Once Aryan Skynet Goes Live It Doesn't Matter Who Pulled The Switch
Among political commentators identifying as men of the Left, Gearoid O Colmain is one of the few – James Petras and Michel Chossudovsky being two others who immediately come to mind – who can be relied upon to offer a sincere perspective which, if not exactly sympathetic to the identitarian viewpoint, at least takes into consideration the actual forces engaged in violently reconfiguring the globe. O Colmain is particularly noteworthy within his political cohort for his willingness to acknowledge the truth about false flag terrorist acts as well as the following economic realities:
One of the problems for the Left, generally – and that’s to say, kind of, where I come from ideologically – is that Marxists traditionally never supported immigration. I mean, if you read works of Marx and Engels, they understood that migration, or immigration, was a tool of the [upper] class to drive down wages and to create division among the workers. And one of the reasons why the United States doesn’t have a militant labor party is because of immigration. Any time workers in the United States organized and got into unions and started making demands and started becoming conscious of their class interests, they liberalized migration law, got lots of immigrants in to take their jobs. And the result of that in the United States is that […] a lot of people who would have been working good jobs in the past are now basically languishing in prison, and you have a constant influx of Mexican labor. And there’s no unions. There’s no organization. There’s no party representing workers [in the] United States. So cultural homogeneity is important for labor organization. Where people speak the same language and have a sort of similar sense of, you know, themselves. […] So, when you get all these different cultures coming into Europe, you know, all desperately seeking work, it’s a recipe for smashing all the social gains of the last century, and that’s essentially what this is – what they’re intending to do with the forced engineered migration happening now.
O Colmain’s commendable realism here stands in contrast to his more recent statements about the growing identitarian movement. “Open borders and mass immigration are a key agenda of globalization,” he continues to concede. “We have shown that globalization is being driven by liberal leftism. The most powerful institutions of the ‘Youth Industry’, ‘Colour Revolutions’, and ‘world-without-borders’ ideology are overwhelmingly Jewish-led,” he also emphasizes; but when it comes to identitarianism, his reason seems to abandon him. “The White nationalist and violent ‘leftist’ hoodie-utionaries ultimately serve the same class interests,” O Colmain contends, embedding into his article a video of last month’s physical assault on NPI’s Richard Spencer. “Workers should not be influenced by the reactionary ideology of either,” he challenges. His reasoning for this is that identitarians and leftist street hooligans “are, in many respects, two sides of a Surkovian psyops ruthlessly conceived to maintain class domination” – “Surkovian” being a reference to Putin’s Bannon, master propagandist Vladislav Surkov.
Is it white nationalism that serves the interests of the cosmopolitan globalist elite – or is it the stubborn insistence of O Colmain and his fellow Marxians on a politely and purely non-racial class analysis model that dismisses potentially the single greatest force for positively recalibrating relationships between labor and capital across the European diaspora? Many of today’s rising generation of ethnonationalists and identitarians may be recovering libertarians and fiscal conservatives – people who have an instinctive aversion for the vocabulary of the Left – but O Colmain would make a mistake to assume that these young men and women preoccupy themselves with race alone and to the exclusion of social considerations, workers’ welfare, and peaceful international relations more respectful of national sovereignties. Many of history’s most determined socialists, it should be noted – men like Allende, Gaddafi, and Chavez – were also committed nationalists. Identitarians, out of all groups, are the young people most likely to share and in future to articulate O Colmain’s view of Jewish power, opportunist “humanitarian” military interventions, and anti-national capitalist no-borders depravity. Considering what he has written about Israeli criminality and “overwhelmingly Jewish-led” faux-revolutions, he already bares his neck for the unimaginative “Nazi” charge with which the automata on his cherished Left will inevitably behead him. Why not address his views directly to the audience most prepared to give his ideas an honest hearing?