Silk Road News: The New 14 Words

Steve King vs. Ted Lieu (*)

King is right; don’t back down, Steve.

To answer Ted Lieu and his supporters among the Silk Roaders, I propose a new variant on the “14 words” – and to commemorate anti-White and pro-Asian lulzers, we can call these the “Ted Salid and breadsticks 14” –

To secure the existence of the White race we must oppose the Asian hordes.

*Even Sailer of all people gets it right:

For some reason, when it comes to immigration policy, non-whites are not expected to agree that somebody else’s babies are good enough. Instead, they are encouraged to demand the demographic transformation of the United States by their relatives.

Non-Whites and their White extended phenotypes demand the demographic transformation of the United States…and Britain, the rest of Europe, all those “sacrosanct” White areas.

Do the 14 Words Still Have Any Meaning?

Apparently not, if the choice is between “a future for white children” and the continued embrace of the execrable Derbyfogle.

So, child porn apologist Mr. Johnred Derbyfogle is attending the Amren conference. Thankfully, he is not one of the speakers (although mophead is), but Derbyfogle will still be there, mingling among all the “latrine flies” – most of whom are decent and well-meaning people who no doubt would be horrified by Johnred’s nonchalant equation of child porn with dissident political opinions, both being persecuted by dastardly “anarcho-tyranny.”

Let us now consider one of Der Movement’s (alleged) favorite memes, “the 14 words” –

We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.

Well said, and a sentiment that all right-minded people would agree with. But note the last part of the phrase: “…a future for white children.” Are those mere words, or does Der Movement take that seriously?

Now, I believe it fair to say that what Mr. Lane had in mind for “a future tor white children” did NOT include their participation in child porn. That Der Movement, with their “1488” memes, can tolerate the likes of Derbyfogle, and tolerate those who continue to promote that monster, tells us all we need to know about the moral bankruptcy of typical “movement” “activists.”

Now, does Derbyfogle have the right to express his opinions? Undoubtedly, yes. But, do WNs have the right to view Johnred’s opinions as repugnant, and worthy of shunning? Yes, undoubtedly as well. If Derbyfogle’s past screeds against White nationalism, racial preservationism, and in favor of miscegenation, were not sufficient to stimulate Der Movement’s vomit reflex, then surely, Johnred’s apologia for child porn should have been sufficient – assuming Der Movement had sufficient moral integrity to recognize the reprehensible nature of Derbyfogle’s comments, and sufficient intellectual ability and judgment to realize that continued association with that creature would taint the image of racialism to the masses, who already view WN in negative terms.

So, the Derbyfogle affair has both moral and practical sides. First, Johnred’s views are morally untenable and a violation of human decency and the meaning of “the 14 words.” Practically speaking, by not denouncing and rejecting the Derbyfogle monstrosity, the “movement” is tainted by Johnred, and the masses can view Der Movement as, at least indirectly, complicit in supporting and promoting Derbyfogle’s views.

As usual, a “movement” FAIL all around. Has Der Movement lived with failure for so long that it is acclimated to it? Cannot recognize it? Is no longer bothered by it? 

Der Movement, Der Movement, Der Movement marches on.