Columbus Day isn't based

submitted by NolobenGlory to Great Russian Empire! Today Ukraine, tomorrow Canada! from (self.debatealtright)

Columbus Day is not based. Columbus was a Marrano Jew who was responsible for mass miscegenation and the creation of mestizos. He was one of the most disastrous people who ever lived.

I celebrate Indigenous People's Day because I support the right of ALL indigenous peoples, including Europeans, to preserve themselves from foreign infiltration, race-mixing and imperialism.

Whites should have stayed tribal and never left Europe. Colonialism and proto-globalism wasn't based. They were products of Christianity and Capitalism, both Jewish poisons.

all 61 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]lokke767 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

Whites should have stayed tribal and never left Europe

That ship has sailed a long time ago, why lament yourself over something that is irreversible.

He was one of the most disastrous people who ever lived.

For native-American civilizations probably, yes. But from the point of view of Europeans Columbus' actions didn't lead to disaster, quite on the contrary. Whites at some point in the 19th century constituted 1/3 of the world's population, up from the usual 10~15% before the age of imperialism. Things didn't start to go south for the West until the late 19th century, I would say. To assign the responsibility for the current degenerate state of affairs to Christopher Columbus is a stretch.

Colonialism and proto-globalism wasn't based.

Expanding your people's living space is not only based, it is arguably a natural impulse of any tribe/group. Imperialism is actually inevitable. The romanticization of tribalism is also the epitome of naive reactionary thinking. What exactly do you believe would have happened if Europeans had stayed 'tribal'? That's right, the European tribes would eventually have been overrun (as they were in Italy, Gaul and Spain, for instance), either by a civilized power or by the hordes from the East. Complex Civilizations last longer, are more stable, and less mobile, than tribes.

Marrano Jew

These idiotic and baseless accusations of Jewishness happen all too often here and make us look stupid.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_theories_of_Christopher_Columbus#Crypto-Judaism

[–]NolobenGlory to Great Russian Empire! Today Ukraine, tomorrow Canada![S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (16 children)

This reminds me of why Eugene Montsalvat was 100% in his autopsy on the alt right back in 2016. Originally, "alt right" was supposed to mean a third positionist movement that would introduce people in the English speaking world to people like Alain de Benoist, but it ended up just meaning old-fashioned colonialist white nationalism. The only interesting person in the alt right was Heimbach so he got treated like shit and driven out.

I notice you didn't address the miscegenation issue. Are you one of those people who think that when men race mix it's based because it's "conquest"? You have an Asian wife by any chance?

[–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

Originally, "alt right" was supposed to mean a third positionist movement that would introduce people in the English speaking world to people like Alain de Benoist, but it ended up just meaning old-fashioned colonialist white nationalism.

You got it the other way around. The alt-right's main focal point used to be race realism/human biodiversity, the JQ, and being unapologetically pro-white (which also means being at least open to, if not outright supportive of, the idea of bringing back some form of white colonialism and global white hegemony).

In recent years, however, the alt-right has seen an ever-increasing (probably mostly astroturfed) influx of retards, schizos and shills injecting it with ridiculous LARP ideologies that suvbert the alt-right's original white nationalist character and intentions, and in many cases would be even explicitly harmful to white racial interests (i.e third worldism/Duginism, Islamism/"white sharia", primitivism/luddism, flat earth theory, boomer cuckservative religious fundamentalism, incel/anti-woman views, etc.).

Furthermore, it's kinda ironic how the very same people who most strongly hold the views you hate the most about the alt-right, such as Jared Taylor and Richard Spencer, are actually the ones who in part originally founded the alt-right to begin with.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

This is nonsense. David Duke has been doing non-supremacist pro-white stuff for decades with the framing of human rights activism, this was always very popular. "A homeland for every race, Africa for Africans, Europe for Europeans" etc was always way more common than Richard Spencer's imperial ambitions. This is a massive retcon by you.

Alt right was a big tent descriptor for everyone pro-white, and even broader than that until Charlottesville lol. Both isolationists/nativists and white supremacists were included. You both are talking out of your arses pretending it specifically referred to one particular strain. Especially when it used to be such a broad tent that before Charlottesville it included non-racialist classical liberals who just didn't like muh crazy sjws and dumb shit like that.

[–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

This is nonsense. David Duke has been doing non-supremacist pro-white stuff for decades with the framing of human rights activism, this was always very popular. "A homeland for every race, Africa for Africans, Europe for Europeans" etc was always way more common than Richard Spencer's imperial ambitions. This is a massive retcon by you.

You're either misinterpreting or deliberately misrepresenting me. My point wasn't that the alt-right used to be fully comprised of people with "supremacist" attitudes, I know it wasn't, but to illustrate how its explicitly white nationalist character got subverted by people who think like OP. It's undeniable that "supremacist" attitudes were much more common in the alt-right before it started getting subverted a couple of years ago.

I have nothing against pro-whites/white nationalists who are non-"supremacist", such as David Duke, but that's totally different from actively pushing for white guilt and ethnomasochism and defacing our history (like OP is doing). By the way, "supremacist" in the way people like you use it is an anti-white slur anyways, which is used to pathologize healthy ingroup preference in whites and whites only. It's perfectly natural to want your race to have power, and among all other races people with strong ingroup preference hold "supremacist" attitudes (often far more extreme than those found among white nationalists), but somehow only whites are supposed to be pacifist isolationists and just let black and brown people dominate the world.

Alt right was a big tent descriptor for everyone pro-white, and even broader than that until Charlottesville lol. Both isolationists/nativists and white supremacists were included. You both are talking out of your arses pretending it specifically referred to one particular strain. Especially when it used to be such a broad tent that before Charlottesville it included non-racialist classical liberals who just didn't like muh crazy sjws and dumb shit like that.

The non-racialist and non-JQ part of the alt-right was never truly part of the alt-right to begin with (just like the previously mentioned retards and shills who've flooded it in recent years), that's the alt-lite and it emerged years after the alt-right itself emerged. A lot of "anti-SJWs" and other alt-liters turned alt-right though, as they watched the alt-lite get BTFO'd by the alt-right in debates (such as the famous Richard Spencer vs. Sargon debate). The alt-right itself was undeniably founded as an explicitly white nationalist movement, considering Jared Taylor, Richard Spencer and ironically enough also David Duke, key figures in the formation of the alt-right, were all explicitly pro-white.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

By the way, "supremacist" in the way people like you use it is an anti-white slur anyways

If you think white people should rule over others, and actively seek to conquer them to rule over them that is what white supremacy means. There's nothing anti-white about that, if that's what you want then you're a white supremacist.

It's perfectly natural to want your race to have power, and among all other races people with strong ingroup preference hold "supremacist" attitudes (often far more extreme than those found among white nationalists), but somehow only whites are supposed to be pacifist isolationists and just let black and brown people dominate the world.

This is a ridiculous notion, there's no contradiction between having power and not being able to take over the world on a racial basis because you believe you deserve to rule them. Racial and ethnic nationalists believe in self determination as a rule. This has been the case for the 20th century form of revolutionary nationalisms and national liberation movements. The belief that white people have to go out and attempt to rule over foreigners is pretty niche and confined only to capitalism/liberalism/colonialism historically, even then it wasn't really racial or ethnic that was just happenstance; their real motivations were simply economic to feed the bankers funding the various European empires.

The non-racialist and non-JQ part of the alt-right was never truly part of the alt-right to begin with, that's the alt-lite and it emerged years after the alt-right itself emerged. A lot of "anti-SJWs" and other alt-liters turned alt-right though, as they watched the alt-lite get BTFO'd by the alt-right in debates (such as the famous Richard Spencer vs. Sargon debate). The alt-right itself was undeniably founded as an explicitly white nationalist movement, considering Jared Taylor, Richard Spencer and ironically enough also David Duke, key figures in the formation of the alt-right, were all explicitly pro-white.

From 2015-Charlottesville (If you look at the trends, the term only really became a popular thing in mid 2016) these people considered themselves alt right and the vast majority of people viewed them as fellow travelers, alt right roughly meant pro-Trump, Brexit, anti-SJW etc. Before then the alt right wasn't really even much to speak of, it was just a term Richard Spencer used for his website that hosted white nationalist content. The 'movement' only really started to refer to itself as alt right around the time of Trump and stuff. Before then most WNs would just call themselves that and the anti-sjw guys would call themselves rational skeptics and that kind of thing.

I agree they shouldn't have been considered one movement and it's absurd, but to say they weren't is just wrong.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nationalism is not supremacism.

[–]Jesus 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

David Duke is a cointelpro shill who gets free reign to talk on CNN (lol), shilled for Zio daddy Drumpf, and hung out with Alexander Dugin.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Gossip shit stirring shit isn't interesting at all. If you want to convince people who are actually smart about anything tackle their ideas, not just string together schizo insults lmao. Alternatively, take your meds!

[–]Jesus 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I have all the info saved in m posts. Also, take your meds is a classic fallacy that I see a lot of astroturfers spew.

Two of those accusations you know are true, the third you're free to look up.

[–]MarkimusNational Socialist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It's not a fallacy, it would just benefit me. I wouldn't have to see your conspiratard bullshit if you just took your anti-psychotics. It's fine tho I'm just blocking you.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Okay. Bye, bye little shill. Probably don't even believe Mossad did 9/11.

[–]NolobenGlory to Great Russian Empire! Today Ukraine, tomorrow Canada![S] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

Actually you are wrong. Here is Montsalvat's article: https://attackthesystem.com/2016/05/21/the-alternative-right-an-autopsy/

third worldism/Duginism

Third worldism is based. Duginism is a bogeyman used by neocon ZOG apologists, so it's based too because it makes all the right people seethe.

Islamism/"white sharia"

"White sharia" was a lame meme invented by some neocon ZOGbots and likely glowies on "The War Room", not by Andrew Anglin as is commonly believed. But solidarity with the Islamic struggle against globohomo is based.

primitivism/luddism

Nothing better than destroying the Aryan folk ways, folk soul and tribal culture in favor of globalism, muh progress and capitalist exploitation. BASED!

flat earth theory

Don't care about this, not a muh science fag though

boomer cuckservative religious fundamentalism

You're referring to Fuentes and the Groypers? Yeah they fucking suck. They're also some of the biggest Columbus/colonialism shills.

incel/anti-woman views

I was wondering if you were Brandon Martinez up to this point. Martinez is a hardcore incel but otherwise is on board with your views.

Richard Spencer

He used to be a pro-Russian Duginist who was sympathetic to the European New Right. Now he's just a midwit vaccine shilling liberal and probably a glowie.

[–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Third worldism is based.

Being white but ethnomasochistic is based? If non-whites and governments of non-white countries that are anti-ZOG want to collaborate with us in fighting against ZOG, no problem, but they can't also be explicitly anti-white. Most non-whites however, even the ones who also supposedly hate the Jewish elites, will just laugh at you and spit in your face if you're white and try to pitch the idea of "muh one struggle" to them, and it's honestly laughable for those non-whites to claim to hate ZOG/the Jewish elites while also being anti-white, since anti-white ideology is literally the product of those same Jewish elites they claim to hate in the first place.

Duginism is a bogeyman used by neocon ZOG apologists, so it's based too because it makes all the right people seethe.

"The right people" being people who are unapologetically pro-white? I thought you considered yourself to be pro-white. Neocons are against Dugin because, according to them, Dugin is a "racist" white nationalist who wants Russia to annex Western Europe. People like me are against Dugin because we know he's anti-white, literally the opposite reason from why neocons are against him. The enemy of your enemy isn't always your friend, sometimes it's just another enemy.

primitivism/luddism

Nothing better than destroying the Aryan folk ways, folk soul and tribal culture in favor of globalism, muh progress and capitalist exploitation. BASED!

Such a pathethic strawman. Having modern industrial and advanced technology is totally separate from ZOG/globohomo and woke culture. You might as well say that using a AR to defend yourself against a murderer is being pro-ZOG, since ZOG also uses ARs to enforce their power. Being a primitivist/luddite and being pro-white are literally inherently contradictory, since getting rid of technology in white society will both cause mass-death and suffering among whites as well as leave us extremely vulnerable from external attacks. Other intelligent peoples, like the Jews and the Chinese, will never get rid of their technology like you insist us whites should do, so they could just come in and instantly BTFO us if we refuse to pursue the same technological innovations as them. I'm also pretty economically left-leaning, so your claim about capitalist exploitation doesn't make much sense either.

I was wondering if you were Brandon Martinez up to this point. Martinez is a hardcore incel but otherwise is on board with your views.

Isn't Brandon Martinez also unapologetically pro-white? In that case, I'm not really surprised that you equate me to him. I've indeed heard that he's very anti-woman, which is very cringe though.

He used to be a pro-Russian Duginist who was sympathetic to the European New Right. Now he's just a midwit vaccine shilling liberal and probably a glowie.

Funny enough, I also used to like him more in the past, and now don't like him anymore. Is he even still pro-white? He doesn't even come off as pro-white anymore nowadays. And although I disagree with Keith Woods pretty strongly (on mainly the same things I disagree with you), I also think it's very low how Richard Spencer constantly attacks Keith Woods nowadays.

[–]DragonerneJesus is white 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Who are some good alt righters that aren't also anti women?

[–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

As far as I know, pretty much all of the old guard pro-white alt-right figures, including but not limited to Jared Taylor, Richard Spencer, David Duke, Henrik Palmgren and Lana Lokteff, Millennial Woes and Mark Collett, have nothing against women. A more recent example would be CatboyKami. Being both pro-white and anti-woman is inherently contradictory anyways, and I suspect a lot of the anti-women stuff is probably coming from hapa, pajeet and mestizo incels, rather than genuine pro-whites.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Considering most Jews are from Russian, Dugin is not based and ZOG is even less based. Dugin literally praises rabbis and teh Eurasian Jewish congress and netanyahu and Zionism, if they side with Russian inc.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

(i.e third worldism/Duginism, Islamism/"white sharia", primitivism/luddism, flat earth theory, boomer cuckservative religious fundamentalism, incel/anti-woman views, etc.).

These are detriments to white nationalism. Could not have said it better. I also noticed that many astro-turfing 'alt-rightists' largely founded by Jews, always spew fallacies when you mention the JQ, as if it doesn't matter.

[–]JuliusCaesar225Nationalist + Socialist 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

Anti imperialism is anti Aryan slave morality. You can advocate for a superior form of imperialism such as one that makes the world better but believing everyone should stay put is unnatural. There is no reason why a race that could easily dominate the world should have this anti imperialist mentality, in fact that is the real Jewish poison.

[–]Rakean93Identitarian socialist 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

Nah I'm totally anti-imperialist, imperialism is bas and leads to America and niggers everywhere. Let the blacks rule the the blacks and so on. Otherwise, be prepared to a black grandson.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Agreed.

Imperialism inevitably leads to the destruction of all cultures involved with an empire. I think most lower-class imperialists are just monarchists who get too dickhard over their preferred Empire.

All upper class imperialists are wicked, no matter the empire they shill for.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Look at Russian inc for reference.

[–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

imperialism is based

FTFY.

[–]Rakean93Identitarian socialist 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Imperialism definetly isn't based, however I'm going to support Columbus Day reguardless for the very simple fact I'm extremely nationalistic and I'm not going to allow anyone to criticize Columbus.

[–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Imperialism itself wasn't what introduced blacks into America, they were introduced by Jewish slave traders who bought them from African tribe leaders. Canada and Australia are unquestionably a product of imperialism, yet they have basically no blacks as slavery was already banned when their colonization really kicked off, and Canada and Australia used to be almost 100% white until the recent non-white mass-immigration.

Imperialism doesn't have to lead to large-scale miscegenation either. The former Spanish and Portuguese colonies mostly consist of mestizos today, because the Spanish and Portuguese sent mostly single men to their colonies and let them fuck anything that moved. The Anglo colonies, on the other hand, prove that it's perfectly possible to maintain racial purity under imperialism, by sending both men and women from the UK to the colonies, and by having a "racist" value system that condemns whites who miscegenate as race traitors and punishes non-whites who try to miscegenate with whites. Hence why even the US, despite its large slave-descended black population, used to be over 85% white until the 1965 Hart-Celler immigration act (read: white genocide act).

The idea that non-white mass-immigration into white countries is just a natural consequence of white/European imperialism, rather than something deliberately facilitated by subversive, malicious Jewish elites in order for them to gain more control over the whealthy white countries, is basically just woke anti-white nonsense. Don't let anti-whites guilt you into blaming our people for all our current problems and defacing our own history. I still appreciate it that you still support Columbus Day even though you morally disagree with him though, that's the unapologetic nationalist spirit I want to see more in our circles. For the same reason, I'm against slavery but at the same time I'm strongly against tearing down statues and monuments of Confederates.

Regarding imperialism itself: Even if you morally disagree with imperialism in principle, it's basically a tragedy of the commons. If we as whites are unwilling to reclaim our dominant position on the global stage, which would also mean either directly or indirectly taking back control over most non-white countries we used to occupy, some other race or civilization (such as the Jews or the Chinese) is going to take our place and do it anyways. So if you're opposed to white imperialism/colonialism, what you're essentially implying is "I want whites to be powerless and get dominated by the rest of the world, and I want more power to the Jews and the Chinese!", which is inherently contradictory to being pro-white. I'm not saying you think like this or that you aren't pro-white, I'm just taking the idea of being white and being against white imperialism to its logical conclusion.

[–]Rakean93Identitarian socialist 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

That's literally a pile of bullshit. Imperialism wasn't what introduced blacks in America, it was slavery (I don't think the the few Jews involved single handedly manage to relocat millions of people by themselves). But you know what will bring for sure blacks in your country? Conquering them. Then you are literally asking to be in the same state as the blacks. Imperialism and ethnonationalism are totally opposite. You may be pro white, but on a broader scope, you are going in a route totally opposed to mine.

[–]NolobenGlory to Great Russian Empire! Today Ukraine, tomorrow Canada![S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Regarding imperialism itself: Even if you morally disagree with imperialism in principle, it's basically a tragedy of the commons. If we as whites are unwilling to reclaim our dominant position on the global stage, which would also mean either directly or indirectly taking back control over most non-white countries we used to occupy, some other race or civilization (such as the Jews or the Chinese) is going to take our place and do it anyways. So if you're opposed to white imperialism/colonialism, what you're essentially implying is "I want whites to be powerless and get dominated by the rest of the world, and I want more power to the Jews and the Chinese!", which is inherently contradictory to being pro-white. I'm not saying you think like this or that you aren't pro-white, I'm just taking the idea of being white and being against white imperialism to its logical conclusion.

You can believe that defensive wars are justified, without justifying imperialism. Anti-imperialist, "primitive" peoples have BTFO'd powerful empires on numerous occasions, such as in Vietnam and recently Afghanistan. There is no reason Europeans could not protect ourselves from imperialists yet reject doing imperialism ourselves.

[–]YORAMRWWhite nationalist, eugenicist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Vietnam and Afghanistan are completely powerless in any meaningful sense (just like most other third world backwaters that managed to fight off invaders), and it took them devastating wars on their own soil to not get conquered, so if anything you're actually further strengthening my argument in favor of being imperialistic rather than just defensive. The truth of the matter is that in geopolitics you're either on the long end of the stick or the short end of the stick, so in geopolitics there isn't really room for morality and moral consistency in the same way there should be on an interpersonal level.

That doesn't mean, however, that we should just oppress and exploit non-whites living in countries to be colonized or indirectly controlled, which I strongly oppose. Under the type of imperialism I advocate for, we would build infrastructure, farms, schools and hospitals for them, help them improve through eugenics, and give them access to the same social safety net and public facilities as people in white countries in general. In exchange, they aren't allowed to leave for white countries anymore, can't have too many children, and have to give us whites unlimited acccess to the valuable resources located in their lands. This would be a win-win scenario: They won't have to live in poverty anymore and get to enjoy a Western standard of living, while we get to curb non-white overpopulation and gain access to the resources needed for our advanced technology.

[–]outrageousboote 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Afghanistan and Vietnam did not BTFO anyone.

They took massive, much higher than the opposing force casualties and only won when the US or Soviets decided it was not worth it anymore and left, not a victory by a military rout but more a political defeat for the other side. The Vietcong for example could not win a single major engagement with US forces and Saigon only fell two years after US withdrawal.

These are the same misconceptions that make neocons think Cletus with his Glock can take an army.

Being a powerless backwater is not good for whites.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

This.

[–]outrageousboote 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Columbus wasn't a Jew, just because Jews tried to claim him in the past doesn't mean schizo theories need to try to validate it.

Also the Spaniards and Portuguese created the Goblinas in large numbers.

[–]DisgustResponse 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Schizos 🤝 Zionists

Giving Jews way too much credit for the state of the world.

[–]Salos60000Pragmatic European Nationalism 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, it's the natural continuation of our movement tying itself to Nazism. Yes, it is true that jews do have a significant amount of responsibility in our people's current position but I don't think we can blame them for EVERY conceivable anti white activity, it says more about our people and our flaws if the most schizo takes on the JQ are the truth.

[–]VraiBleuScots Protestant, Ulster Loyalist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, it's the natural continuation of our movement tying itself to Nazism

Salos, you’re not part of ‘our movement’. You’ve been told this before, stop being disingenuous.

The schizos that accuse everyone of being a shill/Jew/fed have nothing to with the National Socialist party of early-20th century Germany, most of them aren’t even 3’rd Positionists, just racist liberals and hardcore conspiracy theorists.

[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

And yet all of my scholarly books at home claiming he was are just schizo?

[–]proc0 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Columbus was a Marrano Jew

Proof?

I celebrate Indigenous People's Day because I support the right of ALL indigenous peoples

I feel these two things are not related. First of all why replace Columbus day? Why not a separate day? The reason is it's a political woke agenda trying to constnatly erase and change history and substitute with something about the poor POC and their suffrage. Consider that it is a tactic coming from Marxism to divide and conquer people. Natives could easily be celebrated without needing to erase and change history, but then that wouldn't further the conflict between white Europeans and descendents of Natives.

Personally I think the truth is complicated always, and those were completely different times. Wars were normal and humans in general were desensitized to violence, including Natives, which had tons of wars of their own and practiced bloody rituals of all kinds.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

POC and their suffrage.

Suffrage means right to vote. I agree with you, but I dont think you use this word correctly.

[–]proc0 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Suffrage means right to vote.

I admit I was thinking of overall suffering, however, this is was an interesting coincidence. Changing definitions of words is part of this woke/marxist strategy. This is why political conversations have been increasingly hard to have with people (over the past decade or so), because they have been changing definitions. The online dictionaries have updated their definition of "racism" for example, to have some mention of "systemic". This is all rooted in post-modernism and normies that have no idea what is going on get caught in the midst and gaslighted.

What I mean to say is that, interestingly enough, I think "sufferage" was one of these definition changes, dating all the way back to that era. So just because women want the vote, they had to make an equivalence between suffering and not voting? Hmm... quite the political strategy there. I refuse to use that word in that way. I can also use the same strategy and say "sufferage" should mean what it sounds like... the collective suffering of people, but it doesn not include the reason or cause of the suffering.

Anyway, thanks for the comment, and sorry about the rant.

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

While changing the definition of words and newspeak are real leftist propaganda techniques, the word suffrage and its correct definition come from the latin word suffragium, which predates leftism by thousands of years.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

interesting that suffragium didn't mean voting, it meant buying and selling political offices in Rome.

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I see. I meant suffer-age. Like cover is to coverage. I'm making up words because why not at this point.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Columbus had landed in the Americas on 10/12/1492. So that is why columbus day is around october 12th each year, having it change sometimes to make sure it is on a monday. So why still have it at that time if it is now indigenous people's day. Do they realize they really are still celebrating the day their end began? Like you say they should put it on a whole other day if this isn't to celebrate Columbus.

[–]Jesus 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I'll provide some sources from old books in a little bit on Columbus being Jewish.

[–]proc0 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Great thanks. I did do an online search, and just found that is was mostly a rumor because his mom had some relatives named Jacob. Supposedly the first mention of him being jew is early 1900's, and might have been a lie from jews. Who knows at this point.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You might be right and I'll look in my old 19th century books today. I remember reading a chapter on Columbus which was more than just some relatives being named Jacob.

[–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Still trying to find that book I read.

Christopher Columbus famously set sail in 1492. That same day, August 2nd, a ship of Sephardic Jews — those living in and expelled from the Iberian Peninsula — made its way out of Spanish waters. Before embarking on his long voyage a certain Portuguese Jew named José Vizinho gave Columbus a translation of Zacuto's work so that Columbus could circumnavigate the Atlantic more accurately.

(Source: https://jewishstudies.washington.edu/sephardic-studies/how-contributions-from-christopher-columbus-sephardic-astronomer-illustrate-complex-legacies-of-exploration-and-conquest/)

In Spanish, Christopher Columbus was referred to as Cristóbal Colón. Born in Genoa, Italy in 1451

....

Beginning in the 13th Century, Spanish rulers began a series of armed campaigns to rid their lands of the Moors/Muslims. Europe had rid itself of most Muslims by the mid-15th century, and some Kingdoms, like the Spanish Empire, had evolved into European powers. Although Spanish Jews during this time period were subject to occasional periods of anti-Semitism (e.g., the Pogroms of 1391), many Jewish communities flourished.

...

  1. alle, Rodrigo de Sanchez, Dr. Marco (surgeon), and Maestre Bernal. One anomaly to consider about this voyage is that there were no Catholic priests on board.

...

  1. Avoided leaving on Tisha B’Av. The first Voyage of Columbus was originally planned to leave on August 2nd, which was is solemn Jewish holiday of Tisha B’Av (it is a fast day and day of mourning, when historically a number of tragic events occurred, including the destruction of the First and Second Temples). It has been suggested that Columbus intentionally stalled a day so that he would not leave on the holiday.

...

There are additional Jewish connections to Columbus and his voyages to the New World that are not readily learned in school. For instance, much of the money used to fund the expedition were not from the king and queen, but from many converso Jews such as, Alfonso de la Caballeria, Juan Cabrero, Louis de Santangel, Gabriel Sanchez, and Rabbi Don Isaac Abramanel. In fact, the first letter written by Columbus back to Europe was not to King Ferdinand of Queen Isabella, but to Santangel and Sanchez. Rabbi Abraham Senior (he became a converso in 1492) was a smaller financier, but had huge influence upon the king and queen. Why were so many Jewish financiers interested in sending Columbus on his voyage?

...

...indispensable for Columbus and all other ship captains to sail beyond the view of a land mass. Although Jews are not usually thought of as a seafaring people, other Jews that helped with the evolution of maritime navigation also include: Levi ben Gershon (cross-staff/baculus Jacob), Jacob ben Machir ibn Tibbon (quadrant Judaicus), and Rabbi Abraham Zacuto (astronomical charts) [Fast Fact: Zacuto’s tables were written in Hebrew and used by Columbus.]. There were many instruments created by Jayme Ribes (named Jehudah Cresques before he was forced to convert), who eventually became director of the famed School of Navigation founded by Henry the Navigator. [Fast Fact: King Ferdinand’s own grandmother (Paloma of Toledo) was born Jewish, and Isabella was delivered by a Jewish doctor (Maestre Semaya).

...

Upon landing, Columbus noted how impressed he was by the hospitality and friendliness of the native (Arawaks). Also upon landing, Columbus immediately claimed the island in the name of Spain and put the natives to work in the mines. It took only two years for half of the population (about 125,000 people) to be killed off. In his journals, Columbus even wrote about selling 9 and 10 year old native girls into sexual slavery. Some of the brutality by the Spaniards included: the cutting off of native’s noses and ears, burning them at the stake, and setting attack dogs upon the natives. Although most of these horrendous acts were not committed directly by Columbus himself, as Governor he either approved of them or did nothing to stop them from occurring.

...

The brutality was so bad that he was arrested in 1500 and literally brought back to Spain in chains. One of Columbus’s men (Bartolome De Las Casas) was so mortified by the inhumanities he observed, that he left his service and became a Catholic priest. In his journal he had written “My eyes have seen these acts so foreign to human nature that now I tremble as I write.” King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella let Columbus go free because their treasury was growing from the wealth gained from the Island and the newly created slave trade. As a consequence of his actions, he lost his Governorship, much of his prestige, and wealth; but he did make a fourth and final voyage upon his release. Historians estimated that there about 3 million inhabitants in the Caribbean islands when Columbus arrived. In 20 years, the number was cut down to about 60,000. After 50 years, practically no natives were still alive on the entire island; it was genocide. In connection to his possible Jewish roots, I had already mentioned two possible places of his birth, but there are many countries claim him as their own, such as: Italy – Genoa. This is the supposed birthplace of Columbus and has been listed as such for hundreds of years. Most historians still believe this to be his true homeland. Columbus even mentions this in his own letters.

...

The date of the death of Columbus, May 20, 1506, is not disputed. He died in Valladolid, Spain two years after returning from his fourth voyage. It is the location of his remains (his final resting spot) that have been a controversy. His body was interred in Seville, Spain. However, the journeyman in life was a journeyman in death as well. In 1542, his remains were moved on his posthumous fifth voyage across the Atlantic Ocean to Santa Domingo (modern day Dominican Republic). The journey did not end there. When France took over the island in 1795, his remains were moved to Havana, Cuba. A century later, after Cuba’s independence in 1898, the remains allegedly took another transatlantic journey when they moved back to Seville (Cathedral of Seville). HOWEVER . . . . . in 1877, a lead box containing skeletal remains and a bullet with the inscription “Don Christopher Columbus” was found in Santa Domingo, and they have claimed them to be his actual bones. In 2003, A DNA test showed that at least some of the remains in Seville could have been from Columbus himself. Since authorities in the Dominican Republic have not allowed a DNA test to be conducted, their claim cannot be verified. [But wouldn’t it be apropos for his remains to be buried in both the old world as well as the new?] [Fast Fact: After his death, the heirs of Columbus sued Spain for unpaid sums of monies due to him when he was alive. The suit was not finally settled until 1790 (almost 400 years later).]

...

With Columbus (Colon) was 5 Jews - Luid de Torres (Interpreter), Marco (Surgeon), Bemal (Physician), Alonzo de la Calle, and Gabriel Sanchez. Even Columbus' expedition was financed by a jew.

...

Continuing with Columbus, 2 jews who financed him were Louis De Santangel & Gabriel Sanchez. It was Gabriel Sanchez that told Columbus to sell 500 Indians in Seville, Spain. You can see that in the previous book and The Wages of Sin: The Beginning of Sorrow 2020 by Willie Stanfield. Spain kicked the jews out in 1492, & they set sail.

...

Luis de Torres, a Jew, was on the ships with Columbus and he was his interpreter. Arabs were familiar with him. Luis had many slaves.

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Very interesting. Thanks for compiling that. It is certainly possible with all these things being true. History books contained images and stories of Catholic priests being on those first voyages, and I think there is some evidence of that because this happened multiple times with all Spanish voyages to the new world.

I think the biggest lead would be the funding of the trip, and the books say it was the queen of Spain. So if that's not true, then how did that happen (the queen getting the credit), and why did Columbus declared the territory for Spain? I think the most likely scenario could be that he was a secret Jew and did not reveal that to anyone outside of his family. Catholics priests of the time are notoriously anti-Jew, like St. Agustin, or Aquinas.

So then the next question would be, was the cruelty and exploitation driven by a cricle of secrete Jews of the time? Certainly fires up a number of conspiracy theories, which could easily be connected to all of this. I think regardless, people shouldn't make an equivalence between Columbus and European people in general... most Europeans were just living their lives normally and had nothing to do with that, just like most Americans had nothing to do with the Iraq war and occupation of the Middle East today.

[–]send_nasty_stuffNational Socialist 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

This is your warning for thread abandonment.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Columbus was a Marrano Jew

What?

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]WhiteZealotWhite Nationalist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    A lot of people in the Alt-Right haven't taken the egoism pill yet, as we can see from the isolationists in this comment section.

    The cold, hard truth is that each person and group should always do what is in his/her/its own interests. If it is in the interests of a race to conquer another people, pushing them off their land or wiping them out, then they should do it. To not do what is in your interests is irrational and self-destructive.

    In regard to the notion that conquest is never in our interests because it is most likely to lead to mass immigration of non-whites into our homelands, I would just point to history as a refutation. The vast majority of the cases of conquest did not result in such a thing.

    [–]Blackbrownfreestuff 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Yes, I often try explaining the concept of egoism to my leftist friends and family and they dont get it, but they support every other race doing it except for whites.

    If I could summarize the logical end to their position, it's that whites should kill themselves because we won.

    [–]Fonched 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    I don't mind the good parts we got out from it, such as all the civilization across the Americas. I sense the cultural connections Columbus had, but I haven't seen those entirely proved, and besides his troupe is what started all the rest. Hopefully problems persisting can be fixed.

    [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    He didn't discover America, many before him discovered America, including the Phoenicians. He was a pillager and a Marrano. I understand that lefitsts hate Columbus, but who cares, all the things great about him were never were true and he set sail the moment Jews were expelled from Spain.

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    more should be looked into Amerigo Vespucci. He was a scam artist and we named everything after him.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    clumbus got lucky, if not him someone would have eventually sailed over here and discovered two huge continents.

    [–]WhiteZealotWhite Nationalist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Leif Erikson was the first European to set foot in the Americas, circa 1000 AD.

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    true, they were too stupid to do much exploring tho, abandoned their bases

    [–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Columbus was a Jew. Christianity is based.