In my last post, I looked at the U.S. Senate. I pointed out that many of the supporters of the Bush amnesty have been purged in primaries, defeated, or disgraced. Several others have died, retired, or renounced their views.
The incoming Senate will be much improved on immigration. In the Bush years, a two-party consensus in favor of “comprehensive immigration reform” reigned in Washington. In the Obama years, immigration has become more of a partisan issue.
The battle lines are still not perfectly clear. There are still a few Republican holdouts who support “comprehensive immigration reform.” Likewise, there are a few conservative Democrats who oppose amnesty. Their numbers have dwindled in recent years though.
Conservatives and Independents have been challenging and succeeding in defeating the GOP establishment. In the Senate, Rand Paul, Sharron Angle, and Joe Miller are symbolic of this trend.
The Governor Races
The Governor races are another arena where the transformation of the Bush GOP is playing out.
1.) Arizona – Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona is the apple of my eye in this respect. She has reaped a huge political dividend from banning ethnic studies and signing SB1070 into law. Brewer has gone to court to defend SB1070 from the Obama Justice Department.
In recent years, Arizona has moved to the forefront of the immigration debate. In 2007, the Grand Canyon State passed a law that penalized businesses who hired illegal aliens. More than 100,000 illegal aliens have since left Arizona. More will leave after SB1070 and if Arizona continues heading in the right direction.
Gov. Brewer has a commanding 12 point lead over Terry Goddard and will almost certainly win re-election in November. From 2003 until 2009, the god awful Janet Napolitano, now Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, was Governor of Arizona.
Arizona’s SB1070 set off a political earthquake that was felt across America. An obscure state bill set off a polarizing national conflagaration over immigration that pushed moderates in a more radical direction.
The consequences of SB1070 were felt in other states. This was especially true of the South.
2.) Florida – In Florida, Rick Scott defeated Bill McCollum in the Republican Primary. McCollum had the support of the entire Florida GOP establishment.
Like Arizona, Florida has one of the largest populations of illegal aliens in America. Immigration resonated in the Sunshine State and became a battlefield in the Republican Primary there.
In the wake of SB1070, Bill McCollum initially staked out a moderate position on immigration, saying that the Arizona law wasn’t needed in Florida. Rick Scott responded by promising to bring SB1070 to the state. McCollum flipflopped two weeks before the election, but it proved too little too late.
Scott made immigration the hallmark of his campaign and beat the drum against the “Tallahassee insiders” to victory.
From 1999 until 2007, Jeb Bush was the Governor of Florida. With his Hispanic wife and children, Jeb was a prominent symbol of the Bush GOP and its attempt to woo Hispanic voters with “comprehensive immigration reform.”
3.) Georgia – In Georgia, Nathan Deal defeated Karen Handel in the Republican Primary. Handel was endorsed by Sarah Palin and her defeat was widely interpreted in the mainstream media as proof of Palin’s waning influence.
As in Florida, Arizona’s SB1070 became a hot issue in the Georgia Governor race. Deal released a campaign ad attacking the Obama administration for its lawsuit against Arizona.
Deal promised to bring SB1070 to Georgia and contemptuously told the Obama administration you can “sue us too.” The ad struck a chord in Georgia which is also home to a huge population of illegal aliens.
It is possible that Nathan Deal could turn out to be another Sonny Perdue who exploited the Confederate flag issue to defeat Roy Barnes and get himself elected Governor. Unlike Perdue, Deal has a strong record of fighting illegal immigration in Congress.
With an A+ grade from NumbersUSA, I am inclined to believe that Nathan Deal intends to follow through on his promises. He will face Roy Barnes in November.
Barnes, the former Governor and Democratic challenger, says he would support an Arizona-style law in Georgia too. It is nothing more than political posturing, but it shows how far the political spectrum in Georgia has shifted since the Bush years.
4.) Alabama – Alabama has gone through one of the most memorable primary seasons of the year. Candidates like Rick Barber, Tim James, and Dale Peterson (all unsuccessful) made national headlines with hilarious campaign ads.
Who can forget Peterson with his shotgun ranting about “thugs and criminals” or Barber “gathering his armies” with the Founders?
In Alabama, the plain spoken outsider Dr. Robert Bentley emerged victorious in the Republican Primary over Bradley Byrne, the GOP establishment favorite. Earlier this month, the Alabama GOP committed itself to a platform called the “Handshake with Alabama” which is committed to bringing Arizona’s SB1070 to Alabama
Robert Bentley will face Ron Sparks (the progressive nutroots candidate) in November. Sparks is a supporter of “comprehensive immigration reform.” As Governor of Alabama, Bentley would almost certainly sign Arizona-style immigration reform into law.
The Republicans have a chance this fall of taking over the Alabama state legislature for the first time since Reconstruction. Such is the extent of the backlash against the Obama administration and the Democratic Party.
5.) South Carolina – Like Jan Brewer, Nikki Haley isn’t exactly an outsider, but was propelled to victory in the South Carolina Republican Primary with a Sarah Palin endorsement and Tea Party support.
Haley is an Asian Indian, which is certain to provoke opposition from pro-White corners, but as Governor of South Carolina she would do to promote our interests than Meg Whitman in California.
South Carolina is one the handful of states that is most likely to become the next Arizona. Haley has emphatically stated that she supports Arizona and would sign an Arizona-style immigration bill into law.
Haley will face Vince Sheehan in November. Sheehan, who will almost certainly be defeated, claims to support an even tougher immigration law. The political spectrum in South Carolina has also shifted to such a degree that both parties compete to sound tougher on immigration.
Arizona’s Imitators
There are plenty of other Governor races in this election cycle. I’ve mostly been following the ones closest to my own home turf. I’m excited by the possibility of a geographically continguous bloc of states in South passing Arizona-style immigration reform and entering into a polarizing showdown with the federal government.
Florida, Virginia, and Texas are the squishiest of the Southern states. Virginia has already followed in Arizona’s footsteps. Florida is poised to follow soon. Pressure from the conservative grassroots in Texas could force Gov. Rick Perry to flip flop like Bill McCollum and John McCain.
Tennessee has also been one of the most enthusiastic supporters of Arizona. The Tennessee state legislature passed a resolution congratulating Arizona for defending its borders. Bill Haslam, the next Governor of Tennessee, has indicated that he would sign Arizona-style immigration reform in the Volunteer State.
Mainstream vs. Fringe
Pro-Whites have two paths before them. The first path is to work within the mainstream and use polarizing national debates over issues like immigration to push moderates in a more radical direction. The second path is to work within the fringe to build a credible radical alternative to the status quo.
At least from my perspective, having tried the second path (and reaching its terminus in a bad experience), the first path has become more attractive as of late. It seems an easier task to radicalize moderates in the mainstream than to mainstream radicals on the fringe. It is easier to cure ordinary people of ignorance than odd people of more serious problems.
In the last five years, the only detectable movement has been the rise of the Tea Party and the demise of the Bush GOP in the mainstream. As we recently saw in Knoxville, nothing has changed on the fringe.
Until that changes, Whites will continue to look elsewhere for their salvation.
I’d vote for an American Black before I’d ever vote for a Hindu. I do not want any Hindus in my country, period. In the short term, a few of them might outwardly help us, but their very presence, let alone their holding public office, validates non-White immigration. We don’t need Hindu “help”. We don’t need another market-dominant minority. We don’t need another non-White technical elite. We don’t need millions of conservatives saying, “They’re not all bad”. Experience has taught us that any crack will be exploited to the fullest, so close every crack.
Why are you gushing over a dothead like Nikki Haley? I hope she goes down in flames this November. I’d be doubly cautious over anyone that Sarah Palin endorsed. I thought this was a White Nationalist website and I’m reading things that sound like National Review articles. Hunter, are you a Republican Party shill?
In the interest of clarity, the post above refers to 5.) South Carolina candidate Nikki Haley.
Discard, I’m only being a nit-picker because it is my state: She’s really a Sikh, not a Hindu. I agree with your overall point.
SC is, in many ways, a basket case of corruption/old boy networking – the majority of this problem is the responsibility of whites. The local Palmetto Secession guys (http://palmettorepublic.org/) do a really honorable job of bringing the idea to the attention of the public. Nevertheless, I’m not confidant that Columbia would be more than 1/2 of a standard deviation better than DC. I hope other reader’s States are better. Mike (PS I’m from Oregon, have lived in Illinois, NY, Georgia, and now SC for 10 years)
Haley has emphatically stated that she supports Arizona and would sign an Arizona-style immigration bill into law.
Hunter Wallace’s next post: “Announcement to Readers: I am happy to announce that I am the proud new owner of a bridge in Brooklyn!”
Nikki Haley is a part of this white corruptocracy machine; apparently a Sanford disciple, who made political leverage by skirting on the edges of that machine. He is a whole other topic.
She downplays the whole Sikh thing as much as possible, tries to be as “white” as she can. In a way, that such a conservative state could overlook her true background, preferentially focusing on purported sexual escapades, only lends credence to my post above, and that the white outlook here is not that healthy.
Going out on a limb here, you could even imagine a scenario where the sexual bit was a positive diversion: Endorsed and tour around with Palin. Most men dream more about “nailin'” Palin than her political views. Throw in some wishy-washy sexual innuendo, and our Sikh princess is now a white man’s fertility goddess.
Ugh. Mike
I used to live in SC and there’s just no way I could imagine this woman winning the primary. Same with Bobby Jindal in Louisiana. It looks like the Republican Party needed some nonwhite faces so it wouldn’t look racist and rigged the voting machines.
Nikki Haley = anti-Western, open-borders neocon
http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2010/06/15/nikki-haley-yup-pretty-face-waist-and-neocon-open-borders/
I agree with Discard on Haley. I also cannot stand Jindal. The last thing we need as European Americans is to have a bunch of macacas lording it over us. It’s already bad enough with the Jews.
Hunter: I know the feeling…..damned if you do and damned if you don’t. Most, like females, demand perfection (their version of perfection) of others,but don’t make the same demands of perfection of themselves in their own lives. Sheesh…
It is preferable to have Alvin Greenes and Barack H. Obamas win office for the Democrats than to have an aracial, P.C., thoroughly-Integrated, “kosher conservative”, Rainbow-‘Opposition’…
Hunter and his defenders on this (if any): How does it advance white racial consciousness in any way to promote and elect nonwhites to high office on behalf of “the white party” in the USA?
Bill,
It certainly would be nice if White Nationalists would finally get their act together and create a viable alternative to the status quo. Speaking for myself, I invested almost ten years of my life, thousands of dollars, and countless hours of my time before I was finally dissuaded of that notion.
I fully expected people would come on here and grunt something to the effect that Nikki Haley is a “raghead” and “neocon.” That may be true. But what is the alternative?
Where is the White Nationalist candidate for Governor of South Carolina? What are White Nationalists doing to stop third world immigration? What are White Nationalists doing in the real world to wake people up to our impeding racial demise?
If Nikki Haley signs an Arizona-style immigration law in South Carolina, she will have done something more effective in the stroke of a pen to deter Hispanic immigration to that state than two decades of empty White Nationalist rhetorical posturing on the internet.
If the choice is between something or nothing, a “raghead” who is effective in the real world, or White people who shoot off their mouths in cyberspace, but who are utterly ineffective in reality, I will take the “raghead” any day of the week.
So will everyone else in South Carolina in November.
Wanderer,
If you look at Arizona, over 100,000 Hispanic illegal aliens have left the state since the “kosher cons” passed the first crackdown in 2007. They are leaving in droves now that SB1070 was passed earlier this year. The emboldened “kosher cons” in Arizona have since moved on to banning ethnic studies and opening up a debate on birthright citizenship.
Eric Holder responded by suing Arizona. Boycotts were announced. Progressives tarred and feathered the state in an ugly public spectacle. That had the cumulative effect of radicalizing moderates and blowing the floor out from underneath Jon Kyl and John McCain.
So what you are saying is that we DO NOT want that to happen in Florida, Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina, and Tennessee? Because Nikki Haley is a “raghead.”
Instead, we want our worst enemies to get elected, increase their power, run up the score, and make a comeback even more of an uphill struggle. We want more illegal aliens to come here. We want “comprehensive immigration reform” to be signed into law by Barack Obama.
Because when that happens White people will wake up and realize that White Nationalism is the only solution.
Does it not disturb you that this prediction never seems to pan out?
1.) When Barack Obama was elected President of the United States, did millions of White people flock into the White Nationalist movement, or did they join the Tea Party which didn’t exist two years ago?
2.) With over 70% of White people in Tennessee supporting an Arizona-style immigration law, did the White masses flock to the banner of the NSM in Knoxville?
3.) When the 9/11 attacks hit the WTC and Pentagon, did anything change in the White Nationalist movement?
4.) When the stock market crashed in 2008 and the economy began to nosedive, did millions of White people join the White Nationalist movement?
The correct answer is “no” to every single one of those questions. The answer is also “no” to the bizarre theory that the White Nationalist movement will succeed when the conservatives fail.
The answer is “no” because White Nationalists are simply unwilling to construct a viable alternative to the status quo. Without a plausible alternative, White Nationalists are unable to take advantage of any historical opportunity, whether it be a disastrous terrorist attack, a once-in-a-century hurricane, a race riot, a crash of the stock market, or a collapse of the physical economy.
“If you look at Arizona, over 100,000 Hispanic illegal aliens have left the state since the “kosher cons” passed the first crackdown in 2007. They are leaving in droves now that SB1070 was passed earlier this year. The emboldened “kosher cons” in Arizona have since moved on to banning ethnic studies and opening up a debate on birthright citizenship.”
That’s nice, but differential birthrates and legal immigration will still make Arizona a majority Mexican state in a few decades, even with no illegal immigration or anchor babies at all.
True.
The solution is to keep pushing the envelope.
– Build the fence.
– Crackdown on employers of illegal aliens.
– Ban ethnic studies.
– Ban bilingual education.
– Deny public services to illegal aliens.
– Deport illegal aliens.
– End birthright citizenship.
– Make life as uncomfortable as possible for illegal aliens.
– Empower state officials to enforce federal immigration law.
– Confront the federal government.
– Polarize the races as much as possible.
– Take on legal immigration.
Work within the mainstream. Move the goal posts. Never be satisfied. Advance to the next front. Punish and reward politicians.
The solution IS NOT fantasism and internet escapism. It is emotionally satisfying to shoot your mouth off on the internet and parade around in Nazi uniform in Phoenix. What does that accomplish though?
Is doing absolutely nothing in reality a viable alternative? Is that a better strategy? I don’t think so.
As I have said numerous times, it is a choice between people who bark loudly, but don’t bite, or people who bark softly, but bite modestly. What does it matter if White Nationalists are right if they are incapable of doing anything to effect the situation?
Allow me to elaborate my “grunt”. I think that the GOP wing of the multi-cult regime chooses these non-Whites like Haley or Jindahl or the Black guy who is (was?) boss man of the GOP, not to show that they’re not “racist”, but to further acclimate Whites to our dispossession. An anti-wetback law in SC is a tactical victory for us, and a strategic victory for the Diverse if the bill is signed into law by a Sikh. I would rather see the bill lose than the Sikh win. And, given the cowardly nature of politicians, the Democrat Governor might be persuaded to sign the bill anyway to keep his job. Isn’t that why the Governor of Arizona signed SB1070?
ATBOTL – You are, of course, right. I don’t think anybody here is saying that mainstream political action will get us what we want. This is about progressively shifting the goalposts so that, if and when the shit hits the fan, we have a reasonable expectation of having white americans on our side.
Hunter’s commentary on contemporary mainstream politics is pointing out a shift in the attitudes and dialog of normal white America in our favor. Even if the shift is slight, and the ballot initiatives are ultimately ineffective from a WN perspective (i.e. Arizona turns mestizo), it is still more than we as WNs have ever accomplished. These small, unsatisfying changes shouldn’t discourage us at all. It should make us want to work to nudge the goalposts even further
HW gets it, the rest of you albino purists don’t. It’s simple: one step at a time, instead of no steps at all. If a Sikh, a black, even a Jew wants to do something we want done, like close the borders, we help them do it, and they help us. As events unfold, as economic, political, and racial polarization increases, we may well be able to discard these people and go our own way. Now is now, later is later: start living in the Now.
Hunter – yes!
There is a wide gulf between talk of eliminating birth-right citizenship and openly acting for a white racial cause, but if we want to have any hope of winning in the long run we need to bridge that gap as much as possible.
Regardless of the nature of any coming collapse, revolution, or business as usual, the gap will not bridge itself. We don’t have any reason to believe that the mindset of whites in the future will shift radically in our favor if left out of our hands, even following official declaration of white minority status.
We can see that a mainstream route could be more fruitful for us in guiding white opinion, but how do we actually work that angle? Where are the whites who think like this and are willing to work like this, to agitate, to push the envelope? These people need to get involved and get organized.
I think your analysis is sound Hunter. I would prefer a White Nationalist system and an NS system at that! Nevertheless, I realize that gradualism and efforts to radicalize the mainstream are what won the public over to leftism in the 20th century and can do the same for white advocacy in the 21st.
If this Asian Indian woman really does help keep SC whiter a little longer, then she is a lesser evil that we are forced to accept. Though I am so taken aback with how damaged the economy is and how it does not seem to be repairable within establishment perimeters that perhaps in another decade, along with efforts to move the goal posts, white advocacy may in fact be increasingly mainstream.
Hunter: “Ban bilingual education.”
These mestizos have already butchered Spanish. The last thing we want to them to do is degrade English so that Spanglish becomes even more widespread. Let them keep speaking their Mestizo-Spanish.
You are right, however. Legal immigration is the bigger problem:
http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/070731_nd.htm
In my opinion, it is no way in the interest of European Americans (whites) to support non-whites like Haley or Jindal. Do you really want a bunch of macacas lording it over you? Isn’t it bad enough with the Jews?
BTW, Haley will never sign an Arizona-style immigration law:
http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2010/06/15/nikki-haley-yup-pretty-face-waist-and-neocon-open-borders/
In other political minutae, Pat B. all but wrote off the Blank Slate Theory in today’s column.
Hunter, I’m with you. My stomach churns the minute I see a white politician. Because in my heart I know that chances are extraordinarily high that he/she is a race traitor, a sellout of America, AND one of the most morally corrupt of all citizens. And, the only ones that beat out white politicians are white CEOs.
It would be nice if there was a massive WN political party appealing to the huge constituency of Whites in South Carolina who are already racially conscious. It would be nicer still if such a political party was running an insurgent candidate for Governor.
As things stand, we are left with a choice between Nikki Halley and Vince Sheehan. There are already people in the Palmetto State trying to change that. Unfortunately, most WNs seem to prefer posting anonymous comments on the internet to doing anything in the real world, even when such activity (i.e., writing and donating) can be done safely and anonymously.
Wolf,
I don’t like Jindal or Haley either. The indispensible context here though is that White Nationalists have dropped the ball.
In Louisiana, there was no follow up to the Duke campaign, which proved pro-Whites could have succeeded in the state with a better candidate. In South Carolina, the White Nationalist movement hasn’t adequately supported the activists on the ground.
You have millions of Whites in these states who are racially conscious. You have millions more who are implicit Whites. We should be succeeding there. If there was a viable alternative to the status quo, White people would be inclined to support it.
It all comes back to the central flaw of White Nationalism: right on the issues, but incapable or flat out unwilling to do anything about them.
Great article, both in the series were well researched and you really told a story that no one else is telling. Well done.
IMHO we will break the taboo on white racial identification by first highlighting what is against us. The term that will break this taboo is “anti-white”, such as “Mr. Chosenberg your choice of words and policies are anti-white.”
I’ve been reading the internet writings of the more thought out writers like J Taylor and K MacDonald for several years know, but have never had any desire to associate with any sort of “movement.” The way I see it the internet is primarily a way for intelligent writers to get their ideas out uncensored to the public, and is least effective when sites like K MacDonald’s blog allow unmoderated comments from”‘movement” types whose bizarre posturing discredits the well written articles by association. I always cringe when the types who seem to care more about the Palestinians than Americans post on endlessly about Israel and the middle east when these issues are mostly irrelevant. Or other types who are obsessed with all things German, such appears as foolish to ordinary Americans as Gary Oldman’s wigger character. Strange types who are relics of some 19th century “Anti-Papist” movement rattling on about “Roman Catholics.” Survivalist oddballs, people who think the FLDS is a happening scene, or just people who come across as mentally unhinged in general. This frightens off ordinary americans whose thought process goes something like “If I keep listening to these ideas, will I turn out like ‘those people’ and look so odd to my friends and family and spiral into some kool-aid cult?”
I’ve always felt that there are only two possible outcomes, America lets 3rd world people inherit their country, or respectable white people who are part of the establishment in some way finally have enough and put the brakes on things in a more conventional way. If white, gentile America saves itself, I suspect the fringe element will be just as powerless in as they are know and in order to get attention will suddenly “convert” to the imagery of Lenin, or Stalin, or whatever becomes taboo in the future to get their attention fix.
An anti-wetback law in SC is a tactical victory for us, and a strategic victory for the Diverse if the bill is signed into law by a Sikh.
I wish more people thought like you Discard. It really isn’t a victory either way, we’re still headed for the same destination only taking different roads.
“HW gets it, the rest of you albino purists don’t. It’s simple: one step at a time, instead of no steps at all. If a Sikh, a black, even a Jew wants to do something we want done, like close the borders, we help them do it, and they help us. As events unfold, as economic, political, and racial polarization increases, we may well be able to discard these people and go our own way. Now is now, later is later: start living in the Now.
I walk into a coffee house and order a cup of java and the waiter brings me tea instead. I complain and the waiter says it’s practically the same thing and calls me a purist. I persist and he tells me if I finish the tea he’ll bring me a cup of coffee. I look around the room and everyone else is either drinking tea or complaining about the same thing I am. I come to the conclusion that I won’t get a cup of coffee and in fact they probably don’t have any to sell me.
@Nightowl
In real world politics the Roman Catholics in the Congress are allied with the Jews, and they vote against White interests, and for the Jew agenda, even if the Jew agenda conflicts with Roman Catholic interests.
Btw, I can’t think of an elected Roman Catholic politician who isn’t a homosexual, or who isn’t pushing for more immigration, and, amnesty for illegal aliens. Fat Pat Buchanan don’t count because he has never held public office. Pat’s a total Roman Catholic blowhard.
Politics & religion are not polite subjects. Get another hobby.
Oats and Honey wrote:
Hunter’s commentary on contemporary mainstream politics is pointing out a shift in the attitudes and dialog of normal white America in our favor.
Perhaps so, yet what makes no logical sense is to say that the more staunchly racialist elements that are still with us in this bleak postmodern time (Occidental-Dissent being one) should dive to the center when discourse is moving “right”?! That just doesn’t make any sense. If discourse is moving in a racialist direction, why should racialists fold up shop? Shouldn’t they stick around to reap the theoretical benefits? They should, rather, vanish into the mists of Tea-Party-ism?
HW’s argument, it seems to me, is: “Abandon overt-racialism, as it is a loser. Our goals can be accomplished by proxy and/or by accident as long as we don’t ever say what our goals are”.
This tune has been sung many times before. Many readers here will be familiar with the story of the pathetic decline into irrelevance of the John Birch Society. The short version is that they heeded the same call HW is making now, 40 years ago.
Re Hunter Wallace’s post dated “August 27, 2010 at 3:13 am”
I do understand everything you’re saying. I understand the frustration of seeming irrelevant. No one wants to seem like they have-been/are wasting their time for something that will fail.
There is a lot to be pessimistic about if one is a racialist in the (post)modern West. But what is for sure, to me, is that if deliverance ever comes, it will not be from the “Bobby”-Jindals and “Nickey-Haleys”, OR from the clowns who prance around in costumes from long-gone eras.
I understand the direction you’re going, but in my opinion you’re crossing a serious line in supporting this Haley. See here: http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2010/08/26/the-outsiders-the-governor-races/comment-page-1/#comment-76723
Wanderer-
Normal whites aren’t necessarily becoming racialist. They are making a movement in our direction only in the sense that they are moving away from Obama, the FedGov, and ‘business as usual’. This vector away from the establishment is not necessarily directed right at us. Moreover, it may not have the energy to ever reach us on its own.
The idea isn’t to abandon a white cause. The idea is reach into this upheaval, keep the momentum going and steer the trajectory towards us. We do this by agitation and promotion of borderline issues, ‘reasonable extremism’, etc. The only existing avenues to do this effectively are mainstream ones.
And yeah, when we’re doing this in the company of ‘normal’ whites, we DO have to eschew our complete, endgame message. We can’t call for racial separation upfront, not from within the current mainstream window. I realize that this is a giant pain in the ass. It is damn satisfying to just say what you actually think. We don’t get to do that though, not if we want to gain any ground.
“If white, gentile America saves itself, I suspect the fringe element will be just as powerless in as they are know and in order to get attention will suddenly “convert” to the imagery of Lenin, or Stalin, or whatever becomes taboo in the future to get their attention fix.”
It is already happening now with the Rise of National Bolshevism!
Anyhow I view this ‘watering down’ of White Nationalism into Republicanism with grave misgivings.
Wouldn’t it be better for White Nationalists, Right-Wing Populists and Palingeneticists ( http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/critique_of_palingenesis/ ) to instead enter and influence the much farther to the Right Tea Party Movement? Tea Party is already Right-Wing instead of being Trotskyite Neo-conservatives like the Republican Establishment.
Also why not vote for the Constitution Party? (formerly the U.S. Taxpayers Party)
This sends a message to Republicans that there are indeed people farther to the Right out there.
Indeed voting for third parties can have an effect on the two major parties. In Washington State, just North of me, the Libertarian Party is quite large (compared to other states) and has been directly blamed by Republicans for them losing several elections. The local Radio Talkers, have even had to divert from attacking liberal democrats to attacking Libertarians, but this also has the effect of putting Republicans on notice that there are Right Wing Libertarians that they had better listen to and incorporate some of the their ideas to win (sort of like Pat Buchanans comments on David Duke: “Take a hard look at Duke’s portfolio of winning issues and expropriate those not in conflict with GOP principles, such as reverse discrimination against white folks” )
“If white, gentile America saves itself, I suspect the fringe element will be just as powerless in as they are know and in order to get attention will suddenly “convert” to the imagery of Lenin, or Stalin, or whatever becomes taboo in the future to get their attention fix.”
It is already happening now with the Rise of National Bolshevism!
Anyhow I view this ‘watering down’ of White Nationalism into Republicanism with grave misgivings.
Wouldn’t it be better for White Nationalists, Right-Wing Populists and Palingeneticists to instead enter and influence the much farther to the Right Tea Party Movement? Tea Party is already Right-Wing instead of being Trotskyite Neo-conservatives like the Republican Establishment.
Also why not vote for the Constitution Party? (formerly the U.S. Taxpayers Party)
This sends a message to Republicans that there are indeed people farther to the Right out there.
Indeed voting for third parties can have an effect on the two major parties. In Washington State, just North of me, the Libertarian Party is quite large (compared to other states) and has been directly blamed by Republicans for them losing several elections. The local Radio Talkers, have even had to divert from attacking liberal democrats to attacking Libertarians, but this also has the effect of putting Republicans on notice that there are Right Wing Libertarians that they had better listen to and incorporate some of the their ideas to win (sort of like Pat Buchanans comments on David Duke: “Take a hard look at Duke’s portfolio of winning issues and expropriate those not in conflict with GOP principles, such as reverse discrimination against white folks” )
I have no opinions about Nikki Haley, but I would be curious to see as to how the liberal establishment will treat her if she does act on her campaign promises. As an ideology/movement that’s supposed to stand up for the rights of minorities, white liberals have a tendency to act against minorities if said minorities do not fail to act their parts (e.g. Ruth Malhotra).
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=25535
WNs need to take a page out of the Enemy Playbook to reach ALL spectrums of the White race and play the “What’s Fair” game. There are positions that we can take that can actually reconcile even warring POVs.
Affirmative Action. WNs and even some more right-wing conservatives have been railing against AA to no avail for years. We have only gotten more, not less AA. However, we can stop the most injurious aspects of AA by demanding that it enforces proportionate demographic representation. Disproportionate representation needs to be actively discouraged by AA. Insist on more detailed censuses that break down the population even more by racial, religious, and ethnic lines and then demand that they be proportionately represented so that government, university enrollment, employment will “look more like America.”
Merit hiring. Preference must be given to citizens. Those who were born here first and naturalized citizens second. Of course, these positions must also be rigorously tested for merit. We must denounce “the bigotry of low standards and expectations.” No extra points should be given or subtracted based on race. Open positions set aside for certain groups can be temporarily staffed until the right candidate is found. Too bad if there are more Negros into midnight basketball than economics. The Negro race has still managed to produce Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams. If we have to beat the bushes to find more Negros like them, so be it.
This may be a touchy subject to White Americans, but I am old enough to remember that the malevolent EU afflicting Europeans was ushered in under the banner of a Common Market. No way, no how did the Europeans envision their disparate nations being subverted or submissive to rule in Belgium. That’s pretty much happening here with NAFTA and PAFTA. But what makes it more of a problem is that our government incompetents never put a mechanism in place to keep Americans competitive like language proficiency. Since NAFTA/PAFTA has been on the planning boards for about three or four decades, a comprehensive foreign language program should have been put in place back in the sixties or seventies and Americans should have been proficient in Spanish, Portuguese, and French. When, not if, there IS a NAU or PAU, I would prefer to make sure that it is more like an expanded American republic than some socialist Belgium style cabal out of Mexico City.
Wanderer,
You are confusing my argument with another popular one. I haven’t suggested we abandon overt racialism.
CompassionateFascist understands what I am saying. It is a choice between one step or a time, or no steps at all; radical realism or rhetorical radicalism.
I’m writing off internet escapism. It just so happens that 99.9% of White Nationalism consists of thrashing around on the internet under anonymous pseudonyms. It is the equivilant of carving a swastika into the door of a public restroom.
In the real world, where all the important decisions are made, there is effectively no difference between implicitly White conservatism and explicit White Nationalism. The explicit White Nationalists are only willing to hew to the radical rhetorical line in cyberspace.
My point is simple: if you are not willing to advocate explicit White Nationalism in the real world, which is true of 9/1o explicit White Nationalists, then get involved at the far end of implicit White Nationalism, which is represented by the likes of the Tea Party and immigration control groups.
It is better to do something in reality than nothing at all or running around the internet spouting harmless rhetoric in a Halloween costume.
Wanderer,
Say what you want about the John Birch Society, but it is has existed as an institution for over forty years now in the real world. Contrast the John Birch Society with the National Alliance. Show me a White Nationalist organization that isn’t hopelessly dysfunctional or irrelevant to the political mainstream.
The implicitly White conservatives whom White Nationalists mock – who “thrash around” in the real world – are capable of building stable, functional organizations like NumbersUSA or the NRA that have veto power over Congress.
In all that “trashing around,” if memory serves, they somehow managed to defeat “comprehensive immigration reform” three times.
HW @ “I’m writing off internet escapism. It just so happens that 99.9% of White Nationalism consists of thrashing around on the internet under anonymous pseudonyms. It is the equivilant of carving a swastika into the door of a public restroom.”
Actually the in depth internet discussion concerning race and White dispossession is not equivalent to carving swastikas on restroom doors. Not even close. I would say, just guessing, that it is all more a matter of you being bored. Many of us vote, pay dues to the NRA, or join local tea parties in the real world as well.
Hunter Wallace
You are bashing White Nationalist for something they are not repsponsible for. Your post makes no sense. The fundamental issue is the race-replacement of the Native Born White Majority. If White Nationalism means anything it is this:halting and reversing race-replacement.
White Americans are waking up..although not fast enough for everyone here. Very tragic. Apparerntly things aren’t painfull enough..ok so now things are gonn aa get even more painfull…worse is better is the solution.
The point about Nikki Haley is that she is a Trojan Horse…I will say with 100 percent certainty that she is:race-replacement through legal immigration-full speed ahead. I think you should accept this about her.
My God the way you bash White Natinalist, it just ain’t right. Your gonna have let reality kick the teeth out of your fellow White Americans…and don’t worry..the teeth kicking is a gonna happen…for the time being go kayaking,fishing..in addition to your excellent posts.
To be honest, I’m gonna take great satisfication in seeing large numbers of White Americans getting their teeth kicked out by reality…it’s the only way they are going to learn
Hunter, all this slobber over the Republican Party, Sarah Palin, Indian candidates and moderation sounds very Jewish to me. I especially don’t like the attacks on the on so-called fringe movements like the KKK, NSM or the skinheads, people with boots on the ground. You complain about the cyber warriors on here not doing anything for the White Nationalist movement but you attack the people who are doing something. I suspect you don’t like them because they’re anti-semitic. Is that it? Do you want White Nationalism to join forces with the Jews and create some kosher White movement with Jews in charge of conservative gays, race mixers and the guys who use those stupid acronyms like NAMs (non-Asian minorities).
News & Jews is tertiary and system politics is part of that. Destroy the Establishment’s taboos you destroy the Establishment. In a few years time mainstream pols will be using the attack word “anti-white” and it is a taboo destroyer, but I do believe Hunter in that the intenet costume brigade will still have some bithching contest to attend.
Another thought-provoking article which paints the possibilty of a very fluid future, subject to real change, rather than a slow-motion demise of our nation/race/culture. Upbeat and positive is where it’s at.
Clytemnestra: Regarding proportionate representation, we could demand to know what percent of the country is Hindu/Sikh/Dothead, and what proportion of of physicians are Hindu/Sikh/Dothead. “Why are we bringing in foreign doctors instead of training our own?” This question goes right to the issue of market dominant minorities and the importation of a non-White elite, without mentioning the worst offenders, the Jews.
Discard, I am less worried about dot heads that 3 out of the 9 justices on the SCOTUS are from one particular ethnic group. That is 33 percent representation for an ethnic group that supposedly composes approximately 3 percent of the population. The rest are Catholic of varying hues. The White Anglo Saxon population which founded this country has been excluded from the SCOTUS. I was born and raised Catholic and even I find this outrageous, unsettling and disturbing. Whites of every religion, but ONE, have been discriminated against by AA when it comes to getting into the right schools in favor of Negros and Mestizos.
Whites have been opposed to AA from jump street, but it has done them no good. I predict AA will only be ended when Whites are officially a minority, so that they will never be the beneficiaries. There has been some talk from certain quarters of doing precisely that, because the real purpose of AA has always been White dispossession. That is why Whites need to demand that demographic proportionate representation be implemented ASAP.
Moreover by putting a relentless focus on proportion representation, the country becomes aware exactly how many minorities are here in this country. More importantly it shines an intense spotlight on which groups have benefited the most from AA.
What has AA and Civil Rights accomplished but White dispossession? The proportionate wealth of Negros has NOT gone up. Even though the latest census kisses their copper behinds by focusing all the attention on them after throwing out the red carpet and giving them six or seven amnesties, the proportionate wealth of Asians and Mestizos has not significantly gone up. How could it when they only depress the wages of Negro and White Americans?
No. There is only one group that has benefited outrageously … dare I say criminally from AA and the population getting on board for proportionate representation is the only way of stopping their antics short of a red, white and blue pogrom.
Clytemnestra: I oppose proportional representation (PR) until the country is 100% White. PR is a tool of our enemies, an argument that Whites have too much and should share it. I think that we can turn it around and point out that Hindus and Chinese (and Jews) have more than PR would allow. Therefore they should be denied admission to college and so on. Of course the Regime would never do that. The point is to demonstrate to the White masses that the government does not follow its own rules, that the government is controlled by their enemies, and should not have their loyalty. I focus on Hindus only as a beginning, a way to make the point without stirring up the holocaust crowd too much. Hindus are much weaker politically than Jews at present, their caste culture is completely offensive and indefensible, and they have no emotional claim on Christians, so they make an easier target.
Discard, waiting for the day that the country is 100 percent White until putting in PR means that PR will never happen. Furthermore a 100 percent White population makes PR unnecessary. IMO, PR is the ONLY way to not only stop further White dispossession but to actually reverse it. WNs pushing for PR for EVERYONE would only highlight how LITTLE of it the average White Christians actually have when it comes to getting into Ivy League schools, etc. We have a Jewish controlled media who has the entire country believing the WASPs still control everything and they are eeeevillle. It would expose the entire concept of “White Privilege” as a vicious lie.
Hindus don’t control squat and I see no need to harass them. They are just another non-White tool used by our Adversary to dispossess, impoverish and strip power from all White Christians. The media sets up “White Privilege” as the focal point for these Non-White minorities and implicitly promises our wealth and our labor to them. The unspoken understanding is that if the Non-Whites end up in league against us, as reparations for all that our “White Privilege” has “stolen” from them, future Whites will be their servants.
PR shines the light on the group that really has the so-called “White Privilege” in this country and it isn’t White Christians. The penultimate racial grievance hustlers will scatter like cockroaches and go back to hiding under the rocks they came from when/if AA is amended to include PR and is strictly enforced.
The Kennedy-sponsored Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, courtesy of Hart-Celler opened the door to the Rainbow Forces of Diversity and all the multicultural malevolence that we are suffering today. That horse is already out of the barn; it is too late to bar the door now. And until/unless put a moratorium on all Non-White immigration, then PR is needed for our own protection.
The extreme resistance to amnestying anymore illegal aliens and great interest in halting it altogether promises to be one of 2010 and 2012’s biggest political issues. We also need to start including PR are the Whites, particularly the White Protestants who created this great country and all its wonderful freedoms will be dispossessed and/or enslaved by the rainbow tides.
Clytemnestra: I don’t mean that I am waiting for the country to become 100% White, I mean that I oppose proportional representation (PR) in any form, because that means giving away what we have built to outsiders. PR for Whites means nothing more than a seat at the table, when the whole table is ours to begin with. Surely you wouldn’t really have Whites limited to 60% of park rangers or pilots or nurses, and the other 40% given to foreigners? Agitating for PR should only be a tactic to expose the fact that our enemies are hogging the trough and calling us greedy. It is a way to become better liars, as Jack Ryan has suggested.
Hindus may not control squat, but give them time. There are about a billion of them, enough to establish colonies all over the U.S., and those here are actively seeking influence with our Rulers. It’s better to harass them now than find them running your town in 20 years. More importantly, they are easier to criticize as a group than Jews are, and would serve as a first step in exposing and eliminating minority privilege.