The Friend-Enemy Distinction, Part 1 of 3: Believe Your Enemies
We who are invested in the success of any future pro-White movements need to excise subversives like a cancer.
Politics is war by other means (and vice versa). This is a point which I made in Part 1 of my “An Open Letter to Christian Nationalism from a Former White Nationalist” series to emphasize the gravity of the discussion. It will likewise be important here.
This series follows directly from the second point, namely the importance of practicing a strategy of “No Enemies on the Right.” This naturally raises a question, which some readers posed to me, of how one determines whom to include and exclude from this. I will argue that while this is not as simple as it may seem, there is a discernible answer.
The “friend-enemy distinction” is a famous concept from the twentieth-century German philosopher Carl Schmitt, who wrote that “The specific distinction to which political actions and motives can be reduced is that between friend and enemy.” In other words, politics is defined by the identification of your own side and the opposing side, and the waging of existential war against your opposition. If you cannot correctly identify your friends and enemies, you will lose. While Schmitt connected this concept to the definition and purpose of the state, it applies as a general axiom to Christian Nationalists as well.
In this first part of the present series, my thesis is two-fold:
1) Just because someone says something you agree with, does not make him your friend.
2) People tell you who they are—the difficulty is less in discerning hidden motives, than in accepting open testimony.
To the first can also be added its converse, which is that someone saying something you disagree with does not necessarily make him your enemy. Additionally, even your enemies can speak truths that you may not want to hear, but should. However this is largely out of the scope of this series.
In short, we are dealing here firstly with the negative—who is our enemy. In the second part, I will deal with the positive—who is our friend; or rather, what I believe to be the necessary focal point of our current political efforts. I will make certain assumptions about our self-identification which I do not intent to justify here, as my previous series was intended to serve partly as a map for political self-definition. Therefore, it should be considered a reference for that purpose which I will build upon without having to repeat every single argument.
The Cast of Characters
Bronze Age Pervert (BAP), the pen name and online persona of Jewish-Romanian academic Costin Alamariu, rose to national prominence with the publication of his first book, Bronze Age Mindset, in 2018, though he had become known in dissident political circles online—part of or adjacent to the burgeoning Alt Right—in years prior. He was associated with the American Jewish neo-reactionary blogger Curtis Yarvin (known also as Mencius Moldbug, and today associated with Passage Press, run by the Jewish Jonathan Keeperman, or “Lomez”), as well as Jewish White House speechwriter Darren Beattie. BAP’s book was a distillation of Nietzschean philosophy, repackaged in his own idiosyncratic writing style and garnished with contemporary right-wing memes and intentionally edgy prescriptions such as telling political dissidents to enter the underworld of crime and strip clubs. I own and have read his book myself.
Alamariu flourished in the radical atmosphere of the still-cohering Alt Right, which in 2015–2016 particularly, rallied around Donald Trump, who at the time appeared to be presenting a principled nationalist political option based on opposition to immigration, war, the out-of-touch conservative political class, and “globalists.” In 2019, what amounted to a hype pieces by the mainstream liberal media outlet Politico and the Jewish conservative clearinghouse Claremont seemed to solidify “BAPism” as a sign of the entry of radical politics into the mainstream, under the victorious banner of Donald Trump.
In time, much of the radical energy around Trump soured, with some including myself never regaining confidence after the 180-reversal of airstrikes on Syria in 2017. A more comprehensive discussion related to this must wait until the second installment of this series. What is important to note now is that Alamariu has remained a devout supporter of Trump and others like him, such as Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orban, former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro, and current Argentinian president Javier Milei, and overall has consistently preferred mainstream nationalist-presenting politicians.
On X, BAPists form a distinct sphere that is easily identifiable once one becomes aware of them. One of these under the persona “Captive Dreamer” (CD, on X as both “avaricum777” and “siegfriedmuell”) rose to prominence after popularizing the story of Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, eating pet dogs, late in the last presidential cycle in 2024. He has, if anything, been an even more vigorous promoter of Trump, renowned for defending him even when other supporters preferred to pressure the administration over questionable decisions, insisting that they should blindly trust without criticism instead. The name “Captive Dreamer” comes from the title of a memoir by a French Waffen-SS soldier.
In summary, Bronze Age Pervert and Captive Dreamer both voice support for Trump and nationalism, and opposition to immigration and, in some cases, to anti-Whiteness. Looking at these things, which in a quantitative sense may overtly make up the majority of their statements, Christian Nationalists may be led to believe they are worth including in a broader, pro-White, rightist coalition. This is not correct.
A Brief Review
In Part 4 of my last series, I argued the paramount importance of two related issues: the Jewish Question and Palestine. I defined the former as: “the realization that we are confronted with a group which, by all evidence of history, observation, the witness of Scripture, and what the Jews say about themselves, is by nature both opposite and oppositional to us, the White race.” To illustrate this fact, I gave the history of Jewish attacks on Christian Europe; the ritual murder of Christian children; leading movements like antifa, feminism, and LGBT; promoting immigration, pornography, and pedophilia; setting Gentile, especially White, nations in wars against each other; and controlling American foreign policy in all wars over the past several decades.
Regarding Palestine, after describing the inhuman savagery of the Israeli war on Gaza, I argued as follows:
The reactions some on the right have to this situation of insisting that it has nothing to do with us, or that they couldn’t care less because Palestinians are (mostly) not White and (mostly) not Christian, are both morally unaccountable given the extent of Israel’s barbarism, and illogical, given that, as discussed in the previous section, all of this is made possible by Jewish control of our own countries.…
The same people are doing the same thing to Gaza now that they did to Germany before, during, and after World War II, and that they have attempted, and to varying degrees succeeded, in doing to many more places throughout Europe and the Middle East for thousands of years. They get away with it because we choose to forget and not hold it against them. To ignore Gaza is, in a real sense, to ignore everything that came before as well; for if we had not done so, Gaza would not have happened, and if we do so again, it will happen to us again as well.
In short, the tripartite issue of Palestine, Israel, and Zionism is inseparable from the Jewish Question, which is central to our political struggle because the Jews are working to destroy the White race out of intrinsic hatred for us and for Christ. If there is a lull in this, it is only because the Jews, who hold the power in our system—as evidenced by our inability to punish them for any of their crimes—are temporarily easing off the throttle in order to get more Whites to fight in or support a physical war against their immediate enemies (after which they will resume their attack on us even more strongly). Any “nationalism” that forfeits this issue regresses and becomes a mockery of the term, because it surrenders the idea of a national (racial) sovereignty freed from Jews, as well as any historical link with our own people in the past, and not even the distant past. In so doing it fails also to discharge our responsibility toward our people in the future who will continue living under their control.
Sometimes people will try to deconstruct nationalism by thinking of these issues as building blocks that can be moved around, replaced, or even excluded (temporarily—they tell themselves). My argument is that all six issues which I described in my previous series are irreducible parts of the same thing, and if any are removed, that thing—which I hope to be Christian Nationalism—will cease to be itself.
Believe Your Enemies
The reader foresees how all of this comes together. BAP and CD are Zionists who, when pressed, work against any enemies of Israel and of Jewish power in America, either directly, or by attempting to poison discourse or analysis around relevant issues. Their attachment to right-wing causes like nationalism, being pro-White, and being pro-Trump, is conditioned solely on being able to invert them to advance Jewish interests.
After the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, many noted that Alamariu, known for his pseudo-Nietzschean, amoral, “bronze age” approach to politics, ridiculed the attack out of seeming concern for Israel reportedly as a “peasant chimpout” and heaped vitriol on armed Palestinian resistance, while never doing the same for Israeli or Jewish violence. BAP has relentlessly ridiculed the idea of making any principled critiques of Zionism. Indeed, BAP and CD are a leading part of an attempt to move the far right away from operating on principle, and toward an amoral, “might makes right” attitude, which is not only incorrect but tactically serves to defend Jewish interests. As I have said before on X, “might makes right” is only literally true; it is not a moral philosophy to guide action, and there are real-life consequences for this category error.
BAP has also mocked use of the terms “Zionism” and “neoliberalism” to imply that analysis of either is low status. Maybe Zionism can be criticized, but never on principled grounds or by referencing so-called “Third World” concerns like the brutal genocide of Palestinians. He’s said that American nationalists’ true objection to globalist foreign policy was just to America losing wars—a bald-faced lie through which he desires to hand-wave away the fact that some of the most energetic segments of the early Trump movement (and the Alt Right and White Nationalism) were based on principled opposition to foreign wars fought objectively due to Jewish influence, irrespective of whether these were “won” or “lost.” He has even overtly framed Whites and Jews as part of one struggle, by, incredibly, comparing the murder of White student Austin Metcalf by the black Karmelo Anthony to the October 7 attack on Israel.
On the rare occasions when CD has criticized Zionism, he treats it as though he’s just discovered it, intentionally to gloss over decades of existing analysis that would implicate people he wants to defend (explicitly Jews and Israel). Other times he says Jews are his strongest allies and Israel is a model for America. CD frequently asserts that criticism of Jewish power in US politics is not just unrelated to other nationalist concerns like immigration or leftism, but in fact that these things are at odds. At other times, he’s made snarky statements about tripling or quadrupling the aid to Israel because the wrong kind of anti-Semitism exists somewhere, or that Israel looks good when it kills journalists reporting on its genocide.
Unlike many, more principled Trump supporters (such as Auron MacIntyre), who frequently advocate for “chimping out” to give the Trump administration popular feedback on policies and moral confidence for enacting the popular will, CD has derided such people as “panicans,” most prominently during and after the Trump administration’s strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. CD put out an incessant stream of mockery for the very idea of not wanting to fight in a war for Israel, or not wanting to see the US nakedly bow to Israeli geopolitical interests—again, another fundamental principle of original grassroots Trumpist nationalism.
The most generous view one can take is that CD earnestly believes that by slavishly supporting Jewish power as a whole, he can negotiate for them to graciously reverse White genocide through demographic decline. But if we consider the available proof at hand, there is no indication that this generosity is deserved, to say nothing of how absurd this position is in the first place.
After Trump’s decision to forego investigation into Jeffrey Epstein (who “killed himself” in prison during Trump’s first term), CD threw multiple contradictory takes at the wall to prevent a coherent conversation of the implications of the event. Epstein was Jewish, a pervert, and a left-winger; but probably not a child rapist or a Mossad agent compromising Western elites. Epstein-related criticisms of Trump are inherently illegitimate and probably paid for by the DNC. Epstein (the Jewish Mossad asset and trafficker of White girls) is completely unconnected to White genocide and is, in fact, a distraction from it. Epstein wasn’t even important; his sidekick Ghislaine Maxwell is actually the one to prosecute, as her father actually was a Mossad agent, but Epstein definitely was not. Don’t talk about Israel or Epstein. Trump critics are talking about Epstein, so there must be no story there. It’s impossible to know the truth about Epstein and therefore no one should try. If there’s an issue with Epstein, it was Pam Bondi’s fault. Criticism over Epstein is illegitimate because the wrong people are doing it (the right people would be sycophants like himself, who never would). Epstein is connected with Israel and we need to be able to talk about it.
As with Zionism, CD again muddied the waters with sarcasm in an attempt to preempt criticism. Epstein was a core issue for many people. The brunch was good on Epstein Island. Epstein was Jewish. “I have zero evidence.” Epstein cared about humanity and making the world a better place.
BAP, for his part, said Epstein was doing blackmail for Mossad, but that there were no underage girls involved, and in any case, Catholic canon law allows for 14-year-old girls to marry, so you shouldn’t care about the possibility. When all else failed, he just mocked the whole thing. Maybe Epstein “went rogue”; there’s no reason to believe his operation resulted in any kind of blackmail.
It should also be mentioned that CD attacked Eden Deckerhoff, a White graduate student formerly at Florida State University who was arrested after confronting a Jewish student wearing an IDF shirt over Israel’s actions in Palestine. CD speculated that she was anti-White, a communist, mentally ill, a leftist, and “probably” not anti-Semitic, just anti-Israel (itself a subversive and nonsensical statement)—all to argue that nationalist Whites should not have solidarity with her but should in fact support her nakedly political persecution at the hands of Jewish power. As they say, “With friends like these….”
The point of reciting all of these statements is to illustrate that these people feel a tremendous anxiety whenever popular consciousness tends toward a holistic noticing and critique of Jewish power and are willing to say anything to obfuscate, mystify, or otherwise prevent that from cohering. They will grant parts of the truth strategically, always on the condition that they are decontextualized and thereby rendered useless for understanding the mechanisms of Jewish control.
I have cited BAP as one of the examples of “Jews, neoconservatives, and Zionists” who had infiltrated and led astray the Alt Right. In my discussion of “No Enemies to the Right,” I described part of the process of the defeat of the Alt Right as: “the selective adoption by mainstream figures or organizations of WN talking points or positions, decontextualized from a larger radical framework.” This is what is happening here. Maybe Epstein was affiliated with Mossad. Maybe he blackmailed politicians. Maybe he was a pimp. Maybe he was a pedophile. Captive Dreamer and the Jewish Dr. Alamariu aren’t really sure what combination of these things he was, but they are absolutely sure that he wasn’t all of them. Pick your adventure; just don’t pick putting down the storybook and looking at the real world, in which Epstein was a Jewish financier with a shady background and inexplicable connections to the entire Western world’s elite, who trafficked young White girls to be raped by politicians irrespective of political allegiance in order to ensnare them in blackmail and bind them to the interests of his racial group.
Meanwhile, the constant snark and sarcasm is meant to serve as plausible deniability for any individual statement, should it provoke too much backlash; but this cannot disguise the fact that it betrays their fundamental disregard (or even disdain) for being pro-White in principle. Anyone who flip-flops over whether Epstein was a pedophile, or a Mossad asset, or whether Jews control US foreign policy, or whether Israel is an ally or an enemy, based on which way the wind is blowing that day, transparently does not hold a principled stance on these issues; they are merely a means to an end, and that end is shoehorning Jewish racial self-interest into whatever political current is prevalent on the right at the moment, such that no matter which way any political expression of American nationalism turns, it will never meaningfully turn to threaten Israel’s lifeline of White American blood and money. This makes them, in Alamariu’s case, a blood enemy; and in CD’s, a racial traitor. They want White Americans to die for Israel and White Christians to pay for Israel to kill its enemies.
What I have given here are representative examples, as it would be a Herculean effort to collate a full reckoning. Those of us who support Trump, which I freely admit to no longer do myself, do so out of a desire to see him be a nationalist spearhead, and make real progress toward returning White, American, Christian political sovereignty and wresting control of our nation from foreign interests. These people have latched onto the Trump movement, like they did to the Alt Right and White Nationalism, as parasites to ensure the perseverance of Jewish power, and they will say anything, betray any principle, and contort any issue toward that goal.
Indeed, they work overtime to frame Jewish interests and White interests as identical, when these could not be more directly at odds, and openly undermine White racial solidarity. We who are invested in the success of Christian Nationalism, or of the Trump presidency, or any future pro-White movements, need to excise these subversives like a cancer. They tell you plainly who they are. Just believe them.
ATTENTION READER: We need your help.
Institutional trust is at record lows. But without institutions, we cannot renew our people, much less provide an inheritance to posterity. In response to this crisis and as an organic outgrowth both of necessity and natural interest, American Mantle exists. And so we make our appeal.
Donate to the Cause. Help us reach our monthly goal in order to solidify this crucial institution.
