American Racist Richard Spencer Gets to Play the Martyr in Hungary

James Kirchick, Daily Beast, October 7, 2014

Should a country welcome a gathering of American “racial realists,” European far-right activists, Russia’s top nationalist ideologue, and other self-proclaimed “Identitarians” in its capital? That’s the dilemma Hungary faced when the National Policy Institute, an “independent think-tank and publishing firm dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of European people in the United States and around the world,” announced plans to hold a conference in Budapest over the first weekend of October to “share ideas,” “make new [white] friends,” and do other fun white people stuff. {snip}

Yet by last Monday, the Hungarian far-right Jobbik Party leader Marton Gyöngyösi had pulled out of the conference, telling The Wall Street Journal, “I can hardly sympathize with the views of some of the speakers–namely those of the U.S. racists; I don’t share their ideologies at all.” You know you’ve hit rock bottom as a professional white nationalist when the guy who made international headlines for standing up in parliament to demand a list of Jews who pose “national security risks” tries to distance himself from you for being too racist. That same day, the Hungarian government put the kibosh on the weekend affair, denying a visa to the conference’s big draw, extreme Russian nationalist philosopher Alexander Dugin, and pressuring the conference venue and hotel to pull out of hosting the event. Acting on the instructions of conservative Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who ordered that all legal means be used to prevent the gathering from occurring, the country’s interior minister cited the Hungarian constitution, which, according to the Journal, apparently limits free expression that “breach[es] the human dignity of others or infringe[s] on the dignity of the Hungarian nation or of any national, ethnic, racial or religious community.”

Yet by banning the conference, the Hungarian government’s heavy-handed actions, which resemble those of governments across the European continent in their speech-limiting design, have had precisely the opposite of their intended effect. Budapest has turned a relatively obscure group of racists into global martyrs for free speech, and in so doing has amplified their odious views, not discredited them.

Somehow, Spencer and some of his confrères managed to enter Hungary, and on Friday night they gathered at a pub. “At least 25 people came and the atmosphere was friendly and boisterous,” Spencer wrote me from Paris, where he is now staying on his way back to the Land of the Free. At about 10 p.m., a horde of Hungarian police officers raided the bar, demanding that everybody show their identification. It was like a scene from communist times, yet perversely, the “dissidents” in this case were not heroic liberal democrats exchanging dangerous thoughts on the latest Václav Havel play but a bunch of racist pseudo-intellectuals. While the police eventually let everyone else go, Spencer, as the ringleader, was detained the entire weekend and treated like a common criminal, though his alleged crime was harboring stupid and bigoted thoughts.

It’s not a crime in Hungary to hold stupid and bigoted thoughts. But it also shouldn’t be a crime to express them. Many Europeans, given their history, understandably see things differently, but there is no indication that Spencer or his colleagues were planning to incite people to go out and commit hate crimes against specific individuals, the most plausible justification under which someone might be detained for words they express. Spencer spent the weekend shuttling back and forth between various bureaucratic hellholes: an airport detention facility, the central police station in Budapest, an immigration office. His ordeal sitting on “hard benches” under “bright lights” in the dreary confines of a former Warsaw Pact state’s administrative chambers sounds like a combination of The Manchurian Candidate, Midnight Express, and a bad episode of Law & Order.

Spencer was ultimately detained for 72 hours and banned for three years from the visa-free Schengen area of European countries, which includes most of the European Union. “There was a lot of paperwork, unfortunately all of it in Magyar. (This is understandable; we’re in Hungary, after all; however, for me, this gave the process a certain “Kafka-esque quality.),” Spencer wrote me. {snip}

The episode is significant for what it says about the state of free speech in Europe generally and in Hungary particularly. Once the order came down from Hungary’s right-wing government to squash the conference, Spencer and his friends began conflating Orban with his Hungarian Socialist Party opponents and other liberal figures, whom NPI sarcastically referred to as “the forces of tolerance and diversity.” {snip}

{snip}

“I find the idea that a politician ordered my capture because he disagrees with things I say to be morally repugnant,” Spencer says. I disagree with Spencer on pretty much everything imaginable, but I concur on this. And I’m troubled by what happened to Spencer for reasons far more important than the discomfort I feel at seeing a white nationalist creep experience satisfaction by posing as a martyr to the cause of free speech.

To the Hungarian and other European liberals cheering on the shoddy treatment afforded to Spencer, I have one question: If an ostensibly democratic state, a member–albeit not in particularly good standing–of the European Union, feels unencumbered in silencing, arresting, and deporting a trivial and not particularly intelligent man like Richard Spencer, then what is to stop it from shutting down and locking up someone with more brain cells and thoughtful criticisms to make, like, say, yourselves? As much as I hate to find common cause with racists at the xenophobic website VDare, we are indeed “all Richard Spencer now,” at least in Budapest. I may loathe what Richard Spencer has to say, but I will defend, unequivocally, his right to say it.

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • SolStans

    Why do I feel like Mr. Kirchick will need to be reminded one day that he “will defend, unequivocally, [a] right to say [evil hate speech]”?

    • Sick of it

      Not necessarily. He just doesn’t realize that he is a part of a very small and dying breed of leftists who value freedom. Most prefer slavery…they just call it something else.

      • Franklin_Ryckaert

        “Freedom is slavery, war is peace, ignorance is strength.”

        • propagandaoftruth

          Black is white and white is black, up becomes down and vice versa, and most certainly vice and wickedness are converted into virtue and goodness, all morality inverted.

          At this point I have no problem raising the black flag and slitting throats. Proud and defiant servant of the dark side here.

          Dark Enlightenment – last bastion of sanity and decency in an increasingly insane and indecent world.

  • evilsandmich

    Interesting that the author tried his best to disassociate with the victims, while at the same time being very vague about their views and decrying their treatment (i.e. “These people hold repugnant views, please research them more on your own, please”).

    • propagandaoftruth

      Yet by last Monday, the Hungarian far-right Jobbik Party leader Marton Gyöngyösi had pulled out of the conference, telling The Wall Street Journal, “I can hardly sympathize with the views of some of the speakers–namely those of the U.S. racists; I don’t share their ideologies at all.”
      ———————————
      Jobbik is a joke. Really?

      • Sick of it

        They prefer their fellow Turanians from Turkey…

  • Hey, he links to Vdare (even with a bunch of name-calling). I’m good with it.

  • when an idea or even a word spoken becomes taboo, the harder governments clamp down the harder the back lash is. this has been the case from the dawn of man. I salute them and their cause.
    they way they have to hide from a witch hunt across Europe, you would think the Soviets one the cold war……lol hell may be they did in many ways. Remember Anna Smith? she was the poster child of an old soviet spy ring in the U.S and Europe. They mission was to infiltrate the existing governments and institutions of higher learning to influence policy of the U.S and some of our allies. Take a good look around, nearly 20yrs that she and her comrades did there deeds. I would say they have done an excellent job on destroying the U.S and its allies government and schools. This I do very much so believe, see Washington as an example close to home. Our government has been compromised. and the ones in power are just, even if they don’t think so, are their thanks to a dead and gone soviet empire. You may call it the last F…U

    • Julius Caesar

      The Soviets DID win the Cold War, culturally. Go listen to Yuri Bezmenov speak on the matter, if you haven’t already.

      • Mason Gull

        I think that Yuri Bezmenov was mostly telling the John Birch Society what they wanted to hear. Communists certainly won the cultural war in the West, but they were a home grown movement that generally followed Marxist intellectuals like Antonio Gramsci (And later the Frankfurt School) rather than Soviet style Communists.

        The Eastern and Western Communists undoubtedly worked with each other at certain points, but each rejected the other’s original contributions to Marxist theory. The Soviet Union didn’t subscribe to “cultural hegemony,” for example. In many ways, Eastern-bloc society was quite conservative and in some ways healthier than that in the West, and I think it’s unfair to talk about the Soviets as if they are responsible for modern Cultural Marxism.

        • The soviet culture I think is very dead, As for the Russian, this is a differ story very much thriving better than most in the west. The Marxist culture is a dyeing breed. Not that many around and the ones who are, they are extremely paranoid to the point of near suicide. Like little Kim Un. where is that little fat bastard any way…lol… I think what we see today is a large majority of the world don’t like to see the Euro’s and white America as saviors and fathers of democracy of today. History is being re-written be for our eyes, Example such as the end of slavery. White men ended slavery as an trade, as well as a work force, It was not a black man or china man or indian, it was a white man. Slavery exist today, but it is not legal in any white country (Europe, U.S, Canada, Russia) but it dose in many middle eastern, Asian, and African counties still to day. In white countries a black yellow green and purple skin man or woman can serve in congress, house of commons, ect, but can one serve in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkey? hell no, can a china man serve in Zimbabwe Congo, South Africa? hell no.
          So when I hear the race card pulled hear in the States my 1st thought is to ship this person to there ancestral country, to live a min, of 5yrs. and when he returns if this person is not dead by then, lets hear his thoughts of the White man’s countries and form of government. I am no raciest, I am a true believer for every one to have a shot of a good productive life, to have the ability to work protect and serve ones family and community. But I am also tiered of leaches who take advantage of the welfare and people who pull I cant do it because of the white man keeping my people crap down….B.S work hard go to school don’t fight deal drugs kill cops, promote slave trade by pimping your girls and women, and you just might have a good life in this country.

  • WR_the_realist

    So Richard Spencer is “not particularly intelligent.” Okay, so he’s no genius. But from what he’s done and written I’d say he’s certainly no less intelligent than Obama, the man every lefty sees as the salvation of America. The dumbest (and most cowardly) people are usually the hacks who write at organs like the Huffington Post or the Daily Beast. They can make a modest living saying all the conventional things that they know they will never get in trouble for saying. No one ever loses his job in the media for taking the side of the left.

    • Kenneth Arrow

      It is always harder to be a dissident. It takes guts, independence and curious mind. It also takes brains to reach beyond the established dogma. We are avantgarde of dark enlightenment. If there is to be future, we must prevail.

      I bet clerics thought Galileo was stupid. The things he was saying weren’t in their little books. I bet ‘inteligentsia’ thinks we are stupid. The things we are saying aren’t taught in their petty colleges.

      • Sick of it

        The scientific basis for race realism is still taught in universities, but not in direct fashion. Stupid and/or ignorant liberals gloss over facts in order to stick to the tenets of their cult.

        • 48224

          True, they side step the facts, double talk, gloss over…..I’ve seen it. They spend 20% more money on black Detroit schools yet they lag FAR behind some of the poorest (but white) places in America. And they all scratch their heads….or pretend to.

          • Sick of it

            You should see a liberal put on a song and dance routine when trying to teach physical anthropology. Sorry professor, the data does not lie like you do.

      • Malgus

        College and University is where one gets credentialed… not “educated”.

        The word “education” comes from the Latin “ex”. Meaning “out” or “beyond”. And “ducare” meaning “to lead”. So, an ‘education’ means to lead one out beyond their understand of the world, life, and everything…

        I put little faith in colleges and universities… until someone gets out into the world and has their backside kicked into the dirt a few times – and gets back up – they are not truly ‘educated’…

    • Jaggers

      I’d say Spencer’s pretty brilliant. “Pseudo intellectual” is a typical ad hominem leveled against our people. Judge the man on his merits: he’s a fantastic writer, thinker, and speaker. There’s nothing “pseudo” about it.

      • Sick of it

        Oh no, he’s quite right. Intellectuals are less intelligent and rather lazy people who only criticize their betters all the day long. Who would want to be labeled an intellectual?

      • Franklin_Ryckaert

        Well, they call race realism “pseudo-science” too. Everything outside their little ideological box is “pseudo”.

    • Lagerstrom

      He also calls him a ‘white nationalist creep’, he may not agree with his views, but cheap name-calling is hardly what I’d call professional journalism.

      • Ron Cheaters

        The opening paragrapgh, particularly the last sentance, gave me a good belly-chuckle. What the article hinted at but he was too afraid to say is:
        If the government feels the need to shut down an event such as this, perhaps there is a degree of truth behind what they have to say no matter how “repugnant”. That’s what I read into it, through all the colourful attempts at insult.

    • Jonathan Vere

      Author of the Daily Beast piece, James Kirchick, has as his primary claim to fame the exposé of the “racist” writings in Ron Paul’s newsletter. His authority to demean the intelligence of Richard Spencer apparently derives from the fact that he’s a graduate of Yale while Spencer merely graduated from Duke. As a member of the more liberal wing of neoconservatism, Kirchick must still defend freedom of speech, but as a homosexual it becomes tricky, as he must also maintain the legitimacy of the concept of “hate.” The article serves but one positive purpose: it gives a mild rebuke to those on the Left who are ready to throw free speech out the window.

  • JohnEngelman

    I will care about Richard Spencer’s free speech rights as soon as he lets me post comments on his website.

    • Ted Cunterblast

      Perhaps Richard Spencer will let you post comments on his website when you learn to behave.

      • JohnEngelman

        Nation magazine also blocks my comments. I do not know what the problem is. I am polite, and I do not flame anyone.

        • Usually Much Calmer

          I am so very grateful for your voice, John. But you are capable of superhuman annoyance. I see this as a good thing, but I may not be representative.

          • JohnEngelman

            I enjoy political arguments, as long as they are civil, and held in an environment in which knowledge, insight, and the ability to write well are respected.

            Some people come to American Renaissance to reinforce what they want to believe. If I disagree with what they want to believe, I can understand why they are annoyed.

          • Usually Much Calmer

            Maybe you actually think that. But that doesn’t make it so.

            Your delivery arouses more emotion than your perspective. This is a great talent, as I have said before. I hope you retain it.

          • JohnEngelman

            I do not believe anyone can accuse me of making appeals to emotion. With me the appeal is to dispassionate rationality.

        • Franklin_Ryckaert

          You are a troll, but a polite troll, yet still a troll.

          • JohnEngelman

            A troll is one who angers others on internet forums. I anger people by challenging their opinions with facts. I do not insult others. That is an important difference.

            Political forums attract people who have strong opinions. However, many of these people are poorly informed. When their opinions are challenged they often become angry, and even abusive.

            In addition, if those who question their opinions are articulate, that can make them feel inadequate.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            That may be true, but you keep repeating the same ideas over and over again : Jews and Chinese are more intelligent than Whites, therefore they are more successful than Whites. Whites should therefore allow their countries being taken over by said Jews and Chinese. If they don’t accept that, then that is not a healthy sign of defending their ethnic interests but jealousy. You cannot imagine that WN are not interested to hear that message over and over again.

          • JohnEngelman

            You are repeating ideas that are frequently directed against me. I am not a white nationalist. I am a race realist. Although race realism has political implications, it is a scientific theory, rather than a movement.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            Am Ren is WN. Though it uses race realist arguments it is definitely WN, and so is Alternative Right from where you were banned.

          • JohnEngelman

            I was banned even though I was responding courteously to some very rude posters. They were unable to defend their opinions in a rational debate with me. Opinions that cannot be defended are not worth having.

          • propagandaoftruth

            They treated you like dirt. I wasn’t going to stand around and watch that.

            I wouldn’t go back if you paid me.

            This and Takimag are about it for me.

          • JohnEngelman

            I felt honored to have such enemies.

            I enjoy rational debates where facts and logic matter. As soon as I am insulted I know I have won the argument.

          • Usually Much Calmer

            You are able to cross the bridge perfectly freely without paying him. If you don’t like what he has to say, do not engage with him.

      • LHathaway

        Mr Engleman is always on his best behavior. He’ll make leftist attacks on people, much like the author of this piece, and he does hate blacks or pretends to, having been victim of their crimes and more importantly, the heedless pro-black ideology we must imbibe, but Mr. Engelman using obscene or offensive language? He’s never even vulgar. He would be a paragon of virtue on the court of Queen Victoria..

        • Franklin_Ryckaert

          He’s a “Victorian Marxist”, yes.

          • JohnEngelman

            I read any political thinker for insight, rather than doctrine. Karl Marx had two valid insights that should have become more obvious since the inauguration of Ronald Reagan in 1981, and the scaling back of Keynesian economic policy. First, the natural tendency of capitalism is to accumulate wealth at the top. Second, without government intervention in the economy capitalism will experience increasingly destructive economic downturns.

            He was mistaken, terribly so, in maintaining that among blue collar workers loyalties of class are stronger than loyalties of race, nation, and ethnicity.

            He was mistaken in in his belief that the evolution from capitalism to socialism is inevitable. Capitalism and socialism should be seen as co existing in a hostile balance in which each benefits from the mistakes and excesses of the other.

          • Franklin_Ryckaert

            I can agree with your points.

            1) Unregulated capitalism leads to the formation of monopolies and thus to the end of the free market. Mighty monopolies could become more powerful than the state itself and behave without any consideration of the well-being of the people. Therefore for the market to remain “free” it should never be absolutely free.

            2) The realization during WW1 that national loyalty is stronger than the “solidarity of the international proletariat” led some Marxists to adopt Cultural Marxism as the new strategy. Their “long march through the institutions” was successful and we live now under the iron heel of Cultural Marxism.

            3a) Marx was a (left) Hegelian. Hegel was a dogmatic thinker.

            3b) Indeed a balanced combination of capitalism and socialism is ideal. Many successful European countries have it as does Singapore. Combined with ecologism and based on ethnic homogeneity that would be the ideal formula.

            4) Personally Marx was an unpleasant man. I’m not sure if he would oppose cruelty on a mass scale.

          • LHathaway

            Even Marxism can be reformed and create a successful society. I’ve always felt that way. Now I have no doubt. Marxist are like white separatists though, misfits in a society that at least economically has turned it’s back on them. Unfortunately for both of us, we live in the here and now and not some future where one day Marxism or racial separatism rules the day. One thing is for sure, whites in NAmerica are likely to have our own country well before Marxism will make a serious come-back.

          • JohnEngelman

            In a democracy no political philosophy wins total victory, and no philosophy should.

            What Karl Marx had to say that is worth reading he wrote in The Communist Manifesto. That can be read in a single sitting.

        • JohnEngelman

          Thank you.

          I do not hate blacks. One of the most fascinating friends I have ever had was a black college professor.

          However, over the years I have become disenchanted with the Negro race, and with the civil rights movement.

    • WR_the_realist

      I’m dismayed to hear that Spencer doesn’t let you post on his site, particularly when I think of some of the people he does let post on his site.

    • B.A_2014

      Why are you not aloud to comment at Radix?

      Have you been told why?

      • JohnEngelman

        No.

    • Alternative_Right

      You used up your annual quota of commentary round about January 3rd.

  • B.A_2014

    This guy sure does think a lot of himself and his ilk. I’ll give him a tiny bit of credit, he defend NPIs right to free speech. He is the type of journalist I would let write a couple of letters to his family before I emptied a fill clip into him and kicked him into the mass grave along with all those other lefty journalists.

    • LHathaway

      Your day is coming my friend. But it will never come until we have our own white nation in the Pacific Northwest. We need their votes, first. Why should the term ‘useful idiot’ die out in the modern lexicon? We will collect them. We will brand them and we will place them outside our borders. It’s a non-violent solution. You’re wrong about one thing, we will still need a couple of lefty journalists like Mr. Krichick. They will be the one’s explaining how it is a non-violent happencestance (I have complete faith in them), before we kick them out, too.

  • Lewis33

    “Budapest has turned a relatively obscure group of racists into global martyrs for free speech, ”

    I must have missed all the celebrity tweets (a la pussy riot) in support of this conference.

  • Truthseeker

    If an ostensibly democratic state, a member–albeit not in particularly
    good standing–of the European Union, feels unencumbered in silencing,
    arresting, and deporting a trivial and not particularly intelligent man
    like Richard Spencer, then what is to stop it from shutting down and
    locking up someone with more brain cells and thoughtful criticisms to
    make, like, say, yourselves?

    I highly doubt the average Daily Beast reader is more thoughtful and intelligent than Richard Spencer. Say what you will about him, he is a bright guy.

    • Kenneth Arrow

      It is symptomatic of liberals to denigrate their opponents. They don’t understand the concept of honor. If you look at the comments in the article, you will see more of this tendency.

  • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

    Kirchick has no choice. He must deride, demean, dismiss Richard Spencer with all the vocabulary at his command. Spencer and those like-minded are lethal threats:

    “Liberal politics demands that there be no innate differences between groups.” (Jonathan Haidt, Professor of Social Psychology, University of Virginia)

    • LHathaway

      I’m reading the men’s rights people nowadays. The more liberal-left the forum the men’s advocate appear on the MORE their sole argument boils down to biological differences. If they are on a very liberal website the men’s right people base their entire argument on biological difference.

      I could be wrong, but what they are doing is Trying to appeal to leftists. Any criticism of the status quo, to them, for any reason other than biology, could be interpreted as an attack on women’s ‘advances’. Men and boys are facing difficulty because they are biologically different. This gets them to agree with the idea boys are in trouble. On their pages, every woman must remain a perfect mother, just by status or birth, every pro-girl initiative is right on track.

      It’s really madness. One thing ‘realists’ propose is boys and girls in separate classrooms, and one could imagine boys and girls in separate schools. Whatever the Reason for it, this would cut down drastically on interracial relationships (which seem to always be girls picking larger and stronger boys than themselves for boyfriends). This also seems true in homogeneous societies also. No matter how badly girls want to do their part to challenge gender roles or prevent spousal abuse, their ‘commitment’ never seems to be enough.

      This is very, very, likely irrelevant for the future of whites in NAmerica, but it does make you wonder if some whites will be left behind when we move to our sanctuary in the Pacific Northwest. If whites are left behind it would be relevant.

  • Spencer goes on my “List of People I Can’t Feel Sorry For” as number 98877846043755611.

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      There are only 7,000,000,000 people on this planet, so you must have some cosmic experience…

  • FloridaGal2005

    This war against whites is really a war among whites.

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      That is a very astute observation! And that war must be won among whites.

    • KevinPhillipsBong

      White people hate white people who want to help white people.

  • FloridaGal2005

    “I may loathe what Richard Spencer has to say, but I will defend, unequivocally, his right to say it.” He forgot to add “but only after I do everything verbally possibly to humiliate and degenerate him despite having never met him nor engaged him in conversation. And, I cannot really claim what kind of thoughts are in his head, today or any other day, but I will make a complete fool of myself or die trying.”

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      So who is the real “not particularly intelligent man” here?

  • LHathaway

    “It was like a scene from communist times, yet perversely, the “dissidents” in this case were not heroic liberal democrats exchanging dangerous thoughts on the latest Václav Havel play but a bunch of racist pseudo-intellectuals”.

    I like how he describes those who opposed Communism and Marxism as somehow liberals. Using the name ‘Vaclay Havel’, proves it. The forces of good are always leftists, even when fighting against Marx-Leninism. That’s the definition of good and evil for him. Left good, right, evil. I don’t know if James Kirchick is intelligent, or a good writer, but his repertoire seems to consist of insulting people, calling them names and putting them down. I’m not sure if there’s a line in his screed that is not putting someone down, as if bullying is a virtue (for a good cause). Clearly, bullying is only bad when the other guy does it. Since he is supporting us, that gives him extra license to simply insult us in any way and make up virtually anything. That’s his way of providing ‘balance’ for the awful burden free speech places upon him. That, or he’s getting paid by the insult.

    This is Mr. Kirchick’s idea of free speech. To present his ideas, and also to be the one to present his opponents ideas. His idea of doing that to find the most damning thing possible (verified of not?) and then cut-past this, not just without context, but within a faulty or damning context. Since the public is, apparently, too dumb to form their own opinions on even that, too dumb to be able to understand their free-speech rights, unable to filter the truth in a proper way, he must provide the insult as if this is the laugh track accompanying a modern TV show.

    What exact message is he sending? We win by frighting people, making them afraid not to agree with us. That is the front, back, middle, or our argument, that is all we do? Mr Kirchick want’s to be at the forefront of this, the standard bearer, if you will.

    The problem with Mr. Kirchick article is that we have censorship, no different than that which took place in Hungary. The Hungarian government admit themselves they outlawed the meeting in order to conform to leftist sensibilities. Perhaps it’s free advertising, but perhaps Mr Kirchick is being trotted out, not to embarrass himself, but is being brought out as a vehicle to proclaim we have the opposite of censorship, free and open dialog.

  • Usually Much Calmer

    Banned from Europe for THREE years?!

    Man, we need to start talking now while we still can.

    All you have to say is “Race may be much more than a social construct.”- you don’t have come across as an enemy of the state (though you may be) or deranged (you can be that, too).

    Or talk about this Ebola madness. I coaxed my mother-in-law into some pretty realist crap over the weekend about the Dallas guy. Look around, it gets easier day by day to slide into the ‘aren’t we acting insane?’ conversation.

    Run your mouths now, lest you want them coming for you when they have run out of Spencers.

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      That he is banned for three years from Europe shows that it is ultimately the EU and not Hungary that is behind this. The EU is an anti-White totalitarian construct. That is proven once again.

  • journey

    The author does not even realize the problem of oppression and suppression happening right in front of his nose. He is name calling and finger pointing at anyone he disagrees with. He is part of the problem even though he tries to justify himself away by saying, “I may loathe what Richard Spencer has to say, but I will defend, unequivocally, his right to say it.”

  • It is horrible that such injustice is allowed to continue. How are racists allowed to speak anymore? Do we really want people to be able to speak freely without considering the feelings of the lovely anti-whites? /sarc

  • The embodiment of hate is to deny a people the right to
    self-determination. By “loathing what he has to say,” Kirchick is defining himself as a hater. Nevertheless, I appreciate his standing up for
    freedom of speech.

    • propagandaoftruth

      Hey, it’s OK to hate witches. Good people need to hate also, so they find witches, bad folk they can hate, hurt, destroy, and still feel they are the good ones. Even more good, because vanquishing evil makes one feel even more gooder.

  • curri

    Kirchick is a somewhat prominent supporter of the Jewish ethnostate in the Middle East. Has he ever attacked the widespread anti-Arab and anti-black discrimination and racism in Israel?

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      No, because that would be “intolerant”.

  • Jim

    I get the sense that this author will defend the right of free speech for unpopular opinions….as long as he doesn’t perceive them to be a threat. When such opinions gain popularity to the point of gaining critical mass, however, he might just change his view of freedom of speech. Why do I say that? Because you can take the leftist out of Stalinism, but you can’t take Stalinism out of the leftist.

    “Social justice” (and more importantly, social piety) is just too powerful of a motivation to be trumped by free speech for such a personality type. And what personality type is that? His opinion is supposed to be a defense of free speech – that seems to be the moral of his story – but he devotes 70% or more of his article to telling us all how horrified he is with the ideas and positions of the NPI. I get the impression that what he’s really horrified about is being mistaken as someone who covertly harbors sympathy for the group because he defends their right to free speech. So he needs to prove that his halo is firmly in place before playing devil’s advocate.

    And he would have good reason to be scared – the left calls everyone from neo-nazi Harold Covington to Sarah Palin (and everyone in between) – a hater. He knows the tactic of modern “progressivism” is to scream “witch!” and apply scarlet letters to anyone who demonstrates the slightest deviation from doctrine. If I was a left leaning journalist, I’d be scared, too.

  • Eddie Lutz

    The far right in Hungary, namely the Jobbik Party, are no fans of European heritage and no friends of white people. They are useful idiots for radical Islamists (i.e. regular Muslims) united by an envious hatred of Jews. Basically they are worthless scum.

    • Franklin_Ryckaert

      It is clear that these Hungarians suffer from an unresolved identity problem. Racially and culturally they differ little from their surrounding Central European neighbors, but linguistically they belong to the Finno-Ugrian peoples who came originally from the steppes of Central Asia. Early in the 10th century A.D. a confederation of Magyar tribes settled in present day Hungary and imposed its language on the local pupulation with which it assimilated racially. Whatever amount of Mongolian blood must have existed in the original Magyars has been completely assimilated in the process. Because also some Turkish tribes had joined the original Magyar confederation there are also some Turkish elements in the Hungarian language. This leads our Hungarian “nationalists” to construct for themselves a “Turanian” identity, claiming not only kinship with other Finno-Ugric peoples but also with all Turkic peoples of Central Asia, nay even with Mongolians, Koreans and Japanese! And because the Turkic peoples are Muslims our Hungarian “nationalists” also profess solidarity with Islam!
      Not exactly a kind of “Europeans” we need!

      • LHathaway

        They all more or less seem white but from my memory Hungarians look much more ‘white’ than the Spanish or Portuegese. If one only counts say. . 25% or more blond hair/blue eyes, or call any population over 25% blond hair blue eyes ‘nordic’ or some name, only very little of Western Europe might qualify as nordic. 25% is a pretty low threshold to get over. .

  • Malgus

    Who is this guy?

    His article: “Waaah, waaah, bigots, waahh, racists, snark snark snark, some gloating, more snark, ‘waaah”…. then at the end he wraps himself in the flag with “but I defend his right to say it.”

    More excoriating people who don’t share the PC Tolerant Groupthink “opinion” with the barest lip service paid to the right to free speech… what a phony.

    Man… they really really hate our guts, don’t they?

    • M.

      The comments to the original article are encouraging though. Most people seem to have been repulsed by his over-the-top name-calling as you and I have.