The E. Michael Jones thread

Grow Bag

Pelican
Back in 2016 Jared Taylor's wife emailed the SPLC, along with a letter of explanation and copies of birth documents, etc as proof that she was not a Jew, nor has any family members who are. She was born in England and baptized in the Church of England, which the documents attest.

Anyway, here's a LINK where you can go to read what she has to say, along with the submitted documents, if you care to.
I've already seen that link on the SPLC site, I didn't post it because my stance is that the onus is on you to prove your claim, not the other party. Accusing people without evidence and demanding others disprove their claims is what the left do all the time. And it could be that Jared Taylor's wife and/or Jared himself are taking shekels, I don't know, but it wouldn't change the facts of race realism.

Just because Jared won that debate doesn't mean he's superior to EMJ. I totally get EMJ's argument regarding whiteness, even though I also think it has some major flaws. I refuse to call myself white for instance, but I'm also of mixed ethnicity, as are most Americans and an increasing number of Europeans, so I tend to think of myself by my majority ethnicity which is Slavic. But maybe that's just a vain attempt to hold onto some heritage. The fact is, if you're of European heritage, you're considered white, whether you make claim to being white, or not. Denying whiteness will not stop the attacks.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
Only a complete fool would think that EMJ is some kind of a gatekeeper, he is easily the most based, principled, erudite and discerning man in America today, and a staunch defender of Catholic and Christian faith.

Jared Taylor's butt-ugly crypto wife has worked undercover for the ADL, the guy is worth $20 million and has been politically active for decades, through which he has never faced the kind of persecution from the deep state that people like Fuentes have. He is there to keep the nationalist right into the zionist-friendly race-based dead end.

Although today after nearly 60 years race of deep state agitation and social programming race has definitely become a serious issue, it is not the end all be all and the main line of fracture, it is an issue that is used to divide and obscure the fundamental mechanics that have created and sustained that problem.
 

Enea

Pigeon
An accurate appraisal of the EMJ/Jared Taylor debate: https://ironink.org/2021/08/a-few-observations-on-the-jared-taylor-vs-e-michael-jones-debate/


A Few Observations on the Jared Taylor vs. E. Michael Jones Debate​

The question being debated is “Is Race an Important Reality or is it a Fiction.” Jared Taylor argues that Race is an important reality and Dr. E. Michael Jones takes the position that Race is a fictional reality. One would have to view the debate to get the gist of Taylor’s and Jones’ distinction.
Contra both E. Michael Jones and Jared Taylor the white man is who he is because of his genetic legacy and because of the grace of the God of the Bible who has ordained civilizational Christianity as authored and carried by the Christian White man. To suggest, as Jared Taylor does, that the White man is what he is only because of genetics is rank materialism. On the other hand to suggest, as E Michael Jones does, that the White man is what he is only because of his “culture, language, and religion,” is embracing some kind of environmentalism. This Gnostic type of reductionism can be seen in this quote from the debate from Dr. Jones;

“What is the vehicle for the continuity of the Irish people? It’s not DNA. It is language, religion, and culture. That is the vehicle and that has in the past absorbed all different kinds of DNA (among the Irish).”

Jones here has completely dismissed genetics as having any influence on people and people groups opting instead to assert that people and people groups are only products of their environment.
In the end, in my estimation, Taylor vs. Jones in this debate reduces down to nurture (Jones) vs. nature (Taylor) argument. All a Biblical Christian can say to such a debate is “a pox upon both your houses.”
Man is a modified unichotomy — which is to say that man is body and soul that exists as united in life with each aspect identifiable as distinct but as so intertwined that only at death does a divorce take place.

It does us no good like Jones and Taylor to try and play man’s material reality against his spiritual reality. Man is a modified unichotomy and can not be understood outside of his modified unichotomous reality.


It is interesting that the Alienists in our discussions with them years ago made the same mistakes that Jones makes in his debate with Taylor while Taylor makes the same mistakes that the Marxists make when debating with Kininsts. So far as I know only Kinists — being Biblical Christians — understand that man is a modified unichotomy that must not be reduced to either only his corporeal side or only his spiritual side. Man is indeed influenced by his religion, culture, history, language as Jones maintains but man is not only influenced by his environment. Man is a corporeal being and that corporeality contributes to the identity of people and people groups. In point of fact, it could be argued that environment (Jones) and genetics (Taylor) provide a kind of information loop that reinforces the influence of each — a loop that sinful man can only rise above by a supernatural conversion that has the ability to alter both nurture and nature.

If E. Michael Jones had his way there would be little diversity (maybe language) in Unity. If Jared Taylor had his way there would be little if any unity in diversity. Jones’ gives us the vision of a “Christianized” John Lenon. Taylor gives us the vision of Madison Grant.
There are some areas in which I think that Dr. Jones was correct. You go ahead and view the debate and tell me where I might agree with Jones. [Emphasis mine]
 

Papist

Woodpecker
If you're a quarter Irish and Italian, you're most likely a Catholic, and are connected to your heritage through your grandparents and through your congregation.

A subsaharan who moves to Poland doesn't become fully Polish, but his progeny, if born and raised among other Poles could easily become fully Polish, as could a baby who is adopted by a Polish family and baptised Catholic. This model of integration only works if the numbers of immigrants are small enough so these outsiders don't form their own communities or perpetrate their culture in their host country.

The civic nationalism model works with low numbers of immigrants. It was worked in countries like France up to the 1970s/80s until the migrants became too numerous. But back then when the numbers were manageable we did have a lot of kids from overseas who did blend in and grow up identifying as French, adopting French names.
I partly agree with this. I think the 'one drop' concept of racial purity is nonsense, and societies can, and always have, assimilated small numbers of foreigners. It will always be obvious that a sub-Saharan African who moves to a European country has ancestry which has evolved on a different continent, and therefore they could never be said to be truly Polish. However, a small number could be assimilated withing a few generations.
 

Sword and Board

Kingfisher
An observation I have noticed with Jews is they are very cunning at finding small flaws with their enemies like a loose thread on cloth and incessantly plucking at it until it all unravels.

They will create doubt and division amongst their followers and essentially disarm their detractors this way if they cannot defeat or crush them through normal means.
 

Mountaineer

Ostrich
Gold Member

I have a feeling that Charles Moscowitz is a dangerous person. He talks a good game agreeing with Dr. Jones on some issues but also believing the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt. Yikes! He's only one step away from facilitating the anti-Christ when he comes.
 

Raskolnikov

Pigeon
Orthodox

I have a feeling that Charles Moscowitz is a dangerous person. He talks a good game agreeing with Dr. Jones on some issues but also believing the temple in Jerusalem should be rebuilt. Yikes! He's only one step away from facilitating the anti-Christ when he comes.
I don't think that in and of itself makes him dangerous, at least not any other Jew with a spiritual meaning attached to his ethnicity. There is a third temple institute in Israel, preoccupied among other things with breeding the perfect red heifer, which will be sacrificed in a purification ritual before the third temple can be instituted and the "true messiah" crowned.
You don't hear much about them, but the are basically what to keep an eye on with regards to the arrival of the Antichrist. What's dangerous about Moscowitz is that he's a sneaky dude who tries to slither his way into the religious dissident right, all the while being dishonest about his judgment and opinions, as became clear in his debate with Brother Augustine ()
Then again, I believe most people in Ortho and EMJ circles can see right through that, so not too much to worry about.
 

MichaelWitcoff

Hummingbird
Orthodox

The Great Debate | E. Michael Jones vs. Jared Taylor: Is Race an Important Reality or a Fiction?​


I can't attach odysee media links directly in video format, but here is the debate. The comments are very telling. I like Dr. Jones, but there is a huge persistence on both him and Jared Taylor being gatekeepers for various reasons. What do you guys think about this?
What I think is that it makes no practical difference whether it’s a “category of the mind” or a “category of reality” because the enemies of Western civilization believe in it and act on that belief.
 

get2choppaaa

Ostrich
What I think is that it makes no practical difference whether it’s a “category of the mind” or a “category of reality” because the enemies of Western civilization believe in it and act on that belief.
No matter how many times he tells the hey asshole motorcycle story.... It doesn't change the fact that the Overton Window doesn't allowed for separation of ethnicities by language and European country.

I'm white. I can say I'm Scottish or Ukrainian all i want, but other than wearing my kilt and a couple colloquial Ukrainian phrases.... I'm still seen as
white.

Better to take the alternative position of "yes I'm white. Look at we whites have done" than to say "I'm not white, I'm Scottish or Ukrainian" since most Midwestern who are white are going to
Identify as white, whereas they don't identify as Scottish or Ukrainian. Better to group yourself with a larger cultural heritage group than a smaller subsection.
 

Mountaineer

Ostrich
Gold Member
No matter how many times he tells the hey asshole motorcycle story.... It doesn't change the fact that the Overton Window doesn't allowed for separation of ethnicities by language and European country.

I'm white. I can say I'm Scottish or Ukrainian all i want, but other than wearing my kilt and a couple colloquial Ukrainian phrases.... I'm still seen as
white.

Better to take the alternative position of "yes I'm white. Look at we whites have done" than to say "I'm not white, I'm Scottish or Ukrainian" since most Midwestern who are white are going to
Identify as white, whereas they don't identify as Scottish or Ukrainian. Better to group yourself with a larger cultural heritage group than a smaller subsection.
This way you will get destroyed 100% of the time. The point of Jones's effort is to shift the matter away from Jewish optics.
 

get2choppaaa

Ostrich
This way you will get destroyed 100% of the time. The point of Jones's effort is to shift the matter away from Jewish optics.
That's his intent, but the fact is that is that you don't argue with people who blame you for things you didn't do.

Its better to ignore engaging with the race baiters and solidify positives with cohorts than it is to defend positions you're not responsible for or incorrect factual histories of events.
 

2 Right Hands

Woodpecker
That may be his intent, but ironically he’s just repeating one of their talking points. The whole thing is very odd; you never hear a debate from any other race about whether they exist.
Not sure about that. If you went to Nigeria and said to the people of that country "you're all black" they would probably have a slightly different opinion. "White" should only be used as comparative term, not defining one, yet we've all been forced by the elites to use it as the latter. It's especially idiotic when applied to the Europeans (EMJ lived in Europe for some time so he probably understands it better than the average American): I am a Polish Catholic and just because I have the same skin tone as a German Lutheran it doesn't mean I'd feel any particular connection with this person.
 

MichaelWitcoff

Hummingbird
Orthodox
Not sure about that. If you went to Nigeria and said to the people of that country "you're all black" they would probably have a slightly different opinion. "White" should only be used as comparative term, not defining one, yet we've all been forced by the elites to use it as the latter. It's especially idiotic when applied to the Europeans (EMJ lived in Europe for some time so he probably understands it better than the average American): I am a Polish Catholic and just because I have the same skin tone as a German Lutheran it doesn't mean I'd feel any particular connection with this person.
Is the left differentiating between Nigerian tribes when they tell you “black lives matter” and that whites as a group are responsible for oppressing them (and subsequently need to be punished)?
 

2 Right Hands

Woodpecker
But that's a different problem altogether: is it possible to win a game by playing by the ever changing rules, which are set by our enemy who doesn't have to abide by them or should we set up our own game? The left are constantly gaslighting us and we keep falling for it. Accepting that we're all "White" is just another trap set up by them because if you do so you're not just accepting that your skin is of a specific colour, you also accept that you're a "nazi", "fascists", "racist", "anti-Semite", "terrorist" etc. These are, of course, meaningless terms and you should just brush them off in your every day life as much as possible. But if you're trying to form a successful movement you cannot appropriate phrases with such negative connotations. Uniting under the Christian banner makes a lot more sense because being "white" is not an identity whereas being Christian is.
I do think, however, that EMJ's position on this topic isn't nuanced enough. Race is real as are differences between them so downplaying genetics and using this stupid language example ("if a Nigerian learns how to speak Polish then he is a Pole") weakens his arguments.
 

Sitting Bull

Woodpecker
EMJ lived in Europe for some time so he probably understands it better than the average American

Indeed. Even though EMJ lives in the US, his thinking on this aspect is more European than American. This is the reason his fame stretches much farther than his country, and rightly so. He is different in this regard from many American conservatives who view themselves and the civilization they belong to as Western-European while despising or ignoring today's Europe and Europeans.
 
Last edited:

Sitting Bull

Woodpecker
"The point of Jones's effort is to shift the matter away from Jewish optics." That may be his intent, but ironically he’s just repeating one of their talking points.

He's not, although it would seem that way at first sight.
He's "repeating one of their talking points" the better to refute it, like getting closer to an enemy combatant the better to beat him.
Plus, EMJ is not just making claims, he's also demonstrating by example. So far I've never heard any of EMJ's critics question his account of the St-Louis statue episode & debate where, according to him, his ideas helped the Catholics win and saved the statue from being taken down.
 
Top