July 24, 2007
By Patrick Grimm
There are two parties fighting against each other in America, and no, they aren’t the Republicans and the Democrats, two sides of the same Jewish supremacist/Zionist-minted coin. Who are these two warring factions?
The first party would best be signified as “the party of exposure” and the second party would be ominously titled “the party of subterfuge.” These two groups are constantly at loggerheads with each other and the ideological battle wages incessantly, day and night on every front you can imagine.
But there is a profound difference, a schism between the mindsets of the members of these two human infrastructures, as the commenters on this very blog make abundantly clear.
The party of exposure generally desires a discussion of the issues on their own merits and is amenable to logic, facts, research and at least some degree of civility, though occasionally certain persons of the “exposure” camp do lose their cool and behave badly, but such is the way of human beings. Perhaps most importantly they can generally admit when they are wrong or factually incorrect. Most exposurists rely more on common sense, logical dialectic and inferential reasoning rather than appeals to emotion or to subjective feelings, though passion and a fiery presentation have their place.
The party of subterfuge generally frames the discussion as being some sort of childish feud. Instead of keeping their arguments on the topic at hand, they tend to always make it personal and they have fashioned name-calling, petty insults and bullying into an art form. They rarely, if ever, will dispute the points put forward by their enemies in the party of exposure. What they will do in spades is indict someone’s character, insinuate that they have latent sinister motives and often suggest that those who don’t agree with them are not just horribly wrong, but probably among “the forces of darkness.” I know this from experience.
The party of subterfuge fears certain ideas, insists that particular thoughts, attitudes and “prejudices” must be quieted and stamped out. What they are essentially saying with these actions is that the ideas of the opposite party cannot effectively be disputed or debunked. The subterfugites are very big on book-banning (both of David Duke’s books have been officially banned by the Big Jewry government in Canada and other countries), book-burning (they have incinerated volumes they dislike around the world) and the jailing of any soul with the temerity to verbally challenge their Inquisitionally-imposed ideals. It’s a compliment to us that they feel the need to go to such draconian lengths to stop free expression, free speech and the free flow of all ideas.
Since I am a blatant member of the exposurist gang, certain uninformed people, persons who know nothing about me whatsoever, constantly call me a “hater”, a “lunatic”, a “neo-Nazi”, an “anti-Semite” and many other reflexive kosher sobriquets. What they never do is break down and disprove the points I make. However, they will resort to amateur Freudianesque psychotherapy to try to plumb the roots of my “hatred”, explain to me that I feel ripped off personally by Jews, that I have “fetishes” I can’t overcome as well as an irrational fear of the “unknown” that until they pointed it out to me, I was wholly unaware of.
Of course this is all nonsense, but what it does is take the focus off of the subject before us, the issues already raised, making it instead about my shortcomings, my supposed phobias and peccadillos and neuroses, which are all irrelevant and the mention of them by the subterfugites only serves to skirt the issue and avoid genuine debate, of which they are incapable. They won’t engage in an impersonal back-and-forth because they have nothing but fervor and anti-rational emotion on their side. But I don’t blame them. I wouldn’t have a real argument with my opponents either if I had nothing but a sense of moral superiority to sustain me.
How do you know which party you belong to? Here’s an easy test:
If someone brings up the Jewish Question and you reflexively scream shrilly “You’re an anti-Semite! You’re probably a neo-Nazi fan of Hitler who wants to kill all Jews!” then you are most assuredly a card-carrying member of the party of subterfuge.
If someone brings up the Jewish Question and you respond with “Whether or not you are an anti-Semite or do or don’t like Jews is irrelevant to the discussion. Can the points you make be backed up with proven facts?” then you are now a proud member of the party of exposure, or at the very least, the party of honesty and open inquiry.
Thank you for reading and commenting on my work.