Michael O’Meara has a new entry in his debate with GuessedWorker over myth and empiricism. He continues to stress that we are in a new historical era which requires different tactics than appeal to the usual race realist data points. Previous generations of racialists were able to attack and marginalize anti-racism from the commanding heights of academia. In today’s deracinated cultural environment, we no longer have that luxury.
In the 1960s, Carelton Putnam famously tried this route with far stronger cultural, political and scientific wind behind his sails. He launched a failed legal campaign to overturn the Brown decision. Putnam produced two excellent “race realist” books (Race and Reason and Race and Reality) which remain classics. His work played no small role in Jared Taylor’s own racial awakening. Even 50 years ago, presenting the facts wasn’t enough to stop the tsunami of race denial in the courts.
It’s much easier to have a common myth and culture with racial/ethnic homogeneity. But when an alien elite holds the reigns of mass media and popular opinion, it becomes difficult.
I agree that racial statistics aren’t enough, that doesn’t form a society. Race after all is genetic history, it’s our history as a people that is important, that defines us, not where we fit in on a graph.
Why are we having this debate? Race realism is useful. It challenges race taboos and attracts whites to the movement by providing an empirical, factual basis to what they feel but cannot mention. Is it enough? No, but it’s something, and there’s certainly room for race realists in the resistance. More power to them.
This movement won’t be decided by esoteric debates about myth or empiricism.
Why not use this.Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.”
“The Netherlands and Belgium are more crowded than Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.”
“Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.”
“What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?”
“How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?”
“And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?”
“But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.”
“They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.”
“Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.”
” our tasks today is a matter of ensuring our collective survival as a people, which means it is a matter of forming organizations and movements to struggle on our behalf.
Six.
To this end, white nationalists will need to break with the exclusively academic/scientific orientation of race realists and start building a nationalist vanguard to lead their people. The question is: How?”
How does one break with the academic elite?
I think the obvious answer is to point out the civic problem of kidney thievery.
One affects the manner of a man-in-the-street, and one says, “Oi, I may not know about haplogroups, but I know that I don’t like all this kidney-thieving. And I don’t appreciate Israel trying to sue Aftonbladet when it reports on the latest capers of kidney thieves. Shylock got one pound of flesh, and now the right pound of flesh sells for $160,000.”
Such a discourse is far from academic and elitist. It merely requires people to be acquainted with the FBI’s latest noteworthy investigation.