This is the fifth installment in this series.
I’m pumped from our meeting of old forum comrades. After all these years, it is refreshing to know there is another side to the White Nationalist scene. What a relief: it is not just the kooks, cranks, informants, and costume fantasists who get all the headlines and photo ops in the media. I came away feeling more energized than I have in a long time. In hindsight, I think this was necessary on some level for my progress as a racialist.
I feel imbued with a new sense of seriousness and commitment. For too long, I have been a spectator on the fringes of cyberspace, railing against the conservatives and aracials, pointing out their decadence and corruption, prophesying their ultimate demise in a rising tide of color. Looking backwards, this blog has often had a ranting tone. It stems from my sheer exasperation with everything that is going wrong in this country. But I would like to move beyond that to a more constructive approach.
From a sociological perspective, the dynamics of our little get together were fascinating. Since I relaunched Occidental Dissent, I have said scarcely little about my philosophical views (the development of which is largely in the past), but I had the opportunity to observe the subtle manner in which discourse and ritual constructs social identity. It is one thing to ponder racialism as an abstract theory; quite another to experience it in a concrete group setting and see the way memes circulate. My own racial identity has been noticeably strengthened a notch or two. This is undoubtedly why our enemies try so hard to disrupt our organizations and events.
Like going to church or a productive rally, regular meetings in real life will encourage a greater sense of solidarity, seriousness, and self sacrifice among pro-White activists than the thin veneer of relationships that are formed in cyberspace. The anonymous setting is also conducive to fantasy ideology and disruptive behavior. This is so obvious it should be inarguable. The internet is an extraordinarily useful communication tool, but is no substitute for face to face interaction with your peers.
I’m thinking about shedding the last vestiges of being a cyberspace warrior, namely, the “Prozium” username and the creepy Father Knows Best avatar from Equilibrium, and adopting a more appropriate nom de plume. William Pierce used “Andrew MacDonald” to write The Turner Diaries. Perhaps I will adopt something similar. If the name hadn’t already stuck (like “Fade”), I would have already switched to something else.
I’ve been pondering much of this since the O’Meara essay and the idea of myth – mostly as it centers about encouraging a mass movement. Something that clearly has merit with the masses is forthrightness and reaffirming essential truths – in an open way that displays courage. Are most of the vanguard here at that point, Prozium (as you contemplate your name change) ready to step up to the plate?
My name is Michael Alan Smith. I am a 41 year old married Internist, practicing in Charleston, SC. I’m originally from Eugene, Oregon. I’m a White Christian lover of my civilization (Western), and fear for my people’s future for many reason’s. I’d love to explain to others why I have reached this conclusion and explore ideas on how to contribute in a way that corrects the course. I fully recognize the possibly that the majority of the blame for this predicament can be pinned on my own. Nevertheless, time is too short to sit around in a blame-circle, and determine the narrative for the epitaph of the greatest people this planet has known. Whether you agree with my assertion isn’t important to me; what I’m sure I could convince you of is that all people would be worse off with the demise of my people.
If you are an opponent of the Truth or our inalienable rights, you will not like me.
I am just a pebble in the ocean, and so I would be easy to disregard; however, I think times are approaching (something else I’d like to talk about) that our materialistic somnolence is about to be broken. At that time, you may wish to discuss these things or even join me in correcting the problems. I think that you will find a cadre of like-minded people who have quietly been thinking and discussing these things for years, and have anticipated some of the contingencies. Soon you will realize that these are the brothers that you didn’t even know that you had…
We have various people playing a wide variety of roles. Without a doubt, I am the most outspoken “White Nationalist” of the bunch. I’m starting to see my role as creating a space for us in the blogosphere along the lines of what Markos Moulitsas has done for progressives or Lew Rockwell has done for libertarians.
To answer your question, I would say that some of us fly under our own colors, some use pseudonyms, some use pseudonyms online (like I do) and their real names offline. We should be intelligent about sharing our real world identities. Nothing is gained by sharing this information with the wrong people.
There is already a ready-made, White, long standing historical institution that facilitates face to face meetings of people that share our interests and values – it’s called Church.
Church is so important to White American culture that it’s specifically mentioned in the First Amendment to the Constitution. It’s tax free, and completely outside of the government, and major corporations.
The typical churches are full of degenerate whores, but there are enough regular white families that it’s probably worth it. And of course, it costs nothing to set up a “home church” and even to set up an official tax-status church and buy a building is not that difficult.
You don’t have to be particularly religious or literalistic either.
It’s the core of our culture, use it or lose it.
“Like going to church or a productive rally, regular meetings in real life will encourage a greater sense of solidarity, seriousness, and self sacrifice among pro-White activists than the thin veneer of relationships that are formed in cyberspace.”
Let’s hope so.
While it is certainly true that there is no substitute for face-to-face encounters, I for one am very grateful to the internet for its capacity to make available so much that is denied, ignored, or swept under the rug in mainstream culture. And I am grateful to people like Kevin MacDonald and Yggdrasil for their extraordinary contributions to intelligent discussion of the plight of white Europeans. I was delighted to discover this blog, and relieved to Raphael’s “School of Athens” adorning its home page.
I second the comments about the church as being a tax-exempt place of meeting that frequently functions as a functioning community of mutual support–something we must encourage. But for American Christians, the issue of Christian Zionism must be recognized and confronted, if there is to be any progress in the tasks of providing for our people. This is an enormous task.
I think it certainly is a good idea to adopt a different, more realistic name. A solid Southern name such as, say, John Lefevre or Craig McDermott ;). I can’t think of any serious political blogger with real influence who uses an alias, but that’s perhaps the case because they didn’t start out as bloggers and their influence derives partly from their previous job experience in the old media.
By the way, did you know there is something you and Senator Lindsay Graham agree upon? Check it out: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/13/graham-gop-not-going-to-be-the-party-of-angry-white-guys/
I bet you wish more Republicans would just come out and state it as bluntly like this.
Further to comment #6:
What Lindsey Graham is is nothing new but merely a treasonous opportunist, a traitor to his own people for personal gain, a very ancient and well-known phenomenon going by many names the world over, notably seen before in the South under the name scalawag.
From Wikipedia with one or two corrections:
Lindsay Graham is a scalawag. Period. No mystery. That’s all there is to it.
He’s got exactly the scalawag mentality.
Call me crazy but, Buck Bunny has to be a stand in for the American White male. Seriously. Watch this, its only ten minutes long:
I’d love to see a short video like this remade with Buck replaced by a white male and the rodents replaced by three immigant races.
To build a successful coalition like what Lew Rockwell created, you have to be extremely tolerant of a wide range of perspectives within the White Nationalist milieu. You have to be a social “force of nature”, capable of bringing very divergent people under the same aegis. Look at how Taki has the open borders homosexual hissing at Jared Taylor. Look at how Peter Brimelow has Ilana Mercer pontificating on Jewry being the proud parent of her Judeo-Christian West on the same forum as Kevin MacDonald.
Will your contributors generally agree with you on the Racial Question, the Jewish Question, the Christian Question, and the Costume Question? Alex Kurtagic disagrees with you on the costume question. Would he be out? I take it that Jews like Nicholas Stix who feverishly contribute solid and valuable material are out.
Full Disclosure: I’ve met Nicholas Stix and he struck me as sincere and sincerely committed to defending White America.
“Full Disclosure: I’ve met Nicholas Stix and he struck me as sincere and sincerely committed to defending White America.”
For a Jewish man, he really does seem rather decent, sincere and committed to the White Euro cause.
Nice to see there is at least one Jewish conservative who is also pro-White that does not demand “Semitical Correctness” in dealing/dialoguing with him
Can you please direct me to the essay in which Mr. Kurtagic promotes the use of “costumes?”
I have always enjoyed a wide range of perspectives. I’m not looking for clones.
Linder has a post up at VNN Forum where Stix attacks Kevin MacDonald.
I may have jumped to a conclusion that I can’t directly support. He supports the promotion of an exclusive, initiatic subculture and includes photographs of futuristic fashions. I assumed that this implied a general support of the notion of wearing distinctive costumes. Unfortunately, only a Talmudic scholar could hope to offer a complete exegesis of Kurtagic’s impenetrable verbiage, and we don’t welcome those here, so I may have to step back from that claim.
I agree with keeping things relatively broad – inclusion criteria should be based on
1. Are you a member of church of liberalism, held captive by the doctrine, ritual, and clergy? Unfortunately, this currently eliminates 60% of American Whites, right of the bat.
2. Do you believe in Truth (reject relativism) and can you contemplate that the current plutocratic, materialistic state has gone astray?
3. Are you mature enough, or sound enough in mind, to govern your passions? Is your mind still open enough that you enjoy a persuasive argument?
Unfortunately, the above candidate used to be a regular product of a classical education. No mas! Even my alma mater, U. of Chicago, has a gender studies department now. I thought such a thing impossible when I matriculated. At that time, “divest from SA” was the big political issue. Counter-protesting was more rigorous than the predictable liberal mewing. Even burnt down the libs shanty town on the quads! Now most of my class are seaman on one of the investment-banking ships on Wall Street. We all know who captains these ships.
Boy have we slid down the ass-crack of multiculturalism since then.
Right. The Jews within the White Nationalist movement will naturally return fire at the anti-Semites. To my knowledge, Stix hasn’t pressured Taylor in the way that Jobling and Hart have. Maybe he has been applying pressure in private and maybe he’s some sort of group evolutionary ranger on the frontier of Jewish subversion. Even if that’s the case, he sure has been bringing a lot of attention to a lot of White victims of minority crime and doing a lot of beneficial original research on current events.
I’m not proposing that you include any Jewish people in your project. That’s sort of the niche I see you filling – a bright and inclusive coalition of WN contributors who do not feel that Jews can be integrated into the movement. I really just threw him out there as an example of how much diversity there can be within the WN community.
“He supports the promotion of an exclusive, initiatic subculture and includes photographs of futuristic fashions.”
Wouldn’t this be the exact opposite of dressing up in costumes reminiscent of outmoded, foreign political uniforms? Honestly, what is less stylish than an obese man in an ill-fitting brownshirt? That’s not adopting “shiny packaging.” Moreover, by developing a semiotic strategy that emphasises elitism and exclusivity, as Alex calls us to do in the essay above, we would be turning our back on the failed and moldy trappings of vulgar populism born of earlier eras.
I interpret the essay in question as a call for us to understand the full scope of the neuro-semiotic Kulturkampf, in which Mastery of Style is important, and to develop new and innovative ways to engage our people (particularly the youth) and spread our ideas. He is urging us to move forward, not backward.
Two things that all pro-costume people agree on is that the costumes should be “cool” and that the costumes should not be “lame”. The debate between populism and vanguardism and the debate between nostalgia and novelty are tangential to the debate over whether costumes themselves should be a consideration.
One definition of the word costume is, “a set of clothes appropriate for a particular occasion,” and it could therefore be used to refer to a suit and tie if one were so inclined. This is the “costume” of the bourgeoisie.
When I hear the word costume, particularly in this context, pictures of foppish caricatures wandering about in SA uniforms and Klan robes enter my mind. I assumed that was what you were getting at also. Alex thinks style is important (across the board, including literary style), but I don’t think this throws him into the camp of costume fetishists.
I plan on doing a post about populism vs. elitism.
Exercise caution, guys. Be extra paranoid. You need to work under the assumption that you are being monitored — both online and off. It’s likely that you were watched and probably photographed during your weekend meeting(s). And, it’s likely that any group that you form will be infiltrated.
What’s the point of a White movement that includes Jews? I know some some Black conservatives that are against massive immigration, let them in too? What about Japanese and Chinese?
Jews aren’t Whites, and they already dominate the discourse everywhere else in America. I’m tired of hearing from them. I want to hear from White people for a change.
Jews aren’t Whites, and they already dominate the discourse everywhere else in America. I’m tired of hearing from them.
Really. It’s hard finding just the right niche for one’s beliefs. OD’s as close as it comes to a real safe-haven of “free thought”. But that’s because FAAAAAADE (lol) is its creator. Always a fair, broad-minded guy.
@White Non-Conservative – #23
I should have made my position more clear. I was trying to figure out what Hunter’s position was on the critical aspects of managing the kind of coalition that he was describing. I’m not so much a racist as I am a tribalist. Genetic unity is only half of the equation. A viable group evolutionary strategy requires a unity of social, cultural, and political factors that simply don’t scale up to race.
I define “my people” in the same sort of way that Charleton Heston defined it when he demanded that the pharaoh let his people go. I define them in a way that’s compatible with Rudyard Kipling’s “The Stranger”. I don’t care if Jews are White, since they’re clearly of a different tribe, as are most White people.
Jun 14 Oct 2009 at 11:11 pm
“Exercise caution, guys. Be extra paranoid. You need to work under the assumption that you are being monitored — both online and off. It’s likely that you were watched and probably photographed …”
Speaking of paranoia, I notice that you posted at 11:11, or “happy slats”. Are we supposed to believe that this is merely a “coincidence”? Whose interests would REALLY be served if we were paranoid? Hmm?
I thought so.
“Speaking of paranoia, I notice that you posted at 11:11, or “happy slats”. Are we supposed to believe that this is merely a “coincidence”? Whose interests would REALLY be served if we were paranoid? Hmm?
“I thought so.”
Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!
*Looks like Jun has his ‘tinfoil hat’ on a bit too tight.
Buzz off man with your defeatist propaganda — this isn’t prison planet.
>I don’t care if Jews are White, since they’re clearly of a different tribe, as are most White people.
I see your point. However, I think that a coalition of White Tribes is necessary in the present and future, and I don’t have a problem with intermarriage between the White Tribes.
Jews are not part of the White Tribes.