A Buyer's Guide to Antelope Hill

Use Coupon Code "PFBC" for 10% off.

If it’s not clear, I like books. I like reading books. I like buying and owning books. I don’t like marking up books. I want people to make more books for me to buy and for me to read.

I support right wing publishers on general principle. Some of them, I hated from the start, like Passage Press. Some of them have disappointed me, like Mystery Grove, which literally sold out to Passover Passage Press. Some of them are quite good, like Imperium Press and of course the Mises Institute.

One publisher that hit the scene in 2020 is Antelope Hill Publishing.

On Wednesday, 3 December, they’ll be having their White Wednesday sale. Using the coupon code “WHITEWEDNESDAY25”, everything will be 15% off that first day, and 10% off for the two days after. You can also use the coupon code “PFBC”, short for Property Freedom Book Club, for 10% off whenever. Discount codes don’t stack, so the best deal is 15% off on Wednesday.

Here are some books that I recommend you buy. They are not presented in any particular rank order.

The Transgender Industrial Complex, by Scott Howard

This is the first book that put Antelope Hill on my radar. Up to that point, they had only published or republished translations of works by Padraic Pearse, Leon Degrelle, and Cecile Tormay. They seemed at the time indistinct from Mystery Grove Publishing, which was then publishing works by Pyotr Wrangel, Peter Kemp, and Ernst Junger. The Transgender Industrial Complex was their first original publication, and I immediately knew that this publishing house would be one of the few that had popped up in that period to last.

The Transgender Industrial Complex is a deep dive into the “Big Money behind Big Gay.” Every “charitable foundation”, every NGO, every law firm. It is relentlessly thorough and well researched, and every single page is a gut punch to the idea that we are living in a normal country. And I do mean every single page. At one point I would just flip to random pages and read paragraphs aloud to people.¹

You should read this book if you’re already a regular reader of this website or something like the Unz Review, and understand the power process as I’ve described it, so that you can see what it truly looks like in practice. It is a great way to dine out on confirmation bias. If you’re relatively new to this website or you’ve never heard of the Unz Review, more up to the speed of maybe Mises.org, you should check out the next book on this list first.

The Open Society Playbook, by Scott Howard

The Open Society Playbook is the book Scott Howard came out with after Transgender-Industrial. I am a big proponent of seeing what is actually there, and of proving things by citing the words of those involved. For people who like to feel smart by missing the point or engaging in arbitrary skepticism and isolated demands for rigor, this is kryptonite. It’s such a powerful opening play that the rest of the discussion becomes a comedic exercise.

I recall, for instance, telling somebody that the Ukraine War was set up to benefit Israel, a quagmire to draw Russia in and prevent them from protecting Assad from the Jews. They asked me how I knew that. I said that Victoria Nuland herself wrote an article explaining it. How do you know Jacob “Jack Ruby” Rubenstein shot Lee Harvey Oswald for the Jews? Because when he was in prison, he told his Rabbi “I did it for the Jewish people.” How do I know FDR provoked the Axis into war? Because Winston Churchill reflected to the New York Times, “The President had said he would wage war but not declare it and. that he would become more and more provocative. If the Germans did not like it they could attack American forces.”

Scott Howard describes the book as “a deep dive into who is behind globalism.” The book goes financier by financier, foundation by foundation, NGO by NGO. Where a book like Age of Entitlement places the NGO-Industrial complex in its historical context with the ACLU and the causes and consequences of the Civil Rights Act, Howard’s book maps out these networks as they actually exist today and doesn’t play games with dog whistles and blind alleys. Not only is this book an excellent read, but you can pass it to relative normies when you’re done, assuming they are already the sort to know who George Soros is.

The Culture of Critique, by Kevin McDonald

I cannot say enough about Kevin MacDonald’s work. Anybody who has not read it is simply not qualified to discuss the theory and practice of Jewish Power and Jewish intellectual movements. Much like Scott Howard, Dr. MacDonald directly quotes the luminaries who brought us Neoconservatism, Freudian Psychoanalysis, and Boasian Anthropology. It explains what precisely a Jewish intellectual movement is, and their common features, using historical examples.

Dr. MacDonald is one of the most gatekept academics in history, relative to his output. Yarvinite Neoreactionaries, “Bronze Age” Barbarian Vitalists, and other assorted Kosher Rightoid take-sellers enforce a rigorous taboo against so much as saying his name, yet simultaneously all claim to have read his work if you insist on bringing him up, claiming to be “unconvinced”. At one point, Yarvin explained that he doesn’t believe Kevin MacDonald because MacDonald provides too much evidence.

Now, Anonymous has an advantage in that he has actually read MacDonald’s books, as opposed to just a couple of essays, and he is surely right to note that MacDonald has an enormous mass of “corroborating evidence.”

Because all historians do. A historian is not a mere collator of facts—he or she is creating an interpretation, much like a trial lawyer. The goal of history is to paint a picture of the past. The test, for any reader, is simply whether you find that picture convincing. Volume of evidence has not much to do with it.

In fact, it is often a contrary indicator, because a lawyer with a weak case often feels the temptation to try to inundate the jury with a vast mass of detail. The strategy is essentially to demand that the reader either agree, or do the work of assembling the same detail into a counter-narrative. The canonical example is Johnnie Cochran’s great gambit, “if the gloves don’t fit, you must acquit,” although you often see the same strategy in Holocaust revisionists, such as Germar Rudolf. (MacDonald does not claim to be a Holocaust revisionist, and I am not accusing him of being one.)

Why didn’t the gloves fit? Why weren’t the gas-chamber walls stained blue? The only possible answer is “who the hell knows?” There are all sorts of chemical and physical processes that can cause leather to shrink, Prussian blue to decay, etc., etc. There is no evidence, there can be no evidence, for any particular one of them. Forcing your opponent to prove a negative is not a legitimate rhetorical tactic.

If you press them, they will invariably cite the “rebuttals” written by one Nathan Cofnas. It is blindingly obvious that they have never actually read MacDonald, because they will claim that MacDonald failed to take into account that Ashkenazi Jews have high IQs. This is infuriating because MacDonald’s first book, A People That Shall Dwell Alone, set out to explain the precise causal mechanism for that high IQ. It’s also an insufficient explanation for Jewish overrepresentation, for reasons Ron Unz (another right wing writer with an artificial taboo against citing him) explains in his article The Myth of American Meritocracy.

You can read the entire trilogy for free on the Unz Review, but only Antelope Hill sells the new third edition, which among other expansions answers “objections” raised after the book’s publication and contains an entirely new chapter on Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement. Joseph “Seph” Corerro, a.k.a. Doomernat, has also written replies of his own to Cofnas’s “rebuttals” on his substack. You should also read the six supplemental readings from Right Wing Reading Rainbow VI, all of which have also been reviewed by Dr. MacDonald. You can listen to a group discussion involving myself and Dr. MacDonald here.

You Gentiles, by Maurice Samuels

This book, as far as I can understand, was originally published in 1924 as Jew-for-Jew Zionist propaganda, intended to make assimilated Jews feel that they had no hope of being normal and should save everyone the trouble by moving to Palestine. Though Samuel did no such thing himself, dying in New York. The book is framed as a hypothetical letter to us Gentiles, explaining why we just can’t get along.

While a lot of it is meant for flattering Jewish sensibilities, there are genuine insights he offers. For example, he discusses how Gentiles have what seems to him to be an absurd conception of loyalty. Gentiles could choose to go to a given college solely because of the price. Yet, despite this, that college upon arrival will be the best college in the country, the town will be the best town (second only to the town where the Gentile grew up), and the sports team the best team. The Gentile will feel genuinely upset if you ask him to consider the possibility that his sports team is not the best. Luckily, Samuel and myself are New Yorkers, and we do in fact have the best sports teams and the best universities so we don’t need to worry about such cognitive dissonance. In any case, Jews aiming to assimilate will try to be “loyal”, failing to understand that their basic sense of Jewish self-identity will prevent them from being loyal in the way Gentiles understand it because the Gentile understanding of loyalty is fundamentally ridiculous. Those of us on the autism spectrum may empathize with this frustration.

For reasons not known to me, Antelope Hill has not made this book part of a bundle with Culture of Critique, even though the two compose a natural pairing. In fact, Kevin MacDonald wrote the foreword to Antelope Hill’s edition of the book! It’s a very short, digestible read, easily finished in a day, and I also consider MacDonald’s foreword a good primer for his larger body of work.

When Israel is King, by Jean and Jerome Theraud

It is impossible to understand the Europe of the late 1920s without understanding the year 1919.

Lev “Leon Trotsky” Bronstein’s Red Army made war on the Second Polish Republic in February 1919, before even consolidating control over the Russian interior. Within a year, the Soviets would have overrun Warsaw and been at Germany’s gate had it not been for Pilsudski’s resourcefulness and Stalin’s glory-seeking.

On 21 March 1919, the Jewish Bolshevik Bela Kun launched a coup d’etat against Mihaly Karolyi’s liberal-nationalist Hungarian People’s Republic, proclaiming the Hungarian Soviet Republic. Bela Kun was an associate of Trotsky and dispatched to the country in November of 1918 for this purpose. Bela Kun was assisted by fellow Jewish Bolshevik Tibor Szamuely and his “Lenin Boys.", who executed landowners, clergy, and other suspected class enemies.

Literally two weeks later, on 6 April 1919, the Jewish Socialist Ernst Toller declared the formation of a Bavarian Soviet Republic in southern Germany. His reign was characterized by borderline comical decrees including a declaration of war on Switzerland and, more ominously, the adjacent German state of Wurtemburg. His reign lasted for less than a week before he was overthrown by the Jewish Bolshevik Eugen Levine in the “Palm Sunday Putsch”. He went to work according the the proper procedures, seizing cash, food, and guns, expropriating homes, establishing workers councils in factories, and, of course, arresting aristocrats and shopkeepers en masse. In a move more Jacobin than Judean, he ordered churches converted into “Revolutionary Temples” presided over by “Goddess Reason”. In less than three weeks of his rule, there were already food shortages, and he was eventually shot by the Freikorps. Crucially, the 16th Bavarian Reserve Infantry Regiment refused to join or oppose the Bavarian Red Army, under the advice of then Corporal Adolf Hitler, who is better known for other work.

In July 1919, the Italian Red Guards proclaimed a general strike in solidarity with the Russian Revolution, beginning the “Biennio Rosso”. The two year communist uprising would only be put down by armed forces of the Fasci Italiani di Combattimento, led by then “Duce of Fascism” Benito Mussolini, who is also better known for other work.

With regards to the Hungarian Soviet Republic, Antelope Hill sells two books. An Outlaw’s Diary by Cecile Tormay and When Israel is King by Jerome and Jean Tharaud. I recommend Tharaud over Tormay here for two reasons. The first is that the Tharauds devote a more thorough exploration to the history of Hungary and the failure of the First Hungarian Republic than does Tormay, who focuses primarily on the three and a half Red Terror. The second is that, as I understand it, Tormay’s book was primarily read in Hungary itself, while Tharaud’s book was much more popular internationally. Since the goal is to understand what people were thinking at the time, I therefore here recommend what people were reading at the time.

Livin’ the Dream, by Jack McKracken

Prisons don’t work. Not only do they not work, they were never proven to work. They never won the argument.

In the North, prisons are the product of a religious belief that restrictive diets and prayer (lit. Penitentiaries) can cure criminal behavior. In the South, prisons are ways to squeeze profitability off of cotton plantations. Those critiques are in fact correct, no matter how “left-coded” you think they are.

In neither case do prisons themselves reduce crime. Instead, prisons are torture chambers, rape dens (which people think is funny for some deranged reason), and gang banger boot camps. Worse still, incarceration is particularly nightmarish precisely for the sorts of people who are more likely to be victims than perpetrators. We understand that the ghetto gangster who robs his neighbor cannot blame his actions on poverty, precisely because the neighbor he robbed is experiencing that same poverty without robbing anyone.

Consider that neighbor. He’s not too bright. He’s got car payments, credit cards, and a baby mama. But he’s got a job, he’s up to date on all of his payments. He’s living paycheck to paycheck but he’s not hurting anybody, he’s got all of his expenses predictable down to the last ten dollars. He’s not going to take anybody to the moon, but he’s not hurting anybody. Then he gets caught out intoxicated, and he’s incarcerated for even a few days, plus a court date later. He misses work, he misses a payment. His whole life is derailed. Meanwhile the guy with no income, no job, no stable address, the one who would rob him, he laughs off a weekend in jail where he gets to meet his friends.

What should the alternative be? I say fines, floggings, and firing squads. Not summarily, obviously. There would still be cops, courts, lawyers, juries, due process, and all the rest. Most criminal convictions come from snitches and confessions anyway. Why not have our otherwise productive public drunk just take his lashes and be out in the morning without wasting everyone’s time?

For those of you who have a romantic view of the prison system, I recommend Jack McKracken’s memoirs of his time working for the New York State correctional system. McKracken doesn’t share my perspective on what should replace prisons, but his first hand accounts give an inside look from a realists perspective on how prisons are dysfunctional at every possible level.

Let Them Look West, by Marty Philips

Let Them Look West is a character study told from the perspective of Rob Coen, a New York Times journalist from a Community We Know Well.

He travels to Wyoming to write a hit piece on their based governor, and in that process talks to the governor, the locals, his chief of staff, and so on. Coen has watched too many movies, or perhaps movies are drawn from his shared cultural fixations, and he believes that every nice small town has a secret dark side. He sees all of these happy White people and just knows they have to be up to something.

It says something about the quality of the writing that, despite my views on Rob and his Community, I still found myself rolling my eyes alongside him whenever some Heritage American said something so Apollonian you just have to hit them with the Mercurian Stare.

The Autobiography of Sir Götz von Berlichingen

You have likely seen pictures of Gotz von Berlichingen before, otherwise known as Gotz with the Iron Hand. Gotz was a knight of the Holy Roman Empire in the early 1500s, as gunpowder warfare increased in prevalence in Europe. Gotz discovered this the hard way, when a cannon ball blew off his sword arm below the elbow during a cavalry charge. Being a man of means, he ordered the preparation of a new metal arm and continued to fight.

Gotz is the very model of aristocratic virtues. That is, he is an entitled thug with a sensitive ego and a high willingness to engage in reflexive violence. These memoirs were dictated well into Gotz’s old age, where he has outgrown many of these violent impulses and reflects on his changed temperament, though he is rarely remorseful. These are still his glory days.

I really love this book because Gotz does have a certain gift for imagery, and I can almost hear him telling me these stories in the room, relaying old conversations as if they were recent and acknowledging when he had talked himself into trouble that he could have avoided. Indeed, Some part of the book are almost out of Monty Python. Two sequences jump to mind.

There’s one where our hero is eating with a Polish knight who is rather fond of his long, flowing hair, to the point of using raw eggs as a medieval form of conditioner to keep his hair smooth. Our hero does a little trolling and stands up, brushing his harness up against the man’s hair. They fight, Gotz knocks out his tooth, then goes to church. After the service, he notices that the priest seems to be deliberately wasting his time with questions and small talk. When he finally leaves, the town guard is waiting for him. Gotz says that, as a knight, mere peasant guards cannot arrest him. The guards tell him to talk to the local lord about it. Writing on this incident in his old age, he says “those guards were smarter than I was, for if they had chosen to arrest me, I would have chosen to defend myself and gotten myself into even more trouble.”

Another sequence had Gotz joining a knight and his retinue as one town doesn’t seem to want to acknowledge that they are well behind enemy lines and should just surrender to the nice german knights. The rebels have chosen to hole up in a church. When the knight captain with Gotz implores them to give it up already, they throw down a brick and give him a nice facial lasceration. So the knight-captain orders the church burned down. This causes some of the church’s inhabitants to leap from the church tower, including a small child who then simply gets up and walks away like nothing happened. Simultaneously, some of the men-at-arms decide to run into the burning building, not to rescue the people but to rescue the church’s gold, with some of them not emerging after several minutes after which point Gotz decides to move on from this town.

It’s a very fun read.

In His Own Words, by Him

It’s a collection of Hitler’s speeches, from 1920 to 1945, including his trial defense in 1924, his address to the Reichstag after the Night of the Long Knives in 1934, and his declaration of war against the United States in 1941.

The book serves as a natural companion to Hitler’s Revolution by Richard Tedor, which can be purchased from ARMREG here.

There’s not much to say here. Either you want to understand Hitler in his own words or you don’t. Each speech is preceded with historical context provided by the translator, C.J. Miller.

It should be noted that the book does not contain transcripts of speeches made at the annual Nuremberg rallies, which Antelope Hill sells separately in the book Voice of Triumph.

Nuremberg: The Last Battle, by David Irving

The Nuremberg Trials were a legal farce of the highest order.

Affidavits were quoted which no one was allowed to read, signed by witnesses no one had ever heard of. Witnesses at other trials were quoted, not to be cross-examined by the defense. Evidence was provided by the prosecution, its provenance unknown, for the prosecution itself to then “certify” as “genuine.” Defendants were subject to lengthy courtroom monologues denouncing them, perhaps correctly, as murderers and torturers as a form of evidence. Defendants were compelled to sign statements in languages that they could not read, which were then quoted as confessions in the ensuing trials.

Witnesses were interrogated under the laws of the Soviet Union, judicial notice was taken of the findings of Soviet courts, documents and exhibits were introduced into evidence under the laws of Communist countries. Defendants were not allowed to question the credibility of any prosecution witness at any time, any “report” written by the prosecutor was considered “proof” of the defendant’s guilt and was not considered subject to argument. Any groundless assertion made by the prosecutors was considered “proven” unless the defendants could disprove it. Effective cross examination was simply not allowed. The defendants were not allowed to take the stand to contradict the prosecution witnesses, and testimony was curtailed whenever it was feared someone might contradict a favorite prosecution witness. Defense attorneys were reprimanded for “confusing” the witnesses on cross-examination, yet simultaneously were not given copies of documents introduced into evidence by the prosecution.

Anyone who purported to be a survivor was automatically believed. Any accusation was automatically believed. Every atrocity committed by the Russians or other Allies was parodied in some accusation against the Germans, from mass-rape to food-confiscation to aerial bombardment. Most famously, offered as a limited hangout to those questioning these trials, the Soviets accused the Germans of perpetrating the Katyn Massacre and framing the Russians at Katyn. Germans were accused of, among other things, digging up the bodies at Katyn and putting false documents in their pockets to make it look like the Russians did it, then burying them again. Not to be confused with Sonderaktion 1005, another Secret Nazi Mass Excavation Project which saw them remove 150,000 bodies from Babi Yar, over half a million bodies from Treblinka concentration camp, and literally countless more bodies from all across Eastern Europe.

Conclusion

Buy books. Read books. Be less ignorant.

1. I gave an example in Right Wing Reading Rainbow IV. Here’s another sample:

In geo-political and military spheres, NATO plays a central role in the globalist project as we have seen, and it is also fully committed to spreading the gospel of tolerance at gunpoint. Rose Gottemoeller, former Deputy Secretary General of NATO, tweeted her support for “#IDAHOT2017” (International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia, and Biphobia, which “aims to coordinate internaitonal events that raise awareness of LGBT rights violations and stimulate interest in LGBT rights work worldwide”), stating that “NATO is committed to diversity and inclusion—these values make us stronger and safer.” I’m sure Sloboidan Milosevic would agree if he was alive.

[…]

As if the spectacle couldn’t get any more grotesque, while not exactly the same thing, the reader will recall that the “gender equity” precursor was enforced “democratically” when after toppling the regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, the United States mandated gender quotas for members of parliament in the two countries’ new constitutions. In its increasing aggression toward the Russian sphere, James Kirchick inadvertently sums NATO’s mission up perfectly: “One suspects that if Russia were a place where Pride parades were allowed, its quarrels with the United States, and ours with it, would diminish.” I would imagine so.