No, Trolling and Hate Mongering are Not the Same

How Trolls Are A Danger To Society
David Wolf | 18.III.2019
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5S1fLX4YpA

I

4:36 Someone recommended this video to me, if that person considers me as claiming conversion from Judaism, I'm not - for my person.

I owe my Christian heritage in high part to Conversos who did not convert under pressure. Or perhaps even more precisely, to Conversas. Closest in time, a stepgranny who died before I was born. Real mother of a once stepfather.

If I recall correctly, you are the Christian son of a convert to Christianity, but if not, sorry.

I certainly did convert to Catholicism, like Chesterton, from a basically "right wing near Catholic Protestant" stance.

I also have, like Chesterton, lots of other things to write about than my conversion story.

However, some guys who do not wish to give me a place as a writer (and publishing in the days of internet does not automatically mean getting paid as it used to), seem to try to push me or at least my reputation into categories like:

• convert from Judaism
• of suspect sincerity
• who should shut up and find a job other than writing.

I never claimed to convert from Judaism any more than you claimed to convert from Druzism (correct me if I am wrong on your family origins).

I do claim as much a right to write or otherwise express myself as you have, though.

And if you would like to compare me to Levine, well, who are the guys I'm supposed to have made hysterical claims about?

Putin? He's not a religious group. He's not in a position where he can fear getting lynched because a lot of his neighbour share my religion rather than his. He can not be compared at all to Irish immigrants in Philadelphia.

So, who are the guys - plural - I am supposed to be making hysterical claims about?

II

5:00 And where do you even get a statement like "never a Protestant, always a Jew" from?

"At a time when American Jews were few and often scattered, intermarriage was fairly common, comprising more than one in four marriages involving Jews. Still, the constitution of Charleston’s Beth Elohim stated that “any person or persons being married contrary to the Mosaical Law, or renouncing his or their religion, shall themselves and their issue, never be recog­nized members of this Congregation.” By marrying outside the faith, Levin likely distanced himself from the Jewish community."

Your link.

Two things to consider:

• Protestants aren't always the nicest to Catholics.
• Protestants very often are nice to Jews and would for instance not require a converting Jew to sever family ties with Jewish relatives.

So, where is the evidence he never was a Protestant?

III

14:08 "They didn't use that term"

Excellent point.

There is a difference like Heaven and Hell between arresting someone who has provoked a riot with death casualties by being incendiary about a group which is then targetted by violence and avoiding someone on the pretext of his being a "troll".

Being a troll describes an attitude, but it doesn't quite catch what self-imposed or situational limits on that attitude differentiate someone from a man like Lewis Levin.

Even supposing the description be well chosen about a specific person's attitude.

Btw, thanks for saying Zachary Schrag was a Jew, I wouldn't have noticed.

The Bible also is not quite calling the Jews trolls.

IV

16:10 Ah the Democrat militia man had defended a Catholic Church?

Those are the days in which Democrats had for "three R's" three words that really start in R:

• Rome,
• Rhum
  and
  
• Rebellion.

Back when Chesterton loved them.

If Bernie Sanders had been pro-life and pro-homeschooling, I'd have openly supported him.

V

25:43 As you reminded us of Breivik, may I remind you of a few facts about my stance on Utøya, which has been somewhat distortedly reported.

• 1) Breivik was a freemason, while not very active he was excluded from freemasonry (Johanneslosjen number whatever, perhaps 1) of the normal Norwegian freemasonry (nothing like Scottish rite or Grand Orient, but standard Grand lodge type freemasonry).(*)
• 2) News media and Norwegian police had reported him as "Fundamentalist Christian" when he's anything but, he is a "cultural Christian" about as much as Young Turks are Cultural Muslims or like the Atheist Persians in that restaurant in Lund I was neighbour to are "cultural Muslims". He believes Evolution theory should be compulsory in Norwegian schools, he's no believer in a personal God, at least those were his posiitions (and stated such) back then. Somehow, I got associated with Breivik for being a "Fundie" not in the sense of Anti-Catholic, but simply in the sense of Young Earth Creationist. I obviously responded by publishing links to the Masonic news about his exclusion on my blog. Some over here have taken this activity of defending myself and other Fundies from suspicion of being Breivik types as my supporting Breivik's cause.
• 3) I believe the Crusades were just wars. I don't believe all acts in them were just acts. But I believe both the actual way in which Afghanistan war worked out and what Breivik was doing (despite his claiming to be "Templar") are not Crusades and would not have been accepted as such by, for instance, Pope Innocent III. I have said so. Some have taken this as my being a pro-Crusader fanatic, therefore comparable to Breivik and so on.
• 4) I have one hero on Utøya. She swam away, not alone, but with a younger boy who, thanks to her is also alive. Too bad she is socialist, too bad she had those ideals, but I find what she did really admirable, and I think the prayers of St Olav were what chose her for the job of saving one : she's a daughter of Croatian immigrants.
• 5) Breivik senior, his father, is still in a Masonic lodge, he considered his son should commit suicide after doing such a thing. I consider that bad advice, bad sense of honour, and while I don't grudge the long prison sentence, I did lobby for his prison conditions getting better. I have been to prison myself. It can be hard. Yes, he deserved prison, no, no prisoner deserves everyone hoping he suffers as much as possible. Not he, not the guy in Spandau prison either.

As long as some media and some government officials, like those Norwegian police, confuse issues like "identitarian" of a religion and "fundamentalist" of a religion, political hatred of foreigners who aren't that religion (though Breivik did probably state he blamed Muslim immigrants less than he blamed the guys who helped their immigration, or perhaps even not at all, hence he was not targetting a Mosque - if not, it's my bad memory) with religious conviction for your religion being the right one, some stubborn confusion is going to sow hatred by the fact they are nearly acting like trolls, but they are not in a position to be called out as such.

What have some guys been saying over media for very long? Or, perhaps rather, had, back before 9/11?

• Christian fanatics were responsible for Crusades
• belief you could defend your religion = violence in the name of your religion
• Christian fanatics are denying Evolution, denying Climate Change, opposing abortion.

This is not what I say, this is what some were saying, not exact quotes, hence no quotation marks.

Then a guy looks around. He sees some Muslims are "responsible for terrorism in Israel" (Breivik was a Zionist, admired Hitler except for the Antisemitism, a bit like I had done before I discovered Franco, who actually defended the Church and actually held abortions banned). (Before I had, etc, = before I was 15 or so, or perhaps even younger). He sees some Muslims deny Evolution, deny Climate change, oppose abortion, refuse to use condoms, though the Norwegian state so "generously" sponsors these, what kind of conclusion do you think he will draw with values as outlined as PC?

I am a bit tired of, if anyone, comparing me to Breivik or now Tarrant, since, while I have used and will go on to use expressions like "grand déplacement" (Paris region has 20 % Muslims and it makes a difference, not just for the bad, but also not just for the good), I have recommended :

• limit immigration if you want to
• be good neighbour to those who are already here, don't grudge their religious separateness or the freedom they have to express it
• but above all, make a few more babies.

For a "grand déplacement" there are two parties, not just Muslims coming in, but first and foremost Westerners not properly reproducing ourselves so as to need immigration to preserve generations from too much of an imbalance.

If we start with just getting rid of Muslims, we are doomed, too few babies. More and more old will be homeless or ill taken care of.

If we start with getting rid of abortion, contraception, and a few more things like that, we might not need to get rid of Muslims all that badly (it might be too late, see that guy who rifled three guys in Amsterdam, perhaps in reprisal for Christchurch). We might start (if peace is still to be had for that long, it might have been back when I started saying this) getting some more respect from them, converting more of them, getting on better with those we don't convert.

Then again, some places some Muslims have powers over Christians they don't really need to get on with normal Muslim lives, so, overall and not just Muslims, Jews or Calvinists, a little less power to shrinks, to CPS and things like that. And require security guards to be kind to homeless.

(*) His exclusion was the day after his ill deed.

I forgot to link to the post here:

Telegraph : Norway shootings: July 28 as it happened
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/norway/8669706/Norway-shooting-July-28-as-it-happened.html

VI

26:57 I'm not sure if a lot of the socialists were descending from foreigners, I am very sure, the girl I like best of them (she who saved a boy of 11, who might not have made it swimming herself) was Croatian. Martinovic. Emma Martinovic.

Btw, one other survivor was Chechen (17 year old).

And considering some things Russians did, I can relate to why they went to Norway.

VII

28:56 I didn't know it was Alfred Rosenberg (whose Mythus des 20sten Jahrhunderts is on the Index librorum prohibitorum).

I'd have guessed Charles Maurras. While I appreciate some things he has to say on democracy and monarchy and on fiscal socialism, there are parts of government funded things that should be defunded, and liberties and money get back to citizens and tax payers, I have found another side to him since I came to France.

He hated the fact that the Mosque of Paris opened in 1926.

VIII

29:22 I have said it before.

If you want to defend the West, you can't do it for having a white race. You must do it for Christianity - or, failing that, some other actual value.

Sure, whites should stay around, but the "dangers of miscegenation" really aren't that much of a threat.

So, you fight for "whites" (as such), you might end up fighting for National Socialism or something not far off. You fight for Christianity, you will not be either invaded by blacks, nor be unkind to those who do come.

IX

30:53 As having some experience with Satanists, I am not sure someone of them would be too keen to do that.

They do have some ethic of kindness, among them, while also having an ethic of ruthlessness and of provocation to some outsiders, especially Christians.

Varg Vikernes, now an Odinist was back in certain times a Satanist, and he burned Churches when they were empty, but he killed a friend for being irritating. He seems to be a better guy now, but somewhat the type who would like to give me "a new education" like so many others have.

X

David Wolf on video:

23:51 "it's like that story I remember reading"

23:54 "about there was a radio broadcast"

23:58 "called ... War of the Worlds or sth"

24:00 "and some guy who went on the radio, this was back"

24:01 "in like the erly 1900's"

24:05 "I think, went on the radio when radio was a very new thing, you [know, most]"

24:06 "America were used"

24:08 "to radio and he gets on the radio"

24:10 "and he starts reading a sci-fi novel"

24:12 "about how aliens are taking over now"

24:16 "it was a sci-fi novel, but a bunch of people, they"

24:19 "didn't know that people"

24:20 "people were reading sci-fi, science"

24:23 "fiction from the radio, they thought the radio"

24:25 "[was] something you listen to to hear the news, to"

24:27 "inform yourself of what's happening in the country or"

24:29 "you know in your local area or whatever and there"

24:31 "are people who find [went] crazy, there"

24:33 "[are] people committing suicide because they thought"

24:34 "they were being invaded by aliens"

Joseph Grissom

You are referring to Orson Welles. He created a radio rendition of the short story, "War of the Worlds." Thousands of people who tuned in late to the broadcast and who missed the intro left their homes and fled for their lives down highways. It was reported that some men fired upon water towers with rifles because they mistook them for the Martian walker machines.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Did anyone actually die?

Joseph Grissom

@Hans-Georg Lundahl No. No one died.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Joseph Grissom Thank you, so David Wolf kind of misremembered the details?

Joseph Grissom

@Hans-Georg Lundahl Not sure. Did he say someone died? I never remember reading that in any account of that very famous event.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@Joseph Grissom Reading subtitles at 24:17 to 24:33 "but a bunch of people, they didn't know that people were reading sci-fi, science fiction from the radio, they thought the radio was something you listen to to hear the news, to inform yourself of what is happening in the country or, you know, in your local area or whatever, and there are people who crazy there are people committing suicide because they thought they were being invaded by aliens"

I didn't recall such a thing either, no.