November 26, 2017
Instead, the reporter discovered that he’s just a normal guy with a different political opinion.
Instead of killing the story or lying (standard Judenpresse protocol), reporter Richard Fausset (probably an honest liberal Gentile) transcribed his conversations with Tony about his dreams, his political awakening, his daily routine, his social life and his hobbies.
Because Fausset didn’t defame Tony, blue Jude star twitter is coming to his door step with pitchforks and torches.
Holy smokes, I haven’t seen Jews this mad in a long time!
Fuck the Nazi's house and fuck the Nazi's name and fuck the Nazi's faux intellectual books and fuck this editor for not replacing this awful headline with "White Male Inferiority Complex Incarnate Who Advocates for Murderous Racial Cleansing Buys Groceries, Too!"
— Bess Kalb (@bessbell) November 25, 2017
You know who had nice manners? The Nazi who shaved my uncle Willie's head before escorting him into a cement chamber where he locked eyes with children as their lungs filled with poison and they suffocated to death in agony.
Too much? Exactly. That's how you write about Nazis.
— Bess Kalb (@bessbell) November 25, 2017
the nyt reporter who profiled the ohio nazi basically confesses he didn't get much. and that the intvws didn't connect any dots for him. sometimes you gotta know when to kill a story. https://t.co/1VyuN0hNal pic.twitter.com/dRbte68N01
— Charlie Warzel (@cwarzel) November 25, 2017
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 25, 2017
The problem with this article isn't that it's about a Nazi but that it doesn't add anything to our understanding of modern Nazis. Of course racists shop at supermarkets and play in bands and enjoy Seinfeld and own cats. That evil is also banal is not new. https://t.co/bOIQU4pOzu
— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) November 25, 2017
It’s like they were thinking to themselves “how can we do worse than ‘Investigating Trump, FBI Sees No Clear Link to Russia’” and then they knocked it out of the park.https://t.co/E0MnjF0CIt
— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) November 25, 2017
There is absolutely nothing to gain from profile no. 542 of the well-mannered Nazi sympathizer
— Gideon Resnick (@GideonResnick) November 25, 2017
It would be cool if we could stop profiling Nazis as if they’re just people with different views that we should accept in our society https://t.co/p1l43flTRD
— Josh Billinson (@jbillinson) November 25, 2017
Why on earth is the New York Times normalizing a neo-Nazi who posts on Facebook that life would’ve been better had Germany won the war? THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING NORMAL ABOUT NAZISM. https://t.co/dvpyo6Xe9c
— Scott Wiener (@Scott_Wiener) November 25, 2017
— Andi Zeisler (@andizeisler) November 25, 2017
Fucking Stop It. Don't normalize neo-Nazis. Don't whitewash conspiracy theorists. Don't fawn over ex-Breitbart writers. pic.twitter.com/wicBpHG4PO
— Alex Kotch (@alexkotch) November 25, 2017
This bugman either took too much speed or lost his mind over this. Here is his tweet thread with around 30 consecutive entries on this article!
1. The title: "The Nazi Sympathizer Next Door." "The Nazi Next Door" is equally accurate, and way punchier.
— Angus Johnston (@studentactivism) November 25, 2017
The article in question, titled “A Voice of Hate in America’s Heartland” is already politically prejudiced against Tony in the title. These Jews aren’t angry that Fausset is endorsing a nationalist activist’s ideas, they’re mad that he isn’t being more demagogic and dehumanizing.
The task of journalists working on these alt-right hit-pieces isn’t to “learn more” about political dissidents, it’s to portray us in a light that convinces the public that it is ok for the system to censor, imprison and kill us. Anything less draws the ire of Jews!
Which is why Fausset had so many problems getting this story through his editor to begin with.
Here was compelled to write a semi-apology shortly after his article was published.
There is a hole at the heart of my story about Tony Hovater, the white nationalist and Nazi sympathizer.
Why did this man — intelligent, socially adroit and raised middle class amid the relatively well-integrated environments of United States military bases — gravitate toward the furthest extremes of American political discourse?
After I had filed an early version of the article, an editor at The Times told me he felt like the question had not been sufficiently addressed. So I went back to Mr. Hovater in search of answers. I still don’t think I really found them. I could feel the failure even as Mr. Hovater and I spoke on the phone, adding to what had already been hours of face-to-face conversation in and around his hometown New Carlisle, Ohio.
Mr. Hovater was exceedingly candid with me — often shockingly so — but it seems as though his worldview was largely formed by the same recombinant stuff that influences our mainstream politics. There were exceptions, of course: I saw, on his bookshelf, two volumes of Helena Blavatsky’s “The Secret Doctrine,” 19th-century work of esoteric spiritualism whose anti-Semitism influenced Nazi thinking.
But even if I had called Mr. Hovater yet again — even if we had discussed Blavatsky at length, the way we did his ideas about the Federal Reserve Bank — I’m not sure it would have answered the question.
What makes a man start fires?
In other words, there is nothing unusual about the figure he is studying in his piece. There is no “answer” for why he thinks like he does other than he found ethnic nationalism to be the most intellectually sound worldview.
If identity politics aren’t a pathology when Jews practice it, why does it have to be for whites?
A contradiction any honest and well-meaning thinking man will scoff at.
There you have your answer Mr. Fausset. Your critics know it full well, which is why they hate your innocent honesty!