Is Captainchaos a Moby? Discuss

Is Captainchaos a Moby? You have to wonder. Could even his monomaniacal dumb a** be so stupid as to think that posting paeans to Hitler on a thread about the Episcopal Church helps his White Nat case? For those unaware of the term, the definition of a Moby is posted below.

An insidious and specialized type of left-wing troll who visits blogs and impersonates a conservative for the purpose of either spreading false rumors intended to sow dissension among conservative voters, or who purposely posts inflammatory and offensive comments for the purpose of discrediting the blog in question.

The term is derived from the name of the liberal musician Moby, who famously suggested in February of 2004 that left-wing activists engage in this type of subterfuge…

delicious | digg | reddit | facebook | technorati | stumbleupon | chatintamil
This entry was posted in Race, Site Issues on by .

About Filmer

Filmer is the Conservative Times username for a paleoconservative political activist. For those of you who are unfamiliar with him, Sir. Robert Filmer (1588 - 1653) is a largely forgotten English political theorist who deserves more attention from conservative scholars. He was a (the?) main contemporary opponent to Locke and his social contract theory. Possibly as an artifact of Kirk, modern conservatives have largely stopped tracing conservative thought at Burke. This is unfortunate. A potential outcome of this is that you are just as likely to hear "conservatives" spouting Lockean silliness as you are liberals. Hopefully a revival of conservative interest in Filmer will be awakened by the increased interest in paleoconservatism.

25 thoughts on “Is Captainchaos a Moby? Discuss

  1. Weaver

    In truth I don’t think he’s a moby/SPLC agent, though I did suspect this at first.

    He is however guilty of “riding his hobby horse” as the takimag posting rules would have defined. I’ve asked him before to appeal to different historical figures, and he’s refused. The only figure he’s interested in apparently is Hitler; no matter the topic, Hitler and Jews come to his mind.

    An alternative to censorship could be to relocate his WWII references to this thread – and then to additionally link to the new location from the original. The negative of such approach: it’s tedious. The positive: we won’t be guilty of censorship.

  2. Captainchaos

    I don’t work for the SPLC, actually it’s the Mossad. Just kidding.

    I happen to admire Adolf Hitler’s heroic devotion to his race. Read Irving’s book Hitler’s War and you might come to the same conclusion.

    On a side note, here is what Southern White activist Sam Dickson has to say about power, means and ends:

    “Americans feel this way because this is a Whig nation: a nation born in opposition to monarchy, aristocracy, and tradition, and firmly wed­ded to individualism and the principles of the Enlighten­ment. America was settled mostly by Whigs. And with the American Revolution and the expulsion of the Loyalist minority, the United States became a firmly Whig nation. America is a totally Whig version of England. It is all Whig sail with no Tory anchor.

    But even a minute’s reflection will show you how misleading and false Acton’s dictum is, as a guide to people in their personal lives, and in making decisions for their country and community and ethnic group. The most casual reading of history shows that many great men were good men, that power does not necessarily corrupt, that many good men exercised power for good purposes.

    Was Charles Martel a bad man simply because he sought and used power? Remember that Martel used his power to unite the Franks and defeat the Moslems, who were on the verge of conquering Europe, which would have been catastrophic for our people. Would Lord Acton have deemed it better if the Franks didn’t have a powerful leader? Would it have been better if the Frankish lands had been divided and decentralized and incapable of uniting as the Moslems poured over the Pyrenees into France?

    Was Pope Urban II a bad man, because he had power and helped rouse Europe to the Crusades? The crusades drove back the two pin­cers of Islam that were coming through Spain and the Balkans to take our continent from us.”


    “Many American conservatives, Southerners in particular, find the doctrines of States’ Rights and decentralized government very attractive. But these very doctrines played a major and a decisive role in insuring the defeat of the South in the Civil War.

    When the South seceded, when the Confederate government assembled in Montgomery, they were in a revolutionary situation. Things were fluid. Many new things were possible. And—as Lenin and Robespierre, alas, knew—in a revolutionary situation, you hit . . . and you hit hard. You go as fast and as far as you can while the time is favorable. You make the most of the opportunity before things solidify again.

    But with the instinctive English desire to compromise, the South did just the opposite. Jefferson Davis had been a staunch Unionist and op­ponent of Secession until the late 1850s. And his government was made of people like him, who were relatively new converts to the idea of se­cession. There were no militant secessionists or Fire-eaters of any sig­nificance, none of the people who long before had prophetically seen the need to separate from an increasingly hostile North.

    Even worse, in choosing their Vice President, they turned to a physi­cal weakling and pettifogging legalist, Alexander H. Stephens, who had been opposed to the whole idea of the Confederacy. Stephens was cho­sen for the admitted purpose of placating Southerners who had op­posed the Revolution.

    As a result, the government was divided and hobbled from the start by its second-in-command. Stephens would spend the next four years disrupting the Southern war effort. He spent most of the war pouting at home, corre­sponding with people all over the South, attacking President Davis, urging that there be no draft, urging people not to support the army, warning that the central government was becoming despotic like the Lincoln govern­ment, and demanding more States’ rights and decen­tralization, in the middle of an invasion of the country.”


    “Imagine that by some fluke a libertarian like Ron Paul were elected president. Imagine that he really could bring American troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan, block the drive for war with Iran, and end Israel’s ability to loot our treasury and control our foreign policy.

    Private money and private media power would immediately be used to thwart his policies. He would be lucky to avoid impeachment or as­sassination. And, as a libertarian, his own principles would prevent him from doing anything about it. After all, his enemies have freedom of speech and the right to use their money however they wish.”


    “But as a realistic person I know that it can’t be that way. And, as un­pleasant as it may be, in the kind of desperate life-or-death emergency our people are going to face some time in the next two generations, very firm action will be necessary if we are to survive. This will include state coercion on a scale that will make many in our movement un­happy. But the alternative will not just be military defeat, as with the South, but extinction. To stave off that day, we must learn to evaluate and apply all abstract principles by reference to the supreme principle of collective survival and flourishing.

    Our people once knew this. Jews are famous for evaluating every­thing in light of their own collective interests: “Yes, but is it good for the Jews?” I certainly can’t condemn them for this. This is the key to their survival down through the millennia as a people scattered among other nations of the world, as well as to their current position of con­spicuous wealth and power.

    The ancient Romans had the same principle: salus populi lex suprema. The welfare, or the salvation, of the people is the supreme law. We too must learn to evaluate all issues of political and economic policy by this standard.”


    Sam Dickson is addressing his remarks to faileocons and lemmings. Does he work for the SPLC?

  3. Harold Crews

    How many people here actually think Hitler was good for the German people?

    I think the German people were one of the primary victims of Hitler, albeit mostly willing victims. Germany and Hitler for that matter would have been far better off had he remained an aspiring artist in Vienna.

  4. Weaver

    I’ll say this: to his defense the Soviets were positioning as if to attack Germany before Hitler broke the pact. Hitler seems to have been right about communism.

    Did Hitler save part of Germany from Communism similar to how Franco saved Spain? I dunno.

    Hitler wasn’t as evil as Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. But both sides during the war committed war crimes, plus there’s the Holocaust which was a huge war crime, and Hitler failed to prevent war with states he didn’t want to fight.

    Was it possible for him to prevent war? Who knows. Hitler seemed to believe the Jews were somehow behind the nonCommunist Allied war declarations, but I’m doubtful.

  5. Captainchaos

    I wonder if there would be a similar hysterical reaction if I were to shift my motif to fleshing out lessons for our current situation from history concerning the Ku Klux Klan?

    Those Klansters put a bullet in those two poor Jewish “Freedom Riders” and their Negro tag-along.

    You won’t find me shedding any tears for them, how ’bout you Weaver?

    What is the just punishment for trying to exterminate our race?

  6. Captainchaos

    The Klan was always an extra-legal elite group committed to defending the racial interests of White Southerners by any means necessary; just as the SS was for Germans.

    The Southerner Dickson’s clear point is that if you don’t play to win the game you lose. And when the aim of your enemies is to deny to your people the necessary conditions to sustain life (to commit genocide against your people) the gloves must come off.

    The coming decades will decide if our race lives or dies, will do we what it takes to live?

  7. Weaver

    “What is the just punishment for trying to exterminate [a people]?”

    You violate Dickson’s maxim. It isn’t a question of justice but of results.

    Just as Dickson recommends a willingness to make treaties with dictators, you need to be willing to work with people you don’t like.

    I’ve a Whig leaning at times (though I’m really more of a Tory), but who could dislike Martel?

  8. Captainchaos

    No one bothers to make treaties with the weak. We need to establish strength through group cohesion before we have any bargaining chips. But if in the process we become strong enough to secure all of our desired ends without bargaining, it would be tender-minded to bother.

  9. Weaver

    This debate seems to be raging at another site. CC, since you have a tendency to help the opposing side, I recommend you not join in haha (similarly, I’m not joining in because I’d just get in red in the face and explode if I tried – so I’m not singling just you out).

    But from here

    Red comments on this topic you bring up:

    “In some sense might makes, but it does not make right.”

    That doesn’t mean might is never right though.

  10. Filmer Post author

    Harold Crews stole my thunder. Who could possibly believe that Hitler helped his people? While a case could be made for rectifying the injustices of the Treaty of Versailles, plunging his country into a multi-front war he could not possibly hope to win was simply suicidal.

  11. RedPhillips

    CC, I happen to know Sam Dickson. I highly suspect he would find your rhetoric overheated and counterproductive. While I disagree with Sam on many things and he with me, he works with League of the South types and paleos. He attends John Randolph Club events and supports Chronicles Magazine. I highly doubt he would call them faileocons, which is a Linderism.

  12. Captainchaos

    Stalin was preparing to invade Western Europe and would have turned it into one giant Katyn mass grave had not Hitler’s heroic armies met the Bolsheviks in combat.

    The National Socialist movement saved millions of Germans from starvation in the midst of hyper-inflation of their currency.

    Had Germany won our race would not be staring into the abyss today.

    None of the above can be argued with.

  13. Andrew T.

    Captainchaos is certainly not a moby. Nobody who doesn’t have those views could possibly have enough time and energy to state those views as consistently and persistently as does he. No, he is just an internet warrior with an extremely narrow minded, frankly mind-numbingly idiotic set of racist commitments, and probably a very socially awkward one to boot. I find no irony whatsoever in his praise of an evil, murderous totalilitarian tyrant such as Hitler. It only confirms my impression of how deeply screwed up he must be.

    I don’t see why we keep letting him upstage every other topic on this website. We could just be like any other website that deletes obviously racist comments.

  14. Captainchaos

    There is no way in which I could present my ideas that would please you, Andrew. David Duke consistently presents his in mild and universalist terms yet you consign him to Charlie Manson land. If it be a man’s faith that the moon is made of green cheese there is no arguing with him.

    Censor away, but know that Sam Francis and the Founding Fathers go down the memory hole too.

    As for me, the survival of my race is not more important than the buzz you get from your perceived moral superiority.

    I hope your draw with that price tag gun is as quick as ever.

  15. Filmer Post author

    CC, if you are really interested in advancing your cause of White Nationalism and White ethnic consciousness then why don’t you go to mainstream conservative sites, where such is totally anathema, and drop mild white consciousness references. Your overt White Nat rants would obviously be deleted, but you could, if you were judicious, probably get away with some White consciousness pleas. Why do you think it better serves your cause to pester paleos, whether here or at Takimag, to the point of irritation?

    I really don’t think you are a Moby. I do think you are every negative caricature of your beliefs. Although I admit you are quite articulate. And as such, you hurt your cause more than you help it. I really think you would have a very hard time, like every fanatic, of keeping your full spectrum of beliefs under wraps. So the stealth strategy would not work for you. As a result you come here and put the whole sorry program on display.

  16. Captainchaos

    I have never once been beaten in argumentation by anyone on the paleo right. Which only further reinforces my conviction that I am right and they are wrong. If they could have, they would have, no? Only this is not a game and if we do not act to save our race (just think about this for a second, think about the sheer absurdity of this, we are not even allowed to SPEAK about preserving our race, much less do anything about it) the consequences will be dire indeed.

    What is the womanly hand-wringing of pansies (this means you, Andrew T. – LOL!) when contrasted with the looming genocide of our race?

  17. Weaver

    I have never once been beaten in argumentation by anyone on the paleo right. Which only further reinforces my conviction that I am right and they are wrong. If they could have, they would have, no?

    Quite an ego.

  18. Harold Crews

    You won’t see me defending the later day KKK. The post war Klan was required due to the nature of the times. There were no civil courts during the Occupation. Southroners did not have the protection of the law. That was not the case for the later day Klan. Civil courts were and are functioning. Should the day come that the law does not provide protection, then and only then would armed resistance be permitted.

    Captainchaos, for curiosity’s sake do you make arguments for large families by whites? Marriage and large families would go along way in continuing the white race. Appears absolutely essential to me. Something I have no problem with by the way. To be honest I generally skip your rants so you may have advocated marriage and large families any number of times and I just haven’t read it.

  19. Captainchaos

    “Quite an ego.”

    Weaver, I see you have had some of your comments taken down from the Lincoln thread at Front Porch Republic as well. Know why? Because you are guilty of “ray-cism”. Those are the same fanatical dolts who would have carried straw with glee to the witch’s stake in former days. See? You can’t even say you want your people to survive, much less do anything about it. Ironic that, as MacDonald observes, once those Puritan hypocrites pass away their multicult will not survive because there won’t be any White suckers left to facilitate it.

    “Should the day come that the law does not provide protection, then and only then would armed resistance be permitted.”

    Harold, territory is the guarantor of genetic continuity, nowhere in the West are White collectively allowed exclusive territory to facilitate their collective life. It is a policy that will ultimately be genocidal in scope. We have the right to resist our genocide by any means necessary.

    “Captainchaos, for curiosity’s sake do you make arguments for large families by whites?”

    I don’t need to harp on that point, it should be self-evident. I have made the point in the past that our total fertility rate is artificially suppressed due to the entire anti-White thrust of the system; part of the genocide I mentioned earlier. Paul Craig Roberts actually wrote an article at Vdare a couple of years ago more or less making that same point.

    “To be honest I generally skip your rants…”

    Until you start to see the SYSTEMIC downward pressure on the existence of our race, and not just dwell upon its more pedestrian manifestations, you are not even in the ballpark. I typically address the larger systemic anti-White problem. That is why I preach the need to fight the existing system and establish a pro-White one.

    If you want to understand the full and fearsome scope of the problem this piece written by James Bowery – who is a brilliant man – of Majority Rights is a must read:

  20. Weaver


    I have no right to post at that site. They deemed my first comment unworthy and so removed it. I appreciate their publishing the second one.

    It wasn’t anything more extreme than what Buchanan would say that I posted.

    If you really want to get into it, it might have been that I was too critical of Mr. Medaille. Whatever the reason, they were fully in the right to remove it.

  21. Captainchaos

    For those that would resist the genocide being committed against our people the “right” to do whatever we must to remain forever ourselves is arrogated to us. Why? Because we fight not just for extant White people but for all the generations to come that will not be but for our revolutionary efforts. The right of said TO EXIST is greater than any other petty considerations.

  22. ERIC

    Captainchaos is not a “moby”.
    I heard a prominent white nationalist say on his audio program that he uses the name Captainchaos on blogs.
    I’m not going to reveal his name but he is a white nationalist.

  23. RonL

    You really need to be medicated. Hitler hated all non-Aryans including Celts, Slavs and all Southern Europeans. The Nazis may have allied with the Baltic peoples, and the non-Indo-European Finns, Hungarians, and Estonians, as well as the Italians but as with the Japanese and Ukrainians, this was a wartime alliance. You do know the Nazi plans for the Slavic peoples (enslavement, death or dispossession), right?
    And with the war, only the Georgian Ioseph Dzugashvili is responsible for the deaths of more whites than Hitler.
    That Hitler is not a pariah to White Nationalists only speaks to their derangement from resentment and grievance.

  24. Kirt Higdon

    It would be more accurate to say that Hitler hated many Aryans as these include Celts, Slavs and most southern Europeans such as Italians. But basically your point is correct, RonL.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>