Posts
I'm going to talk about some very divisive subjects here, & it is common for a lot of people to jump to conclusions & not read a whole article or finish a whole video.
Take a deep breath. Seriously. If your attention span is short, please do take brakes if that is so necessary to finish the article.
And you do NOT need to watch the videos; they are for pure substance.
I've been wanting to make an article specifically talking about this for well over a year. I've mentioned the DailyStormer (DS) & its owner, Andrew Anglin in my article in response to the late 2016 "fake news" craze (they're all the same article under different names) (
So about that viral list of fake news sites; How Russian Propaganda Really Works in the West), & I've talked about Neo-Nazi, White Nationalist/Supremacist, Facist & Alt-right related circles in this article. Now I gathered enough information to have a dedicated article that talks about.
First off, what type of information does the DailyStormer promote?
If you go to the website, you'll see that most of the information shown is either non-white people attacking white people or committing other types of crime, or reporting on things that Donald John Trump or Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin do that the author likes.
I'd like to compare the DailyStormer with another infamous site: BareNakedIslam.
Both BareNakedIslam and the DailySormer would probably hate each other's guts with the former being vehemently pro-Israel (I wonder if it's actually some Zionist operation that puts attention on Muslims to take attention off of the Israeli government), & the latter being fiercely anti-Jewish.
Despite their different views, their style of reporting, commentary, & politics seem similar to me becuase of how anti they are to certain groups, especially dehumanizing those they dislike & treating disagreements as if they are colluding with the enemy.
Now where did we hear that kind of logic before?
Seriously though.
Both BareNakedIslam and the DailySormer would probably hate each other's guts with the former being vehemently pro-Israel (I wonder if it's actually some Zionist operation that puts attention on Muslims to take attention off of the Israeli government), & the latter being fiercely anti-Jewish.
Despite their different views, their style of reporting, commentary, & politics seem similar to me becuase of how anti they are to certain groups, especially dehumanizing those they dislike & treating disagreements as if they are colluding with the enemy.
Now where did we hear that kind of logic before?
Instead of describing it in the abstract, let's look at two articles about pretty much the same story, & before you go to them, guess which one came from which site:
Since I couldn't find an article about the story from a particular alternate media site that I support, I'll show an article from a mainstream site (even Antiwar.com criticizes them but I remember the link to the article on Antiwar):
I can show more sources, but that's one example in which there is noticeably less of a spin in the reporting style & commentary.
I find it disappointing that a mainstream media source shows the whole story better than two alternate media sources.
BNI has even been known to spread lies (https://www.pinterest.com/allysonabuhajar/fear-mongering-for-anti-islammuslim-dummies).
Speaking of the two leaders, Trump & Putin, DailyStormer seemingly depicts them as heroes of the white race (though I have not confirmed rather or not that is the intention for the latter), literally calling Trump "The Ultimate Savior".
I will definitely say that Andrew Anglin does not want to show the fact that both Trump & Putin are both Zionists, & seemingly even goes to quite a length to defend their actions. Just look:
Compare that to how James Corbett criticizes Vladimir Putin or how Ryan Dawson (who reluctantly supported Trump as being the lesser evil to Hillary Clinton & Bernie Sanders) openly criticizes Donald Trump (Ryan has also made videos criticizing Trump's foreign policy).
Now maybe the people who listen to the DailyStormer may find out a spec of truth about Russia's supposed white nationalism if they find out that the even a Russian web host & government agency doesn't like them. Interestingly, Alex Jones, someone who Anglin hates, says that both Trump & Putin are freedom fighters. So these two enemies really have something in common.
However, Anglin seemingly goes after ANYONE who has a significant disagreement with him.
And this extends to even truth-tellers that expose more important information than the folks at DailyStormer (The Hitler Test, “Storm Clouds Gathering” Libertarian Shill Brilliantly Attacked, Failed Loser Ron Paul Attacks The Leader!).
I mean, people such as Ryan Dawson really helped bring to light Israel's & Saudi Arabia's involvement in 9/11, exposed how the military-industrial complex influences policies, how the war on drugs works, & even exposed the New York City Police Department's corruption (with Doug Valentine), & more.
Apparently, whoever made the "Hitler Test" article is either lying or doesn't know Ryan's opinion on World War 2 is.
Ryan is actually a historical revisionist who questions the Holocaust (partially for historical truth, partially to end the justification for war), why the Allies were involved in World War 2 & even has a nuanced view of the American Civil War.
But he does NONE of this out of any sort of hatred or collectivism. Here's an excerpt of a comment that he made in response to a video of a white nationalist criticiseing him:
"That some racist assholes advocate it for completely different reasons and motives does negate the very real suffering of Germans post war. And same goes for Japan. You don't have to follow the emperor or be a Japanese supremacist to have sympathy for victims of atomic bombs. Why do people have to be either-or so polar?"
And Ryan made an entire article practically about the topic called Sut Jhally will not be coming to LA (his letter to me).
What I find ironic is that the DailyStormer is openly defending known Zionists (one of which is open about his Zionism), yet essentially declares anyone who has the slightest disagreement with him, even if they show facts & evidence of what's going on in the world, including naming names of people involved in Israeli & Saudi supported terrorism, to be an enemy.
I'll also mention that the DailyStormer calls itself "Republican", when it was the Republican party that was actually surprisingly Progressive in the past, opposing slavery, & bringing on Abraham Lincoln (who went on to over-tax & heavily damage the South) & Theodore Roosevelt (who did some domestic policies right, BUT degraded American economic freedom).
Along with the fact that the Republican party, while they do give positive gestures to policies that typical American Conservatives would agree with, as far as I know, they do not support internet freedom (something that Alt-right & White Nationalist related circles depend on), are not serious about improving gun rights, & are not serious about lowering taxes by a significant amount.
Not to mention how Calvin Coolidge supported minority rights, & Dwight D. Eisenhower plaid a huge role in defeating the Axis powers & also supported minority rights.
Also, I've seen in one of the site's banners (which is seemingly changed quite often) that had a picture of Ronald Wilson Reagan in it. Assuming that it was intended to portray Reagan in a positive manner, let's remember that, while he might've done some things right in his fiscal policy, he was a Zionist & even supported gun control. At least one Reagan appointee supports homosexual marriage, & Reagan might not have been as religious as popular culture perceived him to be.
Not to mention how Calvin Coolidge supported minority rights, & Dwight D. Eisenhower plaid a huge role in defeating the Axis powers & also supported minority rights.
Also, I've seen in one of the site's banners (which is seemingly changed quite often) that had a picture of Ronald Wilson Reagan in it. Assuming that it was intended to portray Reagan in a positive manner, let's remember that, while he might've done some things right in his fiscal policy, he was a Zionist & even supported gun control. At least one Reagan appointee supports homosexual marriage, & Reagan might not have been as religious as popular culture perceived him to be.
I'm not supporting or opposing any political party, though someone please do explain to me what this label is all about to whoever runs the DailyStormer.
Also, I've read that a Hamas leader was to speak at a march in Montana that was proposed by people at the DailyStormer, when Hamas is a militant Islamist-fundamentalist organisation that helps justify some of the Israeli government's actions.
Also, I've read that a Hamas leader was to speak at a march in Montana that was proposed by people at the DailyStormer, when Hamas is a militant Islamist-fundamentalist organisation that helps justify some of the Israeli government's actions.
I've found even more interesting information in the article
NOT that I endorse the views of the author or other views espoused on the site.
I have a few theories about why Anglin acts the way he does, mainly being:
1. He won't do a serious, hard criticism of Trump or Putin becuase he refuses to make a retraction, possibly to save face (save his public image of being uncompromising), & perhaps becuase of tribalist politics.
2. He is little more than an internet troll who is using politics to gain popularity & intentionally has a repugnant public image & demeanor to be the outrageous & offensive to society at large. His lack of basic humility, & for icing on the cake, regularly changing the site's logo adds to this.
This is partially inspired by blog posts by Ben Garrison, & I've seen people in White Nationalist related circles question Anglin's demeanor & public image.
3. He is working for some secret agenda.
The talk about Hitler starts later on in the article.
As for Anglin's past relationships, that is talked about here.
How is this effecting the public image, mindset, & who gets attention in the truth movement?
When it comes to public image, the DailyStormer makes it look like that anyone & everyone who dares question Zionism, the Israeli government, mass immigration, &/or is involved in historical revisionism is an anti-intellectual Neo-Nazi. This pushes away much of the public from the truth movement & historical revisionism & members of the truth movement that have not gotten into the power of the Israeli lobby.
As for the mindset, I'd say that the DailyStormer, instead of promoting the gathering of facts, evidence & hints for use in critical thinking & solving problems nonviolently, promotes sensationalism that encourages going after other people on the ground, sloganeering with part truths, blind & unquestioned obedience to a certain authority (which will be explained later on), & agression against literally anyone who says &/or writes something a supposed "leader" dislikes.
This promotes major division in the truth movement, by turning average people against each other, which weakens it.
By extension, the DailyStormer openly embraces extremely partisan labels & pushes them hard. We've seen how, in the past, after both the Tea Party & Occupy Wall Street movements let the mainstream partisan right & left respectively hijack them, with media giving information both sides using the worst examples from the other, alienating many people (especially the more articulate ones) with some of the loudest & most outrageous being their perspective movement's poster child.
Letting the Fascists & Neo-Nazis represent the Truth Movement is no more helpful than having Communist Social Justice Warriors represent the anti-Zionist movement or Occupy Wall Street.
As for who gets attention, DailyStormer had a higher Alexa ranking than, say, the Anti NeoCon Report.
What kind of ideas is Anglin promoting?
To give you an idea of what Anglin wants in the long term, see Total Revolution.
A short analysis of it is in this video (I also highly reccomend going into the comments section):
Doesn't it look Orwellian? Can you honestly tell the world (especially your own family, particularly parents & kids), with a perfectly strait face, that you really want that? To me, that's even worse than mainland China (which is already one of the most egregious human rights abusers in recent history).
I find it ironic that the article mentions plans to crush religions "devised and advocated by the Jews", yet ironically, heavily implies wanting to bring back Christianity, which is actually an Abrahamic religion & is fairly similar to Judaism.
In my opinion, that type of dogma & demagoguery is little better than, say, Communism (in its real-life form) or Sharia law, & almost defeats the purpose of the truth movement (which I thought was supposed to be against oppression & in support of human liberty).
If people really want what was described in the manifesto, I would still highly reccomend that they move to mainland communist China, as that their heavy censorship, strict punishment of heretics & people who accept authoritarianism (& perhaps even have Stockholm syndrome) may be enough to satisfy the totalitarian Neo-Nazi types.
Anglin wants corporations to be under full control of the government (I have a feeling that might not go very well), and taxes on luxury products such as "expensive electronics". Considering how quite a few people involved in the Alt-right are into gaming, I'm not so sure how that would be accepted.
At the very best, this is to preserve the Caucasian race & certain parts of Western culture (in at least an extremely authoritarian fashion at that), but I figure that it's just a dictatorship with little more than a White-supremacist theme.
Funny enough, Andrew Anglin has also proposed a "White Israel", as if he knows that his dream of a perfectly white Europe and North America isn't coming all that soon, & even mentioned a plan to start a white colony in Namibia, even stating, in exact words, "Local Negroes appear to be a peaceful sort of Negro".
Of course, some of the article's commenters were skeptical of that idea.
Telling from the White Israel idea, it seems like Anglin assumes that just becuase a society is pure white means that it's going to be a utopia (or at least really nice to live in), when West Viriginia is over 90% white but is one of the very poorest states in the Union while Texas is 70% white but one of the most prosperous & fastest growing states in the Union.
Maybe their economic policies have something to do with this.
While homogeneity does make success easier, it is not automatic. Just look in the Appalachia, where in some ways, where homogeneously White communities are in some ways even worse off than Black ghettos. At least these poor Appalachian communities have less worries about the Gestapo trying to keep them socio-politically "in line".
The top 3 factors for economic success perhaps are policy, stability & geography, in that order.
Places can be small but prosperous (such as Hong Kong & Singapore). A place can be landlocked but prosperous (such as Switzerland). But they all must be stable to allow for productivity.
Anglin stated that he hates capitalism. But he wants a "White Singapore". And the original Singapore is literally the world's most capitalist independent country.
Anglin is very clearly willing to lie & use his popularity to destroy people for whatever reason:
The picture from the last article featuring Tina & Ben Garrison is clearly a Photoshop of Ben Garrison & a woman (I do not know her identity) placed on a picture of Bruce E. Stern's gun collection.
The picture in the 2nd last article listed is also clearly a Photoshop becuase the color, lighting & even quality of Ben doesn't match the rest of the picture, & the angle does not make sense either.
Never mind how ridiculous the information in the 4th & 5th articles is.
Also, the article Shut It Down: Libertarian Cartoonist Ben Garrison Demands an End to Free Speech on the Internet claims that Ben wants to end freedom of speech (something that is not true; see Ben's interview with Anglin to see what his views are), but then claims itself to be satire.
Read in between the lines: I think the "satire" claim was only for plausible deniability, especially how much Anglin brags about being a "troll".
The story of fake Ben Garrison cartoons was also mentioned in the article Israeli-Canadian Thought Police Take Aim…. At Me, in which the organisation B’nai B’rith, which is with the Anti-Defamation League, seemingly also libeled Ben Garrison.
The articles from the DailyStormer reminds me of the content over at the website Landover baptist Church, a satirical forum site.
Ask yourself: do you honestly think that this type of person would make a good leader, or be trustworthy?
There's nothing wrong with some humor, but try not to turn the site into Comedy Central & ran by a (crass) political comedian with a different ideology. Non-serious talk is TOXIC to political discourse.
If one is confident in their views, there is no need to lie. Lying only hurts one's credibility.
And trolling as a famous political figure destroys serious political dialogue.
So it seems like that Anglin is lying about other people for little reason & having a troll army to practically hound people, just like the Anti-Defamation league lying about people they dislike, Neoconservatives believing that the state should lie to its people or an author at InterpreterMag making libel against peace activists, & I see the troll army being an online version of college snowflakes, leftist militants & related types of people for drowning out intellectual debate & discussion & replacing it with sloganeering.
(I got the above image from http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1164559-alt-right.)
Despite the eyebrow-raising behavior of the DailyStormer & its parallels in the tactics it uses to both the Southern Poverty Law Center & Anti-Defamation League & the Anti-Defamation League's staging of Neo-Nazi activities, I do not see a direct connection between the DailyStormer & the Southern Poverty Law Center & Anti-Defamation League.
How many times do we see dictators use "savior" themes in their campaigns throughout history?
So if there is a person & site that we should thank for making it hard to calmly have an intellectual discussion about the Holocaust or Israeli-Palestinian conflict or whatnot, we have both examples.
About Adolf Hitler:
This is related to a problem that James Corbett talks about the video below:
I'm glad to see even some people (even many that I would consider my enemies, such as those in the Alt-right) actually questioning what is going on.
As for how to get people into the movement & unite on common ground, read
To see how we can secure the future for every race on the planet, read
Here's some comments made by Larken Rose from his video "What's So Bad About Nazis?":
"To all those deluded Hitler admirers, please stop implying that because Hitler spoke out
