too) – do not have many nonwhite friends. This may be changing among the young (I’d like to see real data on this); I don’t know. I think this is especially true of rightist whites. Nearly none of my friends have nonwhite friends, except for the occasional Asian or mostly white Hispanic. But for whites in American urban areas, Jews are almost perfectly integrated. Indeed, unless an intelligent urban white makes a conscious choice NOT to develop friendships with Jews, such friendships will arise. Sadly, the smarter one is, the more likely this is to obtain. My elite high school was filled with Jews. Looking at the early 1980s facebook (the origin of the term) of my elite college class, around 30% were Jews. And I made many Jewish friends in the decades since college – again, without actually seeking out Jews or somehow being especially open to friendships with Jews.

    Given the fundamental decency of whites (ie they are difficult to turn into ‘haters’), and that, with the exception of the ultra-Orthodox, Jews generally look white and behaviorally (if not always psychologically) fit into white society very well, trying to create a mass movement to confront Jewish power is a virtually Sisyphean task, especially given the extent of that power. Far, far more crafty (Jewish?) would be to “outflank” Jewish power – to ignore the JQ and build up positive white pride and race realism, while creating a civic nationalist / anti-immigrationist movement ‘with fangs’, one relentlessly focused on what is, pragmatically, the most important task – stopping nonwhite immigration, a task, moreover, to which some Jews (including most of my friends) are committed, and which it can be argued is in their interest, too (given how Muslim-Americans are becoming increasingly assertive in anti-Zionist/Semitic ways).

    I think Jared Taylor understood all this many decades ago (as did I), which is why he has deliberately ignored the JQ. If we cannot even stop hordes of Mexicans and Muslims from colonizing our lands, where lay the hope for mass-JQ awakening? OTOH, if Euroman can start winning some racial battles – start taking out the “weakest combatants” – we will eventually find ourselves in a far stronger position if/when a JQ confrontation becomes unavoidable.

    • Posted February 3, 2020 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

      Long Shang, nice to make your acquaintance (so to speak). And sorry to delay my reply to your long and thoughtful message. Now let me respond.

      To match your analogy about which adversaries to fight in which order, perhaps a different analogy will help, one a friend shared with me years ago: We need to “obsessively” (not your word, of course) focus on the Jewish threat because it is like a freight train bearing down on us at 98 MPH. To avert our focus for any other reason would be suicidal.

      Further, while you’ve made any number of good arguments about why we should instead take care of this or that group first, let me offer a snippet on racial hierarchy from the same friend just mentioned above:

      “One precept entailed by dominance analysis is that it is vital to correctly identify and confront the Main Enemy in order to solve our racial problems (independence and survival). Conceptually speaking, that is no small contribution. Blacks, Mestizos, Arabs, and Asians are all secondary. As William Pierce stated, we are heading for extinction because Jews are paralyzing our will and ability to resist annihilation. In an environment without Jews, ‘We can whip every other race with both hands tied behind our backs. . . . . We must do something about the Jews — soon. And clearly the key to getting the Jews off our backs is to regain control of our mass media.’”

      I do hope my reply makes it way to you.

  8. Ed
    Posted January 31, 2020 at 12:03 am | Permalink

    Do you think there will ever be like/dislike buttons for comments on counter-currents?

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted January 31, 2020 at 2:39 am | Permalink

      No, probably not.

  9. Oil Can Harry
    Posted January 29, 2020 at 10:24 pm | Permalink

    Jones’ denial of the reality of race is ridiculous and so he’ll lose the debate.

    However, he can score points and make Taylor wince by challenging him on the JQ. That’s because Taylor is Jew-wise but pretends not to be.

    Jones should challenge Taylor on his refusal to allow Kevin MacDonald to speak at AmRen conferences.

    • J
      Posted January 30, 2020 at 11:48 am | Permalink

      Two for the price of one – thanks!

    • Nick
      Posted February 5, 2020 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

      Why does Taylor refuse to allow Kevin MacDonald to speak at AmRen conferences?

      • Greg Johnson
        Posted February 5, 2020 at 3:45 pm | Permalink

        I don’t think that is true.

      • Oil Can Harry
        Posted February 5, 2020 at 11:37 pm | Permalink

        A few years ago I asked Taylor in the AmRen comments section why the brilliant Kevin MacDonald has never once been invited to speak at his conferences. He responded by providing a link to a very flawed and critical 1999 book review of MacDonald’s classic The Culture Of Critique that ran in Amren’s pages.

        Obviously that book is not MacDonald’s only accomplishment and even if Taylor didn’t like it he could have invited him to speak on a different topic.

  10. deanmulready
    Posted January 29, 2020 at 4:31 pm | Permalink

    This could be an interesting debate though I’ve heard all their arguments before. It might be more interesting to hear Jones debate someone arguing from a Christian position, though I’m not sure if that’s possible. Greg Johnson did one of these debates several years ago and made some pretty solid arguments agains the idea that “Christianity will save us.”

  11. rhondda
    Posted January 29, 2020 at 3:37 pm | Permalink

    Poor Dr. Jones. He is not a theologian, although very good at analyzing culture. He does not realize that Roman Catholic theology has collapsed under the weight of their imaginations, Jesuit, no doubt. He called himself a Platonist. Well that is philosophy and not theology. The Logos for the philosophers was the idea taken to it logical extreme. For Christians, the logos is the second person of the trinity namely Jesus Christ. He does not say that. I wonder why? He hardly ever mentions Jesus. This is why St Paul when he saw the altar for the unknown god, told them that Jesus Christ was the unknown God. Some believed him, some did not. Truly it is a choice.

    • Benjamin
      Posted January 29, 2020 at 4:54 pm | Permalink

      I’ve noticed this a lot with high-IQ Christians, especially of the Catholic variety, but also occasionally Orthodoxy as well.

      De-facto, Catholicism is Christianized pseudo-paganism and Orthodoxy is de-facto Christianized pseudo-mysticism.

      These particular types of Catholic folks are big brains, so they can’t get into a lot of what is required by the actual faith, due probably to some internal cognitive dissonance, and the fact that genuine religiosity or spirituality is generally lost on men (an uncomfortable truth), especially high-IQ ones, so they latch onto all of the abstract and intellectual stuff (e.g., EMJ with his “muh Logos”) and go-along with the actual religion because its apart of the same “package deal”.

      The “folk Catholics” are actually more sincerely religious than the intellectual Catholics.

      People like EMJ would’ve been super devout Platonists or neo-Platonists if Christianity had never taken hold in Europe.

      • Ambrose Kane
        Posted January 30, 2020 at 7:19 pm | Permalink

        “De-facto, Catholicism is Christianized pseudo-paganism and Orthodoxy is de-facto Christianized pseudo-mysticism” – That’s actually a very perceptive and truthful statement. I have for decades described Roman Catholicism as ‘Christo-pagan’ in that borrows elements of Christianity and mixes it with paganism.

        It’s no wonder that the Roman Catholic Church has historically made tremendous inroads among third-world countries, including almost all of Central America/Mexico. They allow the peasants to retain their superstitions and pagan belief systems so long as they give to the church and hold some semblance of Catholicism. The peasants know relatively little about Roman Catholicism and even less about historic Christian doctrine or the Apostle’s Creed.

        When I visited Mexico in the late 1970s, I recognized this sort of thing and the many Mexicans I have met since that time justifies describing them and the Roman Catholic system as ‘Christo-pagan.’

  12. Pierre
    Posted January 29, 2020 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

    I like Dr. Jones but he’s way off on race. It goes against his religion : love the meek, we are all equal. love others as yourself, etc.

    • Benjamin
      Posted January 29, 2020 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

      You know, when the Bible says “the meek shall inherit the earth”, I can’t help but wonder if that wasn’t a prediction of dysgenics caused by post-industrial civilization rather than a form of triumphalism of the undermen.

      Probably not, but its interesting to look at Biblical verses from an esoteric perspective

  13. Don
    Posted January 29, 2020 at 1:21 pm | Permalink

    In addition to denying the existence of race (in defiance of indisputable, observable physical differences) Jones also denied the existence of IQ in a You tube video with Dr. Edward Dutton (“The Jolly Heretic”). In opposition to Dutton’s citation of and reliance on the science and data, Jones responded simply, “I don’t believe it.”

    Although he openly denies the existence of race and intelligence, he does believe in the existence of Jewish power. Thank God!

    According to Jones, Europe’s success was based on the Catholic Church and Protestantism has never been anything more than an artifice to loot wealth from the Catholic Church. Maybe so, but Jones skips over the question of how the Catholic Church got so much wealth in the first place.

    He says that 400 years of the Catholic Church is the only difference between Europe and Africa. Also that if Africans moved to Poland and became Catholic they’d be indistinguishable from native whites. Really?

    Of course Jones doesn’t explain why 400 years of the Catholic Latin America failed to produce a single country as successful as the Protestant United States. The USA, the most successful country in the Western Hemisphere surrounded by Catholic countries, over powers all of them.

  14. Mark Smith
    Posted January 29, 2020 at 5:05 am | Permalink

    JT is blind to the JQ & EMJ is blind to the race Q

    • Posted January 29, 2020 at 7:31 am | Permalink

      Exactly. And as great as this match-up is, the real match-up needs to be E. Michael Jones vs. Kevin MacDonald. Should a synthesis between those two ever be reached, we’d make historic progress.

      I’ve read about as much Jones as anyone and have to agree that he’s totally wrong on race. I can’t account for it either. I’ve been hoping he’d make a clever reversal on his position, but he hasn’t, as his Dec. “Culture Wars” cover story on Sam Francis shows.

      Getting back to the Jones vs. Taylor bout, I wonder how Taylor will react when Jones begins to talk about Jews. Silence?

      • Fróði Midjord
        Posted January 29, 2020 at 8:03 am | Permalink

        “the real match-up needs to be E. Michael Jones vs. Kevin MacDonald”

        Why would that be a better match for this topic?

        • Appleburg
          Posted January 29, 2020 at 9:09 am | Permalink

          They have debated before in a podcast in 2010. Was it on the White network with Tanstaaffl and Carolyn Yeager?

        • Sutter
          Posted January 29, 2020 at 3:44 pm | Permalink

          I don’t see why we overly online right wingers keep giving EMJ our attention. The guy has nothing of value to add. He has no plan for a better future for our people.

        • Posted January 30, 2020 at 11:22 am | Permalink

          “Why would that be a better match for this topic?”

          To me, race is obvious, so we can leave that to shitlibs to “debate.” (As I’ve said, I think Jones is completely wrong on race.). The JQ, however, is far from simple yet brutally important. I’m surprised no one has yet mentioned Jones’ tome “The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit,” which I see as supporting so much of what K MacDonald has written. A chief value of something like this work from Jones is that it should force us to ask the question, “Is there more to the Jewish-Gentile conflict than just material factors?” Needless to say, Jones is emphatic that there is.

          With KMac’s scientific approach, a spiritual realm or the existence of God is a non-issue, but, like all material accounts, it leaves us finally asking, “What’s the point of it all?” An important reply, I believe, should be: “JEWS certainly think there’s a point to the life struggle, so let’s explore their sheer will to survive (and dominate).”

          Unfortunately, I can’t envision any outcome in which KMac could convince Jones to change his views on race. (Well, that’s not totally true, as in one of last year’s “Culture Wars” magazines, Jones did allow that we Whites were indeed being attacked due to our White race. I keep hoping that’s a start.)

          As for KMac, I haven’t detected much that he disagrees with regarding Jones’ work, save for the question of the existence of race. In fact, I seem much that is complementary between the work of the two thinkers, which is why I so fervently wish they could explicit work together. The JQ just strikes me as by far the most pressing problem of our day, so hearing these two men hash out their thoughts on the topic would be fascinating.

          • Fróði Midjord
            Posted January 30, 2020 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

            Ed,

            ‘To me, race is obvious, so we can leave that to shitlibs to “debate.” ‘

            The Issue isn’t whether you or I think that race is an obvious reality. The issue is that Jones is an influential figure, that people on the Right obviously listen to him, and that he claims that race is “a fiction created by our enemies.” When an influential person says something like that, it should be taken seriously and debated out in the open. A lack of serious debate leads to intellectual corruption.

            ‘A chief value of something like this work from Jones is that it should force us to ask the question, “Is there more to the Jewish-Gentile conflict than just material factors?” ‘

            As far as I can tell, Jones doesn’t argue that there is more to the Jewish-Gentile conflict than just material factors — he claims that there are no material factors. According to his understanding (from what I have read), that conflict is purely theological.

            ‘The JQ just strikes me as by far the most pressing problem of our day… ‘

            The JQ is of purely instrumental, subortinate value to the intrinsic value of our ethnic interests. The JQ can only ever be relevant if we consider that our ethnic/racial interests are threatened. If we were to think that we simply don’t have ethnic/racial interests, the JQ is relegated to a purely academic question.

            I care about my tribe. It is of no interest to me if some Bantu or Arab “believes” the same thing I do…

          • Posted January 31, 2020 at 10:07 am | Permalink

            Thank you for your reply. Yes, Jones is an important figure on the right, but off the top of my head he is the ONLY one arguing for our side that race doesn’t exist. Very strange.

            But if anyone can surprise us, it is Jones, so I very much do look forward to his debate with Taylor. Further, I’m going to listen to the podcast with you and Greg now.

            I appreciate the fact that you and Greg are working on these issues.

          • Jerome
            Posted February 8, 2020 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

            The latest Culture Wars has (yet another) article on Ireland, which talks specifically about the ethnic Irish being displaced by third world immigration (although this article is not actually by Jones). This could easily be published on Amren:

            https://culturewars.com/news/identity-crisis-for-the-indigenous-irish

            PS – as an aside, one of the things I really admire about Jones is that he’s pretty much willing to talk to anyone, and will give his time to even the most obscure Youtubers and podcasters. The only person he refuses to debate is Alex Linder (I believe). He doesn’t seem to care about “optics” either, and just calls it as he sees it.

    • Dazz
      Posted January 29, 2020 at 7:43 am | Permalink

      Jared Taylor is not blind to Jews, just watch the Millenniyule he recently did, he has his approach to getting pro-White ideas out and has been successful in leading many people to nationalism…maybe he doesn’t have the stunted black/white simplistic view of Jews many have, but he is not blind, he see’s them as another cog in the machine of modernity (the simpletons see them as the machine)…not everyone needs to be foaming at the mouth at every opportunity ranting about Jews (I say all this as someone who was turned off by Taylor in my immature adolescence more than decade ago, due to what I saw as his failure on JQ), we need as many approaches as possible to reach people, once they get comfortable then they can research further and come to their opinions on various matters including the JQ…we have enough people talking about Jews, could always have more sure, but its not a loss if a few stick to certain points mostly.

      • Posted January 30, 2020 at 11:29 am | Permalink

        Dazz wrote, “Jared Taylor is not blind to Jews …maybe he doesn’t have the stunted black/white simplistic view of Jews many have, but he is not blind, he see’s them as another cog in the machine of modernity (the simpletons see them as the machine)…not everyone needs to be foaming at the mouth at every opportunity ranting about Jews . . . ”

        I’m sure you didn’t mean it this way, but those comments can be taken as very offensive given that we are talking about the likes of Kevin MacDonald, E. Michael Jones, and many, many other serious thinkers who have addressed the JQ. Are you suggesting that we (recall that I write as Edmund Connelly for TOO) to be compared with ill-educated drunks “foaming at the mouth” and “ranting about Jews”? Is “Culture of Critique” a rant about Jews? “The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit”? My many columns on TOO and long scholarly articles for TOQ? Do you prefer the AmRen approach? If so, why?

        • Lord Shang
          Posted January 31, 2020 at 3:15 am | Permalink

          I write a reply to you, but for some reason it ended up being posted as a stand-alone comment at the top of the thread.

          • Lord Shang
            Posted January 31, 2020 at 3:17 am | Permalink

            I am an idiot. I WROTE a reply to you (see above) … I wish this site had an ‘edit’ function for comments.

    • Adrian
      Posted January 29, 2020 at 3:25 pm | Permalink

      This is a common misconception about JT. He spoke at a very low-key event in the UK some years ago, where he was challenged on the JQ. His response showed that he understands it perfectly well. He quipped that you should try not to be a crank on more than one issue at a time. His reluctance to engage on this matter is tactical.

      • anongroyper
        Posted January 30, 2020 at 1:16 am | Permalink

        Yes Exactly JT knows what he is doing. Its tactical. We have other people like Kevin Mac and GJ who can talk about that issue

    • Randy
      Posted January 29, 2020 at 9:45 pm | Permalink

      JT isn’t blind to it. He just chooses professionally not to engage.

    • anon
      Posted February 8, 2020 at 11:11 pm | Permalink

      JT is not blind to the JQ. JT is simply being strategic.

  15. Karl Nemmersdorf
    Posted January 29, 2020 at 4:45 am | Permalink

    I wrote an article in December discussing the ideas of Jones on race, “Ethnos Needs Logos (and Genos), a counter to his booklet “Ethnos Needs Logos.” I discussed history a bit, but since Jones and I are both Catholic, I showed that traditional Catholic teaching was very comfortable with substantial differences between men, and gave great weight to heredity. Take a look: https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2019/12/10/ethnos-needs-logos-and-genos/

    • Lord Shang
      Posted January 31, 2020 at 3:22 am | Permalink

      That was a very well done article. I saw it last month. Keep writing such stuff. It’s much appreciated.

      • Jerome
        Posted February 8, 2020 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

        Yes this was a really great article. There’s no reason Catholics can’t have realistic and sensible views on race, and organise their communities and societies accordingly, within the bounds of Christian ethics and morality. Even Jones hints at this sometimes when talking about his book “the Slaughter of Cities” and “white flight” etc., without of course explicitly mentioning “race”.

        One interesting thing about Jones is that he constantly talks about “white” being an empty concept when applied to Americans of European descent, but he’s quite happy to lump all “African-Americans” under the label of “black”. We don’t have to parse out their specific ethic identities or backgrounds, we can just refer them all as “black”. So they do seem to be a legitimate ethnic group for Jones, unlike “whites”.

        I also think his “triple-melting pot” theory doesn’t work anymore, i.e. the idea that true ethnic identifiers in the USA are religious, i.e. “Protestant, Catholic or Jew”. Does anyone really think a white Lutheran from Minnesota is a member of the same ethnic group as a black Baptist from Mississippi? It’s absurd.

  16. Posted January 28, 2020 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

    I can’t wait for this debate to happen. I always thought E. Michael Jones’ views on race were totally and completely insane, which is baffling because he is otherwise a very rational guy. His book “Libido Dominandi” is very good, for instance. But then he said once in an interview, “I am half-German and half-Irish, so that makes me ‘Biracial.’ I am not ‘White.'” Insanity!

    • Ambrose Kane
      Posted January 29, 2020 at 2:38 am | Permalink

      You’re right, E. Michael Jones is quite perceptive when it comes to the ‘JQ’ and what these incredibly divisive people have done to our countries. He has documented it thoroughly in his books. He is intelligent and articulate, and yet when it comes to race and white identity issues, it’s as if he allowed his brain to fall out onto the floor!

      It’s good that Jared Taylor debate him and, hopefully, set him straight. Jones has a growing following, and it’s probably best that this issue gets settled once and for all so that we don’t have a bunch more like Dr. Jones spewing the sort of nonsense he does about race, white identity, etc.

      • Brooklyn Dave
        Posted January 29, 2020 at 11:12 am | Permalink

        Jones is like the Energizer Bunny who keeps going and going. I definitely think he is wrong on the race issue but one also has to understand where he is coming from. Jones is a very traditional Roman Catholic and thus sees his religion as his primary identity. My father (who would be 100 if he were alive) was the same way -and he also was of Irish-German heritage. I’ve heard Jones bellow many times about how the white ethnic neighborhoods in his beloved Philadelphia were busted up by Jews using blacks as foot soldiers etc. etc. -thus after moving to the sterile suburbs they lost their individual ethnic identity -and became white -but retained their religious identity (which to him is of primary importance). Most people today are not as religiously devoted as people like Jones, and also whites like myself have a mixed European heritage. Yes, I do identify as a cultural Catholic, but who would know what I was unless I revealed it. On the other hand, wherever I go, the world sees this white face with blue/green eyes. Just like other races, mine goes with me wherever I go. As the rate of disintegration of society increases, my white backside becomes more and more of an issue as the weeks, months and years march forward. Although extremely interesting, all of Jones’s bloviating about Logos (along with his horrible pronunciation of the word) is not going to save this goyisher tuchas (gentile rear end). I hope I am either gone from this world or completely senile when the SHTF.

    • Franklin Ryckaert
      Posted January 29, 2020 at 7:19 am | Permalink

      E. Michael Jones : “…I am half-German and half-Irish, so that makes me ‘Biracial…”

      Jones is half-intelligent (on Jews) and half-stupid (on race), so what does that make him? Bi-mental?

      • Sandy
        Posted January 29, 2020 at 11:37 am | Permalink

        I don’t know about Jones being bi racial but as his Irish parents married a German wouldn’t that make him the product of a consanguineous marriage which leads to………………I’d better stop there or he will cancel my subscription.

  17. Jud Jackson
    Posted January 28, 2020 at 8:23 pm | Permalink

    I thought JT was prevented from entering Europe until 2021. Maybe I am off 1 year?

    • Adrian
      Posted January 29, 2020 at 3:33 pm | Permalink

      He’s prevented from entering the Schengen zone, which is the EU minus UK and Ireland (I think).

  18. Corday
    Posted January 28, 2020 at 7:25 pm | Permalink

    The esteemed Mr. Taylor will mop the floor with E. Michael Jones.

    For anyone who has consumed Jones’ content, has he ever offered an explanation for why nations exposed to Christianity via colonialism do not very quickly achieve white standards of living? The Philippines, for instance, has 86% of its population made up of professing Catholics. Huge chunks of southern and central Africa count Christians at over 90% of their population.
    I believe it’s even the official state religion in places like Zambia. These have been Christian cultures for generations now. According to his worldview, shouldn’t they have closed the achievement gap? Does Jones discuss divergent group outcomes within Christian nations? How does he account for the successes of majority secular Japanese-Americans when compared to American Negroes, one of the most Christian demographics in the country? More broadly, why is Shintoist/secular Japan more successful than a much larger, majority Catholic country like Brazil?

    • don
      Posted January 29, 2020 at 1:27 pm | Permalink

      A great post and great points.

      Go to the Western Hemisphere and compare the enormous success of the Protestant USA with the relative failures of Catholic countries south of the border and in Latin America. As the offspring of a mixed marriage, Protestant and Catholic, I thank God the two factions have stopped fighting each other. That doesn’t mean I’m willing to be ruled by philo-Catholics like Jones any more than Jews and Philo-semites.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.
 
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
 
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*
*

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs

    Cynosura

    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics

    Rising

    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

    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

    Reuben

    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance