Potok is Jewish but hates whites
SPLC Claims Derek Black Has Renounced White Nationalism, And Apparently He Telegraphed His Intentions Back In December 2012
In December 2012, Derek Black publicly declared that he was not a white supremacist, a neo-Nazi or a Klansman and does not hold such views. He also stated he doesn’t dislike anyone on account of their race, religion, or anything similar. The SPLC jumped all over it, insinuating that Derek was wavering in his commitment to the Cause.
It turns out that Derek may have been telegraphing his future intentions. In their Hatewatch blog, the Southern Poverty Law Center claims that Derek Black, the son of StørmFrønt webmaster Don Black, has actually renounced white nationalism. According to the gay Jew Mark Potok, Derek says that he has been through a gradual awakening process, and has also apologized for his past pro-White activism.
To buttress their case further, the SPLC includes a link to a four-page e-mail sent to the SPLC by Derek Black, triggered primarily by the SPLC's discussion of the December story:
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Derek-Black-letter-to-Mark-Potok-Hatewtach.pdfDerek states that he has been gradually withdrawing from the white nationalist movement over a period of time, hasn't posted on StørmFrønt in 2013, and only posted on that forum once in 2012. This explains why Don Black eventually took over sole proprietorship of the now-defunct Don and Derek Black Radio Show. He says he did not attend the European
American Leadership Seminar in 2012. But then it gets disgusting as he begins using anti-racist terminology, first using the anti-racist term "people of color", and then asserting that whites are "privileged" because of the color of their skin. He gives no indication that he intends to become an anti-racist activist, and he still believes a healthy sense of identity and belonging is appropriate and necessary.
Here's the section where he sets up and spells out his specific objections to white nationalism:
White nationalism supports the premise that multiculturalism is a failure, and that politicians trapped in a multicultural status quo are oppressing white people in “their own country.” They typically blame the West’s movement toward inclusion on a conspiracy of Jewish power to promote multiculturalism at the expense of whites. White nationalists cite black-on-white crime statistics and the increasing prevalence of “nonwhite” cultures and values in western society, as well as the growing number of legal protections and employment opportunities that a “minority” status now affords. On the other hand, white nationalists consider white people in the US to be ostensibly the victims of an ongoing genocide brought about by immigration and miscegenation, and feel that when they try to speak up about it, they are subjected to a vicious double standard. They observe that Black Nationalism and Zionism are recognized as tolerable, but whites with a similar declaration are vilified as racists. When they attempt to claim an accomplishment or cultural. production for the white race that produced it, they are called racists. If they produced their own Malcolm X, the nation as a whole would regurgitate. Thus their own white leaders are victimizing white people -— the system has turned its formidable weapons against a white identity. Therefore they think that whites must oppose resistance to racism in order to guarantee the future of white people as a people. [Note that he capitalizes the B in Black but not the W in White.]
I now consider this belief system principally flawed. Most arguments that racial equity programs disadvantage whites who would otherwise be hired or accepted to academic programs mask underlying anxieties about the growth of non-white social status. It is impossible to argue rationally that in our society, with its overwhelming disparity between white power and that of everyone else, racial equity programs intended to affect the deep-rooted situation represent oppression of whites. More importantly, white nationalism’s staunch opposition to the gains in numbers and in influence of non-whites makes it a movement by nature committed to suppressing these people. The advancement of minorities in the US is not insignificant, but has not ended (let alone reversed) their circumstances. Particularly bizarre to me is the determination of Jewish social domination. Though there are plenty of powerful Jewish activist groups pursuing their chosen agendas, it is inaccurate and outrageous to talk about people of Jewish descent as “the enemy” of anyone, as it is essentializing a large group into a fairy tale antagonist. It has become clear to me that white nationalism is not a movement of positive identity or of asserting cultural values, but of constant antagonism at the betterment of other groups.
A white nationalist party can’t function without standing on these disparities between whites and other groups and essentially endorsing them. To say that white people have let the “minority agenda” go too far implies that the relatively insufficient gains they have made are oppressing us. There is no way to advocate for white nationalism but by arguing that minorities pose a threat to our supremacy. It is not enough to say it is opposition to assimilation when the proposed recourse is to expel, suppress, or marginalize these other groups. Advocating for white nationalism means that we are opposed to minority attempts to elevate themselves to a position equal to our own. It is an advocacy that I cannot support, having grown past my bubble, talked to the people I affected, read more widely, and realized the necessary impact my actions had on people I never wanted to harm.
First, multiculturalism is clearly a failure throughout most of the United States. Not only has it imposed continuous cultural revolution upon our society, but the rules of engagement are disparate. Whites are clearly subjected to higher and harsher standards on racial issues than other races. Look at how Paula Deen was mobbed and purged by corporate interests; when's the last time Jesse Jackson got the same treatment. If multiculturalism is such a smashing success, why do we have a large parasitical class of sensitivity trainers, life coaches, and therapists to help fix the damage? Furthermore, Derek Black damages his cause by spewing nonsense about "white privilege". The doctrine of white privilege is laying the intellectual foundation for white genocide.
Second, although Derek Black gets it part right on the Jewish Question, he ignores the fact that Jews not only dominate the media and the entertainment industry, but that these industries have degraded our culture. This cannot be viewed as a mere coincidence, particularly when over two-thirds of Jewish voters supported Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012. It is entirely appropriate to explore and uncover possible links between the two. We do have extremists who believe we should minimize or ignore Black crime to focus on the Jew, but more responsible and moderate people have emerged. Dr. David Duke focuses on Jewish supremacism rather than Jewish existence, and ANP Chairman Rocky Suhayda has said he prefers to focus primarily upon Jews who are taking active measures against us. Even the NSM downplays the Jewish Question at their rallies to focus on more mainstream bread-and-butter issues such as immigration and crime. But nobody other than Jared Taylor suggests that Jews be considered White.
Derek Black seems to be going the same direction as Lynx and Lamb Gaede, although there's no evidence that Don Black pushed him as relentlessly as April Gaede did with her girls for a time. It's too bad he is embracing some of this anti-racist terminology and doctrine, but this could be attributed to his attendance at New College of Florida, considered a hyperliberal campus.
Reaction: Stormfronters are expressing a guarded reaction. One person wrote "I never followed Derek. His renouncing White nationalism doesn't sway me anymore than hearing about April Gaede's kids does. If that is the path he wants to go down then fine. Not everyone thinks as we do and that is okay". Another person wrote "Two scenarios in my opinion...its a hoax, or there is a liberal girl with a tight grip on his heart. Either way, best of luck to him". A third person wrote "We need to support Don Black and his family through this very difficult period".
Occidental Dissent also picked up the story, and opinion there is much less charitable towards Derek Black. One person described Derek as a little pencil-necked jerk who telegraphed his traitorous intentions literally years ago, and characterized Derek's actions as odious and despicable. Hunter Wallace himself wrote "If he wanted to quit White Nationalism, he could have said nothing, and just moved on with his life. Instead, he did an Ian Jobling and sent this groveling letter to Mark Potok in which he embraces every crazy leftist idea like structural racism and apologizes for harming Jews by posting on an internet forum". Wallace, by his own admission, left white nationalism, but not for ideological reasons; it was the proliferation of unstable personalities that drove him away. Wallace has embraced Southern nationalism; his version is pro-White.
Topic: Son of Don Black,Derek renounces racism but goes to equally bad ideolgy SPLC (Read 3368 times)