Having watched the video, it is clear that anti-racists prefer to discuss the “vanguardists” (read: cultists) over the “mainstreamers.” They want to point the finger at beer soaked, tattooed, sieg heiling skinheads and costume Nazis screaming RAHOWA and use them to define our public image. I have no doubt they would have used the exterminationist material had they been aware of it.
White Power USA
January 7, 2010 Hunter Wallace Anti-Racism, Anti-White, Discourse Poisoning, Neo-Nazis, White Nationalism 25
Hunter,
you seem to divide mainstreamers and vanguardists between those who dress and talk crudely and call for genocide of the Jews, and those who don’t.
I define the difference more substantively: reformers vs. revolutionaries. Reformers seek what Jared Taylor is seeking: an end to immigration, an end to political correctness, and a restoration of the right to free association. Revolutionaries (people like you, Jim Giles, Greg Johnson and Alex Lindner) support the revolutionary overthrow of the United States government and its Constitution, and the establishment of a new state, a jew-free all-White ethnostate on as much of North America as possible.
That’s the most meaningful division. And it is true also that just like on the extreme left, there are those who straddle both camps, who fight for both maximal reforms with a view towards long-term revolutionary change.
The enemy can and will call you whatever he wants, so one should just counter by saying that you don’t choose your supporters, just like the Black Panters supported Obama.
“The attacker always has the advantage.”
I’m starting to dislike the term “vanguardists.” I think “cultists” is a more accurate description of these people. They like to form small cults and wait for a millenarian collapse of American society. At this point, the “vanguard” (or the divine elect) will mysteriously rise to power.
They are the racialist equivalent of David Koresh, Charles Manson and Jim Jones.
I wait for a collapse but I don’t think it will bring back America. Ameica is screwed. Truth be told, I associated for more with Euro nationalists than I do with American “white nationalists.”
*associate far more
See being a metal fan, I can identify with the skinhead culture, but this is no time for jokes.
Hunter Wallace:
“I’m starting to dislike the term “vanguardists.” I think “cultists” is a more accurate description of these people. They like to form small cults and wait for a millenarian collapse of American society. At this point, the “vanguard” (or the divine elect) will mysteriously rise to power.”
I’ve seen a lot of talk about self-styled “vanguardists” and the sorry lot they are. Dr. Pierce seems to be tarred with this vanguard “cult” tag, for one, among all kinds of other off-the-wall smears of him by those who didn’t grasp what he was building, or did and saw him as “competition.”
Dr. Pierce, unlike all those “vanguardists” who have claimed to be successor groups to his National Alliance, actually understood the vanguard approach and had been operating under it with careful deliberation for at least 25 years when he described it thusly at the first National Alliance Convention in September, 1978:
“Our task is not to persuade a numerical majority of the American population that we are right but rather to build the numerical minority of those whose values coincide with ours into a majority of will and determination.”
Simple, huh? From those attracted to the National Alliance’s values, its goals and program, many joined as members. From those with the right stuff were chosen the few considered to be the vanguard, that core of trusted, dedicated cadre, staff and other contributors. It was around those trusted members mainly that Pierce was building that mass movement of will and determination.
We didn’t worry so much about infiltrators; they come with the territory. The more they come at us, the more they repress us and smear us, the better. Our attitude, operating from a righteous position of strength at all times as men of our race, was “convert ’em or expose ’em.”
Of course one of the first things Gliebe & Co. did after hijacking the Alliance, running off Dr. Pierce’s Board of Directors and staff of 15 people at the National Office, was to go “big tent” with his “new” NA. He and Shawn Walker removed pages 46-50 from the NA Membership Handbook — the part establishing that Xianity is an ideology opposed to that of the National Alliance. There went Dr. Pierce’s vanguard approach with just that one ill-advised expedient blunder. Gliebe’s new, Xian-friendly, “broader outreach” backfired on him. He purposefully drove away many of us who were attracted to Dr. Pierce’s honest, hard line that made clear that it’s not only important what an aspiring comrade’s position is on race and the JQ, but, let us say, he should agree on the “spiritual aspect” of our struggle as well. Dr. Pierce’s telling his members the unvarnished truth that Xianity is a large part of the problem, not of the solution, was what had set the Alliance apart from all the also-ran orgs that refused to address the negative impact Xianity has had and continues to have on our race for fear of offending Xian sensibilities.
That’s why I promote the Creativity Alliance these days. At least there we’re all starting back at square one — less Matt Hale & Co. — from the same honest premise of Dr. Pierce’s that Gliebe squandered so stupidly, with such facility: Whites need their own religion, one that’s not Abrahamic, that doesn’t worship the Jew’s tribal god YHWH. Gliebe couldn’t even spell Cosmotheism, much less explain it.
@Hunter
The kooks are mostly federal agents and mental defectives. David Gletty and Hal Turner being examples of the former while Bill White is a good example of the latter.
@Will
You’re absolutely right about the National Alliance. Pierce was a smart man and he understood what’s necessary at this stage. I think the last good thing to come from the National Alliance is the “Who Rules America” report, first published in 2001 (I think.)
I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Williams comments. Mr. Wallace, I think you are misjudging what the vanguardist approach is. It is an approach based deeply on the writings and thoughts of Nietschze, Hegel, Schopenhauer, and others. It turns away from the poisonous liberal doctrine of mass democracy, and is more in tune with European history and mass movements.
In other words, it has a better chance of achieving our goals.
Dr. Pierce is widely credited by both friend and foe as the most effective champion of white interests in our generation.
Since Dr. Pierce has been mentioned, here is one of his classic broadcasts on our current racial and political dilemma: http://www.natvan.com/freespeech/fs966d.html
Its called the Big Picture, as well it should.
4Hunter Wallace
I’m starting to dislike the term “vanguardists.” I think “cultists” is a more accurate description of these people. They like to form small cults and wait for a millenarian collapse of American society. At this point, the “vanguard” (or the divine elect) will mysteriously rise to power.
______________
Wordsmiths are very important; as Craftsmen, like a lengthy game of chess, each move and counter move, relies on what has been created previously. This is why consistent, and hard won traditional terms, instead of a continuous ‘re-inventing’ of words, no matter how lyric or descriptive, should be used without a full realization about inferences and usage.
The first time I saw ‘vanguardist’, I immediately thought of National Alliance; to see these other, less confident and competent individiuals, being flung together into the same mold, has created a certain disconnect, as addressed here: http://www.whitenewsnow.com/forums/philosophy-ideology/2572-vanguardists-vs-mainstreamers-redux.html
Cultists is a better description, but I suggest Hunter, that you work on creating a New word, a word which imparts both the psychological and dysfunctional aspect of what is, truly, OUR fringe/fed element.
8Will Williams
Hunter Wallace:
“I’m starting to dislike the term “vanguardists.” I think “cultists” is a more accurate description of these people. They like to form small cults and wait for a millenarian collapse of American society. At this point, the “vanguard” (or the divine elect) will mysteriously rise to power.”
Faustus:
All movements and Counter Movements have a certain amount of ‘sub-culturists’, of necessity this is practical and important, for it defines the ‘moderate’ and the ‘revolutionary’ elements; the mainstream and the visionaries define each other as Hegel has already pointed out.
I’ve seen a lot of talk about self-styled “vanguardists” and the sorry lot they are. Dr. Pierce seems to be tarred with this vanguard “cult” tag, for one, among all kinds of other off-the-wall smears of him by those who didn’t grasp what he was building, or did and saw him as “competition.”
Faustus:
Dr. Pierce can never be tarred by these individuals, as he stands alone, his vision and his methods…it is only those who ‘claim’ to one thing and then are shown to be another.
Same with Rockwell.
Dr. Pierce, unlike all those “vanguardists” who have claimed to be successor groups to his National Alliance, actually understood the vanguard approach and had been operating under it with careful deliberation for at least 25 years when he described it thusly at the first National Alliance Convention in September, 1978:
“Our task is not to persuade a numerical majority of the American population that we are right but rather to build the numerical minority of those whose values coincide with ours into a majority of will and determination.”
Simple, huh? From those attracted to the National Alliance’s values, its goals and program, many joined as members. From those with the right stuff were chosen the few considered to be the vanguard, that core of trusted, dedicated cadre, staff and other contributors. It was around those trusted members mainly that Pierce was building that mass movement of will and determination.
We didn’t worry so much about infiltrators; they come with the territory. The more they come at us, the more they repress us and smear us, the better. Our attitude, operating from a righteous position of strength at all times as men of our race, was “convert ‘em or expose ‘em.”
Faustus:
Well said.
Of course one of the first things Gliebe & Co. did after hijacking the Alliance, running off Dr. Pierce’s Board of Directors and staff of 15 people at the National Office, was to go “big tent” with his “new” NA. He and Shawn Walker removed pages 46-50 from the NA Membership Handbook — the part establishing that Xianity is an ideology opposed to that of the National Alliance. There went Dr. Pierce’s vanguard approach with just that one ill-advised expedient blunder. Gliebe’s new, Xian-friendly, “broader outreach” backfired on him. He purposefully drove away many of us who were attracted to Dr. Pierce’s honest, hard line that made clear that it’s not only important what an aspiring comrade’s position is on race and the JQ, but, let us say, he should agree on the “spiritual aspect” of our struggle as well. Dr. Pierce’s telling his members the unvarnished truth that Xianity is a large part of the problem, not of the solution, was what had set the Alliance apart from all the also-ran orgs that refused to address the negative impact Xianity has had and continues to have on our race for fear of offending Xian sensibilities.
That’s why I promote the Creativity Alliance these days. At least there we’re all starting back at square one — less Matt Hale & Co. — from the same honest premise of Dr. Pierce’s that Gliebe squandered so stupidly, with such facility: Whites need their own religion, one that’s not Abrahamic, that doesn’t worship the Jew’s tribal god YHWH. Gliebe couldn’t even spell Cosmotheism, much less explain it.
______________
Didn’t you produce the WNF? or is that someone else?
As the U.S. devolves into a violent and corrupt anti-White shithole, a White JDL might become a necessity. I actually think it’s already a necessity.
“Dr. Pierce is widely credited by both friend and foe as the most effective champion of white interests in our generation.”
It seems like he accomplished a lot as a writer and polemicist, very little as a political organizer. Although writing a couple of novels that at least some people will be reading a century from now, and starting a new religion is more than most of us will leave behind.
By the way, while I’m on a thread where there seem to be some people reading this who know about or were members of the Alliance, perhaps someone can answer one thing I’ve wondered about, that is, how did the National Alliance (when it was the NYA) ever get the opportunity to testify before the U.S. Senate against Kissinger in 1973? Page three of this following link indicates what I’m talking about:
http://www.aipac.org/Publications/AIPACPeriodicalsNearEastReport/NER091973.pdf
@Crypto-Aryan
I’m going to have to disagree with you. As that anti-NA screed at Giles’ site implied, Pierce leveraged a sort of Amway-style layout with niche WN merchandise to assemble a disciplined, well-funded, and powerful nationwide organization. I think his brilliance shone more in this pursuit than in his novels, novels which I believe betrayed his basic flaw: a soulless, cold, and reactionary disposition.
I consider him a true hero for our cause. He’s a tragic hero who was despised as evil incarnate by the people he devoted his life to and betrayed a thousand times over by the egotistical scoundrels who destroyed his life’s work with their little empires of shit.
That was a Blast from the Past:
Summit For War Why Not For Peace?
(THE NEAR EAST REPORT: Vol. XVII, No. 38, Sept. 19, 1973)
Referring to Kissinger as a “junior
Israeli citizen,” the Federation’s president,
Dr. William A. Small, and executive
director, Dr. M. T. Mehdi,
questioned whether he would be able
to “emancipate himself from the traditional
link to Zionism.”
An equally outspoken ethnic protest
against Kissinger was made by Nicholas
Camerota, Jr. of the National Youth
Alliance, who contended that “as a Jew
Kissinger cannot help but feel a personal
stake in the fortunes of Israel”
and that his confirmation would not be
in “the best interests of the majority of
America . . . white, gentile America.”
In reference to Post # 11 and Dr. Pierce’s Big Picture broadcast, there should be a hyphen between ‘free’ and ‘speech’.
http://www.natvan.com/free-speech/fs966d.html
This is one of his best pieces and should be contemplated by every racially sentient person.
Wikitopian,
For reasons I cannot explain, I like and even admire William Pierce. I can tolerate his extreme anti-Semitism much more readily than I can tolerate it from people who comment at this site. I was almost obsessed with the compilation of early issues of Attack! that Strom put together (easily available as online download). These are just subjective impressions, but there is something about him I find to be “sincere” and “pure” and “genuine.” My thought however, was that he was not able to train others to follow in his footsteps. I may be wrong. But I don’t know of any others who could be said to be his proteges. And the organization seemed to dissolve very quickly like a house of cards after has death.
It’s one thing to study the history of NS Germany, it’s another to use their emblems and fly a foreign flag. That’s not going to appeal to the vast majority of white Americans, it doesn’t appeal to me. That’s the fringe element, not their message of white nationalism or white preservation. It’s just bad marketing. We need charismatic leaders with the right presentation and we’ll gain a lot more ground.
Watch that video, which do you feel better represents you, the first group with neo-nazi skinheads, or the latter group with mainstream white Americans at the Tea Party rally and CoCC?
The communists have always used their red flags, but the social democrates -liberals have always just ignored them.
Same tactic is should be used with the national extremists, just ignore them, and be thankfull that they draw in youth, that later grow up enough to come to more mature positions.
There is a much more sophisticated brand of pro-White and pro-Western activism currently emerging that is very much different from the “beer soaked, tattooed, sieg heiling skinheads and costume Nazis screaming RAHOWA” which you mention here Hunter; for instance, I just came across an interesting group called ‘Occident’ — just passing along some info, here is an interview with the founder plus a Facebook page for the group:
– http://www.amerika.org/2010/organization/interview-taylor-somers-of-occident/
– http://www.facebook.com/pages/Occident/162064528830#/pages/Occident/162064528830?v=info
Regarding Vanguardists, are you certain that they are a negative for the White Nationalist movement? Europeans have a tendency to become embarrassed by the actions of their co-ethnics and want to punish them. If a White Nationalist group acts like a cult, it makes us cringe, and we just want them to go away. This is in contrast to Jews, for example, who celebrate their radical members. You will never see Jews apologizing for their extreme elements such as Meir Kahan or radical rabbis that call for the extermination of Palestinians.
Just because Media sources use Neo-Nazis as the face of White Nationalism, this does not necessarily mean that Neo-Nazis are bad for the movement. Radicals often have their purpose in a movement. For example, the Black Panthers made Martin Luther King seem like a moderate.
It seems to me that while Neo-Nazis are embarrassing to mainstream WNs, they at least have motivation, are growing their numbers, and engaging in activism (at least according to the video). Even if they did not exist, the Media would easily find some other ugly face to put on White Nationalism. I think that leaders such as William Pierce made very positive contributions to White Nationalism, helping to keep the flame alive. It is possible that in time, extreme groups may gain traction in some parts of the population, and ultimately bring people into the WN movement. While their cult symbols are strange, much of their ideas are correct. I think it may be time to stop cringing at the antics of the extremists, and give them the benefit of the doubt in the same way that Jewish activists accord Jewish extremist groups.
Exactly, Andrew and ‘Volksverhetzer’. There will always be a wide range of opinions within any ideological movement. Pick your comfort zone and go with it. Discourse distraction and defamation are key tools of the racial opposition, as is ‘guilt’ mongering. Why play their game? Ignore the more radical elements if you don’t care for them, however, you are never going to stop your racial and political enemies from calling you a ‘racist’ or a ‘nawtsee’, no matter what you do. Do you think that they only demonize Germans (?), think again, fellow Anglos, they are coming after you too, now. They despise our very being. Every living White person is a potential ‘Amelek’, or ‘nawtsee’ to the Jewish anti-race. Deception by the enemy is to be expected, but self-deception or willful ignorance is lethal!
The simple fact is that they are conducting a low level race war against us, trying to exploit and displace us, and ultimately to genocide us. They are moving in for the kill, and we don’t need to be blinded by their tactical head lights. If White nationalists weren’t around for these anti-White forces to vent their venom on, does any sentient person really think that they wouldn’t be doing the same thing to the vacuous, “respectable” White conservatives?
It’s a waste of time and a bad idea to actually denounce subgroups which deviate from the direction and tone you prefer. I agree that we shouldn’t get tricked into hanging ourselves by the illusion of potential respectability. If the man who invented the semiconductor and the man who discovered DNA can’t retain “respectability” by their standards, then there’s no point in wasting our time.
The best I can do is try to behave honorably and accept the fact that honor and respect tend to get inversely correlated in a degenerate society.
This same discussion has been going on for many years, on Idon’tknowhowmany boards. Someone with some heavy-duty marketing experience please step up and settle this issue once and for all so we can move forward with implementation.
Ultimately, the driving force for any movement is a spiritual one. If one disagrees philosophically with the Christians — liberal Christians especially — one had better have a place for them or one had better have a plan to deal with their opposition, because once they discover your existence and growing influence, their denunciations will carry even more power than Jude’s. Unfortunately, most WN thinkers/strategists display gross ignorace about Christianity and, I think, greatly underestimate how quickly and savagely even traditionalist Christians could turn on you if you handle them incorrectly (even worse than what we see today).
We are learning, as evidenced by HW’s new direction here lately. I only hope we can steepen the learning curve.