About Hunter Wallace 12392 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

50 Comments

  2. What a joke. White Americans have never had anyone to vote for? What about Jim Giles? He ran for Congress three times in Mississippi. There is an obvious explanation for why there are so few pro-White candidates. Who wants to endure that sort of abuse? Who wants groups like the SPLC and ADL harassing their employers?

  5. I agree. I really appreciate Jim’s efforts, but he needs to have a list of questions prepared and be ready to follow up with some hard ones, especially with Kemp. I did find it somewhat funny when they were bashing the people that saw no hope in working within the system, then Giles coming out and saying something to the effect that he ran for office 3 times and it’s uphill due to all the obstacles (splc/adl/media control) that he faced. Kinda of validated the futility of working within the system argument.

  7. I haven’t yet listened to the interview but am not real impressed with Arthur Kemp prescription for political success for pro-white figures. He acts as if a person simply needs to don a suit and tie, denounce and the knatsees, CI and NA, then begin railing against third world immigration, and the white masses will come flocking.

    To win in our corrupt system takes a great deal of money and unless Mr. Kemp is willing to bankroll potential candidates he should stop grandstanding. Further, the political establishment and media elites are hostile to a pro-white platform so good luck making inroads with the two major parties. Remember, Pat Buchanan won the New Hampshire primaries as a Republican in 1996 on an anti-affirmative action and immigration restrictionist platform only to be loudly denounced as a “hater” by his own party as well as the usual media harpies. The resulting smear campaign effectively marginalized the Buchanan campaign and forced Pat to withdraw from the race shortly thereafter.

    If Kemp feels he his dispensing sage like advice then the joke is on him.

  8. “There is an obvious explanation for why there are so few pro-White candidates. Who wants to endure that sort of abuse? Who wants groups like the SPLC and ADL harassing their employers?” ( — Hunter Wallace, #2)

    This is correct. The official (according to Jewish organizations, that is) size of the Jewish population in this country is some 5½ million but I agree with those who estimate it’s really twice that, maybe more than twice. As far as I’m concerned it’s twelve million. The 5½ million figure is laughable but even if I and the others are wrong and that is in fact the figure, that’s humongous compared to anything Europe’s dealing with. (And I don’t think we’re wrong.)

    With that size Jewish population over here, the Jews are able to strongly dominate many key branches of the élite world, I would say most key branches, and are able to absolutely squelch nascent political activity they don’t like in a way Jews cannot directly do in Europe because not as numerous on the ground or in the élite niches. Here they kill it deader than a doornail, done, cooked, extinguished, over with, stick a fork in it, a pile of ashes, charred remains, and smoke; over there they hurt it, they hinder it, they cripple it, but it’s not reduced to smoke and ashes, can hobble on crutches, can stumble forward, can live to fight another day. Here it can’t. Difference.

    The biggest route of Jewish influence on Europe isn’t homegrown European Jews but U.S. ones acting through the medium of the U.S. government, NGOs, and the U.N., all of which they control or heavily influence. That indirect Jewish influence on Europe is a huge problem, a huge drag on anything that aspires to be normalness over there, but it’s not strong enough to outright extinguish all nascent opposition as it is here. We here are in the belly of the ZOG beast; in Europe they’re only the periphery.

    Kemp doesn’t realize that. Neither do a lot of Europeans who dismiss as exaggerations claims of huge Jewish power here.

  9. Quite correct, as usual, Mr. Dithers & Fred Scrooby. What’s with all of these sudden, volte face, strategic political epiphanies of F. Braun & A. Kemp? Have they forgotten that we are indeed living in the land of ZOG? When the great Gengenraße has enough power, stifling White ethnocentrism is what they instinctively do, with all deliberate malice. They gamed the conventional political process long ago, and are not about to let White upstarts elbow their way back in.

  10. Jim Giles is a poor interviewer because he isn’t knowledgeable enough. Why don’t you give a try, H.W.?

  11. I’ve now listened to most of the interview. Looking forward to Hunter’s response, but here are a few preliminary observations:

    1. Kemp is right about ditching or distancing ourselves from the cranks and costume clowns – although we may have some differences as to exactly what constitutes a crank. I get the sense that his definition is quite a bit more expansive than mine. Still, in a fundamental sense, he is correct.

    2. Kemp is wrong about the issue of violence, yet as a matter of political expediency I can certainly understand his position. I do not advocate (but merely speculate about hypotheticals) when I predict that violence is very likely to be a big part of future politics on this continent. But again, this is nothing that any sort of “mainstreamed” WN movement needs to get into, so again, I take his point.

    3. He’s flat wrong about the Jewish issue, but at the same time he did something that I recently suggested (either here or at majorityrights): just say that it’s fine for Jews to have a homeland, but we want our homeland too. They are entitled to a nation of their own…and so are we. Now, of course, this approach leaves out about 1001 things that are important and true, but from the standpoint of “mainstream” WN as he envisions it, maybe it is saying enough. I haven’t decided yet.

    The emerging theme is fairly simple: Kemp gives short shrift to a lot of things that are very important to the typical WN, but his approach is probably the right one for any sort of mainstreamed WN movement.

    That’s not to say that the hardcore types like Linder should disappear. To the contrary, I (apparently unlike Kemp) believe that they are crucial. We need the hardcore radicals (not costume clowns, but radicals!) hammering away with the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. It’s just that they aren’t going to be part of the mainstream WN movement, if and when one is created.

    And to preempt the inevitable line that “You’re just saying that if someone dresses well and waters things down, the establishment will treat them with respect.” No, I’m not saying that at all. But from that it doesn’t follow that one might as well dress as a Kluxer or costume Nazi. The establishment is going to be against us no matter what. The real question is what our TARGET MARKET will think, the marginal person that we can influence and/or recruit. If someone can’t understand that much of our target market is going to respond very differently to a credible guy than some ridiculous caricature in Klan robes, well, he has rocks in his head…or a hidden agenda.

    Just as an example, take the Duke interview with Blitzer. Classic stuff. Now imagine how that would have gone down if Duke had appeared in a red Klan outfit, proclaiming himself the Grand Kleagle of Hobbit Land. The difference is so obvious that only a nutcase (or infiltrator) couldn’t see it. I won’t name names, but…

    The most biting criticism of WN is that, for many decades, it has accomplished virtually nothing out in the broader culture. We have so abandoned the field amongst “normal” people that now many would view us as something akin to Martians, well dressed or not. The only people they have heard advocating anything close to the WN posisiton have been wearing Klan robes, or worse.

    Basically, they haven’t heard our point of view presented credibly for several generations. I know, I know, the establishment crushes good white leadership. We are a suppressed political movement. That much is very, very true. But surely we could have done better than we have. Just a few decades ago, white racial consciousness was still very strong in large sections of the country. Wallace was kicking ass in the early seventies, in and out of the South, for crying out loud. After he was shot, what did we do? Nothing, except for costume clowns who created in the public mind the idea that white racial preservation is only advocated by wackjobs. They did their job well.

    Even today, there are huge numbers of people out there that would serve as a natural constituency for us. With all of that material to work with, literally generations have gone by and we can’t even elect a dogcatcher. Duke was an outlier in this period, but nobody emulated what he did. He showed what could be done, at least in certain parts of the country. Result? No takers. Let’s scream “White Power!” instead, or bitch and moan that nothing could be done – even when we were at a point where much could have been accomplished.

    We simply can’t blame all of this on a hostile media. Much of it, yes. Maybe most of it. But not all of it. We could have done better, and we simply didn’t. We instead pissed away even more years until political correctness was firmly established. Now? You speak out and you lose your job, making organizing more and more difficult, even for a mainstream organization. That wouldn’t have happened so much in 1975, and maybe even 1985. Did we take advantage? Of course not. Just more costume clowns driving nails into our coffin.

    Do I believe that we are going to get out of this mess through the normal democratic process? No. If Kemp believes that, then he is kidding himself. But could we have done better? Could that “better” have possibly put us in a stronger position to operate as the system loses legitimacy? Could we have created a meaningful infrastructure that would have opened up all sorts of possibilities, including some that Kemp might not want to contemplate?

    For me, the answer is yes. The real tragedy of today is that we don’t have a meaningful infrastructure built up, except online. That’s nice, but not nearly enough. We instead abandoned the field to the costume clowns, because they were the only ones in a continental sized nation that were willing to do anything. Amazing, as this is a country where white racial consciousness was the norm within living memory of many, perhaps most, of the posters on this board.

    Despite disagreeing with Kemp on many a point, his criticism has considerable and somewhat painful validity.

  12. I like your website and look forward to your commentary on Arthur Kemp. Perhaps you will convince me that I’m mistaken in this, but it seems to me that Mr. Kemp does have a valid point about the Jewish question and the need to distance ourselves from oddballs, conspiracy theorists, and Holocaust revisionists. The most successful pro-white politician in the US, David Duke, ran on an essentially non-“anti-Semitic” platform. Yes, he had a lot of baggage, but I am pretty sure if David Duke had talked about Jews and Zionism, he wouldn’t have received thirty percent of the vote. The BNP only began to grow when it stopped talking about Jews, the Holocaust, and WWII, and focused on the Islam problem, an issue with which voters seems to have some degree of sympathy. The same goes for other far-right political parties in Europe, from the Flemish Interest to the the Party of Freedom. Shouldn’t we adopt the platform that has borne the most fruit?

  13. We instead abandoned the field to the costume clowns, because they were the only ones in a continental sized nation that were willing to do anything.

    One wonders why.

    Could it be that Nietzsche was right, that only the man of violence can speak the truth – that le bourgeois gentilhomme, he of the suit-and-tie, was then complicit in a lie, just as is the harmless ethnostatist peace-preacher of today, blazing away from his keyboard tray?

  14. Jacques Rancière observes that the term ‘democracy’ does not strictly designate either a form of society or a form of government. Every state is oligarchic; every democracy contains an oligarchic nucleus — a “creative minority,” whose “creative power,” in Arnold J. Toynbee’s interpretation, has been crucial to the rise and demise of civilizations throughout history.

    Since government is “always exercised by the minority over the majority,” Rancière points out, there is strictly speaking “no such thing as democratic government”:

    We do not live in democracies. … We live in States of oligarchic law … where … [oligarchic elites] hold free elections. These elections essentially ensure that the same dominant personnel is reproduced, albeit under interchangeable labels, but the ballot boxes are generally not rigged and one can verify it without risking one’s life. … Peaceful oligarchic government redirects democratic passions toward private pleasures and renders people insensitive to the public sphere. … [T]he multitude, freed of the worry of governing, is left to its private and egotistical passions.

    In a post-democratized world run by inevitable oligarchies, Colin Crouch points out, “political elites have learned to manage and manipulate popular demands,” persuading people to vote by “top-down publicity campaigns.” Governing today, says Baudrillard, “is like advertising and it is the same effect that is achieved — commitment to a scenario.” The political world, thus, intensively imitates and recycles the methods of other more self-confident spheres like show business and the marketing of goods. From this, emerge the familiar paradoxes of contemporary politics:

    Both the techniques for manipulating public opinion and the mechanisms for opening politics to scrutiny become ever more sophisticated, while the content of party programmes and the character of party rivalry become ever more bland and vapid.

    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/

    What is the implication of this fundamental truth?

    The progress to be made by preaching to the choir and the quirites?

  15. I agree with Trainspotter (above). Well said.

    Kemp offers some sensible advice. His critique of conspiracy nuts is spot on. WNs have only ourselves to blame for not forming a mainstream political structure. His discounting of the Jewish role, however, is very disappointing (though his job as a BNP spokesman may limit the parameters of his comments), and I disagree with him over the prospect for violence.

    He claims, in the example of South Africa, that “demography is destiny,” and that the key to political control is to conquer territory and hold it. And yet, if we follow his advice and focus on the political process only, there’s no chance we’ll be able to conquer any territory without the use of force and violence, at some stage. He says the US has 20 years, tops, until the demographic situation is irreversible. And what then? It is at that point, IMO, that non-political solutions probably will be pursued.

    I would like to see a dual approach: a mainstream White political organization, such as “EUPAC,” and a network of non-affiliated hardcore activist and paramilitary groups.

    I like Giles, and I support what he’s doing, but he needs to be better informed about some fundamental issues. It’s really frustrating. We need articulate, educated, informed WN spokesmen and spokeswomen who don’t come across as a caricature. Is this too much to ask?

  17. I think Mr. Giles is doing a fine job and with time he will improve.

    Racially, being a blond Anglo-Saxon type, he’s probably superior to the majority of the people here.

  19. Racially, being a blond Anglo-Saxon type, he’s probably superior to the majority of the people here.

    Do you mean to say that he’s a member of a racial sub-type that is, on average, superior in certain significant respects to other sub-types?

    Or do you mean that his membership in that sub-group translates into an comparable quintessential personal superiority, whatever his objective personal characteristics? Such that Jeffrey Dahmer is personally “superior” to Thomas Sowell?

    I suspect that you will want to affirm the former and are sympathetic to the latter view. The latter view, of course, makes racialism a questionable proposition in the eyes of any potential sympathizer in a position to influence events, since it is obviously the emotional resort of those who can claim no other priority in the real world. But the requirements of popular propaganda are in the appeal to the left side of the White IQ curve, for the sake of additional numbers, you will say.

    But numbers no longer count – this is not a democracy – this is not the Weimar Republic – popular opposition to Communism did not “collapse” or “overthrow” anything in Eastern Europe. You are a victim of the “democratic delusion” that is constantly cultivated in you by polling and the fatuous formulations of political pseudo-science. These are, rather, the times of Septimius Severus.

  21. Racially, being a blond Anglo-Saxon type, he’s probably superior to the majority of the people here. – Mark

    I think pro-white ideology puts a bit too much stock in “blondism.” Blond or red hair, blue or green eyes, these are merely variations of the Aryan phenotype. They show up in all truly Aryan populations whether Scandinavia or Italy (sometimes even in Asia!) to a greater or lesser extent. If there is a correlation between these traits and positive character or intellect traits, go ahead and prove it.

  22. The Fringe

    1.) Kemp is exaggerating the influence of the Klan, Skinheads, Christian Identity, Neo-Confederates, and Neo-Nazis. They were representative of the pro-White movement in the 1980’s, but have been steadily marginalized over the past twenty years. According to Swain and Zeskind, the typical White Nationalist is now a middle class, white male professional unaffiliated with any organization.

    2.) If every single one of these types disappeared tomorrow, we might realize a marginal improvement in our public image, but we would still get unrelenting hostile coverage by the media.

    3.) In a liberal democracy, it is not really possible to “purge” the racialist fringe. They can be excluded from our organizations and websites, but that’s about it. In spite of our best efforts, the MSM will never stop trying to expose “links” between the WN mainstream and the fringe to discredit us.

    4.) Unlike the Jews, the kooks and costume clowns are not a serious social problem. 99% of them are harmless deviants. That should be our response. Making an issue about them furthers enemy propaganda against us.

    5.) The Left moves towards its fringe. The Right pronounces anathema on its own. As a consequence, our culture always shifts toward the Left. That isn’t a winning strategy.

    6.) The five groups mentioned above are unviable. Clearly, they aren’t going anywhere. Again, I don’t see a rationale for making a big deal about them. No one lives in fear of Bill White, World Commander of National Socialism, sieg heiling the Fuhrer over his cornflakes in the morning.

    7.) The Overton Window requires an extremist fringe to make our own positions look moderate.

    8.) There is a strong temptation to scapegoat the racialist fringe for our lack of political success. It appeals to the middle class, conservative, bourgeois sensibilities of the WNs who resent their loss of respectability. This class bias causes a lot people to make mountains out of mole hills. The constant raising of the issue has more to do with fretting over social status than anything else.

    9.) If we abandon “anti-Semitism,” we can go as far as Guy White, Ian Jobling, and Lawrence Auster have gone. If we abandon explicit whiteness, we can go as far as the paleocons. Both groups are excluded from the mainstream.

    10.) Purging the fringe won’t change the “dynamic silence” strategy of our enemies:

    http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_silence

    “Dynamic Silence was invented by Rabbi Feinberg of the American Jewish Committee in 1947 as a method of closing off all access to the public media – and thus the larger culture – for people or organizations deemed to have an unacceptable point of view. In spite of minor changes and adaptations, it can still be understood as being comprised of two parts. In the first part, unfavored individuals are denied unmediated exposure to the public. In the second part, only negative aspects of the unfavored individuals are reported. This starts a downward spiral of de-legitimization in the public eye in which the harder unfavored individuals try to get public exposure, the more negative and unflattering that exposure becomes until, finally, nobody wants to be associated with the ideas of beliefs of the unfavored individuals.”

  23. A bit backhanded, Admiral. I don’t see why people are so malicious towards someone making a positive difference.

    NN, your comment is like something I would read from an anti-racist. I suppose you feel threatened in regards to your ancestry/sub-race so you feel the need to make it a non-issue.

    Dahmer was estimated to have an IQ of 145, probably significantly higher than Sowell. Sowell is also a Marxist and doesn’t believe in racial differences.

    I have the impression that Hunter Wallace wants to appeal to all whites, not just the top 2-3% of the population.

  24. “If there is a correlation between these traits and positive character or intellect traits, go ahead and prove it.”

    That is the essence of racialism. If we were all the same then why would we care?

  25. “1.) Kemp is exaggerating the influence of the Klan, Skinheads, Christian Identity, Neo-Confederates, and Neo-Nazis. They were representative of the pro-White movement in the 1980’s, but have been steadily marginalized over the past twenty years. According to Swain and Zeskind, the typical White Nationalist is now a middle class, white male professional unaffiliated with any organization.”

    I think both you and Kemp want to focus on the last group.

    Kemp advocates real political participation, do you?

    I think the main difference between the two of you is he wants to distance himself from the fringe and you do not, otherwise there are a lot of similarities.

  26. Conservatism

    1.) Arthur Kemp is a conservative. This temperament colors every aspect of his worldview. As a conservative, he is dismissive of equality. His sneering at the racialist fringe is far more about status anxiety than constructing a winning political strategy.

    2.) Conservatism has been tried and failed. We can’t afford another fifty years of more of the same. The argument against discussing the JQ works equally well for White Nationalism and explicit whiteness. Abandoning both improves our chances at the polls.

    3.) Conservatism, not the racialist fringe, is the primary reason that White Nationalism has remained marginalized. The segregationists bought into the argument that the smart thing to do was to abandon explicit whiteness, fight the “culture war,” and use aracial arguments to take power.

    In some distant future, they would change things after “sneaking up on the liberals.” The long term result was massive deracialization and the institutionalization of multiculturalism and affirmative action in the GOP.

    4.) Via the Overton Window, watering down our message, ceding ground to our enemies, allows the Left to shift further toward its fringe. It pushes the discourse on race and other topics in a hostile direction.

    5.) Conservatism is proof that Kemp’s strategy is a loser. The conservatives have won plenty of elections over the past fifty years, a number which we can’t possibly hope to match, but have nothing to show for it. Like all rightwing conservatives, Kemp confuses political power with the ballot box. They are not the same thing.

    6.) What sense does it make to pour our limited resources into doomed political campaigns like the Ron Paul movement? Even if we were to elect a few state representatives, no one would work with them, and they wouldn’t have the power to change anything. If we succeded in electing a Senator or Congressman, there is a good change he would be expelled.

  28. The “Do Nothing” Mentality

    1.) At first glance, the Socialist Party and Communist Party USA were electoral disasters. They never got anywhere at the ballot box. They failed to water down their message and rise to power through a populist electoral strategy.

    2.) In reality, much of their platforms, in particular their racial views, were adopted by the mainstream Left. The Communists didn’t have to win elections to force racial integration on America. Likewise, we don’t have to win elections to reverse it.

    3.) As I noted above, the conservatives have won plenty of elections. They dominated American politics for decades. They control states and entire regions of the country, but they have decisively lost the culture war. This fact alone should give one pause before jumping to the conclusion that electoral politics is the path to victory.

    4.) The Left has a different understanding of political power. They focus on pushing the national discourse on various topics in their direction. They understand that cultural victories result in permanent political victories in the long term. Via the Overton Window, the Right eventually waters itself down to remain mainstream. Examples: feminism, civil rights, immigration, multiculturalism, etc.

    5.) Victory isn’t winning pyrrhic elections. It is pulling the national discourse on race-related topics in our direction. We should imitate winners, not losers.

    6.) This is not to say we should abstain from democratic politics. Instead, I am arguing it shouldn’t be our primary focus.

  29. “There is a strong temptation to scapegoat the racialist fringe for our lack of political success. It appeals to the middle class, conservative, bourgeois sensibilities of the WNs who resent their loss of respectability. This class bias causes a lot people to make mountains out of mole hills. The constant raising of the issue has more to do with fretting over social status than anything else.”

    A lot of truth here, but the real issue isn’t so much scapegoating the loons, it’s the failure of credible people to come together and effectively offer a competing and appealing vision. It’s our failure to address our target market as effectively as we could, regardless of media opposition.

    This leads to a very basic question: regardless of establishment opposition, have we addressed our TARGET MARKET as well as we reasonably could have?

    I think the answer to that is obvious. We haven’t. We have failed miserably in terms of effectively reaching our target market, at least as that pertains to non-intellectual “normal” people. However mistaken he may be in other respects, Kemp is clearly right about that. We abandoned the field to the kooks, for the simple reason that kooks and losers were willing to act and more credible men were not. Now we reap the bitter fruit.

    But, fortunately, all is not lost. Far from it. The system loses legitimacy by the day, and if nothing else we have disseminated our ideas amongst a significant number of the intellectually curious. Not nearly enough, but a lot. We have not been entirely idle, and I believe that Linder is correct when he notes the spread of VNN style ideas. It has indeed spread, and it is a joy to behold. I see it popping up in all sorts of places where it would not have before. That’s the one area where real progress has been made, and at the end of the day, it is one of the most important areas. We’ve built something of an intellectual foundation and, for all of the failures and missed opportunities, that counts for quite a bit.

    So where do we go from here? I think the Admiral has it right when he suggests a dual approach. We need to at least try our hand at some sort of mainstream WN, but we also need to develop and encourage the hardcore/under the radar types. It is not either/or. We can learn from Kievsky as well as the BNP. They aren’t mutually exclusive.

  31. If I had a magic wand, I would wave it and make the fringe disappear. Unlike Kemp, I don’t think it would change anything. The “dynamic silence” strategy would remain intact. We would still be associated with the Klan and Nazism in the media. The MSM propaganda against us wouldn’t change a note. At best, there might be a marginal improvement in a public image.

    Why aren’t legions of WNs taking to the field and running for political office? It is not because these people don’t exist. It is not because of the racialist fringe. Rather, it is due to the relentless harassment of their employers and the ritual shaming done by the media. No rational person yearns to be a piñata. That is why you always see dysfunctional, anti-social types out there representing us on the streets.

    It usually takes a severe psychological dysfunction to seek out and endure that type of abuse.

  33. “1.) Arthur Kemp is a conservative. This temperament colors every aspect of his worldview. As a conservative, he is dismissive of equality. His sneering at the racialist fringe is far more about status anxiety than constructing a winning political strategy.”

    Status anxiety likely plays into it, but keep in mind that the BNP seems to be making its biggest gains from Labour voters. The BNP is not a “conservative” party. It is explicitly white and economically nationalist. Some of its policies would be considered leftist in the American political lexicon.

    “2.) Conservatism has been tried and failed. We can’t afford another fifty years of more of the same. The argument against discussing the JQ works equally well for White Nationalism and explicit whiteness. Abandoning both improves our chances at the polls.”

    Perhaps, but again, the BNP is explicitly white. Yes, they have abandoned the JQ. But let’s face it: the typical white doesn’t care about the JQ. I’m not saying that we are going to get out of this mess by dodging the question – I don’t think we can. But perhaps the “mainstream” wing of the WN movement doesn’t need to obsess over it. Perhaps they need to obsess over the things that the typical white is actually concerned about – while remaining explicitly white and never wavering from our right to exist as a people. As far as I’m concerned, the jury is still out on this.

    “3.) Conservatism, not the racialist fringe, is the primary reason that White Nationalism has remained marginalized. The segregationists bought into the argument that the smart thing to do was to abandon explicit whiteness, fight the “culture war,” and use aracial arguments to take power.”

    The key is that modern conservatism has become aracial. That is what has doomed us. One has to be explicitly white, or all is lost. Whether the JQ should be central is another matter, at least from the standpoint of a hypothetical mainstream WN wing.

    “In some distant future, they would change things after “sneaking up on the liberals.” The long term result was massive deracialization and the institutionalization of multiculturalism and affirmative action in the GOP.”

    The BNP is explicitly white, economically nationalist, and a defender of the white working class – I think they’ve got a good thing going. It’s populism, not conservatism.

    “4.) Via the Overton Window, watering down our message, ceding ground to our enemies, allows the Left to shift further toward its fringe. It pushes the discourse on race and other topics in a hostile direction.”

    Agreed. This was the fundamental error of modern conservatism.

    “5.) Conservatism is proof that Kemp’s strategy is a loser. The conservatives have won plenty of elections over the past fifty years, a number which we can’t possibly hope to match, but have nothing to show for it. Like all rightwing conservatives, Kemp confuses political power with the ballot box. They are not the same thing.”

    Again, the BNP isn’t really what you could call “conservative.”

    “6.) What sense does it make to pour our limited resources into doomed political campaigns like the Ron Paul movement? Even if we were to elect a few state representatives, no one would work with them, and they wouldn’t have the power to change anything. If we succeded in electing a Senator or Congressman, there is a good change he would be expelled.”

    Agreed. But that is not what the BNP is doing. The BNP approach is quite different from that of Ron Paul. In some ways, they are polar opposites.

  34. “Why aren’t legions of WNs taking to the field and running for political office? It is not because these people don’t exist. It is not because of the racialist fringe. Rather, it is due to the relentless harassment of their employers and the ritual shaming done by the media. No rational person yearns to be a piñata. That is why you always see dysfunctional, anti-social types out there representing us on the streets.”

    Yes, this is true – today. Yet it was not always so. As I mentioned in a post above, things were not so bad just two or three decades ago, and yet WN did next to nothing apart from the costume clowns.

    We have been underground for so long that when one of us pops up, like a gopher peeking through a hole, the weight of the system falls upon him. They pick us off and beat us down one by one. Had we created a viable movement with significant numbers, this would not necessarily have been the case. In any event, we’ll never know, as the opportunity was not exercised. (By the way, we aren’t even doing nearly enough of the Kievsky type stuff, which doesn’t require becoming a pinata – but that’s a different story)

    Even today, it may be possible to create a mainstream WN wing, but it must demonstrate great wisdom and vision. Linder’s idea of a white ADL is good. Such an organization could focus exclusively on fighting explicit, obvious wrongs and atrocities against whites. If such an organization steered clear of the loons and costume clowns, including a couple who infest this very board, it might be able to get something going. The establishment would of course still oppose it, but our target market (which is all that matters) would likely see things differently.

    Such an organization should stick to one function and only one function: opposing horrible atrocities against whites, as well as blatant unfairness against whites. The sorts of things that our target market would readily agree with. This organization could, in rapid order, set a precedent that it is legitimate to defend white interests, in turn opening up a world of opportunities for additional organizations. The important thing is that the breakthrough organization must be impeccable in its behavior, and its mission must be absolutely pure. NOT in the vain hope that the system will treat it with respect, but purely because of the effect on the TARGET MARKET.

    Who knows? It might even work.

    That’s the first step to any creation of a mainstream WN wing: a breakthrough organization. Linder’s white ADL idea (actually, a buddy of mine and myself arrived at this idea independently about ten years ago, as I’m sure many other people have) may be the way to go. I can’t think of better terrain on which to fight the initial mainstream battle. It’s vital that the initial battle must be fought on the most favorable ground that we can find.

  35. NN, your comment is like something I would read from an anti-racist. I suppose you feel threatened in regards to your ancestry/sub-race so you feel the need to make it a non-issue.

    No it isn’t. One can not utilize the rhetoric of “superiority” when it is demonstrably false is his point.

    Dahmer was estimated to have an IQ of 145, probably significantly higher than Sowell. Sowell is also a Marxist and doesn’t believe in racial differences.

    Thomas Sowell is committed to laissez faire capitalism and isn’t a communist in any way, shape or form.

    Dahmer got caught even after his little Korean boy got away and he had a second chance so his IQ wasn’t terrible high. Somebody “estimated somebody’s IQ at something” seems to be a popular refrain in WN circles intended to silence people who are making a point they disagree with instead of engaging the point.

    However, Dahmer’s IQ was not the point. In fact, having a higher IQ doesn’t make you “superior” to somebody. This simple fact has been NN’s main thrust for quite some time now. His point is, little Jefferey was inferior to Thomas Sowell and the truth is, he was. I’d rather live in a neighborhood of Sowells than Dahmers despite my beliefs about race.

    I have the impression that Hunter Wallace wants to appeal to all whites, not just the top 2-3% of the population.

    It is the top 15% of whites that are the most important demo to capture.

  36. NN, your comment is like something I would read from an anti-racist.

    Perhaps. But it is also the perspective of the non-bigot, who might nevertheless be led to understand the opposition he faces, if de-or-sub-humanizing it is not involved.

    I suppose you feel threatened in regards to your ancestry/sub-race so you feel the need to make it a non-issue.

    Quite the contrary. My mother’s genealogical investigations turned up the fact that I am descended from a lieutenant of Rollo the Viking, founder of the Norman Duchy. And there are several illustrious A-S ancestors on my father’s side. Nevertheless, this is *already* a non-issue for me, since I need not rely upon any *racial* attributes for a sense of self-esteem. I am the non-bigot, mentioned above, who recognizes the racial issue as one of war and not of taste – as one of “superiority” on the battlefield, not in the salon.

    Dahmer was estimated to have an IQ of 145, probably significantly higher than Sowell. Sowell is also a Marxist and doesn’t believe in racial differences.

    So, was Dahmer personally “superior” to Sowell – and would you publicly defend a judgment as to that, in the affirmative, on behalf of the cause?

  37. White Nationalism won’t begin to gain any nation-wide traction in the USA until, as someone on Majority Rights once wrote, a brilliant and charismatic pro-White strongman emerges on the national scene, someone who rises above the pathetically circus-like ‘democratic’ morass and gets the White masses of the USA instinctively riled up, the rise one of Spengler’s predicted Western/White Caesars – “Caesarism grows on the soil of Democracy, but its roots thread deeply in to the underground of blood tradition.”

    The best we can do right now is work locally/regionally via the founding various pro-White colonies as I discussed in a recent post – http://whitesurvival.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/future-opportunities-for-on-the-groundreal-life-pro-white-community-formation/ – and through those colonies seek to organize racially-conscious American Whites on a local/regional level, to build a parallel society within the increasingly corrupt American national body-politic — as Tip O’Neill once said: “All politics is local.” On that level (the local/regional and state-level) we can begin to effect real changes on the ground; the national-federal level is utterly controlled by organized Jewry (money + mass-media) and their bought-off pawns, and thus a person or group who fails to gain national mass-media exposure is largely relegated to near-obscurity through the highly corrupt and ‘undemocratic’ Jewish strategy of “dynamic silence” as Hunter has written about here. Eventually though, the rise of an American pro-White Caesar will prove unavoidable, and his rise will shatter the Jewish control of the mass-media and the monetary printing-presses.

  39. The fact that WNs are even *discussing* costume clowns and the like is rather disheartening. I think that the historical record is very clear, if there are no weirdos in costumes associated with White Nationalism, ZOG will create them (Frank Collin, Hal Turner, etc.)

    the typical White Nationalist is now a middle class, white male professional unaffiliated with any organization.

    Now we’re getting somewhere. What issues matter to these folks? Black crime? Probably not, they moved away from the blacks already. Illegal Mexican immigration? No, they clean their houses. Black crime and mestizo immigration matter to working class whites, not the professionals. What matters to white professionals? H1B visas, Asian and Indian immigration, outsourcing jobs, etc. Now put the middle class Whites and the working class Whites together and what does it lead to? Anti-immigration. That’s the only mainstream racial issue available at the moment.

    Ask yourself why they are not affiliated with any organization – it’s not just that they are not affiliated with any WN organizations, they aren’t members of *any* organization at all. There aren’t any organizations left – no Elks clubs, no social clubs, no Masons, no fraternities of any size or relevance. (Well, there are the Jew-free churches, a great place for Whites with families at least).

    All the White social institutions died when the Jew-Tube came to dominate White people’s living rooms, in the 1960s (coincidence?) You need social organizations that are NOT primarily political in nature to have a viable community, and you can’t build a political organization outside of these institutions.

    The last implicitly White political movement in the US was the religious right of the 1970s and 1980s. Ultimately a waste since all they did was elect Reagan Republicans, but notice how they did it. They organized through their non-political churches and took over schools boards and local governments first and worked their way up. Their leadership actually had followers, because the movement was based in a non-political social institution.

    On Jews: someone here I think posted that the public strategy should be to put your arm around that Jew, smile for the camera and say “we love Jews, we support Israel) and leave it at that.

    But off-camera the JQ can’t be ignored. White people don’t care about the holocaust certainly, but they’d be offended that Europeans were being put in jail for writing books about it. Even Jew Communist Noam Chomsky supports free speech for holocaust revisionists. I bet a lot of those middle class professional Whites are disgusted by the constant Hollywood promotion of black-white intermarriage and 99.99% of them would never let their daughter marry a black. Do they know Jews are promoting this (for us, not them?) If not they need to be educated on it. Do they know it’s the Jew organizations that are pushing race-replacement? They need to know. Do they know it’s Jews sending their kids to die half way around the world – actually, YES they do, a lot of them.

    Instead of “naming the Jew” maybe just concentrate on “naming Jews” – repeat after me, Paul Wolfowitz, Leslie “Wolf” Blitzer, Rahm Emmanuel.

    As for bypassing the Jew media, we have blogs and websites, good so far. Why isn’t Craig Bodeker getting money and support from WNs? His documentary is the best pro-White media in the Obama era so far. Have you shown that documentary to your friends yet? With the internet and cheap technology it’s virtually free to make and distribute video, and that will appeal to the fat-asses sitting on their couch at least. We need more video, movies, documentaries, etc.

    Here’s an idea, buy a small building and open up a private club, – members only, membership by invitation only, and don’t advertise. Get a liquor license and a big screen TV. Invite all the prettiest young White women to a dance party, the men will follow. Make it exclusive so that all the White women want to go and it enhances their social status that they are invited. Have a twice monthly boy’s night to watch football and drink beer.

    As Whites rediscover how nice it is to be in White social organizations they will look around and notice; implicit Whiteness can now become explicit. When a pro-White White decides to run for local alderman the word goes out to the members that this is “our guy” and the money and votes follow. When you find a local pro-White White business, get your members to patronize them. Get the boys to join you at the shooting range and organize a hunting trip every summer. Provide a safe, Whites only club where White women can dance and be sexy without having some ape trying to freak her, or waiting until she leaves the nightclub drunk to rape her. Invite the local cop with the barely-concealed pro-White opinions.

    These types of social clubs used to be *the* White American society, along with the churches.

  40. That is the essence of racialism. If we were all the same then why would we care?

    OK, but the simple fact is still that phenotype is phenotype. There are plenty of blond, Anglo-Saxon whigger degenerates. It’s not like the appearance alone is the criterion for anything, certainly not intelligence or character – and I think you know that.

    When you talk of “subrace”, you’re referring to phenotype. But, a blond Anglo-Saxon and a brunette Anglo-Saxon will be closer genetically to each other than the former is to a blond Dane, Swede or Russian.

    Anyway, I just wanted to point it out. It isn’t worth going back and forth about.

  41. WNC:”All the White social institutions died when the Jew-Tube came to dominate White people’s living rooms, in the 1960s (coincidence?)”

    That is a very important point WNC, thank you for stating it.

    The Jewish dominated mass-media in the USA, whether Hollywood movies or cable-TV (‘talmudvision’), is one of the main causes which has lead to White dispossession in America. By tuning in to this Jew-produced trash TV every day, American Whites are basically inviting anti-White Jewry in to their living rooms wherein they inculcate Whites with disgusting pro-Jewish values like hyper-consumerism, racial blindness, race-mixing, White guilt, internationalism/cosmopolitanism, far-leftism, anti-Christianity (and anti-religion in general), anti-White misandry, and so on.

    Subjecting White children and teenagers to this Jew-produced trash TV every day ought to be considered a form of child abuse in my opinion.

    Luckily the rise of the internet is helping to lessen the grip which talmudvision has over White American culture. Very many younger Whites spend much more time surfing the web (reading and researching) than watching terriblevision.

  42. Kemp, a “conservative”? Hardly. 😉

    The relative success of the BNP and other nationalist parties in Europe is proof that Kemp’s strategy is a winner; or, at least, a step in the right direction. And whatever else you want to call it, it is not “conservatism,” as a typical American would understand it. It contains far more potential for American WNs, IMO, than the route taken by the conspiracy nutjobs and constume clowns who have dominated the “movement” thus far.

    Is there a middle way between the broken-record Jewish obsessions of the Linderites, and the Jewish arse-licking approach of FB? That’s what I’d like to find out. I don’t see why this is an “either, or” situation. As I said before, I would like to see a dual approach: (1) a mainstream White political organization that would help influence the national discourse on racial issues and address White interests, and (2) a network of non-affiliated hardcore activist groups in which the JQ can be discussed.

    @ Trainspotter ~ Do you have a blog?

  43. “-NN, your comment is like something I would read from an anti-racist.
    -No it isn’t”

    It is. It’s often pointed out that a lot of whites are stupid, poor, criminals etc.

    You can actually see a similar tactic used by a black woman from Jared Taylor’s appearance on the Queen Latifah Show.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY3Z0XYuSog

    “One can not utilize the rhetoric of “superiority” when it is demonstrably false is his point.”

    Comparing a white psychopath to a successful black man is not demonstrating that whites are not superior to blacks.

    “Thomas Sowell is committed to laissez faire capitalism and isn’t a communist in any way, shape or form.”

    He’s a former Marxist, and doesn’t believe in inherent racial differences. He blames environmental factors, such as Southern culture for black dysfunction.

    “However, Dahmer’s IQ was not the point. In fact, having a higher IQ doesn’t make you “superior” to somebody. This simple fact has been NN’s main thrust for quite some time now. His point is, little Jefferey was inferior to Thomas Sowell and the truth is, he was. I’d rather live in a neighborhood of Sowells than Dahmers despite my beliefs about race.”

    It’s not a relevant comparison, Dahmer was a serial killer.

    Would you rather live in an upper middle-class black neighborhood or a working-class white neighborhood?

  45. Comparing a white psychopath to a successful black man is not demonstrating that whites are not superior to blacks.

    I know that. It was a specific case brother. But, NN’s general thrust is it is obvious that we WN’s aren’t superior since we don’t “dominate.”

    He’s a former Marxist, and doesn’t believe in inherent racial differences. He blames environmental factors, such as Southern culture for black dysfunction.

    I’m sorry. I thought you said he was a Marxist. Yes, I’m well aware of his advocacy of cultural factors. I think it was thoroughly explained in his last book that modern black dysfunction is rooted in Southern folkways that blacks have held on to. He asserts that most cultures that immigrate (how this applies to blacks I’m not sure – I suppose since they were uprooted during the transatlantic slave trade they count as “immigrants” in a general sense) maintain a fierce devotion to the culture they left and that this devotion persists even after the homeland has changed drastically its own culture.

    Despite my belief that our differences are ultimately rooted in nature, I believe a large degree of the dysfunction can be explained by the ridiculous nigger culture.

    It’s not a relevant comparison, Dahmer was a serial killer.

    Would you rather live in an upper middle-class black neighborhood or a working-class white neighborhood?

    Shit, I’d even take poor whites. West Virginia has an extremely low crime rate and lots of poverty. Still, I do enjoy the culture in most liberal big cities. I like independent cinema, independent book stores where authors give readings and Q&A, ethnic food, etc. However, when it comes down to it, it is poor white folk that I identify with. They feel me with compassion where blacks (as my sojourn in Oakland helped me realize) fill me with revulsion and a posture of self-defense.

    So, I’ll sink with poor whites before I float with rich blacks.

  47. Arthur Kemp may be conservative on the JQ, but some would call him an extremist for his Nordicism.

    I would if he is a Nordicist. I’m opposed to Nordicism in America. Full stop. I’ll fight it tooth and nail. That said, I’d prefer the country remain majority Nordic, but I believe Sunic made valid points in his latest essay. The recombination of the Alpine, Med and Nordic makes for the most healthy and vibrant culture.

    I feel the English here have already been dispossessed so we are no doing no great moral wrong to allow rational and compatible immigration to America. It should be a White Zion for “superior” whites who can credibly demonstrate their worth and not some second or third Nordic homeland. They already have their own homelands.

  48. Kemp’s critique of anti-Semitism and conspiracy thinking is nothing but an exercise in incinerating straw men–the same straw men that our enemies trot out.

    Freshly reinvented as the voice of reason and moderation, Kemp installs himself as the arbiter of White Nationalist seriousness and begins by denouncing everyone who is now to his right. This is the behavior of a saboteur, not someone who is working constructively to advance our cause.

    Even his accent seems to have changed.

    I just don’t trust this guy.

  49. A constructive attitude toward the existing movement is to build an alternative real-world organization that actually works. That alone will attract all the worthwhile followers of failed strategies.

    So far Kemp has done nothing but (1) talk about his new and improved approach and (2) launch flaming arrows into the camps of people who are supposedly on his side and who are potential allies and supporters.

    Why does Kemp prioritize attacking and denigrating existing approaches (or rather SPLC-type caricatures of existing approaches) over actually building his better alternative in the real world?

  50. I can’t believe the vitriol directed at Kemp here. It’s getting tiring. Kemp and fellow English nationalists already have a better alternative in the real world. It’s called the BNP.

    Kemp is not a US politician, so what he can do in this realm is rather limited. The most he can do is offer a diagnosis and possible treatments. Still, I believe he has offered to come to the US, along with Simon Darby, to help train WNs. The rest is up to us.

    I think the better question to ask is, why do racialist whites here prefer to tap away at their keyboards instead of engaging in practical activities aimed at building some kind of organization–ANY kind of organization–in the real world?

Comments are closed.