Johnson’s amnesty

“White Nationalists treat Mediterraneans like Republicans treat Mestizos.”


In “Dies Irae” I responded to Greg Johnson’s bashing of Pierce’s novels, especially The Turner Diaries, and I exposed him as the pseudo-Nietzschean that he is. (Warning: that article is very strong meat indeed, not for the faint-hearted.) Now Johnson is bashing Pierce again but this time Pierce’s last book, Who We Are. He didn’t do it in writing but in a segment of his recent audio interview of Matt Parrott. In about minute 40 of the interview Johnson started to talk about “genetic purity and white identity,” and in minute 41:30 he began his anti-Nordicist tirade speaking about what he calls “weird forms of purism”:

My attitude is that we… should just have an amnesty for all remote past miscegenation. Because the really important thing… is to preserve our race as it exists right now.”

Since Johnson has in mind the miscegenation that took place in historical Europe through the millennia, he is omitting the crucial question: are, say, brown-looking Sicilians “white”? Pay attention to his words that I italicized below:

“…save the race as it exists… rather than being caught up in the past; and caught up in weird forms of purism.

There’s a kind of fallacy in this statement. Is Johnson implying that every European individual before the mass immigration of recent decades is per definition “white”? Is he asking us not to see the phenotypic difference between, say, a modern Greek that looks like a Turk and the hyperborean nymphs that make me mad? What about the Frenchmen and Frenchwomen who have nigger blood in their veins? Let me rephrase a bit from Arthur Kemp’s March of the Titans:


(French women with non-white blood.)

According to official French statistics, some three million of North African Arabic mixed race and African Blacks, all from the French colonies, immigrated into France itself during the period 1919 to 1927. (Take note that this happened before the Second World War and the Morgenthau Plan to exterminate the Germans.) Kemp’s point is that a significant minority miscegenated with women like those in the pic, creating the inappropriately named “Mediterranean” look associated with the French in certain areas. But apparently, Johnson is not a believer of the one-drop rule: once you are descendant from a Negro you cannot be considered properly White.

Johnson continues his anti-Nordicist speech in his interview of Parrott:

One example of weird kind of purism is in this book by William Pierce called Who We Are, which I have been briefing thru. This book basically is a warrant for genocide—if you will—a brief for genocide, of whites by whites!

Has Johnson read the mini-book about Sparta, originally written in Spanish, that I recently translated? Or Kemp’s? Or Who We Are with due attention (“…which I have been briefing thru”)? The moral of these books is that you simply cannot coexist with non-Aryans or use a class of non-Aryan servants because, in the long run, quantity overwhelms quality. The blond Spartans decayed after the Peloponnesus War precisely because they had not expelled non-Aryans from their conquered territories: a hypothetical prophylactic measure that makes white nationalists like Johnson and liberals shrug in horror!

What Pierce wanted for ancient Greece, which outside Sparta had a substantial amount of Asian and North African half-bloods, is analogous to having expelled the Amerinds to a corner of the continent as the English-derived peoples did in America. The non-Spartiate Helots could have been whiter than the Amerinds, yes: but tolerating them and even darker peoples inside their lands caused the extinction of the Aryan Greeks (see the link to Pierce’s chapter that I baptized as “White suicide in ancient Greece” at the end of this post). Johnson continues:

Pierce basically wants to do [it] by identifying himself as a Nordicist… Everything is blond hair and blue eye and his attitude about say Greeks is that the Dorians invaders should have exterminated all these darker cute white people so they didn’t mix with them. So my attitude is that there were people in the past who were Dorians or Aryans of various sorts. They do not exist any more. They are just ingredients now in what we call white people today. Anglo-Saxons don’t exist anymore. The Anglo-Saxons tribes which landed in England—they are just ingredients in the modern Englishman.

I don’t know shorthand and had difficulties with my laptop to easily rewind the interview after minute 44 but still managed to catch Johnson phrases such as: “If we are concerned with preserving Americans, English, Greeks…” and his mocking for what Pierce, Kemp and others considered “the terrible miscegenation.” Johnson also claimed that we must get “out of that mentality,” and that it is “impractical” to do an “insidious distinction among whites today” (my emphasis).

The same old fallacy again: assuming that all ancient Europeans were, per definition, “white.” In another moment of the interview Johnson says he is concerned about the miscegenation of today but not about the miscegenation of yesterday.

He is simply begging the question. The question is that precisely because in the past white peoples were utterly unconcerned about mongrelization that we have mongrels today. The question is whether or not the French descendants of, say, the women in the above pic should be considered whites or not. Pay attention how in the above quote Johnson mentions the modern “Englishman” together with the modern “Greeks” as if both could be plainly considered “whites.”

When Johnson finished his speech Parrott mentioned his distant drop of Indian blood. But that’s different. A distant drop of Amerind blood does not invalidate your whiteness as some black drops do. See for instance Andrew Hamilton’s article, “Whiteness, blurring.” I believe Hamilton is on the right track as to where drawing the line. Curiously, most commenters of that article published at Counter-Currents subscribe Johnson’s anti-Nordicist stance so common in white nationalism today.

White blurring aside, the issue of this post is people that are literally brown, like many Greeks and Sicilians or even some Southern Spaniards and Portuguese. They look brown: and by mentioning the modern Greeks in his interview together with the Englishmen Johnson seems to be using a handy doublethink to consider them white irrespective of what his very eyes are telling him.


(Felix von Luschan’s skin color chart.)

The doublethink mentality one sees in the comments section of Counter-Currents is exactly the kind of mentality that caused the problem centuries ago. Either white skin is white; olive skin olive, and brown skin brown, and black skin black, or we have entered the world of Wonderland.

When a humble commenter like me has to remind adults all-too elemental things that any toddler can understand—like colors!—something must have gone terrible wrong within the adult mind. Anti-Nordicist nationalists cannot refute us with facts just as liberals cannot refute the hard facts of race realism advanced by the likes of Jared Taylor. Like the liberals, what nationalists do is appealing to emotional non-sequiturs as to what is “practical” from the “political viewpoint.” The paramount issue about whether it’s OK to marry and have kids with, say, a Greek that looks like a Turk is treated with the same horror of what a leftist liberal would say. The leftist would label “racist” those who abhor the idea of seeing a daughter with mulatto grandsons. Would white nationalists call “Nordicist,” a pejorative term in their mouths, someone who would abhor the idea of having a daughter with Sicilian-like grandsons? If so, what about those who the media labels as “white” in the US? Is George Zimmerman a “White Hispanic”?

“Nordicism” is the white nationalist equivalent to “racism” in the liberal mindset. It might seem incredible but the stuff written a hundred years ago by American racialists like Madison Grant was un-infected with the virus of politically correctness as white nationalism is today. See the von Luschan chart. Isn’t it a no-brainer that human “white” skin is up to, say #15? Where do non-Nordicist nationalists draw the line, in which specific number?

Even if some would grant the lighter olive skin as still Caucasian, many so-called Mediterraneans fall into the numbers twenties of the chart. Harold Covington had a hilarious point recently when he said that quite a few modern Greeks “look like Mexicans.” And I find it rather incredible that for nationalists even of the revolutionary type not even the clearly brownish colors of the chart are to be considered “brown” anymore. If theirs and Johnson’s “amnesty” is conceded to them all what is the next step? What about the so-called White Hispanics in Johnson’s own town of San Francisco? Isn’t it so obvious that the line should be drawn somewhere in the second column of the chart (together with other factors, of course, like the shape of the cranium)?

But it is useless trying to discuss the matter with Johnson because he does not answer to honest criticism. In his site he has had a history of not letting pass the comments of those who present cogent critiques to his opinions.

Johnson controversies aside, Pierce was light-years ahead from contemporary racialists. He was the true spiritual inheritor of National Socialism for the American scene. Most, though not all, white nationalists are pigmies compared to him. Who We Are was his last testament and you will probably learn more brutal truth from that book alone than pursuing the diluted racialism so fashionable today. My purpose of translating texts from the Spanish blogsite Evropa Soberana is precisely to warn English-speaking racialists about what we might call politically-correct white nationalism. It was precisely the sort of mentality that we see in this movement, if we contrast it with the purer American authors of yesterday, what led to a runaway anti-racism that is about to grant amnesty to millions of “White Hispanic” Mexicans and other non-whites in the US.

There is a strong trend of anti-Nordicism in the movement just as there’s a strong trend of anti-racism in the conservative movement. Ultimately, when compared to personalities like Grant or Pierce, white nationalists are closer to the conservatives. Here there are three must-reads that transmit the idea of why I believe that today’s anti-Nordicist movement is a dead-end:

• “White suicide in ancient Greece.” These are my excerpts from the tenth installment of Pierce’s Who We Are: A Series of Articles on the History of the White Race. It is telling that this entry has received zero comments as to date.

• “Why Rome fell.” These are my excerpts from Kemp’s appendix to his March of the Titans: The Complete History of the White Race.

• “Were the Greeks blond and blue-eyed?” Yesterday I added all of my recent entry translations on the subject to Ex libris so that this Evropa Soberana article may be read comfortably, starting with the first entry.


Parting word to the anti-Nordicists: Compare the so-called “Mediterranean” descendants of the Frenchwomen caught in the first pic above with the original phenotype of the handsomest ancient Greeks…


  1. I forgot to add that, when I expanded Pierce’s excerpts of his Greek chapter in Who We Are in a more recent entry, it did receive substantial comments (here).

  2. 100% agree. Aryan blood is to precious to waste anymore.

  3. Excellent post, Chechar. I’ll translate it into Portuguese and post it on my blog as soon as I can.

    The only caveat here is that reflexions like these make one even more pessimistic and depressive about the prospects of success for the movement*. How much percent of so-called “White nationalists” are radical and lucid enough to face these most hard truths? Alas, I’m positive that the overwhelming majority of them cannot cope with these facts.

    *As a matter of fact, can we even say we belong to the same movement as they? Now I have my qualms about saying so.

    • Actually, NS is a different movement. WN is a sugar-coated form of NS for those Americans who are still in denial that Christianity and the US have been the most serious enemies of the race (the US since 1861 and especially during and after 1942-1947).

      A completely different movement! I have noticed that here in WDH some native English-speakers who have read my posts blaming Mammon or the Aryan problem still want to make a reading of the same post from the Jewish monocausal POV, as if the money degeneracy and the historic complacency of whites about their racial demise were not the result of the Aryan psyche itself.

      Also, I have noticed that Europeans have a distinct POV and that mine is closer to the Europeans’ than to the Americans’ POV. See for example how, unlike MacDonald, Sunic—like us—focuses on History and how he blames both Christianity and Capitalism for our woes. American WNsts on the other hand are still libertarians, some of them even pious Christians. They want to focus on the JP as if it were the central factor because they don’t want to look at the mirror.

      Johnson’s POV for one is typically American. He believes that Jews are the primary cause. The history of the White race is a nuisance for Johnson because it could open his perspective to the other darkest hours when it was not so easy to blame the subversive tribe. Americans, even WNsts like him, still live under the sky that the US is somehow independent from the broader white history.

      Take for example my forthcoming post today: the second video on the coming crash of the dollar. Maloney’s previous video explained beautifully how there have been thousands of fiat currencies that always collapse. Always! Why aren’t most WNsts taking this into account, especially now that we so badly need a collapse of the ethnocidal System?

      Short answer: because even American WNsts believe that their nation is somehow above the laws of economics. They not only don’t want to delve deeply into the past (the admin of a monocausal site once commented candidly that they must focus on the US). They are also blind about their near future.

      Pierce managed a breakthrough beyond such American provincialism. But make no mistake: most WNsts are no Pierce followers, not even Pierce epigones. They belong to a totally different class (or what in my book I call a “psychoclass”).

      It must not surprise us that those who don’t want to seriously ponder into the distant past or the near future will also be blind about what is happening in the present—like the obvious fact that those French with colored blood, ubiquitously present even in the Generation Identitaire movement, are not whites by any stretch of the imagination.

      After the crash of the dollar it will be much easier for people like us to find ideological soulmates insofar as the sky above the minds of both common Americans and WNsts will fall over their heads, apocalyptically. I can only hope that some of them might finally start to really wake up.

  4. Speaking of the destruction of the White Mideast, the CI people might have a point about the Israelites. If the ancient Greeks were supposed to be decedents of Japheth then Japheth would have been White, which would make Noah White. Joseph passed himself off as ancient Egyptian nobility and David was fair-skinned. The name “Adam” means “flush in the face”.

    Actually, this makes sense when you think about it. Whoever put these stories together would want the heroes in them to be at least as “noble” looking as the kings and priest-classes of the contemporary powers. If you’re going to claim your patriarch called down miracles from your god you might as well claim he was whiter than the king of Persia too.

    Obviously modern Jews are mongrels, and they’ve probably been undergoing mongrelization since at least the religious conflicts between the cult of Yahweh and the Baal worshipers, if we’re using Rosenberg’s thesis.

    • Jews are mongrels. Judaism is a belief system of entitlement and subjugation.

      • Thanks for your aggregations. I’ve just added one of them as a separate post.

  5. Reblogged this on vikingbitch's Blog and commented:

    Chechar hits the nail on the head with this essay. In short, White Nationalism in the USA is bogus because it refuses to acknowledge that the penultimate standard for whiteness is the Nordic type. Period.

    I clicked on the link of this essay that led to a Counter Currents article discussing how the lines defining what is ‘white’ have become blurred. The article linked in this essay states that Jews are not white. I wholeheartedly agree.

    White Nationalism is a farce. It has done nothing because it refuses to take the hard line. The tenets of the ‘hard line’ in my mind are as follows:

    1) Jews are not white, they are the anti -white. They have done everything in their power to genocide White Christians. They have fostered a race war in the USA using the technique of Eliminationism where blacks are their dirty work doers in their purported extermination of Whites. Many white Nationalism groups have been infiltrated by the Jew. Jared Taylor’s Amren is a hoax. The Council of Conservative Citizens is another organization that has been infiltrated. It has the Mad Jewess listed on its blog roll and there are members that are Jewish who are more than likely spies, etc.

    When will whites learn that Jews are our primary enemy?

    2) Christianity holds white people back from achieving their true destiny. Whites need to grasp that Christ died for their sins. That’s it. There is nothing more to debate. We don’t owe anybody anything. We don’t owe blacks squat. We don’t owe Jews anything, as WWII ( and the soon to come WWIII!) was about extracting ourselves from the binds of international Jewry.

    3) Status symbols such as IQ, Money, Phallic centeredness, and the Accumulation of stuff is nothing more than Jew pollution being generated by Talmudvision and Jew institutions such as ‘higher education’ aka brainwashing. Whites must eschew all these status symbols and instead focus on family building, preservation of whites regardless of such flimsy things as ‘status’, and disengaging completely from Judeo American society as it is rigged for our genocide.

    4) White Europeans and/or Americans need to get radical. We need to recognize as Chechar notes that Judeo America is the slayer of Europe and that we must collectively engage in tactics to bankrupt the international banking system. Whites on both sides of the Atlantic need to pull out of the system, they need to stop paying mortgages, they need to max out their credit cards and never pay them off, they need to have as many kids as possible. Judeo America views white middle class Americans and lower class whites as tax slaves and Europe as its ‘bitch’.

    Time to get real and to get willfull. There is no other way but the hard way.

  6. Joe-Troll from Sacramento in California, who used to comment here with a dozen sockpuppets before he was banned, has just tried to post a comment:

    I don’t know where all these penultimate Viking Nordic Whites in America you all are always go on and on about are located exactly. I hardly ever come across one. Only every once in awhile in the blue moon. Even if you’re correct in saying they’re the penultimate Whites, there’s hardly enough of them to make a political/cultural Movement. Maybe Johnson is just going by the reality of the situation in the real world, and not basing his thinking on fantasies and wishful thinking, etc., etc.

    If you love the Viking Nordic Penultimate Whites so much, tell them to start having friggin’ Penultimate babies, and leave the rest of us Whites who are NOT “penultimate” alone. I never stopped any penultimate White from reproducing. Never.

    My neighbor — who happens to be a penultimate Nordic — handed her daughter over to the black race. Her penultimate daughter married a black/Chinese mix last year — they now have a very un-penultimate baby mongrel race-mixed gurl baby. Another mongrel for the USA. No White father in the picture. My penultimate neighbor divorced him because she wanted to be “independent”. [ on his hefty alimony money he has to fork over that is ].

    When she told me her daughter was going to marry a black man, she said, “I’m so proud my daughter is able to see beyond race”. When she saw I did NOT jump up and down with joy, when I didn’t say “congratulations”, she realized I didn’t support her daughter’s decision. She has since “shunned” me. She won’t even wave to me anymore. She has totally shunned me. Go tell it to her. ALL the penultimate Nordics I do happen to know aren’t much better than my “penultimate” neighbor.

    Bashing us Whites who are NOT penultimate is NOT going to compel the penultimate Whites to have friggin’ penultimate babies. It’s just NOT. I think Johnson has the much better — more efficacious — strategy than does CheChar and VikingBitch. Johnson is just dealing with the situation as it is in the real world of reality.

    In another thread today, Joe filled a long comment with vulgar insults and epithets, and most of his comments go directly to the spam filter. I quote his latest comment only if others want to respond him. (Unlike Johnson I don’t shun those who disagree with me because we disagree, only for trolling.)

  7. Dr. Greg Johnson has this to say:

    Andrew Hamilton, “White Census” | Counter-Currents Publishing

    “Here’s my simple answer to the “whiteness” question: Europeans people are the descendants of the first humans who emerged in Europe and painted the caves during the Paleolithic area. These people subsequently migrated to North Africa, the Near East, and to Eastern Europe where they underwent some genetic differentiation. These peoples include Indo-Europeans, Berbers, Semites, Caucasians, and even more far-removed peoples like the Dravidians. Some of these peoples returned to Europe and mixed with the original paleo-European population, further transforming it.

    If Rowan Atkinson is descended from the original Europeans, he is a European. The same is true for the other peoples of Europe.

    The assumption that Northern Europeans (Nordics, Aryans) are more genuinely European than Mediterraneans simply ignores the fact that Nordics are an offshoot of the original European population just as Berbers and Arabs and Jews are. Present-day Southern Europeans are by and large paleo-Europeans with some admixture through back-migration of near-Eastern Caucasoids. Present-day Northern Europeans are by and large paleo-Europeans with some admixture through back-migration of blue-eyed mutant Caucasoids from Eastern Europe.

    Jews are problematic because they are a predominantly Caucasoid people who think of themselves as a distinct race destined to enslave the rest of humanity. Absent that consciousness, they are pretty much like any other Near Eastern people, e.g., Kurds, Armenians, etc. Of course Askhkenazic Jews are a sump of genetic abnormality that would make them undesirable mates on genetic grounds. But even if they all looked like Dolph Lundgren and Heidi Klumm, it is the distinctly Jewish consciousness and culture that makes them so obnoxious.

    From a White Nationalist point of view, however, the most damaging form of self-consciousness is to mistakenly identify ourselves with only one ingredient of our identity, the most widespread version of which is the idea that we are Indo-Europeans or Aryans, a group that may well be extinct but which is an ingredient, genetically or culturally or both, of pretty much every European alive today.”

    you agree with greg, chech?

    • As you must have guessed for the content of this post, I disagree with Greg.

      • at which point you disagree with and why?

        but why armenoids/Semites, Dravidians,Khazars, and North Africans can not be considered European if they are – as well as Iberian (R1B), Nordic (I) and Aryan (R1A) – an offshoot of the original European population ???

      • Do they look like Aryans? Read this:

      • thanks!

    • Johnson’s mistake there is in trying to ‘explain’ himself. His logic is off. We are all descended from (or at least, related to) the higher primates. It doesn’t follow that we’re chimpanzees. Sharing a common genetic lineage doesn’t justify shared identification.

      Johnson would have been better just saying: “My way is the most practical”.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: