Pickup artist and rape legalization proponent Roosh Valizadeh continues his long march to literal Nazidom. Roosh’s far-right leanings have been obvious for some time, and he’s not exactly shy about his racism. But so far he’s managed to avoid one topic of great interest amongst those who think Hitler had some good ideas, if you think about it.
SPOILER ALERT: It starts with a “J.”
Well, Roosh has now rectified that failing with a post today titled “The Damaging Effects Of Jewish Intellectualism And Activism On Western Culture.” No, really.
It seems Roosh has been reading a book, and would like to share its, er, insights with the rest of us. The book, titled The Culture of Critique: An Evolutionary Analysis of Jewish Involvement in Twentieth-Century Intellectual and Political Movements, is the third in a trio of books on the wily Jew by Kevin MacDonald, a retired Evo Psych professor at California State University, Long Beach who’s been described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as “the neo-Nazi movement’s favorite academic.”
That’s a pretty fair assessment of the guy, a white supremacist with intellectual pretensions whose fans include Holocaust denier David Irving and former KKK Grand Wizard/Neo-Nazi pinup David Duke. His writings appear on assorted “race realist” web sites and on his own Occidental Observer, a site devoted to “white identity and white interests.” They love him on Stormfront, the popular Neo-Nazi discussion forum.
And if you look on Amazon, you’ll see that people who bought MacDonald’s book also bought such lovely contributions to the historical literature as “The Track of the Jew Through the Ages,” by a prominent Nazi party “thinker,” and the anti-Semitic nonsense classic “Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.”
Roosh’s post is made up largely of quotations from MacDonald’s book. Lots and lots of quotations. MacDonald’s argument, in essence, is that Jews have been pursuing a sneaky “group evolutionary strategy,” maintaining a tight-knit group identity while trying to undermine the group identities of white Europeans through the promotion of multiculturalism and other “cultural marxist” evils.
McDonald sees anti-Semitism as an understandable reaction to outsized Jewish influence on culture and politics, and has gone so far as to describe Nazism as a “group evolutionary strategy” that “mirrored Judaism” in many key ways.
In his post, Roosh reiterates McDonald’s main arguments about what both see as the baleful cultural influences of Jews on their “host cultures,” decrying their alleged “promotion of cosmopolitanism, individualism, and decadent lifestyles.”
A few of the “lessons” that Roosh draws from the book:
- “Sigmund Freud, a Jew, pushed psychoanalysis to break down traditional pair bonding in gentiles.”
- “A race to degeneracy hurts Jews less than gentiles because they still retain guiding ingroup values. Gentiles are left in the cultural winds that Jews help create.”
- “Jews were originators of the “social justice” movement that we now have to deal with, but they lost control of it after Jews were no longer seen as minorities in need of social justice but as privileged whites who are part of the power structure.”
Roosh, more circumspect in his language than your typical Stormfronter, professes to admire the tenacity of the Jews even while decrying the “degeneracy” they have allegedly promoted.
What amazes me is how methodical, patient, and determined Jews are in promoting their group interests. Such efforts should be commended and modeled. Why isn’t there such a group of Americans that do the same for Christian interests?
As Roosh sees it, the so-called “Red Pill” movement has already started fighting evil Jewish influences.
A lot of red pill truth is concerned with dismantling myths that have been institutionalized by intellectual Jews over the past century. … The bulk of what I criticize about Western culture was in fact ushered in by intellectual Jewish movements.
Even after making what is in essence a neo-Nazi argument — and echoing old school Nazi rhetoric identifying Jews with “cosmopolitanism” and “degeneracy” — Roosh doesn’t see himself as a Nazi but rather as some sort of “truth bomber.”
Before opening this book, I wondered if it would turn me into a neo-Nazi, but instead it served as a historical truth bomb that has made me skeptical of the ideas, behavioral actions, and teachings of prominent Jews and where their true intentions and loyalties lie … I feel both outrage and admiration at the same time.
Roosh’s readers, for the most part, seem overjoyed that he is finally coming out as an opponent of the wily Jew. They’re a bit more blunt about their anti-Semitism than Roosh himself is. Here’s one, er, instructive exchange from the comments to Roosh’s post.
Notice the upvotes.
One commenter was moved to contribute this not-so-little rant:
But Roosh may find it a bit more difficult to win over white supremacists who aren’t already fans of his site. Why?
Well, here’s the irony: because many of them don’t see Roosh, of Armenian and Iranian descent, as white.
Indeed, several years ago, one regular on Stormfront site warned unwary Estonians that “a really nasty sex tourist from America … name[d] … Daryush Valizedeh, nickname – Roosh” was entering their country in hopes of seducing “beautiful, young white women of Baltic and Nordic descent … this person is not white which makes it even more problematic.”
Over on The Daily Stormer, another white supremacist site, one commenter snorted that Roosh “looks like a typical sand n*gger Iranian … who obsessed with with white women.” Another suggested that Roosh wasn’t even a “Real” Persian:
This butt ugly so-called Persian Roosh is pure khazar. Just look at his morphology; Receding forehead & chin, humongous ears, drooping face, heavy lidded eyes, prognathous median section of face, and let’s not forget the mentality. I’ve met many Real Persians, and he ain’t one of them.
Still another suggested that Roosh might even be a … you know.
Roosh might be styling himself as ‘Persian’ and maybe his parents were born in Iran. Jews are also born in Persia.
He looks, sounds and acts like a secular Jew.
Tough crowd, huh?
Does any of this matter? Men’s Rights activists often dismiss Roosh as a “marginal” character in the Manosphere, but nothing could be further from the truth. According to Alexa, his Return of Kings site gets a good deal more traffic than A Voice for Men, the most influential site in the Men’s Rights movement. Indeed, perhaps hoping to divert a little bit of that traffic to itself, AVFM recently ran a puffball interview with Roosh, whom the interviewer described as “a deep thinker, a powerful communicator … I got nothing but respect for the guy.”
Huh. If AVFMers want to convince the world that their site isn’t a hate site, they should probably apologize for running that interview.
It will be interesting — by which I mean both horrifying and cringeworthy — to see how Roosh’s budding anti-Semitism develops over the months and years to come.
The guy claiming that Douche, pardon, Roosh looks like a “Khazar” is actually being implicit anti-semitic, since the Khazars were a Turkic people whose elite practised Judaism. . Well, here’s what wiki says: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars
. Well, let’s see if this whole farce becomes even more Tila-Tequila-esque. Might we see Mr Valizadeh shaving off most of his beard (except for the bit below the nose? Or putting on a swastika armband? If we take his risible “ideology” and replace “woman” with “Jew” and “man”, pardon “alpha”, with “Aryan” (added bonus: what does Iran mean translated into English?), we’re might nit be that far off from Nazism anyway- well except for the sexual dimension of course, but in terms of the intensity of hatred, the mean-spirited dehumanisation of the “Other” as well as the sheer sociopathy of it all, there appears a chilling similarity. Somehow I am reminded of Otto Weininger, one of the people who really deserve the appellation “self-hating Jew”, and no doubt one of the ideological forefathers of the so-called MRM, and one of the inventors of MGTOW avant la lettre. Weininger, who poured his extremely paranoid misogyny into a whole book (“Sex and Character”, 1903) was also an anti-semite as well. All that was bad in humanity he projected into, you guessed it, the abstract female as well as the “effeminate” Jew. (Hetero-)Sexuality was thus out of the question as it meant the degradation of the absolutely positive male. In his desperation, no doubt fuelled by his own pathological ideas, he committed suicide, by the way- make of that what you will. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Weininger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_Character
Needless to say, Hitler was a fan.
Nazism, Fascism and the Far Right in general contain loads of MRA/Red Pill etc.-friendly elements in the first place, such as the obsession with a martial, domineering masculinity and the wish to control women’s bodies and sexuality (for the sake of “racial purity” and other such nonsense) as well as a certain self-pitying sentimentality coupled with the most obnoxious, and bloodthirsty sense of entitlement. Weird how the most base hatreds, the stuff that makes one despair over humanity- sexism, racism, homophobia etc. tend to mingle.
@Jon
The purpose of this site isn’t to counter or disprove the misogyny it reports on. The posts usually aren’t opinion pieces. The clue is in the header – “The New Misogyny, Tracked and Mocked.”
Most especially the latter 😉
I read the original article and can’t help thinking Roosh doesn’t have that far to go in terms of Neo -Nazi thinking. He has thousands of years of Persian antisemitism to influence his formation of opinions.
@Jon
Ah, the ever popular my opinion is totally facts argument. Listen buttercup, no one is under any obligation to refute Roosh’s completly over-the-top and asinine ramblings. There is no substance to address with a logical argument. We will just stand here and laugh at him thank you very much.
I like to pretend that anti-Semites are all complaining about The International Jew, a single man with supervillain-like powers, who enacts byzantine plots and just happens to be Jewish.
… Ignoring for a moment that Einstein Jr here clearly doesn’t know what “Ad hominem” means, why does “This guy just said that he literally agrees with Hitler” need a counter-argument? o_O
@Jon:
That’s an odd thing to say, since
1) I perceived no “arguments” in all that reactionary shitvomit Roosh spit out. How can you refute something that has no thought or logic behind it, just a lot of nonsense that has nothing to do with anything in the real world? It’s like the time some douchesnozzle was actually trying to start a discussion with David on whether or not women should have the right to vote. This happened in the 21st century, folks. What do you say to someone who is so far gone that communicating with them is all but impossible, let alone having a meaningful conversation?
2) as others have pointed out, this is a mockery site, and the author is under no obligation to provide counter-arguments to the views of terrible people. Anyone with a bare minimum amount of human decency can see the terrible crap in Roosh’s comments, and only bigoted, hateful turdsnots would need somebody else to point out that they’re, you know, kinda shitty opinions to have.
3) I saw no ad hominems. See below.
Normally, I couldn’t agree more, especially with completely pointless comparisons like feminists and nazis (who are, essentially, polar opposites of each other). However, the comparison is apt if the person in question actually, literally espouses views that actual, literal nazis hold. You do know that nazis still exist in this world, right? And that nazis have an ideology that blames jews and other non-privileged groups (like gays) for every ill in the world? And that there are no “facts” in Roosh’s drivel, only paranoid conspiracy theories, just-so stories and a whole bunch of non sequiturs, just like in the writings of any reactionary?
tl;dr: You demonstrate an astonishing lack of understanding for how both arguments and basic human decency work. Try again.
“Was there a counter-argument buried in this article somewhere? If there was, could someone point it out to me? I only perceived a lot of ad-hominem.
Ad-hominems, especially of the over-worn “nazi” variety, are fast losing their potency. You can name-call while others are arguing facts, but you won’t win in the long run.”
First time I’m responding here, but christ.
What ‘counter argument’ needs to be given to a blatant chunk of anti-semitism?
And as someone else has pointed out, I’d advise looking up the definition of ad hominem. Roosh is mocked and bashed for things he actually says. And when you begin pinning ‘moral degradation of culture’ on “those fuckin’ Jews, bro.” Then you’re transgressing to Nazi-ish territory
Jon: What counter-argument does “Da ebil Joos rule da world!” need, other than to point and laugh at the obvious ignorance of both the statement and person espousing such beliefs?
from Robert: “Oddly enough, Jack Chick blames Islam on the Vatican.”
I’m sure he does. Jack Chick’s tracts are very anti-Catholic. He’s part of the ultra-Christian group that believes that Catholics are not Christian as Catholics are baptized (usually) in infancy; therefore, as the child did not make a “conscious choice” to be “born again”, he/she is not Christian.
I was baptized as a baby, but I converted to English Literature (dunno why, there’s no money in it.) 🙂
Seriously now… I did my Master’s project on American writer Ezra Pound, and it’s still somewhat confusing for me exactly why Pound was drawn to fascism and anti-Semitism in his middle age.
But Roosh? Doesn’t surprise me.
Evo Psych has disowned him. But the MRA’s haven’t. Interesting.
He’s an undercover Muslim. Clearly, because he wants to make rape legal. I thought about it and wondered how this man could say such a thing. I wondered how insane is this that he would propose such a thing? Think. Western people believe that to be an insanity that muslim women are convicted or beaten or killed and blamed for being raped. This ‘insanity’ would only make sense if rape was legal!!! This is the ONLY reason why women can be blamed or stoned or convicted if they are raped by a man or even a group of savages raping her at a time! Roosh’s law for legal rape is: if you enter on private property, you are at fault if you’re raped. This limits and controls women’s movement and options, rather than men’s impulses towards rape. This is exactly what happens with females in Islamic countries. If females are in the wrong place, at the wrong time, or unescorted, they can be blamed if they are raped as the ‘guilty party’ making rape LEGAL!!! Women can be blamed if they are raped and some are even killed for it. I thought it was a stunning proposition until I thought it through and him proposing to make rape legal, finally caused me to understand the insane practice of females at fault rape in the Muslim world. Only looking through the eyes of Islamists, can females be not human but objects of scorn that can be raped with impunity. In a world where women aren’t people, as the the Jews were not in the holocaust under the Hitler regime, is why they were ok to kill. If you dehumanize and delegitimize people can you easily kill or rape them at leisure as animals. Roosh is likening the Jews to women because in the Moslem ‘mind set’ neither Jew nor female are considered human. This man is more dangerous than we suspect and the free international authorities should be investigating him for inciting violence and hatred -which led to Jewish genocide in WWII. Underneath profundity, is at heart a Sharia law persuasion. If we aren’t smart, we, like Britain, will wake up too late to change it.
Here I thought Obummer was the only secret Moooslem. BENGHAAAZZZZIII!!!!!!!!
Seriously. How did every white American’s racist, Islamaphobic, right wing uncle find his way in here?
http://replygif.net/i/1396.gif
@WWTH
A question for the ages. I think it’s related to “mansplaining”, but more like “right-wing-nutsplaining”.
1KingofKings has an empty WordPress page. That seems oddly appropriate.
It’s occurred to me I shouldn’t have said “right-wing nut”. I just wasn’t thinking when I was posting, and I am sorry.
Ad hominem has a specific meaning. If I say, “This is what Theodore Beale said about women, but what can you expect from a horrible, pustulant blob of glup,” that would be ad hom. Saying, “Theodore Beale wrote this, and only a horrible, pustulunt blob of glup could believe that,” that is NOT ad hom.
Jon, if he’s still reading, should remember that freedom of speech applies to both the speaker and the audience. It also does not require there to BE an audience.
It’s a thing with conspiracists that once you believe one conspiracy you’re more likely to believe others. Since “It’s the JOOOOOOOOS” and “It’s the WIMMMMMMENZ” are both conspiracies, it makes sense that they tend to co-habit in the same overheated brainpans.
Um, can you actually point out to me where the “facts” are in any of Roosh’s so-called arguments? Because all I can see for miles and miles is mounds and mounds of bullshit.
And sweetiepie, the FACT here is, when someone reaches for antisemitism and gross, odious generalizations about Jews (or any other ethnic group, for that matter), they are, objectively speaking, a Nazi sympathizer, if not in fact an actual, swastika-saluting Nazi.
I fear I will forever wait for the day when people realize that ad hominems and insults are not the exact same thing.
“Roosh is acting like a nazi because he is saying terrible, gross things that nazis believe” is not an adhominem. It is a logical statement (as in it follows the rules of logic and is not a fallacy).
“The things that Roosh is saying are terrible because he is a nazi” is an ad hominem, because his words are being judged not on their own terrible merit but because of the person saying them.
Seriously, when someone outright states that they are a shitbag, it is far from an ad hominem to take them at their word and agree that they are indeed a shitbag.
@Jon
I don’t think you understand what ad hominem means. This article isn’t saying to discount what Roosh says because Roosh is a Nazi.
It’s pointing out that what Roosh is saying sure makes him sound like a Nazi.
Saying the names of logical fallacies isn’t a magic spell that somehow makes you right. Try harder.