American Renaissance Conference Canceled Due to Threats of Violence

Read about it on David Yeagley’s blog.

Isn’t it ironic that leftoids who are always complaining about their opponents’ alleged efforts to “silence” the voices of their favorite groups (minorities, feminists, gays, transexuals, etc.) do not see any need to extend what they hypocritically demand for themselves to those who do not share their own ideological biases?

The American Renaissance conference was repeatedly relocated and then canceled due to threats of violence against the employees of the hotel hosting the conference. So much for these leftoids’ commitment to “workers’ rights.” We already know how much they value freedom of speech. Theirs is the standard Communist line of support for free speech only when out of power. Now that cultural leftism is becoming the mainstream social norm, they have no qualms about showing their true colors. It should also be remembered that violent intimidation of opponents was a tactic of the German Nazi movement  even before it took power and overthrew the Weimar regime. This kind of behavior by lefto-fascist “anti-racists” is even more common in Europe.

It should also be pointed out that American Renaissance is not a fascist nor neo-Nazi organization. Its founder and leader, Jared Taylor, has taken only two public positions on race: repeal of antidiscrimination laws which many libertarians view as an abridgement of private property rights and freedom of association, and a moratorium on Third World immigration, whose critics have included such prominent neo-Nazis as Ralph Nader, the late African-American politician Barbara Jordan, and the black writer Carol Swain, who has written critically but objectively on the white nationalist movement in the U.S. Past American Renaissance conferences have featured Jewish speakers like Paul Gottfried, Michael Hart, Michael Levin, Rabbi Mayer Schiller, and even anarchists like Joe Sobran. David Yeagley, an American Indian, was scheduled to appear at this year’s conference.

What the lefto-fascists object to is the mere fact that some people are holding a meeting to discuss or promote conservative views on racial issues.  Whatever one thinks about these questions, if the lefto-fascists are successful in these kinds of effort to silence opponents through violent and random threats, it is quite likely they will start using similar tactics against other ideological opponents as well. If they can deny freedom of speech and association to racial conservatives, why not pro-lifers, conservative Christians, opponents of gay marriage, Second Amendment advocates, critics of environmentalism, economic conservatives, men’s or fathers’ rights groups or anyone else who is outside the totalitarian humanist paradigm.

It is also likely that as totalitarian humanism/political correctness/Cultural Marxism becomes ever more deeply entrenched into institutions that “law enforcement,” law and order liberals like the SPLC, and extra-legal, lefto-fascist, Communist and anarcho-leftoid hoodlums will start bending towards one another and establish a more cooperative relationship. Be prepared.

16 replies »

  1. That’s a great racket they’ve got going.

    Jews and Zionists and Jew-pawns organize a so-called White gathering. They get the AmRen and confused ‘white patriot’ types all worked up about the chance to support Zionists!

    Then they get others worked up about the chance to take down ‘these bigots’.

    Then they get their SPLC-types to raise funds fighting the “White” meeting they themselves organized.

    Then they get their thugs to threaten, and get their own meeting cancelled.

    Then they raise more money and support from the ‘white patriot/nationalist’ suckers who are so outraged they send off donations to Jared Talylor so he can “keep up the fight!”


    “I understand that estimates of the death toll range from four to six million. I have nothing approaching the historical expertise to determine which estimates are the most accurate. … to imply that I somehow doubted the Holocaust itself, is not only absurd but malicious.”

    “AR has taken an implicit position on Jews by publishing Jewish authors and inviting Jewish speakers to AR conferences. It should be clear to anyone that Jews have, from the outset, been welcome and equal participants in our efforts.”

    “One participant [David Duke] well known for strong views rose to denounce Jews as the historic enemy of the European people. Another called him “a f***ing Nazi,” and stormed out of the conference hall. There will be no more disgraceful behavior of this kind if people who attend AR conferences bear in mind that Jews have a valuable role in the work of American Renaissance, and are welcome participants and speakers. Anyone who thinks otherwise has the choice of staying home or keeping his views to himself.”

    “Success for us lies in demonstrating that our views are right, healthy and moral—and that liberal-egalitarianism is wrong and immoral; not in trying to “unmask” it as a Jewish conspiracy.”

    “David Duke provoked a Jewish participant into walking out of the conference.”

    “[I] refused to permit David Duke to attend the February 2008 American Renaissance conference.”

    “Ultimately, for all the things I care about to happen, Jews must be part of the movement.”


    “Jared Taylor [is] an opponent of anti-Semitism.”

    SPLC & AmRen contributor Alan Adrews:

    “anti-Semitic fools, like Duke… only scare well-meaning whites away from our movement”.


    “Taylor eschews anti-Semitism. Seeing Jews as white, greatly influential and the “conscience of society,” Taylor rather seeks to partner with Jews who share his views on race and racial diversity.”


    “From the start, he [JT] has been trying to de-Nazify the movement and draw the white nationalist circle wider to include Jews of European descent.”

    NICK GRIFFIN, in an interview with ‘Ma’ariv’, the Tel Aviv daily paper:

    “four million Jews would be preferable to four million Pakistanis”

    “I have no time for anti-Semites”

    “I admire the Israelis for what they have done in Gaza.”


    Paraphrase of his Jim Giles interview:

    ‘Anti-semitism is anachronistic.. Jews must be at at the highest levels of the party … Jews are no threat to our civilization … I admire Israel … I admire the Jews … all that 911 conspiracy nonsense and antisemitism….”

  2. What bothers me most about these “anti-racist” cocksuckers is their complete and utter lack of respect for freedom of speech and association. What a privately owned hotel voluntarily decides to allow on its premises is none of their business, and when a group of private citizens decides to organize for discussion, it’s also none of their business. They strike me as a swarm of pest insects, always interfering in areas they shouldn’t.

  3. I think the most important lesson to recognize here is that political organizations/movements reveal a lot about how they would run society if in power by the way they conduct themselves when out of power. What would these lefto-fascists do if they had the full weight of the police or the FBI behind them?

    And like I said in the post, if they continue to get away with this kind of stuff, they will likely use similar tactics against other ideological opponents. For instance, the One Peoples Project was apparently one of the main groups behind this incident. On their “Rogues’ Gallery” page they list a lot of people who cannot in any way be considered white nationalists or racialists including paleocon John Derbyshire (whom, I believe, is married to an Asian woman), black conservative Jesse Peterson, Michelle Malkin (a Filipino with admittedly disgusting political views), Marc Epstein (who is half-Korean/half-Jewish), Charlton Heston and Jerry Falwell (both deceased, and neither with any remote connection to Neo-Nazis).

    In other words, to be a “rogue” and be on these peoples’ hit list, one only has to be a non-leftoid.

  4. I think it was the One People’s Project who actually gloated over the murder of a young white-nationalist punk-rocker by muggers, using openly religious rhetoric (“penance”, “burn in hell”, etc). Fucking lunatics.

    The problem with PC anti-racism is that, among the common people at least (the hardcore psychopaths of OPP and Antifa are exempt from this), it manages to cloak itself as being the most reasonable, compassionate, level-headed position, regardless of the horrors implicit in the rhetoric.

  5. Yes, Luke! I have frequently found this to be the most difficult obstacle in explaining the dangers of PC, lefto-fascist “anti-racism,” Cultural Marxism, the therapeutic state, et. al. to ordinary people. Many people unfortunately regard these types as well-meaning do-gooders who are simply overreacting. They don’t understand, for instance, that the “compassion” of the “anti-racists” is really no different than the alleged “compassion” of the Stalinists for the working class. These are dangerous totalitarian ideologies hiding behind fake humanitarian ideals. When these people complete the process of taking over the state, they will reveal themselves to be about as “compassionate” as Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot.

  6. There’s an interesting discussion to be read over at where a politically incorrect anarcho-contrarian (his views on class and race are heavily influenced by Jim Goad) debates a sanctimonious leftard. I can’t find a link to it, but if you can find it yourself it’s a fun read.

  7. I skimmed over that thread and from what I gathered it was a great illustration of something I wrote before:

    “A substantial sector of the radical right views itself as being under attack by an elite that is hell-bent on imposing militant secularism, totalitarian multiculturalism, homosexual radicalism, extremist feminism and other manifestations of cultural Marxism on the broader society and doing so in a way that displays total disregard for the traditional American liberties of free speech, freedom of association, economic or religious liberty and Second Amendment rights. One need not share the cultural outlook of the socially conservative right-wing to recognize that there is much truth to their complaints against the cosmopolitan liberal establishment. On this question, the radical left typically puts the cart before the horse. It is well and good to defend unpopular minorities against genuine oppression and to agitate for the ongoing expansion of civil liberties. But it is strategically foolish to adopt an antagonistic stance towards towards the traditional and majoritarian culture of the working masses by attempting to pit varying demographic groups against one another in the form of blacks against whites, women against men, gays against straights, immigrants against natives, tree-huggers against loggers, animal lovers against meat-eaters, eco-freaks against small property owners, peace creeps against veterans, hippies against blue collar workers, poor Appalachian whites against Jewish bankers or whatever. A grievous strategic error undertaken by the left during the 1960s and 1970s was its abandonment of the class struggle orientation of the historic left and reinventing itself as what the Nixonites would sneeringly refer to as “the party of amnesty, acid and abortion”.”

    The problem with the Left’s identity politics is that it simply degenerates into a “who’s most oppressed?” pissing contest between different demographic groups.

  8. “The most enjoyable thing about analyzing liberalism is watching it run into conflicts of interest — what do they do about black sexism? Latin homophobia? Lesbians who beat their partners? Socialist governments who murder their citizens?” — Jim Goad.

    The whole Prop 8 thing in California’s a glaring example.

  9. “The most enjoyable thing about analyzing liberalism is watching it run into conflicts of interest — what do they do about black sexism? Latin homophobia? Lesbians who beat their partners? Socialist governments who murder their citizens?” — Jim Goad.

    This is precisely why the victimological coalition will fail eventually. We’re already seeing some of that with black American opposition to same-sex marriage and the conflict between Islamic immigration, multiculturalism, and feminism. Eventually, these kinds of fractures will become more evident. The same thing will happen as what happened with the Marxist myth of international proletarian solidarity. The workers have no country? Tell that to all the union members with American flags on their bumperstickers and front porches.

  10. Christ-Killer Killer, you’re full of shit. Because AMREN is not as foaming-at-the-mouth extremist as you are, they must have set the whole thing up themselves. While we’re on conspiracy theories, I think you’re really a member of One People’s Project who is secretly posting as a right-winger in order to frame AMREN and claim they fabricated the whole event. Now prove me wrong.

Leave a Reply