(This article was originally written in August, 2020.)

It was not long ago when I was watching the Harry Potter films, and no great period of time has passed since I had taken an ingenuous pleasure viewing them.

The leading character of the series, Harry Potter, was played by Daniel Radcliffe. Radcliffe is of half-Jewish descent. It may be no coincidence that the author of the Harry Potter books, Joanne Rowling, characterized her protagonist as a “half-blood” – a magical person with one witch or wizard parent with magic abilities, the other parent a “muggle-born”, or a person born from non-magical parents. I find it interesting that within the Wizarding World the “magical gene” is considered the dominant one. Similarly, in the essential spiritual character that is transmitted from Jews with non-Jewish spouses to the offspring, that which is the exclusive spiritual domain of the Jewish race is always dominant, but not only dominant genetically, but appears to be always present in cases of the mixed offspring. Since a Jew may also have a non-Jewish father, this would defy the established rules of human heredity. But the Jews are not human, and the hereditary laws which pertain to us must not always apply to them, especially as regards the much more influential spiritual and moral attributes. As I will describe in some further detail, Radcliffe himself is no exception to this rule. I have read the Harry Potter books and watched the films, but I will focus mainly on the films here; I have already written about Harry Potter and propaganda in another article, where I mostly described the contents of the books and on Rowling herself. (Is it not a remarkable coincidence also, that the hero calls himself “the Chosen One”? Does this vain title remind the reader of something else? It is only benign to the benighted.)

A few weeks ago, I watched some of the films again; namely, the Sorcerer’s Stone, the Order of the Phoenix, and the Deathly Hallows, which was composed of two parts, both of which I watched. But what was it that compelled me to watch them again? Some hope, some faith that perhaps there was some good in some Jews. I wished for some sign that perhaps there was a respectable Jew. After all, the movies, as far as I remembered them, told good morals, and the story contained within the eight movies was entertaining. But does that mean we should be permitted to watch them? No; a Jew in the final sense will always behave according to what is true to his nature, to his Jewish (non-human, demonic) spirit.

Radcliffe as Harry Potter

Recently I watched a movie about a law enforcement agent within the “White nationalist” movement, Imperium (2016), whose protagonist was played by the same actor as that of the Harry Potter films. It was partly for that reason that I had decided to watch it. When I first watched the film, perhaps in 2017, I was already aware that many of the so-called neo-Nazis, “White supremacists”, and “White nationalists” were themselves secretly Jewish. In many cases these Jewish deceivers attempted to hide their Jewish descent as a small and insignificant element in their pedigree. Their behavior and mentality, however, was, as I mentioned above, no less diminished than that of their more full-blooded kin. Today all of the famous and influential “neo-Nazis”, “White supremacists”, and “White nationalists” are Jews. So the fact that Radcliffe is of half-Jewish descent, and that his character joins various “White nationalist” and “neo-Nazi” groups to become an influencer in the movement, gives a more accurate representation of the “White nationalist” movement as a whole today than may at first be assumed. Many famous “White nationalists” have later been exposed as Jews. Sometimes the Jewish media admits this, but this will usually happen only after non-Jews had already exposed them and their true identity had been revealed. Many of the lesser members of the “White nationalist” groups are also Jews, but naturally, there is less interest in exposing them than the leaders themselves. It is also interesting that Radcliffe, as far as I know, was the only actor in this movie of openly Jewish descent. The Jews never give non-Jews major roles in their films and other media, and it is to be assumed that the other major actors are secretly Jewish. Every famous actor, in every movie or television show throughout the world, without exception, is, as far as I am aware, Jewish. Imperium is the same Jewish garbage as all other film and television, promoting dishonesty, indolence, violence, slang, promiscuous and criminal behavior, and hatred of races other than Jews. Of course, none of this should have any effect on the conduct of men of an innately virtuous and astute disposition; nor do I expect it to influence the innately inferior and degenerate individuals to any significant extent. It is the masses who tend neither towards one nor the other extreme that are most easily directed towards one or the other view by influences of this kind.

Radcliffe as a “White supremacist”

Outside of film, television, and the stage, Radcliffe is no different from the other Jews. He is an atheist who supports and promotes the degeneracy of his maternal race no less than kinsmen of similar influence. He unreservedly promotes homosexuality and “sexual equality”. He recently criticized Rowling for her statements about the rights of “transsexuals”. This, I am certain, was staged. Rowling herself is Jewish, as are all popular contemporary authors; and when a Jew claims to have a divergence of belief from that of the rest of his race, one must only consider what tendencies of belief and action the race rather than any single member of it has shown.

The Jews deceive us. They give us the impression that they are capable of good actions. A good human must be able to not only take care of himself, but have something left over for the common welfare. But not only that: He must have a desire to help the greatest possible number of men with no other view of benefit in mind than the common advancement of mankind. The Jews are incapable of this. Everything they have done has been for their advantage. When it sometimes happens that through some coincidence their success happens to also be a boon to us, it is never with our benefit in mind. The Jew is a foreigner in all nations; yet he expects to be given special treatment in every land that has welcomed him. When they speak about racial discrimination on behalf of another race, they do so only because they foresee such actions benefiting themselves. When they claim to support women’s rights, they do so because of their discontent; what those who are not of their race believe matters nothing to them. They incite the lesser elements of mankind to similar action and toward their direction; and what is then promoted by these discontented elements will reach the masses during times of social disruption. Martin Luther said: “If they do perform some good deed, you may rest assured that they are not prompted by love, nor is it done with your benefit in mind. Since they are compelled to live among us, they do this for reasons of expediency; but the heart remains and is as I have described it.”

In the Chamber of Secrets film, it is said, “It is not our abilities that show what we truly are – it is our choices.” But our choices result only in as much good as our mental and moral capabilities allow them. The highest capabilities of one man can exceed those possible of attainment by another. There have always been, and there always will be, differences of attainment among men, and science has shown that these differences of attainment are largely the result of differences of inherent ability. Bad environments usually are the result of bad persons – and that, in turn, is largely the product of bad heredity. In general, the environmental conditions of each man tend to give a more perfect representation of his inherent inclinations and mental tendencies than is possible in the case of members of species of lower evolutionary rank (Frederick Adams Woods, “Laws of Diminishing Environmental Influence”, Popular Science Monthly, April, 1910). The “product of his surroundings” adage applies with least force upon man, and with the lowest degree of efficaciousness upon our most treasured mental and moral qualities. It is interesting also to note that Woods, in his study of European royal families in Mental and Moral Heredity in Royalty (1906), has discovered that the throne inherited by the eldest brother did not correspond to a greater likelihood of his achieving distinction than was the case for his younger brothers, in spite of the much greater opportunity for advancement afforded to the former. Says Woods, “a very decided difference in outward circumstances – namely, the right of succession – can be proved to have no effect on intellectual distinction, or else so small as to be unmeasurable without much greater data.”