Monday, April 22, 2013

Antiracist Cartoon - A Review

I really enjoyed this video.It demonstrates the hypocrisy of our leaders who support Nationalism for Israel but not for European countries (or America).

Here is the link that specifies that the USA is committed to supporting Israel as a Jewish state:



  2. I would like to see some study of how a random selection of people is affected by this. The meaning of it seems to me very ambiguous.

    Fundamentally it seems to be yet another incarnation of the dubious old conservative rhetoric that tries to characterize leftists as "the real nazis" (or "the real racists") or "just like Hitler." That kind of rhetoric emanates constantly from people like Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity. The silly premise is that ANYTHING that Hitler (and by extension racists in general) does is ipso facto evil and disreputable.

    While the cartoon shows what might happen to the State of Israel with rigorously enforced multiculturalism, it does not make clear that Jews are behind multiculturalism in the first place, which is a point of the highest importance. While it puts a Jew's words into Hitler's mouth (in a variant of the "just like Hitler" theme) it doesn't inform the viewer of this, so that it ends up being an inside joke. Apart from that inside joke, the cartoon portrays Jews sympathetically, as being fundamentally just like White people (just as an earlier cartoon from these people portrayed Redskins as being just like Whites).

    Even if the viewer already knows that Jews are behind multiculturalism and that what the cartoon portrays is therefore a turning of the tables, the cartoon's effectiveness could be limited by the fact that many are already quite accustomed to the idea that Jews should not be held to the same rules as anybody else, because they are the Chosen, or because they suffered so much in the Holohoax, etc. Somebody like that could derive the moral of the cartoon as something like: it's wrong to apply multiculturalism to the Jews because that's what Hitler would do.

    Or it could be seen as simply a fantasy about wiping out Jews. In what way has the "anti-racist Hitler" remained Hitler? Despite an outer conversion to anti-racism he is still inwardly bent on eliminating the Jews. This is of course consistent with the false Jewish propaganda about Hitler, and it reinforces that propaganda.

    The use of Hitler as a unique reference-point for evil, and the concommittant identification of the Jews as some kind of special victimized people, are facts that the BUGSters sedulously avoid confronting; these are crucial points that the BUGSters seem to pride themselves on dancing around. It seems to me that the BUGSters work so hard at being clever within the boundaries of conservative respectability they tend to sacrifice clarity, so that a person not already singing from the same hymnal might just find the whole thing bizarre and confusing.

    I hate to damn the work, but it strikes me as yet another wasteful exercise in trying to achieve radical results without ever overstepping the boundaries of respectable conservative rhetoric. That would mean rejecting the shibboleths of respectability that Jews have established for conservatism: Hitler evil; racism evil; Jews innocent victims.

    Again, I would like to see a study as to what effect this kind of presentation has, beyond affording amusement to those who already know and appreciate the inside joke.

  3. The above illustrates why the pro-Hitler folks will never be any good to the pro-White movement. They are more pro-Hitler than pro-White. Ironically, for people who worship, a master propagandist, they know nothing about how it works.

    Notice, they can never allow themselves to seriously criticize Hitler about anything, they can never even let themselves have fun with the image of Der Furher.

    This is the kind of thing we see at Counter Currents and all across Hitler-first websites. Their numbers are tiny, and they will be left behind as the real pro-White movement takes off.

  4. Yeah, it's funny when the shoe goes on to the other foot. And we'll make no mention of the Depo-provera shots, and the forced expulsion of illegal African invaders.

  5. The guy with the godawful-long gibberish name didn't read my criticism very well.

  6. Summary of my criticism:

    1. Godwin's Law describes a kind of irrational argument used by people who can't make a real argument. This cartoon is in part an expression of Godwin's Law.

    2. The cartoon is uninformative, insofar as it avoids saying that Jews are behind multiculturalism.

    3. The cartoon misleads, insofar as it portrays Jews as exactly like (normal) Whites.

    4. The message of the cartoon is unclear, beyond a self-evident point about the effects of immigration and multiculturalism.

    5. The reason why the message of the cartoon is unclear is that BUGSter rhetoric deliberately avoids head-on confrontation about core issues, as a matter of principle.

    6. It is questionable whether this kind of convoluted rhetoric really accomplishes much, other than amusing those who already possessed the crucial information that the cartoon itself refrains from stating.

    I am open to evidence that this kind of presentation really does have some persuasive power. In the past I have found that BUGSters just get angry when the universal omnipotence of their convoluted rhetoric is questioned.

    1. The Israelis and Hitler are just props in this satire video to make a point about what is happening in White countries. The moment Hitler showed up in a Hawaiian shirt it was obvious to everyone that this was not a biopic of Hitler.

      The main goal is to use satire to expose White Genocide. When Jonathan Swift wrote "A Modest Proposal", there was little point in criticizing it from the standpoint of how unrealistic it was to think Irish parents would sell their babies for food. That would have shown one did not get the point of the essay on a fundamental level.

      There are 100,000 views and almost 1,000 comments in less than a week indicating that people totally get the point of the video.

      There is little point in having theoretical "arguments" when we have evidence from actual viewers.

    2. What's the "evidence from actual viewers"?

      Under WhiteRabbitRadioTV's posting on YouTube, Thor Odinson calls the cartoon "an amazing piece of comedy." Sure it is funny, if you are a WN who gets the inside jokes. This is the kind of person who says, "Wow this is great! This should be reposted everywhere!" They are only thinking about what pleases them, not about how to persuade people who don't already agree.

      What do people who are not already members of the WN choir have to say?

      I see a comment a few hours ago from "Annabelle French," who calls the cartoon "blatant propaganda," and says, "Epic Fail. You can't fool me."

      "Blatant propaganda" is a very damning comment. It means that you didn't even get a foot in the door, so far as influencing this person's thinking is concerned. OF COURSE it is "blatant propaganda": casting Hitler as an anti-racist is a blatant example of Godwin's Law, which has been around since 1990.

    3. YouTube is open to all who want to submit videos. Come up with something you think will work and submit it.

  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

  9. There are 100,000 views and almost 1,000 comments in less than a week indicating that people totally get the point of the video.

    Glyn Willmoth

    1. Since the cartoon has been posted on a number of sites that get heavy traffic, and probably also promoted extensively through BUGSter spam, I am not surprised that it has gotten a lot of views.

      If you want to know what people got out of it, however, you have to look at what they say about it. I know that some people experience it simply as trolling.

  10. In the ten most recent comments that I see under WhiteRabbitRadioTV's post on YouTube, most of them seem to be from members of the WN congregation chanting AMEN -- repeatedly.

    The few non-BUGSter comments indicate a perception that the cartoon is obvious bullshit.

    That's understandable. I don't understand why BUGSters can't see that they aren't fooling anybody with their attempts at tricky rhetoric, as if Reductio ad Hitlerum were not already old hat decades ago.

    But it gets worse than that.

    Of the ten most recent comments, there are three saying, "Genocide is bad." These are all obviously from people trained in BUGSter rhetoric. Now, when you consider that the BUGSters are referring to the UN's extremely BROAD definition of genocide -- which had the purpose of preventing any nation-state from preserving its racial integrity -- the benefit of what the BUGSters are doing becomes highly questionable. In fact I regard their efforts as counterproductive, because they are endorsing the criminalization of White history and cutting the moral legs out from under options that we may need for our own future survival.