Our Crisis, Our Opportunity

The Street

Samuel Phillips has penned an article at TOQ Online that touches upon all the red meat of From the Provinces: explicit White Advocacy, implicit Whiteness, the Tea Party, and Red America. Since these topics are the focus of this website, I will attempt to extend and build upon his analysis.

1.) White Advocates are the most despised minority in the world.

A hundred years ago, this wasn’t the case. America was a “White Man’s Country.” Negroes were the demoralized and degraded minority. White domination of America was taken for granted. It never occurred to anyone to cast themselves as a “White Advocate” because Whites didn’t have any discernible competition.

Just the opposite is true now. Barack Obama is President of the United States. Eric Holder is Attorney General. There isn’t a single member of Congress who would sign his name to a White Advocate petition. White women are encouraged to mate with black men.

White Advocates are a despised minority because they are powerless. They are powerless because they are hopelessly disorganized. This stems in part from social ostracism and employment discrimination. It is also attributable to the strategic and tactical intellectual clutter that prevails in White Nationalist circles.

2.) Almost every issue, movement, and political figure is analyzed not on its own terms, but as a possible indicator of white racial consciousness and explicit white political mobilization.

Every society is divided between Haves and Have-Nots. In the United States, the Haves (who desire to hold on to what they got) are the Blues and the Have-Nots (who desire to take back what they lost) are the Reds. The Blues are the insiders. The Reds are the outsiders.

Blue America is obsessed with the threat posed to its wealth, privilege, and power from a White Nationalist rebellion in Red America. This division is at once racial, geographic, and ideological, but not exclusively so.

The vast majority of Reds are ordinary White people who live in the American Heartland. Reds tend to live in the suburbs and rural hinterland. Blues are more likely to live in urban areas and along the coasts.

Jews, Hispanics, Asians, blacks, and homosexuals almost always identify with the Blues. White progressives are Blues. Atheists tend to be Blues. Christians tend to be Reds.

There is no clear division between the two sides. In the American Revolution, Whites were split between Tories and Patriots. White moderates fell between the two camps.

The majority of Reds support the Republican Party. The majority of Blues support the Democratic Party. At the same time, there are lots of Blues in the GOP establishment and lots of Reds among the White working class who vote Democrat.

3.) The problems with this movement from a white advocacy perspective are obvious.

Indeed, these are obvious problems, but they are tractable ones.

– The Tea Party is a loosely organized, grassroots phenomenon. There are a number of important players like Dick Armey and FreedomWorks throwing money into the movement, but this only buys them influence, not outright control.

In many ways, the Tea Party is the rightwing version of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. There are thousands upon thousands of “little guys” using social media to make small contributions. Many of them are giving directly to candidates and bypassing establishment institutions like the RSCC.

Such a loose, horizontally organized movement is much easier to penetrate and influence than a top down, vertically organized astroturf operation. It is still possible to work within the Tea Party to counter the influence of the likes of Dick Armey and Grover Norquist.

– Political gravity has forced the Tea Party into its current orbit of the establishment. The small mass of the White Nationalist movement doesn’t exert a force from the Right that is matched by the strength of the force coming from the Left.

If White Nationalists want to pull the Tea Party in a more explicitly racial direction, they only have two options: organize to their Right or subvert from within. Given the unwillingness of White Nationalists to go public with their beliefs, subversion is the only real option.

– Beck and Palin are twisting MLK’s message and forcing the Left to live up to its own rhetoric of colorblindness. The Civil Rights Movement did much the same thing in the 1950s and 1960s.

The important task is to organize people, end apathy, and win solid victories that build confidence. An organized, engaged, confident and enraged electorate will see the “impossible” in a new light.

Right now most Whites think a White ethnostate is “impossible.” It is too far outside their real of experience. Why support an ideal “that will never happen?”

4.) Some white advocates read into the Tea Party movement a racial consciousness that they think already exists, but is merely submerged.

In the South, this is true.

There are millions of Whites who are already explicitly racially consciousness or on the hard edge of implicit Whiteness who are involved with the Tea Party. In other parts of the country, especially in the Deep North, Whites are more implicit than explicit in their Whiteness.

5.) The Tea Parties are beginning to touch on dangerous territory.

In Arizona, the Tea Party has already waded into the immigration battle. Sheriff Joe Arapio has become a Tea Party icon there. The most sensible course of action for White Nationalists is to work within the Tea Party in other states to give it a harder edge on issues like multiculturalism and immigration.

6.) There is a real chance that the movement could escape from the “safe” rhetoric about debt and taxes that it has been limited to thus far.

The Tea Party is only the spearhead of a much greater White backlash. In Tennessee, less than 20% of Whites are affiliated with the Tea Party, but over 70% support Arizona-style immigration reform in their state.

7.) The result is a nameless anxiety, a vague feeling, a shapeless zeitgeist of white anxiety that manifests itself in an active but incoherent opposition to Mexican imperialism, Islamic triumphalism, and other cultural slights against the “Real America.”

The Tea Party is the other side of the White Nationalist coin. It is an implicit White Nationalist movement that is deformed by social ostracism and employment discrimination.

In explicit White Nationalism, this takes the form of hundreds of thousands of people bottled up in cyberspace, a movement infested with unhinged types, and the unwillingness of White Nationalists to organize so much as a yard sale.

In the implicit side, it takes the form of rhetorical concessions to anti-racism and diversity, which are harnessed to the polar opposite of MLK’s economic agenda. The implicit Whites of the Tea Party and the explicit Whites of White Nationalism are both trying to articulate a nationalist claim on America.

Imagine a balloon that bulges from two sides when pressed upon by a force from above. That is how White America has responded to a hostile elite intent on punishing any deviation from the racial party line.

8.) The problem is that this intellectual sophistication may make it difficult to identify with the symbols and communicate with the rhetoric that will resonate with the “real America.”

It creates an alienation between White Advocates and America and a barely concealed hostility that results in a failure to communicate and work effectively to change the political spectrum. The inevitable result of this is an aloof debating society without the authority or legitimacy to speak on the behalf of the White community or organize its resistance.

9.) Unfortunately, we have no choice but to at least try to engage.  Our numbers are too small and our forces too weak to write off any potential allies.

A White ethnostate is inconceivable in the absence of a real world constituency for White Nationalism. That natural constituency is the “Country Class,” or “Red America,” which could conceivably be provoked into rebellion by intelligent radicals.

Even an aracial rebellion would inevitably become a racial one in the current political context. This is a point lost on most White Nationalists.

11.) Though implicit racial consciousness is rising, there is no evidence that a transition to explicit white advocacy will happen organically or automatically.

It certainly won’t happen if White Advocates continue to build barriers instead of bridges that could facilitate this transition. Their unwillingness to infiltrate the Tea Party and guide it in a more radical direction is equally disturbing.

12.) It will also require many white advocates to leave their comfort zones and engage with people that they may regard as mistaken or even immoral.  However, there is no other way forward.

It will require nothing short of an intellectual reformation in White Advocacy circles.

13.) Everyone is already talking about us.  Our opportunity is here.  Our people are already in the streets, waiting for us.  What do we do now?

The logical course of action would be to go out into the streets, join the crowd, establish our credentials as organizers, rally people around an uncontroversial issue like illegal immigration, use polarization to create an identification between ourselves as organizers and the organized, and then gently lead the masses in our desired direction by seeking out and accomplishing what is possible.

Are we willing to do that?