Topics

• Trump & Lebanon — We examine President Trump's latest comments and actions regarding Lebanon, including the political tensions surrounding U.S. policy toward the country and the broader implications for America's Middle East strategy.

• Sean Strickland at UFC Freedom 250 — I share my firsthand experience attending UFC Freedom 250 at the White House and discuss Sean Strickland’s removal from the event’s surrounding fan festivities. Strickland was escorted away by Secret Service and other law enforcement after appearing at the event, following his earlier claim that he had been excluded from the White House card.

• Eric Trump & Alleged Fight-Rigging Claims — We examine the controversy surrounding alleged images appearing to show Eric Trump asking about whether UFC fights were “rigged,” including the subsequent claims from Eric Trump and Daniel Cormier that the images were AI-generated.

• UFC Freedom 250 — We discuss the unprecedented White House UFC event, its political significance, the atmosphere surrounding the fights, and what the event says about the increasingly close relationship between the UFC, Donald Trump, and American political culture.

Key Takeaway

This episode examines the political controversy surrounding UFC Freedom 250, from Trump’s escalating dispute over Lebanon to Sean Strickland’s removal from the event and the allegations surrounding Eric Trump and potentially rigged fights. We consider what these controversies reveal about the intersection of Trump, the UFC, politics, and the increasingly blurred line between political spectacle and professional sports.

Sources & Further Reading

• Where the Right Went Wrong by Patrick J. Buchanan

• The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John J. Mearsheimer & Stephen M. Walt

• Alien Nation: Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disaster by Peter Brimelow

• America’s Founders And The Quran: A Forgotten Legacy Of Religious Freedom

Listen to the full episode above.

If you found this episode valuable, subscribe to Arditi Magazine, share it with others, and leave your thoughts in the comments.

Follow me @RealBenMichael on all platforms, most active on Instagram and X.

• Instagram

• Twitter

• Kick

• TikTok

• realbenmichael.com

Support me by signing up for YouTube. membership to get a follow back on socials, personal calls, chats, and more.

• Venmo

• Streamlabs

Topics

• Christianity vs. Islam — We examine the central arguments over which religion provides a better foundation for humanity, comparing their competing visions of morality, human nature, and the purpose of society.

• Morality & Human Flourishing — We explore how Christianity and Islam understand right and wrong, human dignity, virtue, family, and the conditions necessary for a flourishing society.

• The Nature of God — We examine the fundamental theological differences between Christianity and Islam, including the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Islamic rejection of Christian understandings of God.

• Jesus Christ — We compare the Christian and Islamic views of Jesus, including His identity, crucifixion, resurrection, and role in salvation.

• Scripture & Revelation — We examine competing claims concerning the Bible and Qur’an, prophetic revelation, textual preservation, and religious authority.

• Christianity, Islam & Society — We consider how the two religions approach law, government, family structure, religious minorities, and the relationship between religious and political authority.

• Which Is Better for Humanity? — We evaluate whether the historical and theological consequences of Christianity or Islam provide stronger grounds for human freedom, morality, social stability, and human flourishing.

Key Takeaway

The debate raises a fundamental question: which religious tradition provides the stronger foundation for human flourishing—Christianity or Islam? We examine the competing moral, theological, and social visions of both traditions and consider their implications for the future of society.

Sources & Further Reading

• Against the Heresy of the Ishmaelites by St. John of Damascus

• The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) by Robert Spencer

• The Legacy of Jihad by Andrew G. Bostom

• Why I Am Not a Muslim by Ibn Warraq

Listen to the full episode above.

If you found this episode valuable, subscribe to Arditi Magazine, share it with others, and leave your thoughts in the comments.

Follow me @RealBenMichael on all platforms, most active on Instagram and X.

• Instagram

• Twitter

• Kick

• TikTok

• realbenmichael.com

Support me by signing up for YouTube. membership to get a follow back on socials, personal calls, chats, and more.

• Venmo

• Streamlabs

Topics

• Iran War Updates — We provide an update on the ongoing U.S.-Israel war with Iran, examining the latest developments on the battlefield, the struggle over the Strait of Hormuz, the stalled diplomatic efforts, and the potential economic and geopolitical consequences of a prolonged conflict.

• Greater Israel — We examine the concept of “Greater Israel,” tracing its biblical, religious, and modern political meanings and addressing claims that discussion of the concept is merely a conspiracy theory. We distinguish between the different meanings of Greater Israel and examine documented statements, maps, and political currents associated with territorial expansion. The term has historically had multiple meanings, and recent Israeli political rhetoric has brought the concept back into public debate.

• The Expulsion of Germans After World War II — We examine the forced displacement of ethnic Germans from Poland, Czechoslovakia, and other parts of Central and Eastern Europe following World War II. We discuss the Potsdam agreement, the scale of the population transfers, the violence and deaths associated with the expulsions, and the broader question of ethnic cleansing in postwar Europe. Historians generally agree that millions of Germans were forcibly displaced, although estimates of deaths vary considerably.

Key Takeaway

This episode examines three often-contested subjects: the ongoing Iran war, the historical and political meaning of “Greater Israel,” and the postwar expulsion of millions of ethnic Germans, separating documented historical events from the competing narratives and claims surrounding them.

Sources & Further Reading

• A Terrible Revenge: The Ethnic Cleansing of the East European Germans, 1944–1950 by Alfred M. de Zayas

• Orderly and Humane: The Expulsion of the Germans after the Second World War by R.M. Douglas

• Imperial Israel and the Palestinians: The Politics of Expansion by Nur Masalha

• The Question of Palestine by Edward Said

Listen to the full episode above.

If you found this episode valuable, subscribe to Arditi Magazine, share it with others, and leave your thoughts in the comments.

Follow me @RealBenMichael on all platforms, most active on Instagram and X.

• Instagram

• Twitter

• Kick

• TikTok

• realbenmichael.com

Support me by signing up for YouTube. membership to get a follow back on socials, personal calls, chats, and more.

• Venmo

• Streamlabs

Topics

• Christianity vs. Islam — We examine the competing claims about which religious tradition provides the stronger foundation for a healthy and stable society.

• Traditional Values — We discuss marriage, family, gender roles, religious belief, social cohesion, and whether Christianity or Islam better preserves traditional social norms.

• Christianity & Secularism — We examine the argument that Christianity has adapted to secular liberal values and consider whether that strengthens or weakens the Christian case against Islam.

• Islam & Modernity — We examine Islam’s relationship with liberalism, secularism, family structure, and modern Western society.

• Preparing for Jvnior — We apply the arguments from the Wilson–Haqiqatjou debate to my upcoming debate with Jvnior over whether Muslims belong in America, focusing on the distinction between individual Muslims, Islamic doctrine, immigration, assimilation, and the American political order.

Key Takeaway

This special examines whether Christianity or Islam provides the stronger foundation for a stable and moral society, reviewing Andrew Wilson and Daniel Haqiqatjou's arguments while using the debate to prepare for the question of whether Islam is compatible with American society, constitutional principles, and national identity.

Sources & Further Reading

• Against the Heresy of the Ishmaelites by St. John of Damascus

• The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) by Robert Spencer

• The Legacy of Jihad by Andrew G. Bostom

• Why I Am Not a Muslim by Ibn Warraq

Listen to the full episode above.

If you found this episode valuable, subscribe to Arditi Magazine, share it with others, and leave your thoughts in the comments.

Follow me @RealBenMichael on all platforms, most active on Instagram and X.

• Instagram

• Twitter

• Kick

• TikTok

• realbenmichael.com

Support me by signing up for YouTube. membership to get a follow back on socials, personal calls, chats, and more.

• Venmo

• Streamlabs

Topics

• Israeli Influence & Mass Migration — We examine the relationship between Israeli and pro-Israel interests and immigration policy in the United States, including the role of lobbying, political organizations, foreign-policy priorities, and demographic policy. We also consider the broader question of whether immigration policy serves American national interests.

• A Debate Challenge to Muslims — We discuss my challenge to Muslims to debate the compatibility of Islamic theology and political principles with the American constitutional order, including questions of religious liberty, law, citizenship, assimilation, and national identity.

• Is Islam Compatible with America? — We examine the competing arguments over whether Islam can be reconciled with America’s constitutional and cultural traditions, distinguishing between Islam as a religion, Islamic political doctrines, and individual American Muslims. The discussion considers whether religious freedom and constitutional citizenship can coexist with doctrines that may conflict with aspects of liberal democracy.

• The Founding Fathers on Islam — We examine what the Founding Fathers actually said about Islam and Muslims, including their views on religious liberty, religious pluralism, natural rights, and the place of Islam in the new American republic. The goal is to distinguish the historical record from modern claims about what the Founders supposedly believed.

Key Takeaway

This episode examines mass migration, Israeli and pro-Israel influence, Islam’s compatibility with America, and the Founding Fathers’ views on Islam, asking whether America’s immigration and foreign policies remain consistent with the principles of national sovereignty, constitutional government, and the interests of the American people.

Sources & Further Reading

• Where the Right Went Wrong by Patrick J. Buchanan

• The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John J. Mearsheimer & Stephen M. Walt

• Alien Nation: Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disaster by Peter Brimelow

• America’s Founders And The Quran: A Forgotten Legacy Of Religious Freedom

Listen to the full episode above.

If you found this episode valuable, subscribe to Arditi Magazine, share it with others, and leave your thoughts in the comments.

Follow me @RealBenMichael on all platforms, most active on Instagram and X.

• Instagram

• Twitter

• Kick

• TikTok

• realbenmichael.com

Support me by signing up for YouTube. membership to get a follow back on socials, personal calls, chats, and more.

• Venmo

• Streamlabs

Topics

• Christian Ethics — We examine the Christian understanding of morality, including the relationship between God, objective moral standards, human nature, and moral obligation.

• Secular Humanism — We examine whether secular humanism can establish objective moral principles without appealing to God or a transcendent source of moral authority.

• Objective Morality — We explore whether moral truths are objective realities or ultimately products of human reasoning, social consensus, evolutionary development, or individual preference.

• The Problem of Evil & Human Nature — We revisit arguments concerning suffering, human nature, and whether Christianity provides a more coherent explanation of morality and evil than secular alternatives.

Key Takeaway

The debate ultimately raises a fundamental question: Can human beings establish an objective and binding moral order without God, or does Christianity provide a stronger foundation for explaining why some actions are truly right or wrong?

Sources & Further Reading

• Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis

• The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky

• Written on the Heart: The Case for Natural Law by J. Budziszewski

Listen to the full episode above.

If you found this episode valuable, subscribe to Arditi Magazine, share it with others, and leave your thoughts in the comments.

Follow me @RealBenMichael on all platforms, most active on Instagram and X.

• Instagram

• Twitter

• Kick

• TikTok

• realbenmichael.com

Support me by signing up for YouTube. membership to get a follow back on socials, personal calls, chats, and more.

• Venmo

• Streamlabs

• Massie Election Primary — We examine the Republican primary challenge against Thomas Massie, the growing divide between Massie and the Trump-aligned MAGA movement, and the political forces seeking to remove one of Congress’s most prominent non-interventionist voices. We consider what Massie’s primary battle could mean for the future of America First, Republican foreign policy, and the broader conservative movement.

• Soviet Union — We examine the persistence of apologetic or revisionist attitudes toward the Soviet Union, including attempts to minimize Soviet repression, collectivization, political terror, and the Gulag. We consider why elements of the political left and right continue to defend or romanticize aspects of the Soviet experiment and what this reveals about ideological politics in America.

Key Takeaway

This episode examines Thomas Massie’s primary battle and the broader ideological struggle within the Republican Party, alongside the persistence of Soviet apologetics and historical revisionism. We ask what Massie’s challenge reveals about the future of America First and why some political movements continue to defend or minimize the record of the Soviet Union.

Sources & Further Reading

• Where the Right Went Wrong by Patrick J. Buchanan

• The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John J. Mearsheimer & Stephen M. Walt

• The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism by Andrew J. Bacevich

• The Gulag Archipelago by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

• The Great Terror by Robert Conquest

Listen to the full episode above.

If you found this episode valuable, subscribe to Arditi Magazine, share it with others, and leave your thoughts in the comments.

Follow me @RealBenMichael on all platforms, most active on Instagram and X.

• Instagram

• Twitter

• Kick

• TikTok

• realbenmichael.com

Support me by signing up for YouTube. membership to get a follow back on socials, personal calls, chats, and more.

• Venmo

• Streamlabs

Topics

• Nationalism is compatible with Orthodoxy - We examine the relationship between Orthodox Christianity and nationalism, challenging the idea that Orthodox Christians must reject national identity. We explore the historical role of Christian nations, Orthodox monarchs, patriotism, and the distinction between legitimate love of country and nationalism that places the nation above God.

• Israel disproportionately controls the US government - We examine the extent of Israeli and pro-Israel influence on the American government, including lobbying, political donations, foreign aid, and U.S. foreign policy. We ask whether America's relationship with Israel serves American national interests and what an independent America First foreign policy would look like.

• Muslims don’t belong in America - We examine the question of Muslim immigration and integration in the United States, including the compatibility of Islamic religious and political principles with American constitutionalism, assimilation, national identity, and the country's historical traditions. We consider whether unrestricted immigration from culturally and religiously distinct populations can coexist with the preservation of a cohesive American nation.

Key Takeaway

This episode examines the relationship between Orthodox Christianity, nationalism, American sovereignty, and immigration, challenging modern assumptions about national identity and asking whether America's foreign and immigration policies ultimately serve the interests of the American people.

Sources & Further Reading

• Orthodox Christianity and Nationalism in Nineteenth-Century Southeastern Europe by Lucian N. Leustean, ed.

• The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John J. Mearsheimer & Stephen M. Walt

• Alien Nation: Common Sense About America’s Immigration Disaster by Peter Brimelow

• The Case Against Immigration by Roy Beck

Listen to the full episode above.

If you found this episode valuable, subscribe to Arditi Magazine, share it with others, and leave your thoughts in the comments.

Follow me @RealBenMichael on all platforms, most active on Instagram and X.

• Instagram

• Twitter

• Kick

• TikTok

• realbenmichael.com

Support me by signing up for YouTube. membership to get a follow back on socials, personal calls, chats, and more.

• Venmo

• Streamlabs

Jason Arday, 41, was found dead in his south London last Friday after quitting his job amid an investigation into his plagiarism allegations and now his family is blaming everyone that questioned his credentials.

In a statement to The Guardian from his family:

“Jason was subjected to a campaign of sustained abuse for more than three years since he accepted the role of professor at Cambridge University by those who would leave no stone unturned in their quest to undermine him. The campaign of misinformation was too much for Jason, who was a gentle man and who always wanted to see the best in everyone. We are in shock to have lost this amazing father, partner, brother, uncle and son. We won’t comment further at this point beyond asking the press to leave us alone now, and to stop the campaign of harassment which has been waged against Jason and his family for too long.”

Arday was found “unresponsive” at his south London home and later pronounced dead at the scene, according to the outlet.

He resigned from his job on August 5th, as the school launched an investigation into accusations that he plagiarized parts of his PhD dissertation and lied about positions he held at other schools.

Arday had faced allegations that he lifted more than 100 passages in his dissertation from another academic and that he lied about job positions at passed schools.

Independent investigations revealed that significant portions of Arday’s 2015 PhD thesis and subsequent articles contained unattributed text and references from other academics, including Paula Zwozdiak-Myers and Anjum Memon.

Originally, Liverpool John Moores University initially attributed the similarities to “honest and reasonable error.” However, new evidence prompted the University of Cambridge to launch a formal inquiry into his academic record and honorary appointments. Additional claims included falsified research data and the invention of guest professorships, such as a purported role at Nelson Mandela University that had actually ended in 2025.

He also claimed to hold a visiting professorship at Ohio State University within the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, a credential prominently listed on his Cambridge University faculty profile. However, Ohio State University has confirmed it has no record of Arday’s employment there, and the specific DEI office he cited reportedly closed the previous year.

Arday faced additional scrutiny over exaggerated or otherwise false stories regarding his personal life, including claims of raising over £5 for charity, running 30 marathons (786 miles) in 35 days, and receiving a £1.4 million book deal from Simon & Schuster

The clincher was the fact that investigations into these claims found no evidence to support any of his claims. Arday had also claimed that he was being threatened by a masked intruder with a knife and receiving a severed pig’s head at his parents’ home—police and CCTV records contradicted these accounts.

Arday denied intentional wrongdoing, attributing errors to his autism and lack of supervision, and described the allegations as a racially motivated smear campaign before his death.

Topics

• Redeemed Zoomer a.k.a Richard Ackerman — is an American Presbyterian activist and YouTuber. He founded Operation Reformation, (formerly Operation Reconquista) in 2023 and operates the Redeemed Zoomer YouTube channel, which has over 700,000 subscribers. Ackerman was raised without religious affiliation in a family of jewish and Italian heritage.

• Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone) — holds that the Bible is the sole infallible, sufficient, and final authority for faith and practice, superseding church tradition or ecclesiastical hierarchy.

Key Takeaway

This episode examines the Orthodox and Protestant understandings of Scripture, Tradition, and Church authority, asking whether Scripture can be properly understood apart from the apostolic Tradition of the Church and how the doctrine of Sola Scriptura differs from the historic Christian approach to biblical interpretation.

Sources & Further Reading

• The Ancestral Sin by Father John S. Romanides

• The Babylonian Captivity of the Church by Martin Luther

• Against Heresies by Saint Irenaeus of Lyons

• The Bondage of the Will by Martin Luther

• Institutes of the Christian Religion by John Calvin

Listen to the full episode above.

If you found this episode valuable, subscribe to Arditi Magazine, share it with others, and leave your thoughts in the comments.

Follow me @RealBenMichael on all platforms, most active on Instagram and X.

• Instagram

• Twitter

• Kick

• TikTok

• realbenmichael.com

Support me by signing up for YouTube. membership to get a follow back on socials, personal calls, chats, and more.

• Venmo

• Streamlabs

Topics

• Thomas Massie — We examine the objections to Thomas Massie, why they persist within the modern conservative movement, and how his positions on immigration, foreign policy, and national sovereignty reveal the differences between the traditional America First approach and the broader MAGA movement.

• Israeli Influence — We examine debates surrounding Israeli influence on American foreign policy, including the role of pro-Israel organizations, political donors, lobbying, foreign aid, and the broader question of whether U.S. foreign policy consistently reflects American national interests.

• Mass Migration — We examine the arguments surrounding mass migration, including its effects on national identity, demographics, assimilation, and the relationship between immigration policy and the interests of the American people.

• Orthodox Saints and Immigration — We examine how Orthodox Christian saints, kings, and emperors approached immigration, settlement, population movement, and the preservation of Christian society. We consider historical examples to explore whether immigration policy can be reconciled with religious obligations, national identity, and the interests of the state.

Key Takeaway

America First is not synonymous with MAGA. This episode examines the competing visions within the modern right over immigration, national identity, foreign policy, and the extent to which American interests should take precedence over foreign alliances and international commitments.

Sources & Further Reading

• Human Capital: The Settlement of Foreigners in Russia 1762–1804 by Roger P. Bartlett

• Mobility and Migration in Byzantium: A Sourcebook by Claudia Rapp et al.

• Death Of The West by Patrick J. Buchanan

• The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy by John J. Mearsheimer & Stephen M. Walt

Listen to the full episode above.

If you found this episode valuable, subscribe to Arditi Magazine, share it with others, and leave your thoughts in the comments.

Follow me @RealBenMichael on all platforms, most active on Instagram and X.

• Instagram

• Twitter

• Kick

• TikTok

• realbenmichael.com

Support me by signing up for YouTube. membership to get a follow back on socials, personal calls, chats, and more.

• Venmo

• Streamlabs

Topics

• The Kalergi Plan — stems from a section of Kalergi’s 1925 book Praktischer Idealismus (“Practical Idealism”) in which he predicted the rise of a mixed race of the future with “Eurasian-Negroid” features and how to achieve it.

• Replacement Migration — a demographic concept describing migration intended to offset population decline caused by low fertility and/or an aging population.

• George Soros — a jewish billionaire investor and political donor, best known for funding progressive/liberal agitators and causes.

• European Union — a political and economic organization made up of 27 European countries that cooperate and share governmental institutions and rules.

Key Takeaway

This episode examines the historical origins of the replacement-migration debate, the writings of Coudenhove-Kalergi, the development of the Kalergi Plan theory, and the role of contemporary institutions and political donors in European migration policy.

Sources & Further Reading

• Practical Idealism by Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi

• You Will Not Replace Us! by Renaud Camus

• On The Immorality of Illegal Immigration: A Priest Poses an Alternative Christian View by Father Patrick Bascio

• Race Suicide by M.S. Iseman

Listen to the full episode above.

If you found this episode valuable, subscribe to Arditi Magazine, share it with others, and leave your thoughts in the comments.

Follow me @RealBenMichael on all platforms, most active on Instagram and X.

• Instagram

• Twitter

• Kick

• TikTok

• realbenmichael.com

Support me by signing up for YouTube. membership to get a follow back on socials, personal calls, chats, and more.

• Venmo

• Streamlabs

In the interest of highlighting what some of the greatest economists of the Aryan race have noticed about jews, I have decided to compile a list of what they had to say about them. Ranging from quotes about economics to social attitudes, this list covers some of the most important realizations regarding the jewish question.

Gottfried Feder (AD 1883-1941)

Gottfried Feder, was best known for his concept of “breaking the bondage of interest” (Brechung der Zinsknechtschaft) and developing the economic ideology of the National Socialist worldview. Although many of his early economic writings focused on finance, banking, and interest, his work became increasingly intertwined with National Socialism, especially after he met Adolf Hitler.

Here’s what he said about the jews in The German State on a National and Social Foundation (1923):

• “The solution of the interest problem is the solution of the Jewish question. The solution of the interest problem in the sense of our explanations is the breaking of the Jewish world-rule, because it smashes the power of world Jewry — its financial power.”1

• “Creative and productive work has become the slave and the cunningly rapacious, eternally mobile Jewish spirit of usury rules the world.”2

• “The interest slavery of the nation means the rule of the bank and stock-exchange. The breaking of interest slavery is by far the greatest task of National Socialism.”3

Werner Sombart (AD 1863-1941)

Werner Sombart, was a German economist, sociologist, and economic historian whose work helped shape early twentieth-century debates about capitalism, socialism, and historical development. Unlike Feder, Sombart did not argue that jews corrupted capitalism, but were heavily involved in its development.

In his most well known work, The Jews and Modern Capitalism (1911), Sombart states:

• “America in all its borders is a land of Jews. That is the result to which a study of the sources must inevitably lead, and it is pregnant with meaning.”4

• “Nevertheless, I uphold my assertion that the United States (perhaps more than any other land) are filled to the brim with the Jewish spirit. … In the face of this fact, is there not some justification for the opinion that the United States owe their very existence to the Jews? And if this be so, how much more can it be asserted that Jewish influence made the United States just what they are—that is, American? For what we call Americanism is nothing else, if we may say so, than the Jewish spirit distilled.”5

• “Before proceeding to the problem before us—the share of the Jews in the work of building up our modern capitalistic system—we must mention one other point of importance. … There were undoubtedly a thousand and one other causes that helped to make the economic system of our time what it is. Without the discovery of America and its silver treasures, without the mechanical inventions of technical science, without the ethnical peculiarities of modern European nations and their vicissitudes, capitalism would have been as impossible as without the Jews.”6

John Maynard Keynes (AD 1883-1946)

John Maynard Keynes, was an English economist whose ideas transformed modern macroeconomics and public policy. He became one of the most influential thinkers of the twentieth century through his analysis of unemployment, recessions, and the role of government in stabilizing economies. His work laid the foundation for what became known as Keynesian economics.

Here is what he wrote while he attending Eton College (c. AD 1900-1902):

“[Jews] have in them deep-rooted instincts that are antagonistic and therefore repulsive to the European, and their presence amongst us is a living example of the insurmountable difficulties that exist in merging race characteristics, in making cats love dogs.”7

Commenting on the Russian Revolution and communism, he wrote:8

• “I do not mean that Russian Communism alters, or even seeks to alter, human nature, that it makes Jews less avaricious or Russians less extravagant than they were before.”

• “In part, no doubt, it is the fruit of Red Revolution… In part, perhaps, it is the fruit of some beastliness in the Russian nature—or in the Russian and Jewish natures when, as now, they are allied together.”

On meeting Albert Einstein in 1926:

“He is a naughty Jew boy covered with ink—that kind of Jew—the kind which has its head above water, the sweet, tender imps who have not sublimated immortality into compound interest… Yet if I lived there, I felt I might turn anti-Semite. For the poor Prussian is too slow and heavy on his legs for the other kind of Jews, the ones who are not imps but serving devils, with small horns, pitch forks, and oily tails. It is not agreeable to see civilization so under the ugly thumbs of its impure Jews who have all the money and the power and the brains.”9

Alphonse Toussenel (AD 1803-1885)

Alphonse Toussenel, was a French utopian socialist, journalist, writer, and naturalist. In The Jews, Kings of the Epoch (Les Juifs, rois de l’époque: 1845) he attacked what he saw as jewish control of French finance and commerce (particularly associated with the Rothschilds and railways), identifying jews as “usurers,” “parasites,” and the new feudal lords of money. He often used “Jew” as a synonym for banker, moneylender, or unproductive capitalist.

From The Jews, Kings of the Epoch:

• “Europe is entailed to the domination of Israel. This universal domination, of which so many conquerors have dreamed, the Jews have in their hands.”10

• “I call, as the people do, by this despised name of Jew, every dealer in money, every unproductive parasite living off the substance and the work of others. Jew, usurer, trader are for me synonyms.”11

Eugen Dühring (AD 1833-1921)

Eugen Dühring, a German philosopher, economist, and positivist, was one of the most radical early proponents of racial antisemitism. He treated the jewish question as a biological and racial problem rather than a religious one.

In his most famous work, The Jewish Question as a Racial, Moral and Cultural Question, he stated:

• “The Jew creeps after the general corruption which he finds or scents somewhere in order to do with it as he does with everything—namely, to exploit it for himself and his chosen, self-seeking, mostly commercial goals and for his own sort of corruption. The Jew is therefore in his most proper place where he can become the parasite of a corruption already present or announcing itself. Where he feels most at home in the flesh of the peoples according to his nature, one should carefully examine whether it is still healthy.”12

• “The Jews are … an inner Carthage, whose power the modern peoples must break if they themselves are not to suffer a destruction of their moral and material foundations at its hands.”13

Maffeo Pantaleoni (AD 1857–1924)

Maffeo Pantaleoni, was an Italian marginalist economist. His book Teoria della Traslazione dei Tributi (Theory of Tax Shifting) is a pioneering study of tax incidence. According to Nobel Prize winner James M. Buchanan, Pantaleoni can be considered as one of the intellectual forefathers of the modern public choice theory.

In an article about the Democratic-Socialist and Freemason, Leonida Bissolati, Pantaleoni mocked Bissolati by stating:

“If, moreover, the socialist is a professional, one is faced with an exploiter who, for his own benefit, takes advantage of the gullibility of others—a dealer in adulterated and poisonous goods, a piece of bourgeois filth—who extends to the Israelite banker, who hires inferior types, finances party newspapers (and also newspapers of other parties), does shady deals with the State through the connivance and participation of his extreme-left deputies, provokes strikes and boycotts of competing firms, moves in high society and is a lion there, is linked to an international gang of his fellows, has views that are equally broad and wicked, and speculates indifferently on war, on the White-slave trade, on emigrants, on the Madonna of Lourdes, on alcohol and on pornography.”14

In 1921, he remarked that Mussolini was at risk of falling into the hands of the jewish banking system and unwittingly going along with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion:

“Mussolini risks falling into the hands of the ‘Jewish bank’ and of following the dictates of the Protocols, of the ‘industrial sharks on the verge of bankruptcy and the lazy, corrupt workers who all collude to plunder, through the Government, its enterprises, its contracts and favors, those who by their own work and talent, and by the use of their own savings, earn an honest living.’”15

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (AD 1809–1865)

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, was a French anarchist, socialist, philosopher, and economist who founded mutualist philosophy and is considered by many to be the “father of anarchism”. He expressed strongly antisemitic views in his private notebooks (Carnets) and some published works.

From his notebooks (Carnets, 1847):

“Jews. Write an article against this race that poisons everything by sticking its nose into everything without ever mixing with any other people. Demand its expulsion from France with the exception of those individuals married to French women. Abolish synagogues and not admit them to any employment. Finally, pursue the abolition of this religion. It’s not without cause that the Christians called them deicides. The Jew is the enemy of humankind. They must be sent back to Asia or be exterminated. H. Heine, A. Weill, and others are nothing but secret spies; Rothschild, Crémieux, Marx, Fould, wicked, bilious, envious, bitter, etc. etc. beings who hate us. The Jew must disappear by steel or by fusion or by expulsion. Tolerate the elderly who no longer have children. Work to be done—What the peoples of the Middle Ages hated instinctively I hate upon reflection and irrevocably. The hatred of the Jew like the hatred of the English should be our first article of political faith.”16

From Caesarism and Christianity (1860):

“The Jew is by temperament anti-producer, neither farmer nor industrialist, not even a real trader. He is always a fraudulent and parasitic middleman, who operates, in business as in philosophy, by fabrication, counterfeiting, and shady dealing. He knows only the rise and fall, the risks of transport, the uncertainties of the harvest, the hazards of supply and demand. His policy in economics is all negative, it’s the wrong principle. Satan, Ahriman, incarnated in the race of Shem.”17

Charles Fourier (AD 1772–1837)

Charles Fourier, was a French philosopher, an influential early socialist thinker, and one of the founders of utopian socialism. Some of his views, held to be radical in his lifetime, have become mainstream in modern society. For instance, Fourier is credited with having originated the word feminism in 1837.

In his 1829 work, The New Industrial and Social World, he wrote:

“To these recent vices, all vices of circumstance, let us add the most shameful, the admission of the Jews to the right of citizenship. It was therefore not enough for the civilized to ensure the reign of deceit; the nations of usurers, the unproductive patriarchs, had to be called to the rescue.
The Jewish nation is not civilized; it is patriarchal, having no sovereign, secretly recognizing none, and believing all knavery praiseworthy when it concerns deceiving those who do not practice its religion. It does not proclaim its principles, but they are well enough known.
A graver wrong in this nation is that it devotes itself exclusively to traffic, to usury, and to mercantile depravity…
Every government having regard to good morals ought to repress the Jews, compel them to engage in productive labour, admit them only in the proportion of one to a hundred: one mercantile family to a hundred agricultural and manufacturing families; but our philosophic age heedlessly admits legions of Jews, all parasites, merchants, usurers, etc.”18

William Cobbett (AD 1763–1835)

William Cobbett, was an English journalist, pamphleteer, and agrarian reformer. He advocated for restrained foreign activity and raised wages, with the goal of easing poverty among farm laborers and small land holders.

On why he disliked jews, he stated:

“My dislike of the Jews is that which our forefathers had of them: I dislike them as insolent ruffians, who mock the religion and morality of Christians; I dislike them as people that never work, and form a body of wretches who live by trick; I dislike them as usurers, and the great agents of those systems of usury by which so many nations have so severely suffered; and this nation, above all others; in France they were the rapacious farmers of the taxes; in Poland, in Germany, in Hungary; every where, where they have been allowed to practise their arts of plunder, they have produced ruin to the people, and very frequently to the state.”19

In Parliament during the debate on jewish emancipation (March 22nd, 1833), Cobbett challenged a claim that jews were industrious subjects:

“[Whether] he could produce a Jew who ever dug, who went to plough, or who ever made his own coat or his own shoes, or who did anything at all, except get all the money he could from the pockets of the people?”20

Remarking on Britain’s national decline:

“…the daily increasing disposition still to fleece the more than half-shorn clergy, who are compelled to be, in various ways, the mere dependents of the upstarts of trade; the almost entire extinction of the ancient country gentry, whose estates are swallowed up by loan-jobbers, contractors, and nabobs [Indian], who, for the far greater part not Englishmen themselves, exercise in England that sort of insolent sway, which, by the means of taxes raised from English labour, they have been enabled to exercise over the slaves of India or elsewhere; the bestowing of honours upon the mere possessors of wealth, without any regard to birth, character, or talents, or to the manner in which that wealth has been acquired; the familiar intercourse of but too many of the ancient nobility with persons of low birth and servile occupations, with exchange and insurance-brokers, loan and lottery contractors, agents and usurers, in short, with all the Jew-like race of money-changers; the loss of the spirit of independence, which is perceivable in the almost universal willingness and even eagerness, with which the higher classes seek to lean upon the Treasury, and with which the lower classes throw themselves upon the higher in the character of parish poor, thus forming the whole nation into a string of political mendicants, cringing to the minister of the day for a portion of that which he has drained from them in taxes.”21

Louis de Bonald (AD 1754–1840)

Louis de Bonald, was a counter-revolutionary politician, philosopher, and economist, for which he is mainly remembered for developing a theoretical framework from which French sociology would emerge.

In his article On the Jews (Sur les Juifs, 1806), he stated:22

• “For some time now the Jews have been the object of the benevolence of the philosophers and the attention of governments. In these various sentiments there enters philanthropy, indifference toward all religions, and perhaps also a little of the old hatred of Christianity.”

• “That is to say, to speak clearly, that the Jews cannot be, and even, whatever one does, will never be citizens under Christianity, without becoming Christians.”

• “There is no doubt that if the Jews had been as numerous in the other provinces as they were in Alsace, the friends of the Jews would sooner or later have had to reproach themselves, like the friends of the Blacks, for the haste with which they called to liberty—which then meant domination—a people always foreign even where it is established, and which also had to avenge the unpardonable offense of a long proscription.”

• “I do not know whether one day the Jews will be sovereign; but if ever they became legislators, it must be said to our shame that one could challenge a Sanhedrin of Jews to enact more senseless and atrocious laws than those fabricated by a Convention of philosophers.”

Pierre Leroux (AD 1797–1871)

Pierre Leroux, was a French utopian socialist, philosopher, and political economist (often credited with popularizing or coining the term “socialism”).

In his 1846 article, The Jews, Kings of the Era concerning the invention of banking, he wrote:

“Let one, if one wishes, trace general or public banks back to the three monti of Venice, the first of which was established on the account of the republic in the middle of the twelfth century; the true bank will nonetheless be the invention of the Jews. For what constituted and created banking is the bill of exchange, of which banknotes, as well as what we today call shares, bearer bonds, dividend coupons, etc., etc., are only forms and derivatives. All the power of the bank, to accumulate capital and to bring it at a given moment to a decisive point, has come from the invention of the bill of exchange. Now no one denies that it was the Jews who invented it.”23

In his 1846 article, The Jews, Kings of the Era, on the nature of the “jewish spirit,” he wrote:

“The Jewish spirit, the spirit of avarice and greed, is nothing other than one of the forms of the war that man, in his blindness, wages against his fellow man.”24

John R. Commons (AD 1862-1945)

John R. Commons, the American institutional economist and progressive reformer, discussed jews primarily in the context of immigration, labor, and racial characteristics during the Progressive Era.

In his book, Races and Immigrants in America (1907), he stated the following:

• “It should not be inferred that the Jews are a race of pure descent. Coming as they do from all sections and nations of Europe, they are truly cosmopolitan, and have taken on the language, customs, and modes of thought of the people among whom they live. More than this, in the course of centuries, their physical characteristics have departed from those of their Semitic cousins in the East, and they have become assimilated in blood with their European neighbors. … That which makes the Jew a peculiar people is not altogether the purity of his blood, but persecution, devotion to his religion, and careful training of his children.”25

• “Most remarkable of all, the individualistic Jew from Russia, contrary to his race instinct, is joining the unions.”26 [Commons didn’t understand at the time that jews were collectivizing against Aryans.]

Gustav von Schmoller (AD 1838-1917)

Gustav von Schmoller, was a German economist and leading figure of the Younger Historical School held a neutral stance on the jewish question, but even he stated that jews took advantage of non-jews:

“I regard especially Western German Jewry, fully the assimilated [portion], as a fortunate addition to the Germanic race. It gives us intellectual strengths that we more or less lack, or at least lacked earlier; it has greatly promoted the German economy. But it carries with it the danger that through its commercial superiority, which it still often and in many ways exploits by dubious means, it generates many internal social resentments and struggles. The tendency of the Jew, where he comes into an influential, dominant position, to disadvantage the Germans and Christians is still so manifoldly present that setbacks in the Jew-friendly attitude of all liberals continually recur, and that the resentments of conservative, peasant, small-trade, and cottage-industry circles cannot yet disappear to the extent they have in Western Europe. It is therefore in the interest of the Jews themselves that their predominance in certain positions, professions, and offices should not assert itself too strongly or too visibly.”27

Adolph Wagner (AD 1835-1917)

Adolph Wagner, was a German economist and politician, a leading academic socialist, public finance scholar, advocate of agrarianism, and Wagner’s law of increasing state activity is named after him.

In an interview with Hermann Bahr (1893/1894), he states:28

• “And in a certain sense I am also an antisemite. I cannot stand the Jewish nature/essence, the Jewish bad habits, and I do believe that it can endanger German customs.”

• “Just look at the Jewesses on the street, how they dress and behave! That must awaken a certain aesthetic antisemitism—we simply sense them as a foreign race that is against our taste and our customs. In this sense every German is an antisemite...”

Thomas Carlyle (AD 1795-1881)

Thomas Carlyle, while not technically an economist, wrote extensively about the economic and social issues of the Industrial Revolution—criticizing laissez-faire capitalism, the “cash nexus,” poverty, and the conditions of the working class.

James Anthony Froude (Carlyle’s biographer and close associate) recorded Carlyle standing opposite Baron Lionel de Rothschild’s mansion at Hyde Park Corner, where Carlyle stated:29

“I do not mean that I want King John back again, but if you ask me which mode of treating these people to have been the nearest to the will of the Almighty about them—to build them palaces like that, or to take the pincers for them, I declare for the pincers.”

He then imagined himself as King John extracting money:

“‘Now, sir, the State requires some of these millions you have heaped together with your financing work. ‘You won’t?’ ‘Very well’—and the speaker gave a twist with his wrist—‘Now will you?’—and then another twist, till the millions were yielded.”

Carlyle is referring to the reign of King John of England (AD 1166-1216). He was incredibly cognizant of the jewish question and in one well-documented case, he ordered a jewish man’s teeth pulled out one by one (with pincers or similar tools) until he paid the 10,000 marks he owed.

Albert Schäffle (AD 1831–1903)

Albert Schäffle, was a German sociologist, political economist, and newspaper editor.

Albert Schäffle developed the idea of the sozialer Parasit (social parasite) in Bau und Leben des sozialen Körpers (Structure and Life of the Social Body).

Schäffle described social parasites as those who live off the labor and wealth of a “host” (Wirt) without making a productive contribution. They are characterized by traits drawn from biological parasites:

• shameless intrusiveness;

• ability to migrate and adapt to changing circumstances and the whims of the host;

• characterless and heartless abandonment of the exploited host;

• the penetrating art of sucking dry (Kunst des Aussaugens);

• highly elastic ability to leap to a new host;

• skill at nesting everywhere, seizing the best places, seeking out debtors, spendthrifts, and vain fools inclined to exploitation, and scenting opportunity “like a raven smells carrion”

In Structure and Life of the Social Body (1881), he states:

“The usurious/proliferating part of Jewry is a parasite, and a highly dangerous one.”30

Edward Alsworth Ross (AD 1866-1951)

Edward Alsworth Ross, was an American sociologist and university professor, journalist, and publicist. A leading figure in the American Sociological Association, he helped found its journal, the American Journal of Sociology.

The following quotes come from his The Old World in the New: The Significance of Past and Present Immigration to the American People (1914). Here you find him speaking about America becoming the new “promise land” of the jews:

“IN his defense of Flaccus, a Roman governor who had ‘squeezed’ his Jewish subjects, Cicero lowers his voice when he comes to speak of the Jews, for, as he explains to the judges, there are persons who might excite against him this numerous, clannish and powerful element. With much greater reason might an American lower his voice to-day in discussing two million Hebrew immigrants united by a strong race consciousness and already ably represented at every level of wealth, power, and influence in the United States.

…

Easily one-fifth of the Hebrews in the world are with us, and the freshet shows no signs of subsidence. America is coming to be hailed as the ‘promised land,’ and Zionist dreams are yielding to the conviction that it will be much easier for the keen-witted Russian Jews to prosper here as a free component in a nation of a hundred millions than to grub a living out of the baked hillsides of Palestine.”31

And on jews trying to control immigration policy he stated:

“Hence the endeavor of the Jews to control the immigration policy of the United States. Although theirs is but a seventh of our net immigration, they led the fight on the Immigration Commission’s bill. The power of the million Jews in the metropolis lined up the Congressional delegation from New York in solid opposition to the literacy test. The systematic campaign in newspapers and magazines to break down all arguments for restriction and to calm nativist fears is waged by and for one race. Hebrew money is behind the National Liberal Immigration League and its numerous publications. … In order to admit their brethren from the Pale the brightest of the Semites are keeping our doors open to the dullest of the Aryans!”32

Here he comments on jews turning to peddling goods during times of poverty, while the Italians would turn to hard honest work:

“The Hebrew immigrants rarely lay hand to basic production. In tilling the soil, in food growing, in extracting minerals, in building, construction and transportation they have little part. Sometimes they direct these operations, often they finance them, but even in direst poverty they contrive to avoid hard muscular labor. Under pressure the Jew takes to the pack as the Italian to the pick.
…
None can beat the Jew at a bargain, for through all the intricacies of commerce he can scent his profit.”33

While he mentions they show valuable traits, he ultimately states that jews are noisy, disrespectful, more likely to take advantage of their own (when they cannot take advantage of their hosts), and more likely to profit off of White slavery (prostitution):

“The Jewish immigrants cherish a pure, close-knit family life and the position of the woman in the home is one of dignity. More than any other immigrants they are ready to assume the support of distant needy relatives. They care for their own poor, and the spirit of coöperation among them is very noticeable. Their temper is sensitive and humane; very rarely is a Jew charged with any form of brutality. There is among them a fine élite which responds to the appeal of the ideal and is found in every kind of ameliorative work.

Nevertheless, fair-minded observers agree that certain bad qualities crop out all too often among these eastern Europeans. … Genial settlement residents, who never tire of praising Italian or Greek, testify that no other immigrants are so noisy, pushing and disdainful of the rights of others as the Hebrews. That the worst exploiters of these immigrants are sweaters, landlords, employers and ‘white slavers’ of their own race no one gainsays.”34

William Cunningham (AD 1849-1919)

William Cunningham, was a Scottish economic historian and Anglican priest. He was a proponent of the historical method in economics and an opponent of free trade.

In his standard work, The Growth of English Industry and Commerce (1882), about the medieval English economic history, he stated the following about monopoly of moneylending and royal control:

“From the fact that taking of interest was prohibited to Christian men, it followed that money-lending was a business which could not be pursued except by Jews; in England they had an entire monopoly of it for a time. But the Jews had no rights or status of their own; they were the mere chattels of the king, all that they had was his. In this lay their security from popular violence; but it was a security for which they had to pay dearly. Their transactions were all registered in the Exchequer; debts due to them were really due to the king; and they might not accept compositions for payment, or grant a secret release. As a matter of fact therefore, the king had, indirectly, a monopoly of the money-lending in the country: so that the expulsion of the Jews by Edward I. was a permanent loss of revenue to the crown. The Jews gained usurious interest, and banking.”35

He continues with the 1290 AD expulsion of the jews from England by King Edward Longshanks:

“For no action has Edward I. been more unjustly blamed than for the expulsion of the Jews. In the interests of good government the step was absolutely necessary, for owing to changes of circumstances, the Jews could no longer be treated as royal chattels, nor was the law strong enough to protect them if they were placed in the position of other citizens. When the step was determined on, every care was taken to protect the Jews on their journey, and to procure for them the payment of the sums owed them by granting a remission of money that would otherwise have been exacted for the crown, to those who discharged their debts to the Jews themselves.”36

What Cunningham means by “circumstances” was the fact that there was a growing popular and clerical hostility towards jews. Increased accusations of blood libel, intensified crusader rhetoric, and inter-racial conflicts created an unlikely environment for jews to stay in England. While jews enjoyed special royal protection—with the condition that jews were essentially indefinite indentured servants—, the protection became politically costly and harder to enforce.

So, 3 years into his reign, King Edward I. made the Statute of the Jewry (1275 AD), which banned usury (jews’ main livelihood) and tried to push them into honest professions such as farming and the trades.

Before he made the statue in 1275, he began consolidating common-law administration, approved parliamentary consent for taxation, and created more uniform governance. And as the years went on, the 1275 statute was failing. Jews were excluded from guilds (because jews didn’t do manual labor and tried to strong-arm the guilds), landholding remained heavily restricted, and many jews continued lending under the nose of the royal government. Therefore, their economic usefulness to the Crown declined sharply.

Effectively, there was no possible way for King Edward I. to allow them to stay in England without it completely destroying English society.

Conclusion

There are more examples that I could find and publish in this article, but I believe the point—from an economic standpoint—has been accurately made. It wasn’t until after WWII, when economics became dominated by jews, that economists stopped finding correlations between unfair practices and the jews. Since WWII, all we hear is how jews are a net benefit to our economy because they are hard workers, smart, diligent, and productive. But the truth is, they don’t actually produce anything, they’re not that clever, they look down on making an honest living, and they take advantage of other peoples for their overall benefit.

Since is the case, why would any rational thinking person ever want the jews to live inside their nation’s borders? And if you’re against this parasitism, the only real option for you is to become antisemitic. However, if you’re now antisemitic, you must look at the other non-Whites in your nation and see the problems with them as well. Ultimately, you must adopt a nationalist mindset in order preserve your race, you culture, your Christianity, and your way of life.

A negro in a clown costume stabbed an elderly man to death and left his body in the street—after he was filmed walking up to a neighbor’s house, staring directly into the security camera, and whispering “I’ve been looking for you.”

The murderer, who has not been publicly identified, was seen approaching an East St. Louis, Illinois, home in a black and red clown suit. The footage, taken from Facebook, shows the alleged suspect leaning into the camera and chillingly stating:

“I’ve been looking for you.”

After, he calmly saunters off the porch and is seen going around the back of the house. Fortunately for the homeowner, he never went in the house.

The footage of the teen shows a timestamp of 9:11 p.m. on Monday—less than an hour before police responded to a report of a body found in the road nearby.

The victim, identified as John Wesley Allen Sr., was found dead just after 10 p.m. from multiple stab wounds, according to police and the St. Clair County Coroner’s Office.

Allen was a Navy veteran, and he was waiting at a bus stop to visit his sister when he was confronted by the murderer.

The juvenile suspect was quickly identified and was found at a residence where he was taken into custody, Illinois State Police said Tuesday.

ISP said in a statement:

“Video footage of the suspect dressed in a clown costume has been circulating and ISP is currently working to collect all relevant video.”

No additional details about the killing have been released. The motive or relationship between the victim and perp wasn’t immediately known.

Lee Palmer told KMOV that his mother was home alone when the murderer suddenly appeared on their front porch.

He lurked around the property for several minutes and went behind the house, he said.

“I couldn’t believe it. He was dressed in the clown outfit,” Palmer said. “That was kind of spooky for her.”

He said he was immediately terrified the clown was “going to kill everybody in the house,” Palmer said.

“Why out of all the houses, why come to this house?” he wondered.

Luigi Mangione, 28, admitted to killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, pleading guilty this morning to federal stalking charges:

“I shot Mr. Thompson in Manhattan and he died,” Mangione said in Manhattan federal court, reading from a written letter.

The Maryland prep school alum was charged with stalking Thompson, 50, leading to his death on a Midtown sidewalk. He was not charged with murder in the federal case because the killing was deemed a state matter.

He then led authorities on a dramatic five-day manhunt before local cops in Altoona, Pa. finally nabbed him while he was eating breakfast at a local McDonald’s.

Prosecutors say Mangione penned a “manifesto” detailing motive to kill the UnitedHealthcare CEO outside the company’s annual investor conference was a way to “rebel against the deadly, greed-fueled health insurance cartel.”

They say he plotted the murder to make apolitical statement, leaving behind bullet casings at the scene with the words “delay” and “deny” etched into them, a nod to language insurers allegedly use to dodge paying out customers’ claims.

He allegedly wrote that other high-level executives of insurance providers were fair game because the industry “literally extracts human life force for money.”

Defense Attorney Karen Agnifilo told the judge:

“Mr. Mangione is prepared to plead guilty to the indictment at this time.”

Mangione looked solemn, close to choking up, as he said “yes” to a series of questions about the legal specifics of his plea.

He nodded his head slightly when Judge Margaret Garnett told him that the maximum sentence he could face is a potential life sentence.

The defiance that defined Mangione’s alleged “manifesto” detailing his ax to grind with the health insurance industry had seemingly seeped away in the courtroom.

Ken Klippenstein

Exclusive: Luigi's Manifesto

I’ve obtained a copy of suspected killer Luigi Mangione’s manifesto — the real one, not the forgery circulating online. Major media outlets are also in possession of the document but have refused to publish it and not even articulated a reason why. My queries to The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN and NBC to explain their rationale for withhold…

Read more

2 years ago · 8433 likes · 84 comments · Ken Klippenstein

The now-admitted killer’s written speech methodically detailed his grudges over enduring years of severe back pain and eventual plot against Thompson.

He revealed that he even posed as an investor at a firm managing $150 million in assets in an email to UnitedHealthcare leadership to score details about their 2024 conference in New York City.

“Before traveling to New York, I used a 3-D printer to make a gun,” he said. “I equipped the gun with a silencer and a magazine.”

Mangione had been set to begin his federal court trial in January on the two counts—interstate stalking resulting in death and stalking through use of interstate facilities resulting in death.

He’ll now face a sentencing hearing on December 18th.

Mangione is still charged with murder in the second-degree, criminal possession of a forged instrument, also in the second-degree, and multiple counts of criminal possession of a weapon in state court.

Jury selection for his state trial is set to kick off on September 8th.

His lawyers confirmed after the plea hearing that they’ll file a motion in state court arguing it’d constitute double jeopardy if he’s convicted in that case.

US District Judge Margaret Garnett warned Mangione on Friday that his potential sentence in the state case could come consecutively.

Find Monika Schaefer at:

https://republicbroadcasting.org/the-flip-side-with-monika/

Find Etta Volk at:

https://republicbroadcasting.org/critical-review-with-etta-volk/

Sources:

NIH liver study
DNA enhancer promoter
Dr Boyle court filing Covid bioweapon law

AI creates viruses funded by gates foundation

Covid mRNA is transcribed into our DNA

Find Patrick at:

Holy Land Radio

Subscribe to the podcast and website

Critical Review with Etta Volk

Thanks for reading! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

The New Way

Arditi

Arditi Magazine features a collection of right wing writers, podcasters, and artists who are White Christians.

By Imperator Ardito

Listen to more episodes of Critical Review with Etta Volk on Arditi.

Arditi is an independent publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Etta’s Social Media Links

Video Live Streaming

Rumble

Call into the show at 512-248-8252

Listen Live RBN

Power is the condition after politics. Once a political status quo is arranged, only then is power relevant. The processes of power are then how power is exercised within a certain status quo, within certain politics. To understand power we must understand politics. To understand politics we must understand humanity, as it is only humanity which generates politics.

All politics are derived from the mind. That is—the worldview which derives from the mind, and which accordingly informs a political structure. These structures—what we could call “ideologies”—are understandings of what is, and then attempts at proposing what must be.

As a consequence, ideology can only be accepted or formed based on an understanding, or worldview. In this case, worldview is meant in the simplest definition: how one views the world. A practical approach to politics will conflict with an idealistic one, a conservative approach will conflict with a progressive one.

With all the diversity of human thought, conflict is inevitable. With conflict comes violence and with violence comes war. War itself is not representative of power; only the authority to initiate a war and the status quo that follows after a war can be considered power. For power cannot be exercised without a system or without a society.

The relevant question is then: what is a society? It may be proposed that a society is a group of humans that share a common interest. On the contrary, we find many societies with a lack of common interest, only held together by the status quo. And indeed, if common interest alone were sufficient to constitute a society, we would have no need for differing ideology, as all rational creatures have a common interest in living well.

A better definition of a society would be as follows: a grouping of humans who are bounded by shared culture and way of life, who live under a system that maintains material harmony—such that no serious conflict of worldviews is pursued—and that organizes itself formally or informally.

It may be said then that the primary inspiration of worldviews is an interest in living well, and once these material conditions are met, difference of opinion (in worldview) is subordinated. However, there are those who are not content with just material conditions. These people are concerned with both the material and abstract, and thus their worldview cannot be subordinated, so long as their experience (and mind) compel them to this worldview.

They are “the thinkers” or “thinking men”, as they are concerned with abstract conditions. Their counterpart are “the workers” or “working men”, as they are concerned with material conditions. The two cannot exist independently.

A society, according to this logic, desires the suppression of hostile thinkers. For if a society is a system founded on one worldview, the tolerance of a worldview that seeks to destroy it guarantees its destruction when it fails to provide material conditions. When material conditions are not provided, there can no longer be subordination of opinion for the working man. A thinking man will learn to tolerate the regime but wish for its replacement. A working man has little reason not to tolerate the regime until it stops providing.

Stability is the fulfillment of material conditions. Material conditions may be defined as follows: economic security, social cohesion, law and order. The first is the most important, as if a working man cannot fulfill his purpose, he will be swayed by the thought of hostile thinkers who provide him his purpose. If the society has no social cohesion—that is to say, it has multiple cultures, languages, and its values are foreign to the worker, this will accelerate any issue caused from a lack of economic security. Lastly, no society can be maintained without the enforcement of law.

Desmond Carter, 21, who is charged for gang raping Madison Brooks, is raising concerns that her family wearing the color pink—her favorite color.

Brooks, 19, was gang raped in 2023, just minutes before she was fatally hit by a car. Carter is now asking that all of her supporters be banned from wearing her favorite color because the creates a “carnival atmosphere.”

Carter’s lawyers pointed to several social media posts of supporters encouraging people to attend court sessions wearing the color pink to ensure Carter spend the rest of his life behind bars.

Prosecutor Sonya Cardia-Porter, who has asked the motion be denied, called the allegations an “absurd exaggeration” and “unpersuasive,” describing Brooks’ supporters as “silent, passive spectators wearing a particular color.”

Cardia-Porter asked the judge to instruct the jury to “disregard any attire or display from spectators.”

Brooks, was a sophomore, who was raped in the backseat of a car by Carter, who was 17 at the time—but being tried as an adult—Kaivon Washington, 21, and Casen Carver, 22 after the group left Reggie’s bar in East Baton Rouge where Brooks worked and they had been drinking heavily in Jan. 2023.

The defendants have claimed that the encounter was consensual before they left her on the side of a roadway.

Carter currently faces charges of first-degree and third-degree rape.

Footage from the car shows Brooks arguing with her alleged attackers before she stumbled out of the car.

Investigators said Brooks had a blood-alcohol content of 0.319%—nearly four times the legal limit—when she stumbled onto the busy road.

The East Baton Rouge Parish Coroner’s Office concluded that Brooks died from “traumatic injuries” after she was raped.

Jerry Falade, a graduate student at Southern Methodist University, has recently lost a $2 million book deal over allegations that he has used AI to write it.

Falade is saying that his own reps pulled the plug on the sale of his first crime novel, “Call Me, I’ll Hide the Body,” and now Falade is claiming that the allegations have been made because he’s a negro.

In two posts from his Instagram:

1. “Definitely innocent!!!,” he wrote in an Instagram story.

2. “They CAN’T and WON’T stop this Black boy’s light from shining!!,” he wrote in a second post.

In a series of social media posts, he said claims against him are part of a systemic pattern of diminishing the intellectual contributions of negros. But I wouldn’t diminish the intellectual contributions of negroes… I would deny they even exist.

Falade wrote:

“If you’re a Person of Color and you secure a lucrative deal in history, someone, somewhere, will accuse you of using AI.”

Meanwhile, he added that white authors “brag about using AI all the time.”

Fourteen publishers had bet on the US rights for Falade’s debut novel, and he ultimately inked a deal with Minotaur, a Macmillan US imprint for a reported $2 million. HarperCollins Publishers won the UK rights.

Soon after the deals closed and Falade was set to make millions, an agent at Europa Content notified the publishers in a letter that he could no longer support the book after evidence of AI being used to write it came up.

Falade told the Wall Street Journal that he only used AI for research, “and not for writing the book itself.”

He explained that he relied on a tool that let him run an open-source AI model on his own device, to obtain details on topics like what chemical someone might use to dissolve a human body.

The tool he used doesn’t keep or share extensive search histories, raising eyebrows. But Falade said he used that method because of the grizzly subject matter of the questions for his crime novel—which he felt could raise red flags if they were tracked.

Falade said that none of the editors he met with during the book-sale process asked about AI usage. Falade also stated that he never consented to having his manuscript run through AI detection software.

We all know now the reason why he wouldn’t have consented is because he used AI to write it. However, refusal wouldn’t have necessarily meant that he was guilty, so the publishers were smart to go ahead and scan it after the book closing.

The scribe said that none of the editors he met with during the book-sale process asked about AI usage, noting that he never consented to having his manuscript run through AI detection software.

Falade told the Journal that he was contacted by a reporter who said there were rumors of AI usage. Hours later, he learned his agent, Marc Gerald, was pulling support for his book.

Gerald said he is no longer Falade’s literary agent and a rep for Macmillan confirmed Friday that the publisher participated in an auction for “Call Me, I’ll Hide the Body,” but they had pulled the book.

In the meantime, Falade said, he is going forward with his next work:

“Trust me, when this book is finally released, the bidding war we saw on ‘Call Me, I’ll Hide the Body’ will be child’s play compared to this.”

Join The New Way and Partake in Operation Wayside