Tag Archives: ADL

Myth or the Great Hoax: The Origins of Modern Demonology

Posted on by

Myth or the Great Hoax: The Origins of Modern Demonology


Myth or the Great Hoax: The Origins of Modern Demonology

June 17, 2023/0 Comments/in ChristianityFeatured Articles/by Tom Sunic, Ph.D.

We all use mythical language, although we seldom admit it. In contrast to concepts which are the hallmarks of modern discourse, myths are based on images and symbolic forms of speech. In the mythmaking narrative images change and vary over historical time and place although their driving force remains constant in the identity building process of peoples, tribes, nations, including political movements. Many Christians, along with many atheists and agnostics, who deride as surreal ancient Greek myths, resort to their own self-made myths, adorning them with their own pack of metaphors and imagery. In a sharp contrast to the historically recorded end-of-time, single-God revelation religions, such as Judaism, Islam and Christianity, European myths surfacing in epics, folk tales, legends or sagas have the advantage of overstepping the historical timeframe. They fuse the past present and future in one whole, offering the hope of gods’ return and announcing the rebirth of a vanished or destroyed political order.

The man of the myth discovers his freedom not in the possibility of building up his own history, but in the fact of being free vis-à-vis history.  It is in the abolition, relativization and reinterpretation of history that he finds his freedom.[i]

Ancient Europeans who believed in myths had a profound historical consciousness. Yet—unlike Christians, Jews or Muslims, let alone unlike modern political true believers—they could neither grasp nor embrace a linear historical and “unique” narrative announcing the beginning of time and the end of time. To a traditional man, of the myth, history, with its incessant flow of time, is always open. The belief in a plurality of gods means also the ability of accepting the plurality of ideas, the plurality of different truths and consequently rejecting a single religious or political dogma.

The tragic side of life is a cornerstone of ancient myths, as depicted in ancient Greek epics and dramas. However, one never spots in ancient mythical prose or poems signs of religious and political nihilism. The man of the myth is essentially a historical optimist: he believes in the return of historical cycles that will also bring about the return of the hero and witness the rebirth of gods, even if the sky is doomed to fall with the entire cosmos swept in chaos. One of the sharpest American scholars of the twentieth century, Joseph Campbell, understood well the subconscious human desire for the world of the myth, myths being “like dreams, revelations of the deepest hopes, desires and fears, potentialities and conflicts, of the human will.” [ii]  The mythical world is anchored in all of us, as can be witnessed by an ever-growing interest in the mythical characters inhabiting J. R. R. Tolkien’s novels or George Lucas’ movie Star Wars, as well as in the proliferation of hundreds of science fiction movies.

Despite his insight into various faces of mythmaking Campbell was not spared from demonization by new mythmakers who labeled him with their own mythicist vocabulary an “antisemite and racist.” [iii]

Vice, or better yet, virtue signaling squads of the modern morality police, such as the SPLC or the ADL, were quick to shove Campbell into the realm of underground demons.

Resorting to a mythical language is also a prime goal of modern political demagoguery. The word ‘myth’ is often used incorrectly in defaming a political adversary. This word, when used in political discourse carries a derogatory meaning, bearing no resemblance to the ancient belief in mythos. Today its verbal derivatives are widely used to delegitimize the beliefs of a political opponent, often having the goal of ruining his reputation in the public eye by painting him as some kind of a conspiracy theorist. The problem with conspiracy theorists, regardless whether they come from the Left or the rightwing political spectrum is that they can never be refuted with any empirical, forensic and contradictory argument.

To a very extent that conspiracy theories claim to “explain” everything, rejecting out of hand any contradiction and any argument put forward against them is seen either as a proof of their opponents’ “naivete”, or a simple plot by conspiracy theorists aiming to prevent them from being exposed. Any contradiction any denial only becomes an additional proof of the existence of conspiracy.”[iv]

Many conservative and nationalist authors in their own description of leftwing opponents have popularized expressions such as the “myth of progress,” the “myth of Marxism,” “the myth of multiculturism.” On their part, left-leaning authors accuse nationalists and conservatives of believing in the myth of race and the myth of Jewish world conspiracy. Many Jewish and liberal authors, however, seldom tire from resurrecting their own conspiracy-laden language depicting and evoking the mythical and ever lurking “white supremacist,” anti-Semite, or Neo-Nazi bent on destroying the liberal democratic order. Even if White anti-Semites and Neo-Nazis were to disappear, the Liberal System would need to reinvent them over and over again – similar to the ex-Soviet Union and its former client states who, in order to justify their repressive nature, constantly kept resurrecting the myth of the Fascist Evil.

Without using over and over again the modern myth of the Absolute Cosmic Evil, allegedly incorporated today in the eternal Neo-Nazi and White Supremacist, the Liberal System would fall part.

To the word of the myth, one could substitute more hyperbolic verbal constructs such as the “big lie,” the “grand hoax,” or “political theology,” or even “fake news,”—expressions which are quite trendy among conservative and nationalist authors. While the Left likes to denounce the “myth of the White race” as a sign of pseudoscientific and retarded mindset, the Right, by contrast, denounces the liberal and communist myth of egalitarianism as a belief contrary to the laws of evolutionary biology.

Credo quia absurdum, or the belief in the Big Lie.

The line between a belief in the big lie and a belief in some kind of a myth is often blurred. It is wrong to assume that only a few bad people impose their political lies on a credulous or stupid populace. Very often it is savants and allegedly great minds who are believers and instigators of surreal political myths, strange beliefs, bizarre victimhood stories which they usually discard after some time and replace them with new trendy myths or hoaxes. Often masses deliberately accept new political myths because it is all too human to take wishful thinking for granted. In the study of crowd hysteria, Gustave Le Bon observes how masses accept political myths without ever reflecting upon their disastrous consequences:

Crowds being only capable of thinking in images are only to be impressed by images. It is only images that terrify or attract them and become motives of action.[v]

It can be the mythic imagery of the shining communist future, or the myth of the end of the world caused by the Covid pandemic that can whip up masses into political frenzy or justify the most severe forms of political repression.  Religions, as well as modern beliefs and ideologies are also heavily interwoven with mythical scenes. Often those who ridicule beliefs in the mythical nature of the scenes from the Bible or from Homer’s Iliad are receptive to modern myths of a Marxist classless paradise on earth or the nature of permanent economic growth in Liberalism. One may recall intellectual enchantment with the Freudian-Marxist mystique by hundreds of thousands of US and European college professors in the first half of the twentieth century and extending even after psychoanalysis had lost all scientific credibility and communism had resulted only in political repression and economic stagnation. By the end of the century, these professors had no qualms in replacing their former ideologies with new myths of the free market and the myth of the invisible hand.  The capitalist myth aptly called “monotheism of the market” by the French philosopher Roger Garaudy, suggests the belief in permanent economic growth as the only salutary objective of human existence.[vi]

But one must be careful when reading Garaudy’s texts, as well as those of hundreds of other popular academics and authors preaching formulas of religious or political salvation. Garaudy was a reputable World War II antifascist resistant fighter, later a high-ranking French communist party member and a renowned intellectual—before he turned into a devout Muslim toward the end of his life. For his revisionist and anti-Israeli writings, he was also charged and convicted by the French courts with anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial, claiming it to be a “Jewish myth.”[vii] Regardless of what one may think of Garaudy’s  many astute observations about Israel, Jews, and American decadence, recanting his once upon-a-time mythical persona and accepting the other mythical opposite is not a sign of integrity of character.

Many revisionist scholars critical of Jews and their social status depict the Jewish World War II victimhood as a new secular religion containing its own legions of saints, sacraments, salvagers and survivors. What strikes one is the following: while one may openly downplay, deride and minimize the number of victims of communist killing fields during the Ukrainian Holodomor, the Croat Bleiburg, the Gulag sewage system in the ex-Soviet Union, or the millions of killed German civilians, during and after World War II without facing legal troubles, critical debates on the Jewish Holocaust story must stay off limits—an excellent marker of the power of the Jewish community.

But even authors complaining about legal duplicity regarding the narrative of Jewish victimhood are seldom consistent. Many of them believe in good faith in the immaculate conception of Virgin Mary and various surreal miracles performed by Jesus and his early Jewish disciples. They would never consider their faith in Jesus a myth, let alone, a hoax, a fraud, or a conspiracy theory.  They reject the claims by anti-Christian authors “that Jesus was a deliberately constructed myth, by a specific group of people with a specific end in mind,”[viii] as David Skrbina wrote recently.

Neither do the faithful ones who believe in the Jesus story want to hear the arguments purporting that the history of Christianity is replete with serial killings of infidels as well as lengthy inter-Christian religious wars. It remains difficult for them to admit that Christianity emerged in Judaism and that until the end of the Second Temple and the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, all the way till the end of the second century, Christianity was just one of the several infighting Jewish sects in the Roman empire.

Christianity remained Jewish Christianity. As we move into the second century not only certain Christian sects can be described as ‘Jewish-Christian’, but Christianity as a whole can still properly be described as ‘Jewish Christianity’ in a justifiable sense.[ix]

The prominent Christian theologian Adolf Harnack also traces the roots of Christianity to Judaism, claiming that “it was the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple which seems to have provoked the final crisis, and led to complete breach between the two parties.”[x]

The debate on mythical Jewish-inspired origins of Christianity is largely avoided by modern White Christian conservatives and White Christian nationalists. It must be noted though that the most critical analyses of Christianity over the last century and half have not come from the Left, but primarily from conservative and nationalist authors, especially in Germany and France. Particularly in Germany during the National-Socialist regime, from 1933 to 1945, there was a flurry of well-researched books and scholarly pieces by hundreds of academics dealing with the interrelationship between race and religion. Most of those authors contend that there is a causal link between Judaism-Christianity and their modern secular offshoots in the modern myth of Communism and Liberalism

We cannot expect that Christian religion, which originated from Jewish racial heritage, and which today still feels constrained by a baptism commandment issued 2000 years ago in the Jewish land, will atone for the guilt of the German soul.[xi]

It is a great setback that the works by German religious scholars, regardless of the demonic, or rather demonized nature of the National-Socialist epoch when their works were published, have not yet received a proper scholarly evaluation. Nor are the books on the racial makeup of a man, tribe or a people and how it affects the choice of his religion easily accessible. This raises the question of genetic and racial proclivity of any racial ingroup toward accepting or rejecting a foreign religious or political myth. Wilhelm Hauer a prominent religious scholar in National-Socialist Germany, noted:

For one thing, there is no longer any doubt today that race means not only body forms, but also forms of the soul and the spirit. And secondly, religion is not just a matter of the absolute truth, but also of various forms of truth by the bearers of religion.[xii]

Each racial group has its own vision of afterlife including its own notion of truth, or for that matter its acceptance of the big lie. Accordingly, to a large extent it is racial heritage of each man that shapes his world view. Between the German notion of “reality (Wirklichkeit) and “truth” (Wahrheit) there is a sharp distinction that needs to be made.

In addition, it is with great modesty of which Indo-European man is aware: we possess reality while being also possessed by it, but we are eternally on the way to truth, if by this we mean the knowledge of finitude. The absolute truth in the sense of final possession of the deepest mysteries is nonexistent. Such possession would mean the death of the living spirit. [xiii]

Why did early Europeans in the ancient Roman Empire out of hundreds of different cults and sects, each with its own myth, metaphor or allegory, embrace a small Middle Eastern Judaic cult will remain a riddle. Starting with the second century, many Oriental cults had already spread like wildfire in the Roman Empire, cults such as the Persian Mithra cult among Roman soldiers and the Egyptian Isis and Serapis cult, very popular in the high echelons of the Roman imperial court.[xiv] But they did not last long.

Wilhelm Nestle, a German philologist and expert on the mindset of early Greeks and Romans, writes in one of his essays published in the quarterly Archiv für Religionswissenschaft that late Greco-Roman pagan thinkers were hostile to the idea of the messiah insofar as they recognized in messianic prophesies a presumptuous claim by the Jews to future world domination.”[xv]

Nestle, along with many other German scholars in the first half of the twentieth century  voices amazement at how prominent and large European tribes and peoples had fallen prey to a strange Oriental cult preached by a small and insignificant tribe in Judea.

It seems incomprehensible that God did not send the messenger of his revelation to a large and famous people, but to the Jews in a small corner of the Earth, and that despite being omniscient he left his “son” to be shamefully punished by bad people. [xvi]

It does not make much sense to criticize inordinate Jewish political, social, and intellectual influence and popularity, which among other things can still be observed in the writings of a Jewish-born Karl Marx and his modern followers, or modern Jewish neocons dominating the U.S. foreign policy establishment, while at the same time accepting Christian scripts and screeds  which were originally written by Jewish prophets. This is a clearcut case of spiritual and political neurosis that the entire West has been victim of over the last 2000 years.

Seen from the secular perspective, the strong an unwavering support of Israel today by the United States is part of the predictable political theology based on the myth of self-chosenness borrowed from the Jewish Old Testament.[xvii]  It has served over the last one hundred years as a legal justification for its messianic do-good diplomatic efforts, but also its military engagements all over the world. The mythical “city on the hill,” the “manifest destiny” and the recent launching of “diversity” programs are essentially mythical derivatives from the Bible cloaked in modern languages.

It would be false to ascribe the mythical mindset or the religious mindset to one race or to one group of people only.  The myths of the nation and nationalism have  plunged European peoples into incessant and bloody civil wars, from Troy to the Thirty Years War, from the American Civil War to World War II and likely to the upcoming Third World War.

Myth, be it bad or good, is not a privilege of any people or race. Some of the sharpest Western minds who detected best the myth of the communist and liberal   myths were devout Catholics. We owe much to the early Catholic author Joseph de Maistre who criticized the French Revolution of 1789 and who was among the first to debunk the abstract globalist myth of “human rights.” Also, there are legions of Catholic writers who are critical of liberal modernity, such as J.R.R. Tolkien, G.K. Chesterton, Thomas Molnar and many, many others.

One must also mention a Catholic conservative expert in the international law and a noted political scientist Carl Schmitt, who was very popular in Weimar Germany, National-Socialist Germany and post-World War Germany, and who is now a household name of the New Right and the Alt-Right both in the U.S. and E.U. To him we owe the statement that “all significant concepts of the modern theory of the state are secularized theological concepts.”[xviii]


[i] Alain de Benoist, „Mythe“, Krisis, (Paris, numéro 6, Octobre, 1990), p.8.

[ii] Joseph Campbell, The Inner Reaches of Outer Space; Metaphor as Myth and as Religion (Novato: New World Library), p.27.

[iii]  „ After Death the Writer is accused of Anti-Semitism “, The New York Times (Nov 6, 1989).

[iv] Alain de Benoist, „Psychologie du Conspirationnisme“, in Critiques-Théoriques (Lausanne: L’Age d’Homme), p. 96.

[v] Gustave Le Bon, The Crowd; A Study of the Popular Mind (London: T. Fisher Unwin,1920), p.76.

[vi] Roger Garaudy, Avons-nous besoin de Dieu ? (Paris: Ed. Desclée de Brouwer 1993), p. 205.

[vii] Roger Garaudy, Les Mythes fondateurs de la politique israélienne  (Paris: Samizdat, 1996).

[viii] David Skrbina, The Jesus Hoax: How St. Paul’s Cabal Fooled the World for Two Thousand Years (Detroit: Creative Free Press, 2019), p. 23.

[ix] James D. G. Dunn, The Partings of the Ways (London: SCM Press, 2006), p. 307.

[x] Adolf Harnack, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries, Vol. I (NY: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1908), p. 63.

[xi] Robert Luft, Die Verchristung der Deutschen (1937 Archiv-Edition, Verlag  Dietrich Bohlinger 1992), p. 74.

[xii] Wilhelm Hauer, Religion und Rasse (Tübingen:  JCB Mohr (Paul Siebeck, 1941), p. 6.

[xiii] Ibid., Hauer, p.48.

[xiv] Franz Cumont, Oriental Religions in Roman Paganism (1909 Eugene, OR:Wipfs and Stock Publishers, 2003).

[xv] Wilhelm Nestle, „Die Haupteinwände des antiken Denkens gegen das Christentum“, in Archiv für Religionswissenschaft, Vol. XXXVII, Book 1 (Leipzig: BG Teubner, 1941), p.61

[xvi] Ibid., p.87.

[xvii] T Sunic, Homo americanus; Child of the Postmodern Age, with preface by K. MacDonald and postface by A. de Benoist  (Arktos, 2017).

[xviii] Carl Schmitt, Political Theology (1934 Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press 1985), p.3

Tucker Carlson Visits Hungary, A Country that Protects Its Borders, & The Fake News Media Go Crazy

Posted on by

Tucker Carlson Visits Hungary. Apoplectic Rage on the Left

August 7, 2021/6 Comments/in Featured Articles /by Kevin MacDonald

Liberals and leftists are absolutely apoplectic about Tucker Carlson’s week-long visit to Hungary. His shows featured views of the border as well-fenced (built after the 2015 attempted invasion) and peaceful, with migrants from Serbia being turned back—a far cry from Biden’s unofficial policy of welcoming migrants and putting them on planes and buses to be sent around the country to dilute any remaining places that are seen as too White, with the assumption that they will eventually vote Democrat when they get amnestied or they change the voting laws. (The NYTimes recently published an op-ed arguing there is no good reason why illegals can’t vote, so it’s definitely on the left’s wish list.)

On Monday Carlson opened his show with this:

If you care about Western civilization and democracy and families, and the ferocious assault on all three of those things by the leaders of our global institutions, you should know what is happening here right now.

That quote appeared in an article in The Daily Beast where the author, Jared Yates Sexton, couldn’t resist referring to “so-called ‘Western Civilization.’” You definitely know where that train of thought is going.

Here’s most of the show from last night.


At the beginning there is a clip from an interview with Victor Orbán who reasserts the right of Hungary to decide who comes into their country, and that they have a right to decide on their culture. If they want a family-friendly culture and oppose LGBT+ propaganda and Critical Race Theory in their schools, they should be able to do that. If they would rather not have a post-Christian society or a Muslim counter-culture, it’s their right. Their culture is up to them, not globalist elites residing in Brussels or Washington dictating what they must do. And that’s what they have done.

Mr. Orban’s party recently adopted a law restricting depictions of homosexuality; critics said it was being used to target the country’s L.G.B.T.Q. community. And the government-aligned media regularly rails against the destabilizing effect that Western “woke” culture has on traditional society. (Benjamin Novak & Michael M. Grynbaum in the NYTimes)

One can only imagine the horror at such things among our ruling class. “Authoritarian!” they’ll say—while happily mandating their own totalitarian ideology in America.

As Orbán notes, the globalists basically want to force other societies to be multicultural—to admit Muslim communities, for example—in the belief that these disparate groups will get along just fine. But, he says, it’s “obviously risky.” So true. Multiculturalism is a utopian ideology, and what evidence we have thus far is not encouraging—even apart from the argument from ethnic genetic interests. As Orbán says, Germany has gotten what it deserved for bringing in millions of Muslims. Now Europe has no-go zones and organized crime by family-based cartels. You can import people out from of the Middle East, but the magic dirt of Europe doesn’t obliterate their clannishness or their criminal tendencies. And minimally, the multicultural United States has never been more polarized, with the polarization essentially along racial lines.

Carlson’s comment on the effect of immigration on crime infuriated Salon. All they had to do was quote him commenting on a case where an illegal beheaded a woman in broad daylight in Minnesota after authorities did not deport him:

The Biden administration did this on purpose, and they’re still doing it. And that is exactly why Democrats become hysterical when you mention the obvious successes that are on display here in Hungary on the immigration question. They don’t want you to know that there is an option to the chaos and filth and crime growing all around us.

“Chaos, filth, and crime.” But the idea that there are globalist elites seeking to impose multiculturalism and massive non-White, crime-prone (and low-IQ) immigration on European societies is a complete fantasy in the eyes of the Daily Beast writer:

Using fellow Hungarian [???] George Soros as a catch-all bogeyman, Orbán prides himself as a champion against a massive global conspiracy that involves wealthy and powerful liberals, and international organizations determined to undermine the authority of the state and break the back of nationalistic thought.

The idea that there is no globalist, wealthy, liberal elite that opposes nationalism is absurd. But this elite doesn’t generally undermine the authority of the state. Only if the state is trying to enforce nationalism.

The left loves authoritarianism. It’s a recurrent theme that globalists want to force conformity and obedience on any dissenting entity to produce a homogeneous culture of the left. Later in the show he interviews the always interesting Michael Anton, who notes the same thing about the U.S.: Blue states want to impose their values and way of life on the red states, but the red states just want to be left alone to decide on their own culture, whether it’s energy policy, mask mandates for schoolchildren, or teaching White students to hate themselves (here).

But as I said, the left is apoplectic about seeing such ideas in the conservative mainstream. A recurrent theme is that Hungary under Orbán is authoritarian—that he has dismantled democracy so that there are only sham elections. Here’s Zach Beauchamp at Vox:

Fidesz justified its power grabs by demonizing a series of outgroups and external enemies. If you read the state-aligned press, you’ll learn that only Viktor Orbán can save Hungarian civilization from the threat posed by Muslim immigrants, liberals in the European Union, the LGBT community, and the Jewish billionaire George Soros.

Orbán won reelection in 2015 and 2018, in votes that were formally free but in no sense fair. Fidesz benefitted from massive resource advantages, backing from government-aligned media, and rules designed to tilt the playing field. Though Orbán’s party won less than 50 percent of the vote in the 2018 election, it still won a two-thirds majority in parliament — thanks in part due to gerrymandering.

Today, political scientists see Hungary as a textbook example of something called “competitive authoritarianism”: a kind of autocratic system where elections happen and aren’t formally rigged but are so heavily stacked in the incumbent party’s favor that the people don’t have real agency over who rules them.

One thing that’s obvious about the left these days is that they are not self-aware. They routinely project what they are doing throughout the West onto their enemies. It’s quite reasonable to argue that the left stole the 2020 U.S. election, certainly via biased media coverage, and at least partly by changing the voting laws under cover of the Covid crisis. And quite possibly much worse. Now the left is going all out to continue those laws, rejecting voter ID laws and other election security laws as Jim Crow 2.0. And, despite several of the articles cited here condemning Orbán for imposing a gerrymandering regime favorable to his party, they don’t seem to notice that it’s very mainstream among them to want to get rid of the electoral college, pack the Supreme Court with leftist judges, and get rid of two senators per state. Their entire program promoting maximum levels of legal immigration, amnestying illegals, allowing illegals to vote, disbanding the border patrol, distributing migrants to red states, and pathologizing criticism by Whites that they are being replaced is aimed at creating permanent hegemony—the sort of hegemony that they already have in blue states. Yes, the left loves authoritarianism.

But here’s Vox: “Competitive authoritarian regimes survive, in part, by tricking their citizens — convincing enough of them that democracy is still alive to avoid an uprising.” Exactly what’s happening here. We still have the flag (although even that is in jeopardy) and we have the illusion of free elections. In fact, the vast majority of the media in 2020 was propagandizing for one candidate, demonizing the other, and ignoring anything unsavory about the one they like—Hunter’s notorious laptop.

The left loves authoritarianism, but only when they have power. When they were out of power during the 1950s, they were all about the civil liberties of communist professors and how evil Joe McCarthy was. There developed a whole literature on the evils of suppressing free speech, such as Arthur Miller’s The Crucible which implicitly condemned the  House Un-American Activities Committee by comparing it to the Salem witch trials. But now that they have power, they have used their power to basically end free speech at universities and for anyone in the private sector who they might be able to get fired from their job by calling him a racist or anti-Semite. As this recent article by Glen Allen of the Free Expression Foundation shows, there is already a double standard of justice where the system throws the book at right-wing protesters, including solitary confinement for January 6 protesters awaiting trial, while leftist rioters from last summer who burned and pillaged a great many American cities and attacked police have gotten off scot-free. But here’s Sexton in The Daily Beast complaining that Hungary now is hostile to free speech, impartial law, and representative government:

Within this system [i.e., the former regime], certain rights were considered inalienable and automatic. Expression. The press. The right to representative government and the rule of theoretically impartial law.

The left is now firmly in charge of the entire federal bureaucracy, including the FBI and other national security organs. Dissidents are being purged from the military. It’s gotten to the point that even if, by some miracle, a real populist was elected, he or she would have to direct a massive purge of the federal bureaucracy, from top to bottom, to get their policies implemented and to prevent these agencies from actively working against the administration—as certainly occurred at the FBI with Trump-Russia collusion hoax.

And the media. Vox complains that 90 per cent of the media is in government hands, and The Daily Beast complains about lack of press freedom in Hungary. From the perspective of the dissident right, it’s more like 99.9 percent of the media in the U.S. is in hostile hands, and for mainstream conservatives, 90 percent is probably a good estimate. Here the left benefits from the wokeness of the corporate media, including social media. But the result is the same. A façade of democracy in which most people are simply unaware of what’s really going on. And dissenters from the left, such as Carlson, who have a significant media following, are subjected to activist campaigns against their advertisers.

And The Daily Beast complains that the government is pushing its nationalist ideology in schools, completely ignoring the left’s push for everything from holocaust education to Critical Race Theory and LGBT+ propaganda in public schools. Same outcome, slightly different way of getting obtaining it in the U.S. while paying lip service to liberal democracy.

But for The Daily Beast, in order to make their argument, all they have to do is claim that Orbán, Carlson, et al. are nothing more than lunatic conspiracy theorists.

There is importance in western civilization, they maintain, that must be protected at any and all costs, particularly from evil, criminal traitors determined to undermine it. They are in league with foreigners and constantly manipulating people of color. Behind the scenes lies a shadowy threat pulling the strings. They control the media. They control culture. And liberal democracy, with its freedoms, its espoused equality, with its acceptance of diverse identities and ideas, brings with it the contagion of the very populations and creeds that will dilute the country and undoubtedly destroy it.

If you are on the left, there’s no need to really make an argument that liberal elites are not in control of the media or culture, or that they are not really interested in bringing in in people of color in order to further their agenda. The fact that non-Whites vote Democrat is complete happenstance. And the people who run the media are of no discernable ethnic group, and they are nothing but truth seekers. When you have the kind of power the left has today, all you have to do is just accuse those evildoers of believing in conspiracy theories.

Vox quotes Rod Dreher, Senior Editor at The American Conservative:

The unhappy truth is that liberalism as we Americans have known it is probably dead. Our future is almost certainly going to be left-illiberal or right-illiberal. The right-of-center thought leaders who want to figure out how to resist effectively will be coming to Budapest to observe, to talk, and to learn.”

Vox condemns this because Dreher sees a role for the state in creating a right-wing regime, but, as usual, the author seems blissfully unaware of the obvious authoritarian trends on the left—trends they are doing their best to enshrine with state power. I’m afraid Dreher is right. It’s going to be an authoritarianism of the left or of the right, take your pick. The old conservative values of limited government are non-viable. The old America is dead. And right now, I certainly wouldn’t want to bet on the right eventually winning. While the left is pretty much united around a program of authoritarian control—they love censorship, whether by government or corporations, and would embrace prison terms for thought crimes, as they already do in Europe—the right remains fractionated between idiotic libertarians, traditional country club, business-friendly conservatives (even though corporate America hates them), and religious fundamentalists.

However, it’s somewhat encouraging that 23 percent of Republican men have a favorable view of White nationalists, and actually shocking that 17 percent of Democrat men have a favorable view; and discouraging that only 7 percent of the  electorate have a favorable view of White nationalists—again  highlighting the problem of White women, especially unmarried White women, being more likely to buy into the contemporary zeitgeist of White guilt and the left generally. I’d be interested in a poll where they also asked about attitudes toward Carlson. I suspect that Republican men with favorable views of White nationalists overlap to a large extent with those who are fans of Carlson.

I realize Carlson is not ideal. But there’s no one else even close to him in continuing to hit on the issues that vitally affect White America. It’s no surprise that his trip to Hungary set off a firestorm on the left,  or that the ADL was furious when he referred to White replacement. I think he’s waking a lot of people up, and that terrifies the leftleft%2FWhatsAppEmailPrintFriendlyShare

Share this entry

6 replies

  1. todd hupp todd hupp says: Orban is upfront-very direct. Great interview. He wants Hungary reserved for the indigenous white people.Interestingly he pointed out : the central european countries -who recall Russian communism- largely agree with the Hungary policies.Poland in particular.They were pro Trump. BTW: The Russian takeover as sole gas provider to Europe(via Nord Stream) is a very dangerous situation.From Germany pipelines will distribute Russian gas to most of Europe and the UK.Trump had negotiated a portion natural gas would be USA LNG.Biden has dropped this requirement-inexplicably and against USA policy.The left US press is not reporting on this.Russian control of energy=Russian control. The equity for Nord Stream @ 30% comes from European pipeline operators and Gasprom.70% is debt from large European banks.It is reported that a well connected/well funded DC lobby group made this happen against US interests , Reply
  2. Tim Folke Tim Folke says: It is encouraging to see a few bright spots in this darkening world, such as Hungary, Russia and to some extent Poland. These countries know that, in order to survive, their folk, culture and children must be protected. Courage is contagious, and I am grateful for people like Tucker Carlson, as well as the writers on this and other sites. There are still good places in America as well. Last June we went to the Bigfoot Festival in Metaline Falls, WA (NE corner of Washington State). I would guess there were several thousand people there. No weirdos, no unnatural hair colors, no rainbow flags, kids were well behaved and the women wore the jewelry. Just a lot of our folk having a good time and telling Bigfoot stories, some of which may have even been true! Reply
  3. Jo Jo says: The Right is divided. Their most charismatic and articulate spokesman, Jared Taylor of American Renaissance, ignores the JQ entirely. Whether that is for pragmatic reasons — why take on another powerful enemy — or out of conviction is unclear. The most firmly held assumption of postwar morality, that the Nazis were irredeemably evil, has led us ad absurdum. They adopted policies in extremis to overcome a similar predicament to the one we now face. The assumption must be dropped. Reply
  4. Tom Tom says: I’ve been watching Tucker’s broadcasts from Hungary and they are fantastic indeed, not to mention a big F#*k You at the American Left also. The guy’s got balls, but of course he also knows how to choose his words and targets carefully so as to avoid something along the lines of the sacking of Pat Buchanan from mainstream media.
    The mind-boggling thing about the American Left is its hippieish, totally adolescent conception of morals. For a modern leftist, EVERYTHING is a human right, from defecating on sidewalks to illegal alien voting “rights” to free food and college. Basically, if you want something, they see it as a duty of the state to either deliver it or safeguard it. Those who disagree are then considered “illiberal” and “authoritarian”. This stupidity is the reason for the Left’s cocksure confidence in their visions for a new society. It literally is like dealing with rotten children who demand anything and everything from their parents. In this case however, the “parent” now becomes the state. Reply
  5. tito perdue tito perdue says: I urge Carlson to get into elective politics Reply
  6. CM CM says: Thank you for reviewing this program segment from Tucker Carlson. I’ll take his faults to have the benefits of the really good coverage Carlson gives topics like this. Especially interesting to me is that Orban is a member of the Calvinist Hungarian Reformed Church connecting him to the movement of Calvinists – Presbyterians, Dutch Reformed, French Huguenots – which formed the US. Calvin advocated for the republic as the best form of governance and to support it also instituted schools which educated all the people, men, women, and children since he was fully aware that only an educated populace would be capable of self-rule. Hungary’s most recent Constitution also asserts that Hungary is a Christian nation. I regret that our Christian founding fathers let Jefferson and others get away with not including such a statement in our US Constitution. Reply

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Name *

Email *


Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

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