We traditional conservatives and other racialists pride ourselves on being undeceived. We reject idealistic nonsense about the perfectibility of man and take mankind as he is: as a social animal with instincts that lie somewhere between the Hobbesian depravity ascribed to mankind by Pauline Christianity and the demigod transcending the darkness ascribed to mankind by Enlightenment types. When others retreat to prayer and platitude, we stick to the facts and work with what we’ve been given.
Or so we like to think, anyway…
It’s a tragic irony that the most absurd of the abstract idealists, Marxists, have mastered the art of shrewdly operating an efficient and successful political machine, while we’re unrivaled in our naivete and our failure at political action. While they’re going from door to door and from dorm to dorm to mobilize people, we’re typically hiding behind closed doors and waxing poetically about redeemers, vanguards, and historical cycles that will do the work for us.
A couple weeks ago, a commenter at Occidental Dissent mentioned George Washington Plunkitt’s essay, “How To Become a Statesman”. The essay is part of a larger compendium entitled Plunkitt of Tammany Hall. Yes, it’s hosted at www.marxists.org, but there’s nothing Marxist about Plunkitt’s message. Plunkitt was a successful boss in Tammany Hall, New York City’s once-omnipresent political machine. His message was about how to be politically successful.
His style amused me but it might irritate others. To some extent, the style is the message, of reaching people with appeals to their emotions and their interests rather than their ideals. There’s quite a bit to sift through which isn’t entirely relevant, such as his overt participation in graft, his ongoing feud with upstate politicians, and his struggle against civil service reform.
But even in the outdated argument for political graft, one can extract a message about the value of offering incentives of some kind for political support. Patriotism and political support can’t be sustained without some sort of incentive, a point Plunkitt beats into the ground. His contempt for idealism and rhetoric are a welcome contrast to our virtual subculture and his emphasis on keeping with relevant issues is something we could all bear in mind. Regarding the imperial battles in the Philippines, Plunkitt noted that his constituents “…got too much at home to interest them; they’re too busy makin’ a livin’ to bother about the niggers in the Pacific.”
I hope the book can be a conversation starter for others who are working to convert theory into practice. Much of it is the same message David Duke has been trying to tell us for years, but told with more frankness and depth than Duke can be expected to offer. The final chapter, which wasn’t written by Plunkitt, describes what is allegedly a typical day in the life. It’s the life of a true servant of his community. If we expect to be taken seriously as candidates for leadership, I think we need to figure out how to become serious public servants.
“His contempt for idealism and rhetoric are a welcome contrast to our virtual subculture and his emphasis on keeping with relevant issues is something we could all bear in mind.”
Such is why those like Taylor focus on black crime, something the common man is aware of firsthand. Most people really don’t understand the Jewish question or Holocaust revisionism.
Undeceived or not, this stuff has a lot farther to go at both a theoretical and practical level before it gets anywhere serious.
*** It’s a tragic irony that the most absurd of the abstract idealists, Marxists, have mastered the art of shrewdly operating an efficient and successful political machine, while we’re unrivaled in our naivete and our failure at political action. ***
The Marxists are terrible activists. They are good at moving things along, but in the wrong direction. For example, they will decide to create a workers’ paradise in Russia or China, and their first step will be to kill half the population. If their stated objective is to improve the lot of African-Americans, they will try to do so by importing Mexican competition. The leftists usually want more money for themselves. What a better way to do so than to elect an Obama who will wreck the economy for everybody? The leftists usually wreck the lives of people they say they want to help. It isn’t clear what their motives are in the first place.
By contrast, common sense people are good at defining the right policies, but not so good at getting elected.
*** Plunkitt noted that his constituents “…got too much at home to interest them; they’re too busy makin’ a livin’ to bother about the niggers in the Pacific. ***
He was wrong about that. People care too much about the niggers in the Pacific. Misguided idealism, exploited by cynical agitators, is one of the reasons behind the current disaster.
@Mark
Right. I don’t want to overstate my case and come off as anti-intellectual, though.
@Evan
I disagree. My projects are already getting somewhere serious. It’s a mistake to wait until we’re done theorizing to start practicing. Ideally, the two will feed off each other, with the theory informing the practice and the practice informing the theory.
@Armor
I’m talking about generic activism while you appear to be talking about general strategy. I fully agree that killing half of your constituency is a non-starter. What’s fascinating to me is that Marxists can still find real support despite doing that.
My suspicion is that the misguided idealistic crusades will be the first to topple as the currency crisis gets worse and our activism makes progress. We’ll see, I reckon.
@ Wikitopian
I’ll have to take your word for it.
Visit my chapter’s site and decide for yourself.
We have a monthly newsletter, a published book, monthly meetings, rallies, and are applying some innovative guerrilla marketing concepts to an ambitious campaign to influence state legislation. It admittedly has a long way to go, but some very sharp people have stepped up to help.
http://www.hoosiernation.us
@ Wikitopian
Looks like some good activity. I was trying to scale the problem in grander terms–an effort to understand and prepare a change in the cultural and demographic setting, to understand what needs to be done, and to figure out how best to gain leverage at a political level given severe disadvantages. Something like that. But there’s nothing wrong with what you’re up to.
You can buy “Plunkitt of Tammany Hall” at most used book stores for a couple of dollars.
Here he is at Project Gutenberg:
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2810/2810-h/2810-h.htm