Immigration: Moving the Goalposts

Roy Beck Succeeds in Moving the Goal Posts.

In August, I took a look at how a debate over “birthright citizenship” was emerging in the mainstream. A few years ago, ending “birthright citizenship” for illegal aliens was seriously discussed only in radical circles. The same was true of taking on legal immigration.

The political landscape on immigration has radically changed since the waning years of the Bush administration. According to Politico, as many as 17 Senate seats currently held by Democratic and Republican supporters of “comprehensive immigration reform” could switch hands in the 2010 midterm elections.

Consider the following: in January 2011, “comprehensive immigration reform” could have as few as 30 supporters in the Senate, down from 46 in 2007, and shrunk from a highwater mark of 73 in 2006.

The decline began in the Bush years and has continued throughout the Obama administration and the last two sessions of Congress. It is not due to any unwillingness on the part of Democrats to pass the amnesty of their dreams. Harry Reid will be making a renewed push for the DREAM Act next week.

It is wholly attributable to the grassroots pressure on the Republican Party and the willingness of the conservative base to punish the traitors within their ranks. Instead of abandoning the GOP, conservatives and nationalists decided to purge its Blue establishment and replace them with Tea Party candidates who are tougher on immigration.

Lisa Murkowski was the third incumbent Republican supporter of amnesty to fall in primaries this election cycle. She will be one of five Republican Senators leaving office who once supported “comprehensive immigration reform.” On the Democratic side of the aisle, Blanche Lincoln is expected to fall to John Boozman in Arkansas and Michael Bennet to Ken Buck in Colorado.

Roy Beck now confidently states that “there is no chance for an amnesty” in the next Congress regardless of which party controls the House and Senate. The political winds have shifted too far in our direction.

Having won the battle over “comprehensive immigration reform,” NumbersUSA is moving on to advocating a “time out” on legal immigration and congressional hearings on “birthright citizenship.” After rallying Whites around opposing illegal immigration, Beck is now leading the mobilized masses into more controversial territory.

There are a number of important lessons to draw from this experience:

1.) Those who abandoned the mainstream wasted the last five years. The White Nationalist movement has nothing to show for its efforts during that time period.

2.) Those who stayed inside the mainstream and worked to incrementally push the national debate on immigration in a more radical direction succeeded. They killed “comprehensive immigration reform” and laid the foundation for an attack on legal immigration.

3.) Starting where people find themselves today, rallying them around an uncontroversial position, and leading them to the next front when trust has been established is what works.

4.) Starting where you are at today, not your audience, and attempting to rally your audience around an extremely controversial position does not work.

5.) Communicating with people in terms of their own experience works. Treating people like objects without thoughts of their own does not work.

6.) Those who disliked the Republican Party under George W. Bush but chose to work within the system and purge the establishment succeeded.

7.) Those who abandoned the system failed to construct an alternative to the status quo. When the White backlash against the Obama administration finally came, it was directed into the Tea Party, not the White Nationalist movement.

Moral of the story:

From 2005 to 2010, the radical realists got something. The rhetorical radicals got nothing. From 2010 to 2015, radical realists will continue to push the envelope in the mainstream. The rhetorical radicals will sit idly by on the fringe, mired in their perennial debates on the internet, and will get nothing a second time.

There is a huge difference between effective action and ineffective rhetoric. The former poses a threat to the status quo. The latter does not.

How many years are you willing to let pass by before you decide to start doing something effective with your time?

About Hunter Wallace 12380 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent


  1. Some news:

    In the face of Hillary Clinton’s filing a UN Complaint seeking the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to rule that AZ’s new immigration law violates “human rights”, I have filed a complaint (registered mail 9/3/10) with that same High Commissioner charging the US Federal Government with GENOCIDE of European-American Christians. I ask you to publicize this in any ways that you can. It truly is a powerful response that can be used to bring Clinton, Obama et al. into at least an interesting dilemma.

    The act of GENOCIDE trumps all international and human rights laws (and US Public Law and the US Constitution (see attached filing), and if the UN Commissioner Pillay dares to rule favorably on Hillary’s complaint, she must *MUST* rule that the intentional destruction of Euro-American Christians preempts and nullifies Clinton’s lesser complaint, and all efforts that coddle Third World immigration, legal and illegal. Such a UN ruling also would stop all challenges to AZ law, and force the Feds to immediately halt
    all efforts to maintain open borders, and begin legal reparations to restore the majority Euro-Am Christian population. If UN Commissioner Pillay upholds Clinton’s complaint, but refuses to act on this GENOCIDE complaint, she is ruling that human rights and international laws, including the 1948 UN Convention on Genocide are no longer binding on the U.S. government or
    that European-American Christians, alone, are not protected by those laws.

    That said, I ask all of you to publicize this complaint, and ask others to use it to file their own complaints. I believe that actions of Clinton, AG Holder’s DOJ, Congress, the Supreme Court and the entire Obama Administration — having taken steps to subvert our Constitution and laws, both of which in fact SUPPORT the UN Convention on Genocide — must be met with a superseding complaint in the UN.

    Terry Graham

    NEW RELEASE – For immediate release

    Sept. 13, 2010

    For more information, email Terry Graham at

    California Woman Files UN Complaint Charging Feds with Genocide of Euro-American Christians

    A California woman has filed a formal complaint with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights charging the US federal government with genocide of European-American Christians through its immigration policies.

    Terry Graham sent the eight-page complaint to UN High Commissioner Navanethem Pillay on Sept. 3, after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s filed a report with Pillay’s office claiming that the federal government’s legal challenge to Arizona’s new immigration law will protect “human rights”.

    In July, the US Dept. of Justice filed a lawsuit in federal district court seeking to nullify and prevent enforcement of Arizona’s immigration law, asserting the federal government alone has authority over immigration. Earlier, President Obama attacked Arizona’s law, saying it was “unfair” and potentially violated the civil rights of Hispanic citizens.

    “The US Constitution, and US federal and international laws against genocide preempt and nullify all laws, policies and procedures – including those advanced illegally last month by the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of our federal government that result in the destruction of European-Americans,” says Graham.

    Graham’s complaint cites the UN Genocide Convention of 1948, international and human rights laws, US Public Law 95-435 and the US Constitution, Article I, Section 8, which gives the US Congress the power to “define and punish… offences against the Law of Nations.”

    The UN Genocide Convention defines genocide” as “deliberately inflicting upon [a group] conditions of life calculated to bring about the physical destruction in whole or in part.” Article II further defines genocide as “causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group” and “imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group”, which can include job losses and taxation policies that cause stress and lower
    birthrates. Under the Convention, which Congress adopted under US Public Law 95-435, “group” is defined by nation, race, ethnicity, or religion.

    Graham noted that in 1960, Euro-American Christians comprised 89% percent of the nation’s population, but now are minorities in many parts of the United States solely due to federal actions that promote massive Third world immigration.

    In 1998, Hillary Clinton’s husband, Pres. Bill Clinton, publicly
    acknowledged that the destruction of White Christian Americans was intentional when he said, “In a little more than 50 years, there will be no majority race in the United States.”

    In her complaint, Graham asks the UN Human Rights Commissioner to promptly investigate her charges and “make an immediate, formal request of the US federal government to place a judicial stay on all US laws, policies, procedures, lawsuits and legal actions that advance this genocide.” She is also seeking reparations as defined by the UN Genocide Convention that “must wipe out all the consequences of the illegal act and to re-establish the situation which would, in all probability, have existed if that act had not been committed.”

    Graham is urging others to file their own complaints with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights via mail or email as soon as possible. She also asks that lawsuits be filed charging the US federal government with genocide of European-American Christians in US and courts in nations who are signatories to the UN Convention on Genocide.

    “If the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights refuses or fails to investigate and rule on my complaint that the U.S. federal government’s laws, policies, procedures and other actions are an act of genocide against U.S. European-American Christians, we must conclude that ”human rights and international law are no longer binding on the U.S. government or that European-American Christians, alone, are not protected by those laws, Graham said.

  2. I think the radicals might have had some influence. The respectable conservatives who are pushing to end birthright citizenship got that idea somewhere. You don’t know what these guys are looking at in private, or what’s influencing them.

    But that means the most effective role for radicals is as intellectuals and writers, providing alternative ideas that may one day make their way into the mainstream. Going out dressed in a brown shirt carrying signs and yelling slogans doesn’t really help with that.

  3. coldequation,

    The idea of ending “birthright citizenship” was made possible by the heat that Republican incumbents were feeling from their right flank. That was made possible by organizations like NumbersUSA and CIS which have succeeded in translating anger over illegal immigration into effective grassroots action.

    The most effective role for radicals is not “spreading ideas.” It lies in setting realistic goals and working within the system to achieve what is possible. Once you mobilize people around an achievable goal and set them in motion, they will likely keep going after the immediate goal has been achieved.

    Look at the Civil Rights Movement.

    In 1955, the immediate goal was to end segregated buses in Birmingham. Once that was accomplished, the movement was energized by the victory and continued to push the envelope.

    In 1963, Martin Luther King wanted to end segregation and achieve a colorblind utopia where all people could live in racial harmony. That wasn’t his real goal, but it was the rhetorical position he adopted, a strategy for making headway in the political environment he was facing.

    After the Voting Rights Act and Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended Jim Crow, the Civil Rights Movement kept chugging along and moved into the territory of housing discrimination and forced busing.

    Then it was justifying affirmative action in the name of achieving “diversity.” Then it was electing a mulatto as President of the United States to symbolize White America’s repentance of racism.

    Now it is denouncing the Tea Party simply for being White.

    Politicians respond to pressure. Ideas that take pressure off Republican incumbents (like the absurd idea of voting for Harry Reid for Senate) are counterproductive.

  4. In the latest news, Christine O’Donnell (the Tea Party candidate) defeated Mike Castle tonight in an upset victory in the Delaware Republican Senate primary. Rick Lazio went down in New York.

    This is further evidence (Rand Paul in Kentucky, Joe Miller in Alaska, Mike Lee in Utah, Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania) that the GOP establishment is not as invulnerable as it once seemed under the Bush administration. The Tea Party is literally hijacking the Republican Party.

    They are forcing the Republicans to adopt their platform. With each new scalp the Tea Party claims, the survivors in the Senate like Lindsey Graham and John McCain are cowed and forced to back down from offending the newly awakened Joe Six Packs.

    We are fast approaching the day when immigration will be a polarizing issue. All the Republicans in the Senate will soon be against amnesty. The survivors like Richard Lugar will be picked off in future primaries.

    The political spectrum is shifting radically against the Democrats on immigration. We will spend the next decade talking about deportation of illegals, the border fence, ending birthright citizenship, and ending legal immigration in a Depression economy.

    Now why the hell can’t White Nationalists do that? Isn’t that better than how we spent the last twenty years?

  5. Birmingham was late in the game. The civil rights movement was only made possible because of earlier radicals who spread the idea that races were equal and deserved to be treated equally, which was far outside the mainstream at one time. Think back to the Radical Republicans around the time of the Civil War – even they mostly didn’t believe that.

    Franz Boas was an example of the kind of intellectual I was talking about, except on the other side – he was an influential college professor who was probably more responsible than any other single person for spreading the idea that the races were equal, decades before Birmingham. That alone didn’t cause the civil rights movement, but it was probably a prerequisite. And he was far more effective where he was, in academia, training the future heads of anthropology departments who would brainwash future generations, than if he had tried to be an anti-racist activist c. 1910.

    I don’t disagree with your overall point (that influencing existing organizations from the inside is more effective than being a radical fringe character), but somebody has to tell the unvarnished truth, which is not possible if you’re trying to operate in remotely mainstream political circles today.

  6. Agree with equation. Well for one thing this internet extremist has a case of “Diversity Fatigue.” Maybe millions of other non-internet extermist whites has it as well?

  7. Roy Beck is a stand up guy.

    Everyone should use his website to the max.

    Don’t be lazy. That’s the biggest thing holding us back in my opinion—sloth!

  8. I don’t mean to be a nattering nabob here, but a bunch of federal employees blubbering about reinterpreting the 14th amendment during an election cycle doesn’t really mean much does it?

    Anyone remember the posturing and lamentation of “respectable conservatives” (an oxymoron if ever there was one) the secure fence act prompted during the 06 cycle?

    What did that accomplish? Other then Napalitano’s inevitable assurance that the border is as secure as it ever was and so “on to the amnesty!”

    For my part, I find this preoccupation with the passage of comprehensive immigration reform, amnesty, superfluous. The unrelenting commitment of the feds to catch and release, sanctuary policies and litigation against local governments who dare to defend themselves has already established a de facto amnesty that no amount of blubbering from respectable conservatives has, or ever will stop.

    Coldequation? Without Americans carrying signs and standing in the streets, respectable conservatives are still on their knees munching on the table scraps their Republican pimps spit in their direction.

    As for the brownshirt stuff, well, fu girlie.

  9. Hunter, I enjoy much of your material but this time you’re stretching like a drowning man grasping at straws. Perhaps you’re trying to “will” an immigration victory by prematurely celebrating this hypothetical one and I wish you success, but realistically I don’t think so.

    You also exhibit a repulsive amount of faith in a system that’s been failing us for decades. The fact is mass Democracy is the worst form of government according to 1928 US Army Training Manual 2000-25 and I agree. It’s nothing but Mobocracy, where the stupid, lazy, and easily manipulated elect our leaders. When these temporary leaders get into office, they simply grab money, privileges, and favors before their term is up, then skeedadle without any accountability for long term damages.

  10. I’ve signed up with Beck’s org to send faxes, emails, and telephone calls not only to my own representatives but to those of other states as well, whose votes were undecided and more crucial. Combined with the similar efforts of others I really believe that we prevented amnesty legislation from passing a few years ago by a hair. One more hard vote in the other direction and I think amnesty would’ve passed cloture in the Senate and gone on to final passage at Bush’s desk.

    That said, I am under no illusion that we will ever get control of our Southern border nor change the way birthright citizenship currently works. I am convinced that our establishment would rather let the country dissolve into an anarchic cauldron than change its mind on these matters. I could easily imagine the establishment making a few restrictionist concessions in order to prevent things from boiling over, but nothing major.

    I see the Tea Party phenomena as the American body rejecting the Marxist head that has replaced our own. It’s a political version of what the medical world calls as a transplant rejection; initially, all is well with the new organ but then problems start to arise. Just as the body can’t make the transplant its own so the American body can’t make its Marxist do things contrary to its nature, like stopping immigration.

  11. Whoops, I made some grammatical errors in my previous comment that I’d like to point out:

    “I see the Tea Party phenomena as the American body”

    should read

    “I see the Tea Party phenomena as being akin to the American body”

    “the medical world calls as a transplant rejection”

    should read

    “the medical world calls a transplant rejection”

    “can’t make its Marxist do things”

    should read

    “can’t make its Marxist head do things”

  12. Helen,

    If they move the goal posts on immigration, I don’t care if they support Israel. We have to be realistic and immigration is the central fight in preserving America’s White majority.

  13. Sometimes I feel like Hunter’s posts are directed at specific individuals or groups, that he’s in the process of winning a long term argument over strategy and tactics.

    I think the recent posts on the Tea Party and the importance of moving people from where they are, as opposed to the radical vangard approach, are excellent I think it’s important not to throw out the baby along with the bath water.

    Sure, Numbers USA and other groups are getting a lot done right now. But to say that no WN group has accomplished anything in the last five years is a step too far, I believe.

    The truth is that we are in the midst of a major White racial awakening in the USA, and the bounds of acceptable debate (the Overton window, if you like) have been moved substantially in our direction.

    This can be seen all over the blogosphere. Comments that would have been erased on mainstream conservatives sights like Free Republic are now common place. Posters are no longer banned for pointing out that epidemics of black and Mexican crimes, the warped standard for hate crimes, the duplicity of the media in reporting black-on-white crime vs. it’s opposite.

    Sites like Gates of Vienna, Brussels Journal and others that were excessively focused on 9/11 and the Islamic threat (which, granted is a more serious threat in Europe) have embraced a larger narative about the “Death of the West” and the dispossession of Whites from all of our nations. Authors like Fjordman have moved from “Moslems are terrible in Sweden” to “our race is being destroyed”.

    On a personal level I couldn’t have said one coherent thing about White Nationalism 18 months ago. You mean the fellows who dress up like Nazis? Thanks to this site and a few others I now have an entirely different outlook on things, another set of cognative filters for understanding the world. Among my acquaintances are four others who have made similar journeys in the last year or two.

    Sites like OD, OQ, OO, AmRen, AltRight, have provided a framework for discussion which is now wide ranging and is a factor in the Tea Parties even existing at all. The Tea Parties are about the majority rising up and insisting on our own vision, our own leaders, drawn from among us, not distant Ivy League waldos deciding for us what to think. Glen Beck is surely of the “Country Class”, and despite all his sucking up to the MLK orthodoxy he’s 10X more radical than the previous round of conservatives that Fox presented, many of whom were leading neocons.

    When the next evolution in the Tea Party comes, it will come in part from those all the way inside the movement driving it, but in part from the ideas and observations made outside the movement, which is still hobbled with PC shackles that must eventually be removed if we are to move from a lumbering walk to a full gallop.

    Such shackle busting remains a legitimate focus of some segment of the WN 2.0 movement, while at the same time great engagement with the more mainstream Tea Party & traditionalist movements is a great idea.

    Given this I feel that saying that most of the people here (yourself included Hunter) have wasted five years is going to far. Perhaps you didn’t realize your highest goals, but neither have you failed to change the landscape.

  14. Vic and tatosian,

    The purge of amnesty supporters in the Senate and their replacement by opponents of “comprehensive immigration reform” represents real change. It is a tangible, substantial victory that we can point to – not empty rhetorical posturing that is emotionally satisfying, but accomplishes nothing.

    As for the border fence, it is important to keep in mind that much of it was built before Obama won the 2008 election. The border fence is another example how acting in the mainstream through organizations like NumbersUSA and putting pressure on politicians is what works.

    Let met ask you this.

    After sixteen years of the internet, what have White Nationalists gotten in return for the millions of anonymous posts that clutter forums like Stormfront and VNN Forum? All that energy could have been channeled in a more productive direction.

    Unfortunately, White Nationalists are unwilling to set realistic, achievable goals. They are unwilling to start where people are today. They are unwilling to communicate with ordinary people in their own terms. Most are unwilling even to act on their own ideas in the real world.

    Active pacifism is a prescription for irrelevancy.

    If White Nationalism is going to act as an escape valve for people to blow off steam on the internet and do nothing about issues like immigration, what is the use of White Nationalist movement? It is the equivalent of World of Warcraft.

    Finally, the 14th Amendment is the cornerstone of the entire edifice of federal civil rights law in America. The willingness of conservatives in the mainstream to go there (after being forced to do so by their base) is another step in the right direction.

    The choice is between small steps and small victories, incremental progress in the mainstream toward our racial goals, or no steps and no victories, substituting a fantasy world for reality and then moping around on the internet about our irrelevancy.

    It is clear that the White masses have already settled on the former. Instead of joining the White Nationalist movement, they have created their own movement and are moving the goal posts on immigration, which is more than I can say we are doing.

  15. Thanks Hunter, this is the best article I’ve read anywhere, in quite a while.
    @Helen, Fixing immigration will throw a stick in the spokes of our Zionist handlers. While I’d love what I’d wish for, I’ll take what I can get, and hope the next stick won’t be too far away.

  16. Well, if beltway politicians merely talking about the 14th amendment and/or the supposed purge of amnesty supporting politicians (like mccain, graham and voinovich?) represents incremental progress, may I consider the increase of kidnappings in Arizona, the establishment of cartel observation posts in Arizona, cartel members firing at our BP guys in Arizona and the US government’s growing number of suits against Arizona to be a different and far more substantial example of incremental progress?

    I mean the former is theater. The latter is hard reality.

    The secure fence act was before 08. What of it? So was sending the Guard to the border. And the expenditure of 1 or 2billion dollars on a non existant virtual fence. In fact obama’s sending the Guard back to the border in the same ineffectual support role the bush/chertoff producers bragged about. More theater. Or is that too incremental progress?

    We are in an election cycle. Whatever campaigning beltway dandies vomit up now will be unrealistic, divisive and bigoted six months from now.

    How many times does this scenario have to play out? How much incremental progress can we take before we are no more?

  17. Roy Beck and have done an outstanding job of mobilization (White) American opposition to mass NW immigration. Roy Beck and make it very easy for people who feel the way we do to make our view/voices heard.

    Roy Beck and don’t just rant and rave, restate the problem, the build strong grass roots activists that learn to do things the right way.

    They key here is actually “doing” effective activism, not wasting time with all sorts of nonsense like sending petitions to THE UNITED NATIONS -“UN High Commissioner for Human Rights via mail or email as soon as possible” and supposedly getting the UN to prosecute the Federal Government for GENOCIDE against White European Americans. Yes, people are still suggesting such nonsense/waste of time here on O.D.

    One might as well try to petition the ADL, SPLC or the Organization of African Unity to save White European Americans on the basis of some shared commitment to self determination.


  18. Hunter,

    I’m all for effective activism by any means and I applaud your efforts. However, being unrealistic about our situation doesn’t benefit anyone. As tatosian points out, the shadow government oligarchy of bankers and media bosses have made it clear they won’t close the border. Not only that but they’re on the offensive against Arizona with lawsuits, media pressure etc..
    You can bet those National Guard troops are there to stop Patriot Groups, not illegals. We need to set our sites beyond this failed system of government and stop gambling at a table with stacked decks and loaded dice.

  19. coldequation,

    Franz Boas was mostly active from 1900 to 1940. In those years, racial attitudes hardened. The Ku Klux Klan experienced a mass revival in the 1920s. Woodrow Wilson resegregated the White House. The Immigration Act of 1924 was passed. Several other immigration acts during this period banned immigration from most of Asia. Madison Grant was a respected public figure with mainstream legitimacy.

    Ideas alone do not produce change. Context is needed.

    In the 1940s and 1950s, the impetus for change in America was the fight against Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union in the Cold War. Americans seized on Boasian anthropology because of the polarizing conflicts with the Nazis and Communists.

    Similarly, Americans seized on John Locke’s theories to justify the American Revolution, in spite of the fact that they had neglected his work for most of the previous century. Thomas Paine’s Common Sense was popular because it justified a Revolution that was already in progress.

    Neither Locke or Paine can be said to have inspired the Revolution.

    The retreat of anti-racism following Reconstruction is another example. In the 1880s and 1890s, Northerners grew tired of the racial quagmire they had created in the post-war South. Americans turned their attention to industrialization, national reconciliation, and expansion into the Caribbean.

    Popular theories of racial equality were challenged by Darwinism and fell on fertile soil because of the context of the times.

    The anti-slavery movement is another good example of the failure of ideas to produce action. This seems counterintuitive at first, but it becomes clear in light of the fact that the first anti-slavery movement failed in the 1790s and 1800s, only to revive in the 1830s.

    In that case, the demise of anti-slavery can be explained by the cotton gin and the spread of plantations into the fertile soil of the Southwest. Slavery became fabulously more popular.

    Similarly, in the 1830s the North was growing in industrial strength and population, and was blocked from asserting its power by the Southern elite who had traditionally dominated the federal government. Antislavery was a useful critique of the South that allowed Whigs and Republicans to build a broader coalition in the North.

    It was a classic “wedge issue.”

  20. Defeating amnesty is a victory only in the sense of staving off total defeat. That birthright citizenship is being questioned is good, but it’s still all related to the “illegal” thing. The real battle needs to be over the issue of a large reduction in legal immigration, and even more importantly, legitimizing white interests in keeping America majority white.

  21. “Franz Boas was mostly active from 1900 to 1940. In those years, racial attitudes hardened. The Ku Klux Klan experienced a mass revival in the 1920s. Woodrow Wilson resegregated the White House. The Immigration Act of 1924 was passed. Several other immigration acts during this period banned immigration from most of Asia. Madison Grant was a respected public figure with mainstream legitimacy.”

    Well I’m glad you’ve finally admitted that racial attitudes hardened in that period. Before, you were trying to portray a slide of ever increasing Yankee racial degeneracy from the abolitionist movement to today.

    The 20’s Klan was made up of non-elite, non-educated WASPs. Boas and his disciples influenced people who were students at elite universities in the 20’s-40’s. These students grew up to be judges, lawyers, professors, university administrators, national level politicians and journalists, writers, senior military officers, CEO’s etc. who gave America away during the 60’s.

  22. The rhetorical radicals are anchored, in the midst of a political storm, to ideological purity. They need to be able to harness the winds, tack across and sail on as the winds change. That means tailoring the rhetoric, changing targets, staying on the offensive and shifting goal posts ever closer to rather than only on top of the goal.

  23. ATBOTL,

    1.) I agree that it is unfortunate that we are even having to fight something as awful as comprehensive immigration reform. Unfortunately, that is the legacy of the past forty years. From 1970 to 2010, White Nationalists did little to turn the tide, with the brief exception of the Duke campaigns in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

    2.) Illegal immigration is an issue that the majority of Whites can rally around. NumbersUSA has the right idea. Rally the White majority around an uncontroversial issue, set them in motion, and move the goal posts by starting new fronts in the war. Once people are set in motion, they cease to be apathetic and gain confidence, which allows them to go further than they otherwise would have.

    3.) If you follow the link to the Politico story, NumbersUSA is calling for a “time out” on legal immigration now. They have the right idea. Demand the end of legal immigration for the wrong reasons. The economy is terrible right now and it makes sense to push the envelope while we have the opportunity to do so.

    4.) In the North, the Jim Crow laws fell between the Civil War and WW2, but there was also the Second Klan and the Immigration Act of 1924. Racial attitudes certainly hardened between Wilson and FDR, but not to the point they were prior to Reconstruction.

    5.) Franz Boas didn’t train anything remotely like that number of students. He certainly had an impact on undermining racial theory in American anthropology, but it was the Second World War and Cold War that discredited racialism. It was in that context that anti-racism triumphed in the American mainstream between 1937 and 1945.

    The Mind of Primitive Man was released in 1911 without making much of an impact. It was rereleased in 1937 where it became ammunition in the fight against Nazism.

    Like I said above, it wasn’t until 1775 that John Locke’s Second Treatise became popular in the American colonies. If Thomas Paine had published Common Sense in 1757, it would have fallen on deaf ears.

  24. Hunter, you didn’t waste any time with your prior efforts. You wouldn’t be where you are if you hadn’t had those experiences. The Zeitgeist was less ready for WN then than now. I talk to fellow builders and there is a growing affinity with the Tea Party etc. I keep the racial issue to a sub-topic. The main point is to build group cohesion. We start where we are and then move in an intended direction one step at a time.

  25. HW, I think you’re getting carried away with your argument. There would’ve been no Bolshevik Revolution without Marx et al. Any successful movement needs theoreticians to prepare the ground for men of action (who are often men of ideas, too). There would’ve been no Third Reich/National Socialism without Revolutionary Conservative intellectuals who gave it the necessary ideological foundations.

    What are you trying to discredit? It’s not clear to me.

  26. EuroMike,

    I should rephrase that statement. The years I spent on White Nationalism were not a total loss. I learned a number of things about the world. My view of the world changed for the better.

    When it comes to pure analysis of reality, White Nationalists make persuasive arguments. They are right about issues like race, Jews, White identity, the future decline of America, etc. That is why I bothered with the movement in the first place.

    It is changing the world where White Nationalists get in trouble. I don’t think anyone can persuasively argue that the White Nationalist movement in America has been succeeding on this point.

    Instead of rehashing what everyone already knows, subjects like race exists or Jews are bad, I have turned my full attention to this problem. I believe I have identified the major obstacles and I am increasingly confident that there is a way out of this thicket.

    As to whether White Nationalists have the desire to win, I think the jury is still out on that one. I believe some White Nationalists are so neutered by their radical rhetoric that they have become active pacifists.

  27. FB,

    I’m trying to discredit this idea that “spreading ideas” is sufficient to start a revolution. I don’t believe that is the case at all. For every successful revolution you can point to, there are a hundred failed revolutions which are just as instructive.

    White Nationalism is a failed revolution. The problem with White Nationalism is not that it lacks good ideas or the ability to spread those ideas. It lies in the inability to communicate with ordinary people, the refusal to start where people are today, the rejection of reality in favor of a fantasy world, and a radical rhetoric that translates into active pacifism.

  28. HW’s critique of WN idealization is on target, though he is much too optimistic about the current immigration situation; ZOGster Reid just attached his legalization scam to the Defense Appropriation Bill and you know the Republicrats on that one. And raw ideas do matter, so you keep putting them out there UNTIL their time comes: then they play a big role in precipitating a historical moment: every revolution fails…until it succeeds. So, today I contributed $100 – big bux for me, more than I make in a 10-hour day – to O’Donnell, AND I keep reading and posting at this site BECAUSE I learn useful stuff that has future potential. That’s the way you collapse a corrupt regime: simultaneous work from inside and outside. Incidentally there’s a site – something like, I’ll check this in a minute – where you can contribute to all or any one of the TP candidates who have knocked off Republicrats in the primaries and are now challenging sitting Demican Senators.

  29. Yes, that’s it:, set up by Jim deMint. Looks like Joe Miller in Alaska is in the most need of help, as ZOGster Murkowski is running a write-in in an effort to throw the election to the Demican. Next, tomorrow I go to the gun store, have a conversation with some militia friends, and lay in some more .30-.30 ammo. Inside/Outside.

  30. Explicit WN is too far a step for most white folks these days. On my job site yesterday I had a spontaneous talk with the furnace installer. He’s all pro-Tea Party, pro-gun, anti-illegals, anti-Obama and anti-Replicats. He is not explicitly WN, but, give him, and many more like him some time. I’m not going to alienate him by talking about “why Hitler was right”, or “why the jews are the devil’s spawn and the cause of our problems”. Let’s get real. Let’s learn from history and then present the best ideas in a way that resonates with people today. If you want people to ‘hear’ what you have to say then you have to talk to them in a way that they can understand and are receptive to.

  31. “NumbersUSA is calling for a “time out” on legal immigration now. ”

    I think they have always had that position. Discussing lowering legal immigration has yet to break through to the broader conservative movement. It’s still a verboten idea on Fox News and right wing talk radio as far as I know. Many of the media figures opposing amnesty have praised legal immigration slavishly, so it may be hard to get things moving in that direction.

    Franz Boas’ grad students founded many, if not most of the other anthropology departments in America. It was a new discipline. So almost everyone who took an anthropology class in America during the early to mid 20th century was being taught by one of Boas’ disciples or was at least heavily exposed to his writings. That’s how he was so influential. Remember there were far fewer people in colleges back then and anthropology came to the most prestigious schools first. The people taking these classes were the future elite.

  32. The biggest hurdle for White Nationalists to translate their ideas into real change is that they cannot act as “White Nationalists.” David Duke already tried that, and in a southern state to boot. It’s one thing to say you’re a “libertarian,” or that you “love the Founders” (sidestepping what they may have said about non-Whites), or that you’re a “Tea Party” spokesperson, but say you are a “White Nationalist” and the mainstream media will bury you with NSDAP and KKK imagery. Whether the WN “representative” or “spokesperson” effectively engages and wins an argument in such a format then becomes moot: the audience believes the individual is a crypto-Klanner Hitler, and that’s just eeeeevil. If you’re an academic and you “come out” as someone affiliated with a WN group (like Pierce’s NA), you will be buried — just look at what happened to Paul Fallavollita. Admittedly, though, people like Jared Taylor have been able to present themselves as “race realists” while simultaneously avoiding ‘Nazi-KKK’ type cheap shots. I think that WNs need to bag “WNism” altogether in favor of something that sounds more ‘benign,’ whether it be race realism or racial preservationism, or continue to coalesce on the fringe while acting to infiltrate more far-right, but more socially acceptable, political groups/think-tanks/associations/publications/whatever.

  33. Hunter-

    I agree with you that “realism” trumps “rhetoric”. But I still think you’re attributing too much to the radical realists themselves rather than a larger cause. The recent successes in Europe and America have little to do with working within the system. To quote Clinton’s ’92 campaign, “It’s the economy, stupid.” If the Dow were at 15,000 with 4% unemployment they’d pass an amnesty next week. People are only really nationalist when they’re angry. And there’s no reason to be angry when everyone is fat and happy.

    But since everyone is pissed off those same pols who were looking down their noses at us 2 years ago are sucking up today. And the ultimate proof of this is McCain’s flip flop on immigration. 2 years ago he all but promised an amnesty. Now, he’s demanding enforcement. On the other side of the pond, Sarkozy is kicking out the Gypsies and telling his EU critics to pound sand. Do you think he’d be doing that if the economy were hot? Then why wasn’t he doing it 3 years ago? McCain and Sarkozy aren’t nationalists. They’re just politicians who want to be re-elected. Nothing more. For this to have real legs the economy is going to have to get much worse for much longer.

    PS- I saw your mention of the economy in your response to ATBOTL. But it was so brief that it was clear you didn’t grasp that the poor economy is the real reason for the sea change.

  34. HW, one does not exclude the other. The right circumstances, a perfect storm, are necessary. You don’t have to denigrade intellectuals to make your case. It’s the thinkers who establish the ideological climate that makes changes possible.

  35. Yeah, we need the thinkers. The American colonists may have started their revolt without ever having read John Locke, but it was those ideas that gave form to their grievances, and brought the Founding Fathers in, without whom the Revolution would have fizzled like all peasant revolts. These Tea Party people are not just against the Feds, they have an ideology, call it Constitutionalism, to give their opposition structure. We need to infiltrate some of our ideology into these groups.

Comments are closed.