I just finished reading Greg Johnson’s review of Elle Reeve’s “Black Pill”, a book in which the lefty journalist dishes out the dirt she dug up on various alt-right figures a few years ago. Sex scandals, infighting, betrayals, mental problems and the rest. It reminded why I’m such a big Jared Taylor fan.

Some strong arguments indeed. Does Mr. Taylor support separation of Whites and Jews on the same grounds?

Does the book include information on the pre-college background of Mr. Taylor’s colleague and fellow TUR columnist “Gregory Hood”?

He reportedly grew up in Arlington, VA, which makes me wonder what his parents did for a living.

If a people can justify separating from another people (or sub-people), it can also justify removing another people. If it can justify removing another people, it can justify liquidating those people.
Hobbes 101.
“Separation” and “Secession” ought to be code merely for “the Final Solution.”
Let’s all hope JT is winking.

BAMMAMA – Blacks are more muscular and more aggressive.

But citizenism says these black thugs who rob, loot, rape, and murder are ‘fellow Americans’.

If most blacks were like Candace Owens, things could work out.

But most are like trashy rappers.

My favorite philosophy teacher used to say that the most dangerous words in human language were “if” and “therefore” — especially when used in combination. I’m inclined to agree.

You can have a perfectly pleasant society based on just “if”. But you better watch yourself when you get to “therefore”, because that’s the screw-top can that nightmares spring out of.

Your philosophy professor was very astute.

the most dangerous words:
Too bad your fondly remembered pedagogue had not been cured by Hobbes:
“Words are wise men’s counters, they do but reckon by them: but they are the money of fools.”
Leviathan (1651) pt. 1, ch. 4

At 44:12, Jared utters those words you’ve always wanted to hear.

Video Link

Just as with states, people are not free until and unless they are free to secede. The most basic human right is the right protect yourself; to separate yourself from your oppressor. If violence is ever justified, it must be justified against those who would deny you this most basic right.

Catholics and Christians of all types are welcome within the faith.
This does not negate the need or desire for Christians to establish their own racially or culturally separate communities.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Christians who desire to do so.
Many people have the mistaken assumption that Christianity demands that racial or cultural boundaries be abolished. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Yes, there are Christian sects that preach (and desire) “multiculturalism and diversity”, much of this attitude being driven by outside (jewish) interests, in order to destabilize Christian and other cultural and societal preferences.
THAT is the jewish way–reserving social and cultural exclusivity for themselves while spreading their “multiculturalism and diversity” poison demanding that “the rest of us (gentiles)” give up racial, social and cultural exclusivity.
All one has to do is see what was done to Catholicism with the imposition of “mandates” on the Vatican II Ecumenical Council. It is when jews got their “get out of jail free” card, being “forgiven” for the crucifixion and death of Jesus Christ, despite their hatred of Jesus Christ and Christianity that exists to this very day.
Let’s not forget the “slide” towards “anything goes” when it comes to sexual matters. The promotion of homosexuality by jewish interests has led to other sordid perverted practices being legitimized. From homosexuality and LGBTQXYZ perversions imposed on civil societies and on vulnerable children to pedophilia which is about to be “normalized”, even the Catholic Church is not immune from such sinful practices and heresy.
Normalizing what was once considered “mental illness” at the behest of jewish interests has only one solution…
The “Austrian painter” had the right idea–expulsion…
The “problem” remains…expulsion to where?

Utter rot. Cough up your Jew religion, Christ-INANITY, once and for all.
Try dealing with Your Savior’s own commands: to let your enemies strike you with impunity; try following His example: get yourself killed.

The Christian Nationalist? Greater love hath no nation than this…MAGA?

“America First”? The Christian is ambivalent at best: the first shall come last! Christianity itself never commands you to save yourself—let alone does it encourage you to pursue your own safety, comfort, and self-interest at the expense of others. Precisely what distinguishes Christianity is self-sacrifice, a sort of super-altruism—albeit one that is supposed to be rewarded in heaven: eventually it will earn you a stupendous, astronomical personal profit. For now, you are to neglect and even negate yourself for others—even for your enemies. Or what does “love your enemy” mean?

If an individual Christian is called to love his enemy, why not a whole Christian country? A group of Christians. If an individual Christian is not to use violence against an enemy, why would a Christian country not be forbidden resort to violence, that is, war? Verily, I tell you, the country shall prove itself Christian (that is, self-sacrificing) by its own self-destruction. A martyr-nation for Christ. But to begin with, what Christian man would think to form a state, whose indispensable element is an army that maintains borders against others? “Render unto a Caesar,” don’t become one yourself! Don’t make your own government and army; obey (and be coerced and destroyed by) all the ones which already exist. “The powers that be are ordained of God.” The concept of a “Christian state” can be regarded as a contradiction in terms if a state is an organization to protect and advance the interests of a people—interests which are sooner rather than later to be in conflict with those of another people/nation.

How do we justify killing the killer? Our own welfare. Our own safety. We serve our own interest at the expense of another who is dangerous—demonstrably lethal. But how can the principle of “love your enemy” permit this? It cannot. The Jewish “Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth” can. But Christ commands you to a higher, super standard: “love your enemy.” Ever forgiving; ever merciful. Thus, the “eye for eye” is revised (violated), for love and mercy will not practice such self-interested retribution. How do we justify limiting or ending immigration? Our own safety, welfare, and prosperity. We serve our own interest at the expense of the would-be immigrants. How can the principle of “love your enemy” permit this? It cannot. Christianity, if it really means love your enemies, cripples all actions and policies that would benefit ourselves; that would preserve our comfort and prosperity and advance our own interests. Likewise, by locking up or executing your son’s killer, we are not serving the killer’s interest. We serve our own. By rejecting the troublesome immigrants, we serve our interest. By imprisoning the killer, we serve our own. Any restriction on immigration is selfish and mean; denial of love and charity to the would-be immigrants. Selfish and mean to others? Unchristian. For the Christian is loving, charitable, compassionate: sacrifice your life—or at least your own safety, comfort, and wealth. Anyone who wishes to come into your house to live and eat free of charge should be welcomed, no? Jesus would welcome them into His house…His country, wouldn’t He? Christ would welcome them into his living room and dining room, no? Christianity easily justifies “open borders.” Because it warrants no borders.

Christ, the ultimate martyr, is all magnanimity. And can have nothing to do with MAGAnimity.
(And now substitute, above, “Whites and Blacks” for “Citizens and Illegal Immigrants”…)

…Oh, but Cyst of an Anarchyst, you’re the _Crusader_ knightly version of Christian? Yes, that violence by the Crusaders was truly in the spirit of “Peter, put away your sword”…and “do not resist an evil person.”
Those pacifists the Quakers come much closer to Christ.
Whites who submit to the Jew who told the begging hag: “I came only to save the lost sheep of Israel”… the false Messiah, sloppy-seconds, good enough for the despicable Goyim.

It is apparent that you are a younger person with a worldview that promotes the jewish “multiculturalism and diversity” poison. You probably never lived in the pre-civil-rights and pre-Vatican II days where “freedom of association” was still the “law of the land”. I cannot blame you for your naivete. You concentrate on a small portion of today’s Christianity (which has nothing to do with true Christianity).
There are many Catholics and other Christians who “know the score” and privately admit that the destruction of civil societies begins with the jews who use uncontrolled immigration to poison White societies.
Let’s not forget Protestantism which was co-opted by jewish beliefs centuries before the Vatican II Ecumenical Council poisoned the Catholic Church.
The Protestant “prosperity gospel” comes to mind with shills like Osteen and Beck promising “prosperity” and “good fortune” to those that just “believe”. Of course, a substantial “donation” in the collection plate assures that personal success is forthcoming.
True Christianity does not support “open borders” as you state.
I can remember when the 1965 “Hart-Celler Immigration Act” opened up the floodgates to middle eastern (jewish) immigration while placing heavy restrictions on European immigration to the USA.
There are those of us who DO “know the score”…

Hobbes 101.

What exactly did Hobbes say about this?

Was Jesus Christ a Jew? Do you believe the deity chose the JEWS…to communicate to me…or to the five billion Chinese?
Anyway, if you’re still not cured: Genealogy of Morals by Nietzsche. Try understanding the diagnosis: Sklavenmoral.
(You might be older than Methuselah, or at least much older than I. So, all the less reason to excuse your ignorance?)

If you are in earnest: read merely Chapter 13 of Leviathan. It is a short but very dense exposition. If you still cannot grasp how my reasoning derives ultimately from his basic logic, then consult me again.
The primary principle that you must comprehend is that if you somehow have a “right” to preserve yourself, that self-same right can be invoked/cited to harm or kill me. You might decide to kill me today if you believe that I’m going to kill you tomorrow. You might decide to kill me in order to get the food or woman you lack. The point is that, just as the individual, for self-preservation, may need to kill other individuals; so a group (clan, race, nation) may need to kill other groups (clans, races, nations). This is the famous “state of nature” most associated with Hobbes.
As Hobbes emphasized, peoples, races, nations, states are in a constant state of war because there is no sovereign above them. (And of course things like League of Nations, UN do not count as sovereign; unless one is an arrant imbecile.) Hobbes reminded readers of Leviathan, in war there are only two virtues: force and fraud.

Jesus Christ was of the Essene sect, not the Pharasaic (criminal jewish) sect that dominated most of judaism. THAT is a big difference that is overlooked. The Essenes espoused many Christian-like attitudes and beliefs.
This is a major point that is almost always overlooked, especially when Christian groups promote the false doctrine that elevates the jews to “our elder brothers” to which they are NOT.
The Vatican II “ecumenical council” was instrumental in absolving the jews of Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and death, despite jews taking credit for Christ’s crucifixion and death to this very day.
Christians who hold fellowship with jews are not Christians, but are willing dupes for jews, not unlike the willing dupes who made (and still make) excuses for jewish-invented and run bolshevism..
The jews themselves have stated that judaism is communism and vice versa…

The Vatican II “ecumenical council” was instrumental in absolving the Jews of Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and death:
Sounds very like Christ. Forgive 7 times 70 times. Why aren’t you LOVING your enemies the Jews?
“Do not resist an evil person,” even when he’s named Abraham Cohen.
As for “Roman Catholicism” (not least Mariolatry and “transubstantiation”) it is has pretty much NIHIL to do with Christ; and “the Papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman Empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof.”
The Borgia popes were only the most forthright of the mostly Italian dynasty.
Let me remind you of your assignment: Go tell the Chinese that the deity (up there?) Chose the Jews as his darlings and spokesmen.