Thursday, November 17, 2016

I've lost respect for Styxhexenhammer666 - over Syria

I just lost my respect for Styxhexenhammer666.

He's evidently swallowed the Putinist and Assadist propaganda on Syria, hook, line and sinker - propaganda which has infected the Far Right, the Alt Right, and the Far Left, in Australia and abroad.

The truth of the matter is this. Ba'athist / Arab nationalist dictator, Hafez al-Assad, had ruled Syria, a backwards country, from 1970 to 2000. Assad showed himself to be a wily politician and one who possessed great political skill, as evinced by the fact that he survived in office for so long, just like other long-lived dictators Robert Mugabe and Fidel Castro. And like Castro and Mugabe, he was a butcher. During the 1976-1982 Syrian civil war against the Muslim Brotherhood, he massacred tens of thousands of his own people. After his death in 2000, power was handed to his son Bashar. In 2011, Syrians revolted against Bashar as part of the Arab Spring. As his counterpart Ghaddafi did in Libya, Bashar responded with massacres. Any liberal, secular and moderate Syrians - few as they were - were killed off, and the uprising became a civil war, with Islamists predominating.

Bashar is repeating history, and following his father's tactics, by reducing Syria's cities to rubble and massacring civilians (as Hafez did in Hama in 1982). Contra Styxhexenhammer666, Bashar caused the current 'refugee' crisis plaguing Europe. Had Bashar been deposed in 2011, or had he stood down, and had not Putin supported him to the hilt, there would be no refugee crisis.

Styxhexenhammer666 has fallen for the Bashar and Putin con. These two men, along with their Islamic supporters (i.e., the Mullahs in Iran, Hezbollah in Lebanon) and the many pro-Putin and pro-Assad Marxists such as our own Communist Party of Australia and John Pilger, claim to be rebels against a 'globalist elite', but in fact form part of that elite themselves. They are only interested in perpetuating their own power - even if that power is confined to their own little niche movement (and contemporary leftism is one such movement). In the case of the Syrian and Russian and Iranian elite, it comes down to money: they became rich under the patronage of their respective dictators, and they want to stay that way - hence their desire to stay in the saddle.

Bashar may end up remaining king of Syria, but he'll be a king of pile of rubble. He'll have lost all legitimacy as a ruler. Yes, the Ba'athist Bastard Brigade are tough blokes, all right - but no-one likes a bastard.

I can't be bothered with Styxhexenhammer666 any more. The same with the Daily Shoah at the RightStuff.Biz. Once I heard host Mike Enoch (a few episodes ago) declaring that Assad, in bombing the hapless civilians of Aleppo, was 'bombing ISIS', I switched off.

We on the Far Right, or Alt Right, or whatever, are a feeble-minded bunch whose knowledge of history doesn't extend further than 2001; as such, we are easily duped by Putinist and Assadist propaganda. We've been taken in.

Yockey examines, in Imperium, the subject of Culture Distortion, and how one Culture (e.g., the Jewish-Islamic-Semitic) may overlay, suppress and distort another (e.g., the Western). In Imperium, Yockey was concerned with the Jewish element of the Arabic-Semitic Culture most of all. But, were he alive today, he would be concerned with the Arabic: after all, Zionism is Jewish nationalism, Ba'athism is Arab nationalism, and the latter has begun to infect the West at the level of fringe politics at least. Yockey himself championed Arab nationalism and Nasserism in the 1950s, and by the 1970s, we on the Far Right went further still and made a fetish of Palestinian nationalism. As if the Palestinians - or any other Arab group - had any bearing on the white racial cause.


  1. I think some people take the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' idea a little too far.

    Why do so many support, or at least, have an enthusiastic tolerance for Assad? When you look into it, you don't reason and analysis of history. Rather, you see the West. We saw similar rationalisation with Saddam. If America are against something, then, as it stands to reason with some, that person they are against must be a hapless victim. Perhaps a victim who has a bad history, but a victim nonetheless.

    Pilgers anti-American narrative wouldn't hold if they people that the West were trying to dispose of truly were tyrants who deserved to be disposed of. That narrative wouldn't sell tickets to his screenings, and it would mean those against American Imperialism would have to grudgingly admit that even the West/USA/NATO, whatever, get it right now and then.

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

  4. This dude that look kike a happa or a west indian ,in fact is a khazarian jew.