In my absence, Vanishing American has written a long post about divisiveness within the pro-White movement, which was undoubtedly inspired by the previous thread here. The general thrust of her argument is that we should have more patience for those who are on our side (in particular, Christians) but disagree with us on some particular. I see nothing to argue with there. It was not my intention to spark a debate about Christianity, but that was the result of my brief comment on demonic possession.
As to divisiveness on our side, I have been around long enough to resign myself to its existence. Fractiousness of this sort is typical of emerging political movements. It is undesirable, but unavoidable. There is nothing that I or anyone else can do about it. Most of these divisions were sown in the distant past. Even if we chose not to comment on them, they would still exist. Here are a few that come to mind:
– Europeans vs. Americans
– Canadians vs. Americans
– Yankees vs. Southerners
– Nords vs. Meds
– Race Realists vs. White Nationalists
– National Socialists vs. White Nationalists
– White Supremacists vs. White Nationalists
– Paleocons vs. White Nationalists
– Christians vs. Pagans
– Christians vs. Atheists
– Creationists vs. Darwinists
– Mainstreamers vs. Vanguardists
– Radicals vs. Moderates
– Socialists vs. Capitalists
– Single Jewish Causers vs. Multiple Causers
What is the definition of “our side?” Where is the line to be drawn? I’m willing to work with anyone (except criminals, fantasists and defectives) who is 1.) pro-White, 2.) advocates the ethnostate solution, and 3.) supports Jewish exclusion. This disqualifies Auster, Jobling, G.W., Robert Lindsay and the rest of the philo-Semite race realists. It excludes the paleos on the conservative fringe. My definition includes Meds like silver; Brits like GuessedWorker; Christians like Fred Scrooby, notuswind, danielj and Rusty Mason.
In my view, subrace, nationality, region and religion are not dealbreakers. I link to Christian websites like Spirit Water Blood and Cambria Will Not Yield. I support their work. In contrast, I stopped linking to the humanist Richard Dawkins, although I agree with him on evolution. If White Nationalism is to succeed in North America, some accomodation with Christianity is inevitable. I have in mind the arrangement between the Southern Baptist Convention and the Jim Crow South. That would suit me just fine.
What say you?