HOW CONTROVERSIAL IS TOO CONTROVERSIAL?
Looks like we finally went too far with Great Replacement talk...
Hey Folks,
Well, looks like we finally went too far…
As you’re likely aware, Nevermore likes to post deliberately provocative things. Personally, I see myself as a kind of agitator, and a great deal of whatever success I can claim to have has to do with a willingness to break certain political taboos.
But this morning, I woke up to read something extremely distressing. It was written by Dave Amis (a.k.a. The Stirrer), one of the founders of Nevermore Media:
"I used to write for Nevermore Media. I can tell you one thing, that sure as heck won’t be happening again!... Deliberately contrarian pieces such as the ones where Nevermore extensively quoted Simon Elmer are only going to serve to hamper attempts to build genuine neighbourhood solidarity. I for one have no f**king intention of indulging such contrarianism....
Fuck. I guess I’ve got some explaining to do.
Okay, so where did this all start? Well, as you may or may not be aware, the immigration has been the hot-button issue in the Truth Movement of late.
On December 29th, Off Guardian posted an article called Magdeburg, “the Great Replacement” & conspiracy theories: OffG’s informal debate with Simon Elmer, in which they posted about a nasty Twitter beef they had had with Simon Elmer after he got mad at them for rejecting something he had submitted.
Now, I have been a great admirer of Simon Elmer since the early days of COVID, and I think that he was one of the most lucid writers on that subject. Furthermore, he was one of the only Leftists who didn’t completely lose his mind during COVID.
Eventually, he would go on to publish three books about COVID - The Road to Fascism, Virtue and Terror, and The New Normal.
Simon Elmer helped me to stay sane during a very difficult time in my life, and I feel a debt to gratitude for him for his intrepid work. We all know it wasn’t fun being a dissident during the dark days of the biggest Psy Op in history.
Then he went ahead and published a book on an even-more-contentious subject - immigration. That book is called The Great Replacement: Conspiracy Theory or Immigration Policy.
Provocative, right? As far as I know, Elmer is the first prominent Leftist to take the idea of the Great Replacement seriously.
Simon Elmer, like many of us here at Nevermore, likes to write about controversial subjects. We have published his work on multiple occasions, and it has always been well-received. The man is a super-genius; there’s no denying that.
But apparently, Elmer went too far with his latest book. Or at least a lot of people seem to think he did. As for myself, I haven’t read the book. I’m guessing that most of the people who have gotten offended by it haven’t read it either.
So, I was curious about what Elmer had said that had gotten people so upset. As someone who’s been cancelled more times than I can count, I also wanted to express some kind of solidarity with one of my intellectual heroes. So I reached out and offered to publish his piece.
I then asked my friend, the reknown artist Jordan Henderson, to prepare the piece for publication. I asked him because I knew that he had also been writing about immigration.
We ended up posting two pieces about the Great Replacement within a few days of each other, fully expecting them to be controversial.
The first was by Jordan, with an introduction by me, and the second was by Simon, with an introduction by Jordan.
In my introduction to Jordan’s piece, I wrote:
Anyway, what I’m about to share is a piece certain to make you squirm in your seat. If it wasn’t for the impeccable reputation of its author, the celebrated fine artist Jordan Henderson, I might not publish it.
But Jordan is a friend and fellow traveller, and I know that his intentions are good. And he’s doing something very brave - signing a name to a piece that some people would immediately condemn as unacceptably racist wrongthink.
So although I don’t agree with everything Jordan says here, I certainly applaud him for saying it. I am hoping that this plays a part in a much-need “Great Correction” after the deranged racist anti-racism of recent years.
Plus, I like controversy.
As you can see, I was clearly asking for it. Well, ask and ye shall receive. But we seem to have gotten more than we bargained for.
A British writer named Rusere Shoniwa, who seems to share a lot of the same political views I do, is currently three articles deep on a four-part series critiquing Jordan (and also me, mostly for having had the temerity to publish Jordan and Simon Elmer).
Furthermore, Real Left, with whom Nevermore has been largely politically aligned since we both made our names opposing COVID authoritarianism from a Leftist perspective, has republished two of Rusere’s articles so far.
Initially, my reaction to this was “Oh good! There’s no such thing as bad publicity!” Anyone familiar with Nevermore knows that we court controversy on purpose.
All this changed when I got the news that Dave from the Stirrer was renouncing his association with Nevermore due to this controversy.
I still consider consider Dave a comrade, and I’m hoping that I’ll be able to patch things up by acknowledging that we went too far.
He makes some valid points - for example, that what calls the “Divide and Rule Merchants” love to pitch us plebs against one another… and that stoking racial tensions has always one of their favourite ways of doing this. I don’t deny this at all. I suppose that I will now have to explain my own views on the subject, which are different from Jordan’s.
I suppose I’ll end by saying that Nevermore has taken on all kinds of controversial subjects, including COVID, the Rothschilds, trans ideology, pedophilia, incest, bestiality, religion, feminism, abortion, rape, identity politics, and all kinds of other things. Apparently, out of all these subjects, immigration is the most controversial of all.
Now, perhaps some of you won’t believe me as I furiously backpedal, but what I was really trying to do is start a conversation about a controversial subject.
I guess I’ve succeeded in doing that, but if it causes us to lose the support of people like Dave, it wasn’t worth it.
I’m sorry for disappointing you, Dave.
Love & Solidarity,
Crow Qu’appelle
I don’t think you need to apologize. Controversy is good, especially if it can start a conversation. It’s sad that people you respect are willing to cancel you for wanting to have a good discussion on a difficult subject. It’s on them, not you, to come to terms with their inability to critically think on this topic. NEVER APOLOGIZE FOR WHO YOU ARE.
OMG, here we go again, with this political correctness by affiliation BS. I read Jordan's article, know nothing about the Stirrer, and don't even care to get into the weeds of immigration policy per se. But every time this business of canceling allies on some issues because they express some opinion one doesn't agree with on another issue is just wrong--or at least, counterproductive. Another recent example was a post by Charles Eisenstein on free energy, where a commenter bashed him for quoting Elizabeth Nickson, because she supposedly endorsed clearcutting--a totally different issue. I'm touchy because I lost a good former "friendship" (sic) because I retweeted somebody who was associated with somebody else I never heard of.... you get the gist. Get over it, people! Or rather, keep playing in the sandbox of ideological castles, and joust all you like, because it's fun, I guess. ;)