The words and language a person uses to describe their beliefs is the basis in how we communicate to one another. We all know this. The words used to describe ideas of political importance can have far reaching consequences, both for the speaker and the audience. We all know this as well.
On that point it behooves the speaker to use language that is becoming of a considerate, upstanding person with well meaning and honest intentions. Unfortunately not everybody knows this.
Some people, like myself, can handle the rough language of a typical biker bar and not feel ill at ease. Many people however, cannot. We all know the person who blushes at swear words or becomes uncomfortable at biker bar type of talk. Just picture a typical grandmother in a biker bar. She won’t be happy with what goes on in there and would probably rather be at church or some other pleasant place.
I think that in conversations on political topics the average person is much like a grandma. They consider themselves to be a good, honest person and they want the best for everybody. My grandmother at least was such a sweetheart she would be very upset if I used language that indicated I wanted anything negative to happen to anyone. Granted, that’s not always possible, but it is possible to not make yourself sound like a biker in the whiskey bar.
When I talk with someone about a political topic, I have to assume that they are speaking with good faith with the information that they know about. Wikipedia has a great introduction to what “good faith” means with this: “Good faith, or in Latin bona fides (bona fide means “in good faith”), is good, honest intention (even if producing unfortunate results) or belief. In law, it is the mental and moral state of honesty, conviction as to the truth or falsehood of a proposition or body of opinion, or as to the rectitude or depravity of a line of conduct.” Another good way to understand the other person is by putting yourself in their shoes or in a word, empathy.
Empathy is a topic for another article but the words you use can and should be analyzed. All words have a perceived value whether positive, negative, or neutral. Are the words you use to describe certain things mostly one or the other? Do you describe your views by what you are against? Or what you are for? The statement, “I am a nationalist and opposed to multiculturalism and the Hollywood induced consumer lifestyle of contemporary America” is a negative one. If you tell that to a grandma she will think “Ok well now I know that he really dislikes but what does he like? Anything?”
People that complain a lot generally love to share what they don’t like about an infinite number of things. The pop psychology term is called venting, just like a vent of hot air releasing the pressure. The problem with venting is that it burdens the listener with negative associations and grandmas don’t like negative associations. It makes an icky feeling and most people will do anything they can to distance themselves from the source of those feelings.
Since as an individual we are alone responsible how people perceive us and the ideas that are important to us it is imperative to always be mindful of the consequences your words have on the people around you.
For purposes of political activism, this is even more important. Using careless, negative, or hurtful language will make you look like a classless, negative person best avoided. The kind of speech that has always been important to me has been enthusiastic, encouraging, and helpful.
Arguably, all politics is about ‘something sucks’ and proposed solutions to that problem. What I’m interested in doing is raising the level of discourse about the solutions we have to those problems. By motivating instead of criticizing, focusing instead of not caring, striving for excellence rather than sloppiness, we can reverse the entire frame of discourse. Instead of being a movement whom 99% of the time talks about things they do not like, we talk about things we like 99% of the time. Do you know any grandmas that love hear about things you like, no matter how mundane? I reckon you do. I also think that the first time you talk to somebody on the street about these ideas with passion and conviction they will notice that too and will at the very least want to know more.
Happy mothers day to all of our wonderful women out there. We wouldn’t be here without you.
All too often, white advocates use speech as a way of blowing off steam as opposed to effective political communication. This is a luxury we can not afford.
Excellent work Andrew and while many in the Laptop Luftwaffe will not take this advice, I hope others do.
I feel a warm fuzzy inside!
Gregory Hood: And our enemies want to criminalize us blowing off steam.
Very good article, Andrew. There are a few basic verbal “tricks”. A lot of the phrases to use sound “mushy” and “touchy-feely” and a lot like soundbites, but that is the price one pays as a political soldier. My question to those who don’t want to, is; are you in it to win for your race or are you in it for yourself?
Just think like this: “something sucks and I hate it and want to destroy it, ‘cuz it’s anti-White”. Then flip that thought and present a solution in clean, crisp and simple language.
It may sound like a lot of work, but changing the world is a lot of work. Also, last time I checked, some guy got elected by screaming “yes, we can”, “change we can believe in” and “I don’t look like the other guys on the dollar bills” about 50 million times…
“What we as a people can achieve together”.
“Helping our brothers and sisters who are being used”.
“Protecting our women/people from violence and rape”.
“Teaching our kids a healthier lifestyle”.
“Protecting our minds from unhealthy choices”.
“Keep our taxdollars here in America”.
Excellent post, and yay for grandma!
Yes, but the problem is: Most of the positive things we talk about have long since been branded as evil, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, hateful, etc., etc.
This essay is actually just another equivalent of the Right Wing pleading of “we are not racists! Let me prove it to you!” And of course, it doesn’t matter. They still label you as a hateful, bigoted, racist who wants to stuff all non whites into gas chambers.
I have come to the conclusion that the vast majority of white people are still not taking politics seriously and it is still only a form of entertainment for them. They just cannot comprehend that non whites and Liberals mean business, so they automatically think any talk by us about what is happening is “over the top.” Whites want a pleasant conversation where at the end of the day everyone remains friends. They don’t understand this is a life and death struggle for territory and cultural dominance, and even who will be discriminated against. To them, everything will still yet be white, like they have known all their lives. To them, non whites are just white people with a dark paint job. They don’t get the fundamental difference in mentalities and will. That is why they keep talking against people bringing up “divisive” points.
Let me add that expressing yourself clearly, using good standard English, is a real advantage as well. I’m new to this site, and appreciate the writing standards around here. A good idea, poorly expressed, has little chance of being heard. Some people will misunderstand it, and others who do understand and oppose it will use grammatical or other errors to dismiss the idea and its author. If we want honest racial discourse, which I believe we can dominate with our ideas, we cannot allow the multi cultists any opportunity to divert attention from the thought to the thinker and his sloppy language. I wish some of the posters over at AmRen cared about that.
Not only is that useful advice in any “movement,” that’s useful advice in life.
We must become the greatest actors in the world. Our job is to convince the most people to get on our side. Our job is to overcome our natural honesty (overwhelmingly negative feelings about modernity) and do what needs to be done. Make the case for living White.
To touch upon racial issues while conversing with a racially unawakened White (and with any other potential ally) is to play with dynamite. It is powerful stuff that need not even be over-the-top to elicit intensely negative reactions due to the way we’ve all been conditioned. You’ve got to be strategic about it.
These issues of ours must be addressed if we are to achieve the TOTAL cohesion and TOTAL separation that we are working towards. Each of us needs to speak on these matters in a way suited to the various circumstances/audiences every chance that presents itself. Having intentionally well refined speech and delivering a palatable message allows one to capitalize on so many more opportunities than when one only talks race in the hushed whispers of angry and defeatist guttertalk.
We must be appropriate if we wish to have more conversations with more people. No shooting ourselves in the foot simply because we are intellectually lazy and/or not shrewd enough to play by the rules of the world we actually live in. We gain nothing by scaring people away from our cause. Grandma’s will be a part of our future nation too and may very well be some of our greatest advocates. We don’t have to be overly cautious gentlemen or even water down our goals, but we certainly don’t want to make them ashamed to associate with us by having too many rough edges.
People like to know they are doing the RIGHT thing. Too many spooky WWII films have convenced them that up is down and right is wrong. We can show them that is not the case by being shining examples of high virtue and clear thinking. At the very least, we will be healthier and happier if we focus on empowering thoughts and actions. We should be offering the right way forward if we are truely intending to help our people. We shouldn’t be propagating bad habits of mind and ineffective activism.
In order to demonstrate my commitment to these ideas, I hereby drop needless slurs and negativity. Bitter nastiness is not as potent a weapon as many White Nationalists seem to think and will only be a stumbling block to our progress. Let’s watch as the tone of OD rises yet another level. I, for one, welcome such a development.
Get positive, and get to work doing something for yourself, your family, and your people!
Nearly all western thought since the last war, certainly all “progressive” thought, has assumed tacitly that human beings desire nothing beyond ease, security and avoidance of pain. In such a view of life there is no room, for instance, for patriotism and military virtues. The Socialist who finds his children playing wilth soldiers is usually upset, but he is never able to think of a substitute for the tin soldiers; tin pacifists somehow won’t do. Hitler, because in his own joyless mind he feels it with exceptional strength, knows that human beings don’t only want comfort, safety, short working-hours, hygiene, birth-control and, in general, common sense; they also, at least intermittently, want struggle and self-sacrifice, not to mention drums, flags and loyalty-parades. However they may be as economic theories, Fascism and Nazism are psychologically far sounder than any hedonistic conception of life. The same is probably true of Stalin’s militarised verison of Socialism. All three of the great dictators have enhanced their power by imposing intolerable burdens on their peoples. Whereas Socialism, and even capitalism in a more grudging way, have said to people “I offer you a good time,” Hitler has said to them “I offer you struggle, danger and death,” and as a result a whole nation flings itself at his feet.
Mein Kampf, by Adolph Hitler, review by George Orwell
March 21, 1940
Hunter, can you delete this later? I try not to associate with ‘
“western Racial and cultural Preservation.” I’m more into ‘Traditional idenity and Cultural development.’
Re: nice words
It sounds nice. And I try it. But it’s easy to use up all one’s will power and end up posting something horribly unPC notes on Facebook and sending it out…to everyone. Which I often do. Somewhere in the back of my mind, I think that if I put things bluntly, people will wake up. But they don’t. Because they are wide awake and just post-ethnically undead.
“Instead of being a movement whom 99% of the time talks about things they do not like, we talk about things we like 99% of the time.”
Which is why this is needed. Actually two things are needs. The Liberal Moral-theology needs to be desacralized; And a positve alternative needs to be offered. In general, People and societies require sacred values and political narratives — they are naturally reinforced, even when they are unnatural or inverted. And are defended through an assortment of psychosocial mechanisms. The optimal way for change, then, is to aviod the defences as best as possible, undermine the dominant moral theology and political narrative, while offering a compelling alternative. Momentum — the emergent, self-moralizing nature of social being — will take care of the rests. Of course avioding defences is no easy task –Moral-theologies are greedy and wont to give up territory. So you have to wear them down, charm them, sneek across the borders, give and take but always take, cry, demand fairness, be a woman ect. Until you are in a position when you can flip out when not appeased. In regards to this, I have touched on this:
“According to the Sacred value protection model (SVPM) put forwards by Tetlock et al. (2000), secular challenges to Sacred values will be met with expressions of Moral outrage, acts of moral cleansing, when not avoided as best as possible. And in fact we see this. This is what produces the irrationalisms we see. Expressions of disgust at the supposedly unconscionable thoughts and the desires for cleansing oneself, should not be surprising, given the relation between them and thoughts of moral purity, as discussed in Zhong and Liljenquist (2006). Nor should we be surprised at the the ever more Manichean nature of the discourse. As Haidt and Algoe (2004), there are a number of reasons for the desire for moral polarization”
“When it comes to deleterious Sacred Values and Taboos, the goal is to bypass them. Since they are position based and boundary protective, one cannot reason them forward. One has to gain a consensus and make them irrelevant. Sacred Value and Taboo thinking, of course, is structured to prevent this, and a loss of Imperium, by boundary policing and enforcing. Therefore, one has to make space to gain a consensus by continually pushing the borders and testing the boundaries, while at the same time minimizing an eliciting of boundary defenses. This means that the boundary police, which act to defend against subverting the Imperative and command of the Transcendent Value, need to be maneuvered around or undermined. To do this, the non-rational nature of the policing and enforcing needs to be exploited.”
There are several ways of doing the above. I would suggest you look into the research and then go back and study what the left did to undermine Christianity. With regards to the second part, you need a compelling narrative to sell. And you are marketing to pods and zombies. In both cases, it helps feeling like you are on the (morally) right side.
Brutus, this does not sound to me like pleading. Rather, it sounds more like a plea to be SOLUTION oriented rather than carping on the problem over and over. Most WNs I’ve run intoo seem to like to do the LATTER, not the FORMER.
If you want to talk about words, then I am perhaps not unjustified in mentioning this:
“The words and language a person uses to describe their beliefs is the basis in how we communicate to one another. ”
Don’t let the feminists force you to speak ungrammatically for the sake of gender neutrality. Your sentance should read:
“The words and language a person uses to describe his beliefs is the basis on which how we communicate to one another.”
Point taken. I slipped up myself when that Spock character was here justifying the attacks on BANA, and went a bit gutter on him. It’s not becoming to our blog collective. and Andrew’s post is a good reminder.
“Don’t let the feminists force you to speak ungrammatically for the sake of gender neutrality. Your sentance should read:
“The words and language a person uses to describe his beliefs is the basis on which how we communicate to one another.””
Exactly. “His” in that context is common gender. But don’t ever call the uncorrected version “politically correct”. “Political correctness” is marketing genius, if you think about it. We should stop using it, as that phrase essentially cedes the argument to the adversary. We should replace it with a clever but highly vituperative word or phrase. I thought of some but they don’t come to mind right now.
I used the gender neutral pronoun because this is important for both men and women.
I completely disagree. Hitler has absolutely nothing useful to do with any of this.
The point isn’t to be touchy feely. The point is make a positive impact on others with the words we use. That doesn’t mean being PC but it does mean using inspiring language instead of complaining about everything all the time.
Someone who harps on about wild and wacky plans in a joyous tone can suck you in, like if someone talks about winning the lottery and all the stuff they will do with the money…
“Ill never win, so I dont bother” – Anyone feel anything?
“I would buy a plot of land and start building a house maybe even grow some vegetables, get a dog call him fido, build a pool for the kids” – Makes you want to put on the lottery and actually think you might win.
I completely disagree. Hitler has absolutely nothing useful to do with any of this.
16 Andrew Yeoman
If reclaiming our homelands will require great sacrifice then Orwell’s insight into Hitler’s strange appeal is useful. I don’t suggest we adopt any of the specific symbols or language of National Socialism. I suggest we look at how the last politically successful racially conscious movement achieved victory. It wasn’t with the comforting language of modern marketing, that’s for sure. The National Socialists told the horrifying truth about Germany’s perilous situation. In the United States things are even worse. We have nothing to offer people looking for comfort and happiness today. They’re content to believe the positive lies of the race replacers.
There is no way to explain what’s happened to the West without using hurtful language. Jews will be hurt by the truth, and they should be.
Basically we are gonna have to tell the lady folk that the anti-whites are not “NICE”, and that there will be a price to be paid for supporting the anti-whites. But say it in a gentle soothing voice that shows you care.
Exactly, in fact just reordering how you wrote that works wonders:
“Speak using a gentle soothing voice that shows you care that the anti-whites are not good and the price to be paid for supporting the anti-whites affects all of us in a bad way.” Grandmas can follow that reasoning.
“Brutus, this does not sound to me like pleading. Rather, it sounds more like a plea to be SOLUTION oriented rather than carping on the problem over and over. Most WNs I’ve run intoo seem to like to do the LATTER, not the FORMER.”
Regarding critical responses to pessimism: There is an implicit assumption present in ALL commentary such as the above. Viz, that these “solution orientated” strategies have yet to be tried.
They have, and rather extensively, Stormfront type forums and commentators aside. There have been a great many highly intelligent and competent persons involved in this struggle over the decades.
In other words, my pessimism is not due to inexperience, but rather the opposite, while I suspect there is a very good probability that you may be looking at this from the other end of that spectrum. When one tells you an idea won’t work, it does not necessarily mean he is just a Fuddy Dud, he may have already tried it numerous times and knows it just won’t work, no matter how good the idea sounds.
I do not like being pessimistic, but the Internet is distorting many people’s perception every bit as much as the Mainstream Media distorts, maybe even more. The exponential growth of racial awareness one runs into on the Internet is NOT widespread out here in the word.
Look no further than the Tea Party. A great many people thought it was going to be some great thing, but last I heard they are now considering Newt Gingrich as a “solution” to our problems!
The brutal truth is White people do not want to think in terms of race. Worse, they even think the true solutions to many mundane problems are too “radical” and won’t even consider them.
There is also the matter of simple math that so few seem to consider when they speak of voting or political activity. Factor out the non whites. Now, for just a moment, consider the very large number of whites, whose income and thus very living standard depends upon the current system. Add to that the large number of people who never pay the slightest attention to politics or what is going on and rely exclusively on campaign slogans and/or work related political organs, e.g. labor union members (and I’m not talking about the usual culprits, but rather the large number of persons belonging to such unions as Boilermakers, heavy equipment operators, carpenters, etc., i.e., people who actually very much agree with us but who are not ever going to vote for any candidate but a Democrat, even if he is a black Marxist. And these men will fist fight you over it.
Don’t forget the millions of church goers. You know, the “those are God’s children, too,” crowd. ( I don’t care if that is not “your Christianity,” I care that it happens to be the Christianity of apparently some tens of millions.) And even when they are not around the bend on race, most are not too keen on anything they might consider unkind and unfair.
Speaking of “unfair.” Evidently that is now an outstanding characteristic of the modern American. He gives every indication of being opposed to denying any two legged biped the opportunity to “share the American dream,” so long as they do so legally.
Let’s not forget the military fetish.
Let’s certainly not forget the huge number of white people who are pretty much degenerates. They are more receptive to legalizing drugs right now than White Nationalism or race survival. And don’t make me laugh by suggesting an appeal to them for cultural revival. They like much of the Hollywood culture.
We had better not forget the “I really don’t care” attitude, either. Nor, to extend an above observation, the large number of people who simply do not keep up with news and are essentially unaware there even is a race or ideological crisis.
Forget not the general attitude of a great percentage of white folks who are only slightly less put off by any suggestion that they study any subject like this than they are to becoming paraplegics.
The no doubt several other factors I cannot think of at the moment.
Where does that leave our “solution orientated” proposals?
Again, I’m not here so much as a wet blanket as someone who is reminding you of some crucial realities. You MUST consider these.
Andrew we will also have to say in “a gentle caring way” that siding with the anti-whites is bad and bad consequenses follow. If white women are anything they are herd creatures dependent on social acceptability for their self esteem.
True but don’t forget men are as well and they ALL act like grandmas. 😉
I have suspected that Whites have a higher level of empathy than non-Whites. I also surmise that Whites has evolved high levels of trust among non-kin, and that is how we form our organizations. Which is also why when non-Whites and sociopathic Whites mimic normal White behavior to a degree that an empathetic White will often assume that some behavior is an honest “White” attempt at conforming to some rule. While non-Whites see this not as an example of neighborly trust, but a weakness in Whites to be exploited.
In an all-White society, this is a strength, in a mixed society, it’s a weakness.
Before the Internet I had no idea of how shockingly illiterate large numbers of people are. Everything I read before 1995 was either the work of a professional author or filtered through an editor at a newspaper, publishing house, etc. Probably only a small portion of the population at the time actually was exposed to the “literacy” of the general public such as teachers, or newspaper editors who opened the mail. With the Internet the raw ramblings of societies’ multitudes of idiots is finally exposed for all to see. (For instance I spent the afternoon reading You Tube comments on a forensics video of AA Flight 191 that crashed near my home in 1979. My cat could write better English than some of those commentators.) I am absolutely shocked by how many people don’t even bother to capitalize the word “I” anymore. Every site is full of these brain-dead morons who don’t capitalize, punctuate, and throw out idiotic misspellings like “u” “ur” “cuz” “4”(supposed to be the word “for”) and all kinds of things that make any reader suspect their IQ is about room temperature. Do people realize what idiots they look like when they write like that? If I saw that on a resume I’d toss it straight into the garbage.
Thank you for posting the best example of “venting” so far!
Brutus plays a great and essential bad cop to Andrew Yeoman’s good cop. Both of you speak with logic and rationality. There is no conflict in your views from an endgame point of view. All coins have two sides, and all fighters have two fists.
Reality based assessments of the problems we are up against (eg. the difficult task of awakening the brainwarped masses) are needed in order to form appropriate solutions that meet our goals in the most timely and bloodless way possible.
Without a dissatisfied (this is distinct from pessimism) appreciation of our current situation, there’d be no need to do a thing. It would simply be a matter of inevitability. As far as I am concerned, only once the problem has been identified will people begin the real work that is ahead of us. It won’t all be pretty either.
The great thing about so many people being involved in this struggle is that, collectively, we can get to cracking on all sides of this egg at once. Specialize in what you are good at and then get even better. Learn from the mistakes of yourself and others. And, keep trudging along until we’ve all found our way home.
Brutus, as you suspect I am rather new to White Nationalism as a whole. I have only been interested in it for about a year or so. I’ve lurked on many sites and posted on a few but have NOT come out of the closet in RL due to present circumstances.
I know what you mean about most whites’ attitudes, and why the usual methods of voting and party politics won’t work. I would like to get an idea of what we COULD try that WILL work, because I have come to the conclusion that nothing will ever really change until there is a revolution, which will NOT happen until the state suffers some sort of economic catastrophe.
The recession is not what I’m talking about when I write “economic catastrophe.” I am referring to something more on the order of the Great Deprression or worse. The problem is that people have been predicting such things for decades and by the time it actually happens it may be too late. So what can we as awakened Whites do to help our people NOW?
It’s an admirable thing and always fitting to speak English properly. Insults can be Shakespearean as well, rather than common profanity.
Excellent work Andrew and while many in the Laptop Luftwaffe will not take this advice, I hope others do. – Gregory Hood
“Laptop Luftwaffe” – LMFAO 😀 😀
I have come to the conclusion that the “solution” will NOT come from us. It is obvious that no argument, line of reasoning, recitation of crime statistics or facts concerning economic drain, appeal to history or the advantages of our culture, no matter how eloquently delivered and no matter what the force of any personality we find and put forward to speak on our behalf is likely to penetrate the conscience of our people. They simply are no longer wired to think in these terms, *if they ever were to begin with.*
No, where our ONLY hope is going to emerge is *when* the non whites come full on with their own race hatred and it becomes so brazen, so “in your face,” so obvious that it can no longer be denied or spun any other way but what it is. This is already well under way, but it is not quite brazen enough just yet and not quite visible enough for the *majority* of whites to see it and therefore no longer be able to explain it away as simple agitation on the part of politicians.
THAT is where the solution lies.
The extreme anti white hatred is going to have to be so prominently displayed for all whites to see that they finally see this is no mere political ploy by Liberals. And it MUST come from the non whites themselves, and not just the media, blogs and ideological literature of the Left. In other words, our only remaining hope is for white people to finally see for themselves the hatred of non whites laid bare and manifested in actual living, breathing human actions and words.
Until now, our “case” has been primarily one of presenting certain facts to demonstrate fundamental differences and “end game” desires on the part of non whites and Jews. But such arguments just don’t have the punch to sustain prolonged interest on the part of our people. Sure, many responded well and agreed whenever they heard or read these arguments, but within minutes or maybe an hour the conversation and interest went back to the mundane things white people like: Basketball scores, NASCAR, the latest gossip, and the latest scheme for acquiring additional money. And at that point they were once again ready to be “realistic” and look once more to the politicians the media outlet of their choice warranted “acceptable.”
Until now, the non white hatred was, if visible at all to our people, something distant and abstract, important only in the sense that a murder or robbery reported in the local or national media, i.e., that is fleeting, like a car wreck we sometimes drive by.
But maybe, just maybe, a hundred million or so non whites, right in front of their faces, who are clearly different and baying for blood and bragging about conquest will shock our people into the harsh reality of this world.
THAT is our solution.
All other proposals and leaders are, as Revilo Oliver stated thirty years ago, merely acting out a play on a darkening stage in an almost empty theater, whether we know it or not.
31 Brutus: I agree. I try to be as persuasive as I can, but the only people who get it are those who already know that they’ve been dispossessed, namely White working men. Most other Whites are just waiting for “the economy to turn around” so they can resume spending. The stick is the only way to teach hard truths.
I find, by the way, that the method of discourse that is least likely to close your listener’s ears is to ask questions. “What does it mean when capable Whites are discriminated against?” “How will uneducated Mexicans sustain a modern economy?” I don’t get answers, but it’s a good day’s work to get Whites to actually wonder about such things. When enough Whites begin to receive the whippings they deserve at the hands of the diverse, when the post-racial world comes apart, I hope that some of them will finally connect the dots that we have so patiently pointed out to them.