Hipster Racist Continues To Influence Counter Currents

I write about David McGowan, James O’Meara writes about David McGowan.


I start writing about A Nolen’s Crowley-MI6 connection articles, James O’Meara writes about Crowley-MI6.


There’s nothing on O’Meara old blog that suggests anything about espionage, fictional or real, but the more I write about it, the more he does. Not only does James O’Meara read this blog, although he’s probably not allowed to admit it, but so does Richard Spencer. I don’t mind, I don’t need credit. As Johnson would say, I want people to steal my ideas, I can’t give them away fast enough.

But, really, what is Counter Currents? Greg Johnson once attacked the Daily Stormer for their idiotic Nazi-shtick, and one of the CC posters rather hesitantly asked, well, Counter Currents is full of Nazi-shtick. Greg Johnson writes articles about what Hitler ate for lunch and how that made him fart a lot. Johnson constantly promotes Savitri Devi, the inventor of “esoteric Hitlerism” which is literally a religion based on Hitler. Many people have noted that Counter Currents has a lot of gay writers and is, essentially, a pro-gay site, but has anyone ever noticed that their Hitler/Nazi fetish is quite probably just that – a sexual fetish? It’s well know that a segment of the gay community sexualizes the Nazis and does BDSM-style role play as Nazi Stormtroopers.

Maybe Counter Currents can be explained as just that. The White Nationalism is just for show; it’s the Nazi sexual fetish that is the core of the project. Hunter Wallace once dug up a quote from Johnson posting on the neo-Nazi VNN site a rather homoerotic fantasy of living in a world run by Nazis.

Still, they do publish a lot of good material and James O’Meara’s “Queer Eye For The White National Guy” stuff is usually amusing and sometimes even informative. However, what is good about Greg Johnson’s writing is not unique, and what is unique is not good.

Johnson goes out of his way to attack “conspiracy theorists” which leads to him getting his geo-political analysis just wrong. For instance, while Johnson was wringing his hands about Islamic State, the better informed people were explaining that it’s not really an ideological movement, it’s a mercenary force, and the atrocity videos are often staged.

Well, of course, this is attacked by Johnson as a “conspiracy theory” until it becomes relatively acknowledged:


Then Johnson just ignores the story, pretends he never said it, and when the next false flag propaganda story comes out, he repeats the cycle: attacks the “conspiracy theorists,” gets proven wrong, and then pretends the whole thing never happened.

Does Johnson actually believe any of it? It doesn’t seem likely. He seems to aspire to be a right wing version of Noam Chomsky: pose as a dissident then use the pose to attack ideas that would actually go against the powerful. When you are dishonest, lying and hypocrisy are second nature. So, Johnson can hilariously attack the Daily Stormer for tying the White cause to a dead political movement while his entire site does exactly that.

It’s likely similar to how Johnson destroyed a once-promising website, the Occidental Quarterly. The Occidental Quarterly was on the way to becoming something like Radix Journal. When he was put in charge it all but died and then when he was fired, Johnson went on a tirade against Hunter Wallace who was apparently meant to be the replacement for Johnson. That is the origin of the Counter Currents website, in fact – no one would work with Johnson so he took his ball and bat and went home.

CC used to also promote the laughable “North West Front” which was, essentially, “live action role playing” meant to attract as much negative attention from law enforcement as possible. To show you how much of a joke it was, they even designed their own flag for their non-existent state. The guy behind it wrote a few novels and, at least the one that I read, was awful. What is it about right-wingers and their completely unbelievable female characters? The romance in the NWF novel honestly seemed to be written by someone who had never met an actual woman. Sure, I maybe be a sexist pig and a misogynist asshole, but I don’t think anyone could credibly accuse me of not, you know, actually interacting with women on a regular basis – sexually or otherwise.

9/11 isn’t exactly current events, even though there are still near-daily stories relating to the attacks even 14 years later. It’s interesting that other neo-Nazis, or “costume clowns” like we used to call them, are also anti-9/11 truth, for instance Chechar at “West’s Darkest Hour.” Like Johnson, what is good about Chechar isn’t unique, and what is unique about Chechar isn’t good. His site actually uses swastikas and idolizes the Nazis, but Chechar is the “homophobic” version to Johnson’s “homophile.” But really, it’s the same thing: Nazi fetishes, anti-9/11 truth, neo-con foreign policies (especially in the case of Chechar,) an obsession with Muslims (odd for Nazis, eh?)

All of these people first came to my attention on Hunter Wallace’s old OccidentalDissent site, they all came from there: Greg Johnson, Gregory Hood, Matt Parrott, Kievsky. Then the Greg Johnson incident blew the whole thing up and caused major tension for a while. Greg Johnson started attacking Hunter Wallace and Matt Parrott accused Hunter Wallace of stealing money from the website to go pay for Black hookers in the Bahamas.

I see that Matt Parrott now does religious-themed LARP-ing with that Matt Heimback guy and also writes for Counter Currents once in a while. Matt Parrott is also anti-9/11 truth. Heimback went from a promising student activist to a costume clown, dressing up in skinhead boots and sieg-heiling. Now, he poses as an orthodox Christian and “counter-protests” at Slut Walks.

This core group from the old OD site – they are like straight out of Central Casting. They just get the tone wrong consistently, every single time. Like that old saying, if they were just making mistakes they would make a mistake in our favor at least occasionally.

Homosexual and homophobic Nazis, militia fantasies complete with ill-fitting costumes and fantasy flags, public harassment of liberal white women having nothing to do with race, and pretending to be religious fanatics. It’s like it’s meant to turn off normal white people, isn’t it?

I will tell you who is doing it right: Radix and Richard Spencer, Kevin MacDonald and TOO, and Bob Whitaker and the BUGsters. They are effective spokespeople for the cause.

The rest are play-actors and costume clowns.

9 thoughts on “Hipster Racist Continues To Influence Counter Currents

    1. To be fair, that wasn’t an original idea of mine. I think it was Richard Clarke who suggested holding back the 28 pages was being used to pressure the Saudis in various ways. The implicit threat being, if you ever cross us we’ll say you did 9/11 and sanction, bomb, or invade you.


  1. I hardly ever look at Counter-Currents or Radix. When I do check those places, the writing tends to be strong and backed by an impressive store of reading; but increasingly a lot of that stuff just seems blue-pilled to me. I have difficulty taking a commentator seriously if he still expects me to believe the line about Arabs in caves plotting 9/11. Most of those writers are just intellectuals who are content to write literary essays and aspire at best to be regarded as some counter-intelligentsia. I remember listening to a show with Greg Johnson chatting with Jack Donovan (another role-playing macho queer for you), and they were fantasizing about how great it would be if society collapsed so they could have post-apocalyptic adventures with guns. It was like listening to two professors suddenly turn into twelve-year-old boys. If entertaining doubts about some news event might endanger their quasi-academic reputations as thinkers, though, they’re not going to touch it in public, ever.


    1. Radix is about as good as it gets. I think Spencer makes a good spokesman and Hood is a great writer. They will go further than, say, Jared Taylor, but they won’t do anything to expose propaganda. Suggesting that the news is not “real” is a “conspiracy theory.”

      Bruce Jenner is interesting. A reality TV show star, he dresses like a woman. No surgery, no hormones, he just put on a dress and wears make-up and a padded bra. It’s a costume – no different than an actor on TV wearing any other costume.

      But if you suggest that the TV show “isn’t real” and that Jenner is actually a man dressed as a woman …

      … now you are not only a “conspiracy theorist” but actually a “hater” and “transphobic.”

      Suggesting the TV is not “real” but in fact “scripted” with “actors” and “costumes” is not just crazy but actually “hate speech.”

      Spencer and Hood, as good as they are, don’t have the balls to suggest such a thing.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. So you don’t think Bruce actually chopped his nuts off?! I thought he was the real…fake…deal. This is the first I’ve heard this, have to investigate…but it kinda makes sense.

        He’d never be able to go anywhere as ‘Bruce’ again, though. I’ve barely caught him in video because it’s so Twilight Zone horrid.


  2. http://www.letsrollforums.com/forum/forum/the-last-american-forum/government-media-corporate-hoaxes/439175-article-is-the-bruce-jenner-story-a-big-hoax-or-sham

    He attended Newtown HIgh School. Wow.

    Also, the biggest resistance to the transsexual agenda is girls and women, especially athletes. Didn’t some gym have all their women members renounce their membership and demand a refund when some guy tranny changed in their locker room? There can’t be girls and women’s sports that include male to female transsexuals. Nor even gym locker rooms it appears.

    So it wasn’t just to distract us, it was to further force us, even girls and womens sports which would otherwise defy the NWO’s agendering.

    Wow wow.


    1. @Kylie

      I do think there is an “agendering” agenda. In fact, you can go back to some of the earliest communist literature and find such a program laid out explicitly. The easiest and most obvious way it starts is by dressing boys and girls in the same outfits and integrating sports or restrooms. You can even go to some of the early ultra-radical Protestant utopians in North Western Europe and find something similar, if to my eyes a lot less sinister.

      While I have no doubt there are mentally ill men that actually think they are women, and vice-versa, I’m not sure if the Bruce Jenner thing even rates to that level. I think it’s more like a “reality TV” thing. First and foremost it’s a gimmick to sell ads.

      But the agendering agenda generally is about atomizing a community where everyone is “equal” – at least the proles are. It’s the same agenda behind destroying patriarchy – the real kind of patriarchy, where a man knows his children and has personal responsibility for them. Again, in the early communist literature and in certain communist regimes like Ceausescu’s Romania, they had experimental “orphanages” and “communes” where the children were not supposed to have any attachment to their natural parents, or in some cases even know who they were. The early Zionist kibbutz movement did something similar. “It takes a village” as Hillary Clinton would say.

      Specialization of roles makes for a complex and powerful community. A slave class is easier to manage if everyone is equivalent, interchangeable, and replaceable.

      Oh, and as to whether or not Jenner had any sort of surgery – I don’t know. That was part of the whole propaganda campaign. John Oliver of the Daily Show did a skit about it. He showed a clip of Diane Sawyer asking Jenner if he had surgery, Jenner wouldn’t answer, then Oliver came on and shouted “it’s none of your business! How dare you ask about her genitals!”

      So you just have to accept it. If the TV says it’s a woman, you’re a hate-monger if you disagree and you’re a “conspiracy theorist” if you have doubts.


  3. Your truther conspiracy theories are even more irrelevant than they are wrong.

    They just get the tone wrong consistently, every single time. Like that old saying, if they were just making mistakes they would make a mistake in our favor at least occasionally.

    Pause for a moment and try to recognize what you did there. You implied that the people who disagree with your conspiracy theory are all in on a conspiracy.


    1. You implied that the people who disagree with your conspiracy theory are all in on a conspiracy.

      No, read it again. You’ve misunderstood.

      There is no need for a theory about a “conspiracy” when motivation and a lack of character explain things.


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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s