San Francisco, CA
Whenever I visit “Counter-Currents,” I am reminded that some White Nationalists live in an alternative reality. These last few months have been an instructive lesson in the schism between “mainstreamers” and “vanguardists” within the White Nationalist movement.
I have been too busy studying the entrails of the growing White backlash to comment on the matter, but recent vanguardist activity has not escaped my attention. Now that the election is over, it is the appropriate time to share my thoughts.
What happened last week should determine the course we take moving forward.
Mainstreamers vs. Vanguardists
As the old proverb goes, “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” The 2010 midterm elections revealed nothing new about the White Nationalist movement.
For decades, White Nationalists have fallen into two major camps, the “mainstreamers” and the “vanguardists.” We spent a lot of time exploring this anthropological division of nationalist late last year. It has remained intact down to the present day.
In case you have only recently joined us, a “mainstreamer” is a White Nationalist who favors “working within the system,” adapting our rhetoric to connect with our target audience, quietly injecting our ideas into the mainstream, moving the goalposts, and removing the barriers that exist between White Nationalists and White America.
In contrast, a “vanguardist” is a White Nationalist who believes “the system” is hopelessly corrupt, must be destroyed (sometimes through military action), and that we should create small groups of radicals who will rise to power in the aftermath of “the collapse” of civilization. In the meantime, they prefer to focus primarily on sealing themselves off from their contemporaries and pursuing their own eclectic interests.
It all boils down to the question of whether reform is possible or even desirable. Mainstreamers incline toward the belief that progress can be made through working within the system. Vanguardists reject the system on the basis of principle.
The former want to reach out. The latter want to pull away. The former want to build bridges. The latter want to burn them. Simple enough to understand?
This internal tug of war has been the defining dynamic within the White Nationalist movement for generations.
The Vanguardist Critique
The “vanguardist” critique of the mainstreamers should sound familiar. If you have spent any considerable amount of time in the White Nationalist movement, you have undoubtedly heard many iterations of it by now. It goes something like this:
1.) The system is hopelessly broken. There is nothing to be gained by working within the system or supporting system politicians. Instead of engaging in “mainstream politics,” we should spend our limited time and resources on creating and nurturing a White Nationalist counterculture.
2.) This counterculture should take the form of creating small groups of “wide awake” true believers, or “purists” as they are often described, who will become the vanguard of the White Nationalist revolution.
3.) America is so degenerate that the system will eventually collapse. In the context of this inevitable collapse, White Nationalist vanguardists will seize power; all we have to do is wait. In the meantime, we should focus our efforts on maintaining an ideologically rigorous opposition.
4.) Mainstreamers are “conservatives” who have a weakening effect upon the White Nationalist movement. They are cowardly enablers of the Jews who are only propping up the rotten system.
5.) There are no explicit White Nationalists in Congress. Mainstreamers like the CofCC and Amren have failed to break out. They are diverting resources toward people who do not need them.
6.) The White Nationalist cause can only be advanced by “standing firm” in favor of explicit White Nationalism.
7.) White Americans, represented by the likes of “the people in Peoria,” want the present system, which rules out a political path to a White ethnostate.
8.) Since Whites want the present anti-White system, we need a “metapolitical movement” to change the fundamental values of White Americans. We cannot succeed in politics under the reigning value system. The most fundamental values of White Americans must be eradicated and replaced by the “ideas” of the White Nationalist counterculture.
The Mainstreamer Critique
The “mainstreamers” have their own critique of the vanguardists. It is no secret that From The Provinces inclines toward the mainstreamer camp; Counter-Currents toward the vanguardist camp. Again, if you have spent any considerable amount of time in White Nationalist circles, this “mainstreamer” critique should sound familiar:
1.) The vanguardists have lost touch with reality and immersed themselves in a fantasy world. Many of them started out as sincere White Advocates, but at some undefined point their own alienation grew to such an extent that they became openly hostile and contemptuous toward White America. Their existence has become a burden for those White Nationalists who are trying to connect with a larger audience.
2.) The vanguardists are “rhetorical radicals.” Their radicalism consists entirely in anonymous words posted on the internet, not in their deeds or actions in the real world. The vanguardists may strike a pose as radicals, but the actions they counsel (namely, disengaging from the mainstream) effectively enable our worst enemies like Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan on the Supreme Court.
Talk is cheap.
When you disengage from the system, you make it easier for our enemies to pass their crazy agenda. You increase the perception that White Nationalists are not a political threat and reinforce our marginalization on the fringes of society. The culmination of this is the “worse is better” theory in which the political actions of vanguardists become synonymous with the endorsements of the ADL.
The “rhetorical radicalism” of vanguardists can be contrasted with the “radical realism” of mainstreamers. Moderate actions in the real world might not sound rhetorically hard enough to radical ears, but they are effective at crippling the legislative agenda of our enemies, and advancing our own agenda in the mainstream on issues like immigration and affirmative action.
3.) The system is not nearly as broken as the vanguardists claim. In 2010, we had over 130 candidates running for office in the House (and many more at the state level) on a platform of cutting legal immigration. As a result of the 2010 midterm elections, we now have the most restrictionist Congress since 1924; supporters of less immigration now outnumber advocates of more immigration.
Shutting down legal immigration, deporting illegal aliens already here through attrition, and securing the border are tractable goals. If we work within the hated system, it is entirely possible that we could succeed in halting the Third World invasion within the next ten years.
4.) The GOP establishment is not nearly as omnipotent as the vanguardists have claimed. White Nationalists are well aware of Corporate America’s influence over the Republican Party, but even at the height of Bushism the conservative base was successful at defeating the Chamber of Commerce and the Business Roundtable that were pushing amnesty for illegal aliens.
In the 1990s, David Duke was nearly successful in defeating the GOP establishment and becoming Governor of Louisiana. James Russell received 37 percent of the vote in the 2010 midterms and he was running in New York’s 18th District with the leaders of his own party campaigning against him. In Alabama, the Holocaust denier Larry Darby carried 33 of 67 counties and 43% of the vote in the 2006 Alabama Democratic primary for Attorney General.
The fact is, within the last five years, the conservative base has succeeded (without our assistance) in transforming the position of the Republican Party on immigration. John McCain is penitent and begging for forgiveness. Mitch McConnell is now adjusting to the reality of Senator Rand Paul.
We have entered the Tea Party, Arizona, implicit White Nationalist era in mainstream politics; a time when the borders of the mainstream Right and pro-White politics will begin to blur.
The post-Bush GOP and post-Buckley conservative movement are no longer immune to challenges from their Right. The barrier that has kept White Nationalist mainstreamers from breaking out into the broader Right is weaker than ever before. White Nationalist rhetoric is already making deep advances into the mainstream conservative movement.
5.) Since the second term of George W. Bush, and especially since the rise of Sarah Palin and the election of Barack Obama, White America is stirring and lashing out in unpredictable ways. The Joe Six Packs of the 1990s are the Tea Party activists of the 2010s.
Major changes which I have been tracking are now in progress: Whites are starting to identify as “outsiders,” the White vote is coelescing, Whites are visibly starting to adopt the language of an aggrieved minority, Whites are openly flirting with an embrace of identity politics, Whites are forcing mainstream politicians to advance their interests with primary challenges.
Just as the White backlash is blowing at Hurricane Katrina levels, vanguardists are advocating the brilliant idea of spurning ordinary people because they are not radical enough for their tastes, coupled with the equally absurd idea of offending them with “meta-political” assaults on their most fundamental values. As White America finally starts to wake up, the vanguardists are not even really paying attention, or when they do tune into reality, it is as an afterthought or an occasion to give offense.
6.) Vanguardists, who are usually experiencing some type of personal identity crisis, are bent on erecting unnecessary barriers between White Nationalists and White America: constantly heaping praise on fascism, radical attacks on republican government, anti-Americanism, attacks on Christianity, importing exotic ideas from Europe, advocating violent revolution, etc.
Their alienation has lately reached comical levels: labeling North America the “Great Death Continent,” investigating the great questions of our time like whether the Confederacy was controlled by the Rothschilds and anti-racist masculinity among “alpha males” in science fiction films, speculating about the Lemurian orgins of Jews and the populating of Europe by refugees from Atlantis.
While Middle America is revolting, Counter-Currents can be found reviewing “Legally Blonde 2” and discussing Coco Chanel’s Nazi love affairs. When “progressive” is becoming a four letter word in White America, Counter-Currents is charting our course forward from a “degenerate” White Nationalist movement to a vitalized “progressive” utopia in which “kooky” bureaucrats have harnessed eugenics and government mandated social engineering to “transform” our descendants into elves from Lord of the Rings.
7.) Vanguardists have no interest in communicating with ordinary people, responding to their concerns, or engaging the electorate. They misrepresent ordinary Americans, whom they no longer sympathize with, in ways that are detrimental to the success of the White Nationalist movement.
To hear vanguardists tell the tale, White Americans love the status quo, are wedded to the existing regime, are perfectly content with hordes of brown skin invaders flooding into the United States, and hold “anti-racism” as their only sacred value.
In reality, Congress has a 12% approval rating, the majority of White Americans consider the federal government “a direct and immediate threat” to their freedom, nullification and state sovereignty are in the air, most White Americans believe the next generation will be worse off, and the charge of “racism” in the midterm elections resulted in a White backlash and a Republican landslide the likes of which hasn’t been since the Great Depression.
8.) Instead of reaching out to White America, building bridges to a potential mass constituency (which is already searching for ways to revolt), vanguardists are desperately trying to blast off into the furtherest reaches of the fringe. They seal themselves off from contamination in small cult like groups and occupy themselves in their own fantasy world.
This usually takes the form of retreating into the distant (the Middle Ages) or recent past (Nazi Germany) or the distant (White colonization of the Milky Way galaxy) or near future (the Northwest Republic). Some vanguardists have creatively combined National Socialism with their interest in esoteric subjects like UFOs, numerology, and speculation about the demise of Atlantis.
9.) Among the many mainstream politicians who are a bane to vanguardists, Pat Buchanan, Tom Tancredo, and Ron Paul rank highest on the list. They stand accused of diverting scarce White Nationalist resources from vanguardist projects.
Returning to reality, Tancredo, Buchanan, and Paul are trailblazers who have done more than anyone else in America to mainstream controversial positions on issues like immigration, multiculturalism, foreign wars, and monetary policy. There are now hundreds of little Tancredos in Congress and the state legislatures, a Senator Paul and a whole movement of aspiring Ron Pauls, and Buchanan’s rhetoric on immigration and free trade is triumphing in the Tea Party.
As a “meta-political” project, these mainstream politicians (and more broadly, the Tea Party) are actually succeeding in redefining the ideas that constitute Americanism. They reach an audience of millions where obscure vanguardists reach an audience of hundreds. Even if our goal was to “spread ideas,” the Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan presidential campaigns (followed by their bestselling books) did more to “spread ideas” than writing for obscure websites ever did.
10.) If mainstreamers sound like they are from Mars, the vanguardists sound like they are from Pluto.
Last Tuesday, White America revolted against the Democratic majority in Congress over Obamacare. If entrusted with power, the vanguardists would only build a monument to Adolf Hitler on the National Mall and expand the scope of the national government to the point of allowing “kooky” bureaucrats to arrange marriages so that “a god-like race” of White elves and “Nietszchean supermen” could be created.
That won’t play in Peoria or Portland.
The vanguardist “strategy” is nothing less than converting Americans to “ideas” like that one. In other words, they are taking people out of the mainstream (people who might now vote, donate, organize, protest, influence their peers) and alienating and lobotomizing these “wide awakes” to the point where they can’t even communicate with their own family members.
Few of these “wide awakes” are actually married with children.
11.) Even if civilization were to collapse tomorrow, the vanguardists would never rise to power. They spend so much of their time alienating and offending their contemporaries (basking in the role of the village atheist) that they would never turn to them in the event of a national emergency.
In fact, the return of barbaric conditions would likely spell the end of this species of fantasist (costume or otherwise), as it is the liberal value of tolerance (and the anonymity of the internet) that gives them the platform to spread their views. In the Mad Max world, violent gang rule would replace the soft tyranny we live under today; the market for esoteric, avant-garde European fascism would evaporate overnight.
12.) The vanguardist inclination to violence is a threat that constantly hangs over our heads. The MLK assassination gave the Left the opportunity to deify MLK into a secular saint. In 1994, the Oklahoma City bombing singlehandedly destroyed all the momentum that the critics of the federal government had built after Waco and Ruby Ridge. More recently, James von Brunn’s inept shooting spree provided a convenient talking point in the backdrop of the “townhall mobs” that were sweeping across America.
There is a real chance that some vanguardist lunatic might go postal on a prominent elected official and our remaining freedoms could be curtailed as a result. Mark Penn, one of President Clinton’s former advisors, is already appearing on cable television saying that Barack Obama needs another Oklahoma City to reconnect with White voters in the Heartland.
Toward 2020
Predicting the future is always a precarious enterprise.
Looking ahead into the next decade, I am willing to roll the dice though and gamble on a few predictions.
1.) William F. Buckley’s forcefield that has traditionally separated the “respectable right” from the “fringe right” will eventually breakdown. When Mitch McConnell laid his hands on the shoulders of Sharron Angle, Christine O’Donnell, and Rand Paul, it heralded the end of the era of the gatekeepers.
2.) As this barrier to respectability crumbles under the challenge posed by social media, the White Nationalist genie will escape from the bottle. Specifically, the “mainsteamer” wing of White Nationalism will dissolve into the broader White Right and “sweeten the tea” on issues like immigration, affirmative action, states rights, political correctness, and multiculturalism.
When pro-Whites discover the political mainstream has become permeable, there will be less anonymous posting on the internet and more real world activity. The internet will be used by White Nationalists in more productive ways like throwing their support behind candidates who are solid on immigration in close races.
3.) The economy will continue to deteriorate. The unease of the White electorate will grow and it will continue to lash out in unpredictable ways. In such conditions, it is guaranteed that Whites will turn against immigration. Historically, Americans have only felt more inclusive when the economy is booming or in wartime conditions.
4.) The breakthrough of pro-Whites into the political mainstream will first occur in the Southwest or Southeast, but it could conceivably happen in relatively White states like Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, or West Virginia.
5.) The breakthrough will start as a tax revolt over America’s fiscal insolvency before evolving into a more interesting rebellion.
6.) California will collapse, probably under Governor Moonbeam, and this will have sweeping consequences Whites who live elsewhere in America.
7.) Barack Obama’s defeat in 2012 at the hands of White voters will inaugurate an era of racial turmoil.
8.) While all this is happening, the vanguardists (after launching from San Francisco) will continue their strange journey in their counterculture spaceship locked into a course of political insanity, although they will travel smaller and smaller distances with each passing year as White Nationalist resources are diverted to more profitable projects.
Maybe they will reach the stars and open up diplomatic relations with aliens. They lost their ability to communicate with us mere humans long ago.
The Million Dollar Question
We have limited resources: time, money, bodies. How should we invest them?
I would argue that this is an easy one: throw everything we got into working within the system to secure the border and shutdown legal immigration. That means donating, voting, volunteering, organizing for candidates who will stop the invasion.
If we can’t stop the invasion, we are going to lose. We can openly work within the mainstream to fight legal immigration and deport the invaders who are already here. That’s what we should be doing.
I’m sure there are those who disagree. I’ve said my piece. Now I want to hear you argue the contrary.
This thread is getting ugly. Time to move on to other matters. I will respond to Johnson’s promised essay when it is released.
Wow, what a thread — very interesting, but unfortunately a lot of personal attacks just because of a difference in opinion on strategy. The insults by both sides are a real turn-off.
Anyway, I appreciate the work Greg Johnson is doing over at Counter Currents, and do hope he continues.
This reminds me a bit of something I read on the European New Right, and how their numbers dwindled as advocates moved away from it and into political parties or other more “practical” efforts. The “action” and “excitement” is with the people involved in politics and in-the-streets advocacy. I think even Alain de Benoist mentioned that he was a bit envious of the students who were protesting in 1968 – “action” is very compelling.
On a funny note, this also reminds me of the comparison between debating online and the Special Olympics…
I’ve just heard some terrible news. If this is true (and I suspect it is), it will be sad day for the pro-White blogosphere. This quarrel with Johnson can be carried on another day.
“The vanguardists may strike a pose as radicals, but the actions they counsel (namely, disengaging from the mainstream) effectively enable our worst enemies like Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan on the Supreme Court.”
Why is every failure laid at the doorstep of the so called vanguardists? In the the case of Elena Kagan it was your beloved Republicans that rolled over and confirmed her. They could have filibustered her confirmation but didn’t because they feared the backlash by the Jewish lobby. Yet somehow this is all the fault of Alex Linder and Stormfront.
No one ever said the vanguardists have all the answers or don’t have their shortcomings. But I’ve never known a vanguardist to order his readers/followers to disengage from the mainstream, shutter up his windows, and not to come out until he’s read Mein Kampf, Francis Yockey and Julius Evola and is sporting a Waffen SS uniform with swastika armband.
The vanguardists, at least, won’t compromise their message and are willing to address issues and subjects and are too politically incorrect from a mainstream WN’s point of view. An example would be the controversy of contemporary Christianity and if it’s leading whites to their doom. Hunter says don’t touch that subject because it will only alienate your target audience. I say we need to critique every aspect of Western culture to determine what ails us and to create a value system more conducive to our long term survival.
The long and short of it: a well known White blogger has terminal cancer and probably only has a few weeks or months to live.
It must be Linder since his site has been down for weeks.
Greg Johnson said:
Republicans are not pro-white. They take white votes and subscribe to policies that are dooming whites to extinction. Republicans are not even pro-white out of simple self-preservation. As the white majority shrinks, their long-term viability as a party will disappear. Redisticting will only delay that. But Republicans would reject furiously any suggestion that the party needs to preserve the white majority.
But what about “implicit whiteness.” I am working on an article on that right now, to combat some of the destructive fantasies that have been grafted on to Kevin MacDonald’s research. The core of it is this.
(1) Whites might be voting Republican out of implicit ethnocentrism and racial identification. But if you were to “accuse” them of that, 99% would ferociously reject the claim.
(2) Republicans routinely take the votes of explicit pro-lifers and explicit conservatives — then betray them. The idea that they will be loyal to the interests of merely “implicit” whites — whites who themselves would reject racial loyalty — is a fantasy.
You are absolutely right about Repugnants, Greg. However, you forget one thing. By “talking the talk,” the Repugnants made themselves vulnerable to the pressure of having to practice what they preach. Or see themselves pay the price. By losing their offices. In the past, White Americans would get upset with the Repugnants and vote in the Democrats. That didn’t phase the Repugnants at all. Why? Because they knew that the hurt the Democrats would put on White America would be so bad that they’d turn back to the Repugnants for relief. The Democrats would take two step forwards and then the Repugnants would take one step back, but the movement was always progressively in the same direction.
However, these Tea Partiers have changed the game. They are taking over primaries and electing genuine conservatives who will enforce the fiscal and socially conservative promise that the Repugnants keep making …. and breaking. Have you noticed that its not only the Democrats who are having a meltdown over this? Have you seen how perplexed and upset these Repugnants are? How they have done everything imaginable to undermine the Tea Party? If this was all about the GOP taking back control of the country then what difference does it make to Newt “Contract With America” and Karl “The Architect” Rove which Republican is seated in the House or Senate? Especially when many of them have replaced RINOs who stabbed the GOP in the back before repeatedly! So why are the Democrats not the only ones having a meltdown and doing everything imaginable to undermine the Tea Party?! Because though they make (and break) explicitly conservative promises, the Repugants are a defacto Fabian Socialist party. And these faux conservatives are astute enough to understand that real conservatives are using the GOP party structure to take over the damned place.
Do not underestimate the value of implicit Whiteness. For one thing, it avoids conveying the attitude Whites and only Whites can be American Nationalists. There are Negros and Mestizos and Asians who consider themselves American Nationalists who respect the Founders’ ideas and, even though the American nation was established by Whites, they would be repelled by explicit Whiteness and cause all kinds of problems for the Tea Party if they were stupid enough to go there. The point is, the vast majority of Asians and Negros and Mestizos, in particular, are highly unlikely to join a party that wants to eliminate the benefits they’ve enjoyed from Affirmative Action and socialism. Therefore, by default, the Tea Party IS a defacto White Nationalist Party.
“My definition of destructive of our movement is: “Hunter Wallace.”
Chime in people if you are getting this. I need to know if I am wasting my time here.”
Greg Johnson
Hunter isn’t doing what he suggests. He’s still writing openly WN essays. He’s not blending into the mainstream. So he doesn’t really believe it himself. I don’t either. We should both work to influence the mainstream and articulate an attractive vision of a WN ethnostate and that means discussing the Jewish Problem.
He’s right about your site, though. You focus on divisive issues and you’re Monday morning quarterbacking games that were lost 200, 400, or in some cases 2000 years ago.
For example, America is a Christian country, most Whites are Christians. If you associate WN with anti-Christian neo-paganism or atheism you only harm WN.
You need to know your limitations and pick your battles.
White racial awareness is undergoing its growing pains. Both the mainstream and the vanguardist positions have value. Everyone should work where they feel it has the most use. We should however avoid personal insults in our discussions. That needs to stop immediately. Nothing is gained by ascribing the worst possible motivations to someone who genuinely takes the other position. Stop it.
I support both the mainstream and the vanguardist wings of the growing White Identity movement. Something good can be learned from both viewpoints. Personally I tend more towards the Vanguardist camp, but I respect and support the mainstreamers. I wish I could have voted for the Republican candidate in California. But Meg Whitman…..??? Naw, I voted American Independent Party wherever I could and Republican everywhere else.
I’m having really good conversations with many people about what’s happening. I wouldn’t be able to talk to them if I was wearing a Swastika pin. That’s too far out for the average state of mind of the disaffected individual. Maybe the Republicans will prove to be be ‘just right’ at this time and place for most of the disaffected whites. That’s a great starting point. Maybe the Republicans will change towards a more explicit white party. That would be great. If they don’t, then another party will emerge to do just that.
Let’s stop the bickering and celebrate the victory that we all just had.
Any step forward anywhere is a victory!
Greg: 99% of White Americans would not furiously reject the claim that they are racist, unless the Thought Police were the ones asking. They will deny that they are evil, and will defend their views instead. Most White adults are racist, if you judge by their actions instead of their words, or their silences. And if they trust you, they’ll say things that will never make it into the controlled media. I was talking with a White liberal a few days ago about how fraudulent the Hispanic education statistics are, that they are uneducated and will remain so. My specifics were new to her, but not the basic facts. Yes, she is benighted, but she it a good person and citizen who gives a whole lot of her time and effort to her community. And she is worried about what is to be done about the tens of millions of ignorant brown peons who have flooded the country. She knows there’s no good solution, that the liberalism she has endorsed all her life has brought us to a dead end. I can’t imagine that the average TP doesn’t know the score when a woman like this does.
Before 1989, how many East Germans openly said what they all knew? How many Russians? So it is with Americans, they’re just whispering among themselves for now, but the whispering is getting louder.
If I remember correctly, Alex Linder all but had himself a little victory party when Sam Francis died. I’ve been told that Francis tried to reach out to him toward the end. Linder celebrated his death and even went so far as to brag that he had contributed to it.
M,
I’ve learned to bifurcate my activities. If you search the archives, you will see that we were doing all kinds of stuff earlier this year and writing about it on this website. I have since learned not to write here about what I do in the real world. It serves no purpose.
@HW
Re: Sam Francis
Damn, I find that hard to believe even for AL. I do remember well, however, AL pounding that canny sammy nonsense over and over again for years up right until the great Dr. Francis’ death.
Discard,
Most whites are implicitly racist in their choices of mates, schools, neighborhoods, restaurants, music, political parties, entertainment, and the like. But most of them would still explicitly reject that claim if you confronted them with it.
Yet I agree with you that more and more whites are willing to articulate politically incorrect feelings about other races if they feel safe.
Mike Polignano talked about the analogy between our situation and the end of communism in his article “A Revolutionary Act” over at Counter-Currents.com. I wholly agree with his analysis.
Linder has had some kind of illness for years. Chron’s disease, right? It is an inflammatory bowel disease that causes ulcers in the digestive tract and chronic diarrhea. It causes you to bleed out of your ass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crohn's_disease
However, Crohn’s disease is associated with an increased risk of small bowel and colorectal carcinoma, including bowel cancer
http://www.mazorguide.com/MazorNet/genetics/crohnsdisease.htm
Although environmental factors clearly contribute, there is strong evidence from studies of twins and affected families that Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD), especially Crohn’s disease, has a genetic basis. Research has shown evidence of a genetic predisposition to a chronic Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IDB) among Jewish individuals of Eastern European descent.
Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is two-to-eight times more common in Ashkenazi Jews. Genetic factors inherited from the mother may play an important role in predisposing these individuals to Crohn’s disease. Crohn’s disease occurs in all ethnic groups and races. However, its incidence is highest in Caucasians and Jewish people of Eastern European (Ashkenazi Jews.) The Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation of America estimates that over 2 million Americans suffer from some form of inflammatory disease. There is an equal incidence of IBD in males and females.
Hunter,
Who is it that is terminally sick? Somehow I doubt it is Linder.
I’m not going to say. Not my place to announce the news. Besides, I have only heard this through the grapevine.
Texas strikes!
‘Arizona Style’ Immigration Law Proposed in Texas
http://radio.woai.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=119078&article=7811998
Georgia about to follow:
Georgia seeks Arizona-like immigration law
http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/georgia-seeks-arizona-like-700147.html
Worthless White Americans want the Third World flood:
Florida Voters Say Immigration Is An Important Issue
Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/11/04/3160485/florida-voters-say-immigration.html#ixzz14kYHJY6o
There seems to be personal issues between the two behind all this arguing. I have no problem with Johnson reviewing contemporary movies and TV. The public has an interest in this and pointing out things like the faked out “Black Scientists” and mandatory “Evil Rednecks” demonstrates first hand to the public the tecnique that Hollywood subjects us too every minute. However, I must chastize Johnson…for recommending “Caprica.” That has to be one of the WORST sci-fi shows I’ve seen in years. It was so stupid, so bad, and SO DATED trying to cash in on the post 911 thing IN 2009, with middle class suburban school kids blowing up subways in ?suicide bombings? FOR NO APPARANT REASON OTHER THAN THE FILMAKERS THINK IT’S “deep man, totally relavant.” Caprica sucks.
I saw one episode … then half of the second episode. Then I completely tuned it out. I heard the show was cancelled. It had some of the most awful, flat characters I have ever seen. The show was about a brat who blows herself up and her boring friend talking to her avatar in a robot.
Daniel Greystone’s antagonist Joseph Adama was portrayed as some type of Mexican gangster. His brother was in a gay marriage. There was also a “plural marriage” in the show. The poor Taurons were victims of discrimination on Caprica.
More worthless Republicans:
Missouri, Kansas and 11 other state files brief in Arizona immigration case
http://www.kansascity.com/2010/11/04/2395880/missouri-kansas-and-11-other-state.html#ixzz14kduY8nS
Republican Senator urges Obama to support war with Iran
Lindsey Graham (SC) thinks the Republican sweep in the last election was a show of support for neo-con foreign policy.
Was it?
Or is Lindsey aberrant?
Grahamnesty is probably the most hated Republican in the Senate right now. He was reelected in 2008. He comes up for reelection in 2014.
Over the last year, he has backtracked on immigration, first by refusing to work with Democrats on “comprehensive immigration reform” after Obamacare, then with his remarks on birthright citizenship, and finally by voting against the DREAM Act in September.
His previous treason has not been forgotten. Graham was the one who famously crowed before La Raza that he was “going to tell the bigots to shut up.”
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2010/08/04/birthright-citizenship-moving-the-goalposts/
Now, the real question is how do we solve this problem. We can gripe about Lindsey Graham’s neocon votes which is only one of the many strikes against him. Nothing productive will come of that.
Alternatively, we could work with other groups to knock him off like Arlen Specter and Robert Bennett in a primary challenge. There was a Dump Lindsey campaign in 2008. I supported it at the time. Another one is needed.
Linder’s family has strong roots in the Midwest/Upper South. Usher Linder, an indirect ancestor of Alex, was the pro-slavery attorney general of Illinois back in the 1830s. Irish born Judge Luke E. Lawless and Usher Linder were largely responsible for destroying Reverend Lovejoy’s Abolitionist movement in Illinois and appear to have successfully lobbied the public to lynch Lovejoy.
I bring this up because I don’t think Alex Linder has any Ashkenazic ancestry regardless of the statistics involved with his ailment. If it is this man, I wish him the best and for all his perceived or real flaws, I recognize a man who trully did care for our people and tried to help us by speaking out.
Hunter Wallace says:
November 9, 2010 at 3:38 am
Grahamnesty is probably the most hated Republican in the Senate right now. He was reelected in 2008. He comes up for reelection in 2014.
Graham was the one who famously crowed before La Raza that he was “going to tell the bigots to shut up.”
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2010/08/04/birthright-citizenship-moving-the-goalposts/
Now, the real question is how do we solve this problem. We can gripe about Lindsey Graham’s neocon votes which is only one of the many strikes against him. Nothing productive will come of that.
Alternatively, we could work with other groups to knock him off like Arlen Specter and Robert Bennett in a primary challenge. There was a Dump Lindsey campaign in 2008. I supported it at the time. Another one is needed.
JR
Agreed. Lindsey Graham really stands out as the worst RINO ever – plus… is it just me or does Lindsey Graham come off as a Mr. Rogers style creepy queer? When we were beating back the last amnesty (I went full out bought the Congressional Staff directory and sent out the names and contact info for the entire US Senate, Congress) I told some proud Southern patriots that I really respected the South, but couldn’t see how the proud state of South Carolina could elected this lisping, poofter, traitor and that the Yankees would have won every battle if the South was led by such weak men.
I still can’t see how Lindsey Graham is a Republican US Senator from South Carolina – what happened there?! It must have something to do with Charleston having too much wealth, too much foreign investment and the locals want show that they are as liberal, tolerant, and anti racist as the most liberal New York/Kennedy Boston types.
HW,
Thanks for the explanatory response.
JR,
…is it just me…
No, it’s not just you!
or does Lindsey Graham come off as a Mr. Rogers style creepy queer?
In spades.
You should be able to find it on Youtube but Lindsey Graham was outted by some guy who publicly and very bluntly accused him of being blackmailed into supporting amnesty in order to cover of his homosexuality. The guy urged him to come out of the closet and take his chances with conservative voters rather than betray his country. Graham never openly announced his homosexuality to my knowledge, but his support for amnesty and other creeping, backdoor amnesty measures evaporated like smoke right after that. The next thing you know Graham could be a Minute Man he’s so strong on border enforcement. He even wants to repeal Birthright Citizenship for the children born here of people in the country illegally.
Here it is:
“US Senator Lindsey Graham is gay and while many people in South Carolina and Washington DC know that, the general public and Graham’s constituents do not,” said William Gheen President of ALIPAC. “I personally do not care about Graham’s private life, but in this situation his desire to keep this a secret may explain why he is doing a lot of political dirty work for others who have the power to reveal his secrets. Senator Graham needs to come out of the closet inside that log cabin so the public can rest assured he is not being manipulated with his secret.”
http://www.alipac.us/article5156.html
VIDEO: US Senator Lindsey Graham Is Gay
From NumbersUSA:
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/beckr/november-5-2010/number-true-reformers-doubled-next-us-house-tigers-who-will-lead-othe
Big gains in the Senate too:
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/beckr/november-7-2010/9-big-gains-make-next-senate-far-more-pro-enforcement-anti-amnesty.ht
Both types of activists are needed. Marx and Lenin, but no Trotsky to organize the Red Army? Hitler and Rosenberg, but no Roehm to organize the SA?
We need kings, priests and soldiers. We need all types.
Seriously folks, I understand that this discussion might have it’s points, but it’s getting out of hand.
Erik,
I agree that we need White Nationalist activists. But Hunter is not advocating that. He is advocating that WNs put all their time and money in the service of system politicians.
I agree that we need WN mainstreamers. We need genuine WNs who work on the outer edge of the mainstream in such a way that there is a net movement of discourse, people, and resources from the mainstream toward us. The purpose of mainstreamers is to move politics in our direction. Hunter is advocating the opposite. He recommends that WNs “dissolve themselves” in the mainstream, claiming that would change its character.
But there are too few of us, and we have very little by way of resources, so what he is advocating basically is the dissipation of WN into the mainstream, i.e., the destruction of our cause. Because if WNs do not advocate White Nationalism who will?
I have put forth this argument again and again, and Hunter merely replies sneering, witless attempts at satire, and increasingly desperate and cheap ad hominems. This guy is up to no good. Time to get the message people. Then hang up the phone.
Greg,
Your comments in this thread have been revealing. I used to think that we were on the same page. It is now becoming clear that was never the case.
There are lots of people who have gotten involved in White Nationalism because they have legitimate grievances about issues like immigration and discrimination. They have rationally concluded that the ethnostate is the best long term solution for White Americans. It is the safest and most secure vehicle for their posterity in North America.
I stress that these White Nationalists are ordinary Americans. They are normal, socially adjusted people who work for a living and pay their taxes. They obey the law. They marry and have kids. Many of them go to church on the weekends. They are involved in professional and community based organizations. Most are highly educated. Some are businessmen. They enjoy sports and are otherwise unremarkable compared from their neighbors.
Aside from their political beliefs, there is little difference between White Nationalists of this sort and their peers. They fit into their communities. Most are driven by their sense of racial and ethnic allegiance and responsibility to their communities.
If you saw them in a bar or at a ball game, you would never think they are revolutionaries.
OTOH, the White Nationalist movement has always attracted another type of individual: people who are naturally weird, who gravitate toward the fringe because they are engaged in some type of rebellion, misfits who never fit into their communities no matter what the historical situation, natural oddballs, village atheists.
The fact is, the only reason I am outside the mainstream is because of the prevailing taboos against White racial consciousness. Where I come from, White racial consciousness was “mainstream” for centuries and to this day most Whites back home are still racialists.
I don’t hate the system because it is the system. If the system can work for us, I have no objection to using it. If our society was pro-White, I wouldn’t want to change it.
The day is coming when the barrier of respectability that has marginalized us on the fringe will break down. Personally, I think it is less than a decade away. When that happens, I predict that no one who is normal in the White Nationalist movement will voluntarily choose to remain an outcast.
You know what I am starting to think? I think you enjoy being an outcast. The more I read Counter-Currents – the more I think about your counterproductive suggestions, which seem deliberately calculated to insult and alienate White America – the more I am starting to believe that you gravitate toward our circles because of our marginalization.
That would explain why you are interested in all this other weird shit which in your mind takes precedence of over immigration and other issues which are far more important than esoteric European avant-garde neo-fascism.
The day the forces that have marginalized us from our people succumb to political gravity: that will be the greatest day in the history of the White Nationalist movement. This struggle is about our racial survival, not your own weird sense of identity.
You sound exactly like those artsy beatnik types who turn on bands after they attract a following and cease to be cool. I honestly can’t wait to hear your strategy for leading the masses. Literally everything you do telegraphs the message that you don’t relate to them.
Note: You seem more interested in the money than anything else.
Greg,
If you’re still reading this, I will say you have convinced me of this much: never to donate to a system politician again because what he gets from me will never matter.
That said, I would encourage you to take a close look at what the commenter M said above about picking unnecessary fights. As long as it’s necessary, fine; by all means, go ahead and pick the fight; take the undiluted vanguardist message straight into the heart of Peoria, and then say necessary things that people might consider shocking and immoral but that they need to hear, but also consider dropping whatever isn’t necessary to make the most important vanguardist points go over in a place like Peoria. This suggestion assumes, of course, that vanguardists actually care about winning over at least some of Peoria (and it’s still not clear to me that they do BTW.)
The way I look at it is like this.
Telling people “listen, if you’re White and care about keeping everything you’ve worked for and want a future for your kids and grandkids, you need to understand the American political system wants you dead because you’re White. America is becoming more non-White everyday and the hour is late — you are about to be totally dispossessed in your own country. You and your family will never survive unless you totally reject this system, become explicitly pro-White, and work with us, the White Nationalist vanguard, to build a new homeland for White people where our kids will have a future. And if you’re not happy with the direction of the country, let me tell you something else, the Jews are responsible for much of it. Take a look at history and educate yourself on how Jews operate.”
Even in Peoria, that might shock somebody out of their torpor and convince someone. And by framing the argument in this manner, the vanguardist has not conceded one inch of ground to the existing political value system.
So why in the world would would any vanguardist want add on top of that, “and by the way, if you’re a Christian or have Christian friends or family members, you need to understand that your faith is for the weak and the craven and is nothing but a 2000 year old Jewish plot to subvert White culture. America itself is also a Jewish/Masonic plot according to Julius Evola.”
Obviously I am greatly oversimplifying and caricaturing the vanguardist position to make a point, but come on, why add that other unnecessarily alienating and totally peripheral stuff?
It’s highly dubious and questionable history for one thing (a debate for another day), but more importantly no one is going to listen to that which means they will also ignore the most important element of WN vanguardism itself (reject the current system).
This is why vanguardists often leave me scratching my head. It’s as if they want to be alienating and forever cranky about people not responding to vanguardism, even though they bear some of the blame for why people don’t respond.
And just to be totally clear, this isn’t an attack on you or your scholarly judgment about which thinkers have value and which don’t. Not at all. It’s just a few observations from a mainstreamer offered in what I hope is perceived in a collegial spirit.
LEW,
The first part of your message is dead on. Where you veer into parody is the idea that one would just casually toss in religion and Evola like that. There is a logical order of instruction in all disciplines and ideologies. You start with arithmetic before you go on to geometry and calculus. You start with basic mechanics before you go to string theory.
In White Nationalism, one needs to lay out the core political message as clearly and compellingly as possible: To preserve our people on this continent we need a land of our own, where we are free to live according to our own natures, where future generations of whites can thrive free from the filth and violence of multicultural America. We deserve nothing less, and nothing less will do. Other political movements on the right will not save us, for the following reasons . . . And so forth.
Once people get their mind around that message, then other questions will naturally arise, and one should deal with them in that order. My inclination is to deal first with the idea of the ethostate, the necessity of the ethnostate, and the non-viability of other options. Only after people have wrapped their minds around that should be delve into the opposition, and that is where the Jewish and Christian Questions naturally arise.
People like Evola and Savitri Devi are analogous to string theory in physics or topology in mathematics. Sure, they are “peripheral” viewed from the earlier grades. But one can get there from here, and they hold great interest and explanatory power. But not for everybody. You don’t need topology to do one’s taxes or Evola to take one’s own side in a fight (but you might need to get the Sermon on the Mount off one’s back).
Yes, Hunter has got me pegged. I am more interested in money than anything else. That’s why I have chosen to spend my life promoting a homeland for white people.
I still can’t see how Lindsey Graham is a Republican US Senator from South Carolina – what happened there?! It must have something to do with Charleston having too much wealth, too much foreign investment and the locals want show that they are as liberal, tolerant, and anti racist as the most liberal New York/Kennedy Boston types.
Well, I think it comes down to the fact that most people don’t have very good “gaydar,” heck I remember in the 80’s there were frat boy types who were saying “Oh, No. Boy George isn’t really queer, it’s all an act for money.” Heck, as a high school kid I had no idea the Pet Shop Boys were queer, nor that flamboyant prince in the “Heavy Metal” movie who wanted the Locknar, nor the toga wearing fairy on the planet where Kirk fought the Gorn by gathering up the minerals to make gunpowder. Later after getting older and wiser I took a look back at things like the above that I hadn’t seen in years (or Mr. Rodgers) and my reaction was “Holy Shit, They’re Queer!”
What is the effective result of that?
1.) The system has been rejected. Now what? It means our enemies have an easier time pushing through their legislative agenda. We get things like “comprehensive immigration reform” and “hate speech legislation.”
Life becomes worse for White people, not better. We are left with a steeper mountain to climb; a bigger hole in which to dig ourselves out.
2.) By rejecting the system, we demonstrate our irrelevance and powerlessness, reinforce the taboos against White racial conscious, and make it easier for our enemies to demonize us. Anyone can push us around. It is not like we are going to do anything about it.
3.) We cede small victories. These may seem unimportant in the larger scheme of things, but these small victories (as we saw in the Alaska and Delaware Senate races) are necessary to build confidence, keep people engaged, demonstrate our relevance, reduce apathy, and change their perception of what is possible.
When people are winning, they think bigger. When they are losing on every single front, they get demoralized, and eventually they quit. White Nationalists get involved in this vanguardist nonsense for a few years. Then they quit once they conclude they are wasting their time.
The result is irrelevance and massive turnover in our ranks.
4.) By refusing to start where people are today, refusing to adapt our message to our audience, we are dismissed as lunatics. The effective result is that we have no influence in our communities because we are unable to communicate with our people.
We are not moving our people anywhere. Much less to a White ethnostate. We are only wasting valuable time which we don’t have.
5.) You know as well as I do what “rejecting the system” effectively translates into. It means coming onto the internet to blow off steam with thousands of anonymous comments. It means converting other people to this radical perspective while neutering their ability to be effective.
6.) These vanguardists are rhetorical radicals. The only thing radical about them is their words – their fantasies. They run their mouth. Anyone can do that. We have utterly no shortage of ineffective people talking about revolution.
7.) If you go back ten years ago, fifteen years ago, you will find that the vanguardists were saying the exact same thing that they are now without so much as a dogcatcher to show they are making progress.
8.) Here’s the most important implication of “rejecting the system”: ordinary people are going to look at White Nationalists, see how hopelessly disorganized we are, how alienated we are from them, how we have no interest in changing their circumstances … and they are going to conclude that we are useless.
In so many words, that is why the Tea Party exists today. The White Nationalist movement blew a historic opportunity to connect with millions of people. When the White masses finally started to revolt, we were hopelessly unprepared to take advantage of the gift that we were presented with.
HW: I pretty much agree with your take on this and plan to work within the mainstream myself for the reasons you give, among others. The furthest outside the mainstream I personally will ever consider going is the A3P, which is openly pro-White but not anti-American in imagery or substance, as far as I know, nor is the A3P disengaged from and totally indifferent to the concerns of most White people like the pure vanguardists who often pride themselves on disengagement and contempt. The A3P talks about jobs for Americans, the White victims of AA and so on. My point to Greg is just that anyone who insists on a pure hardcore vanguard approach can make the vanguard message a little more palatable and convincing by not highlighting writers like Evola, Devi and bashing Christianity based on dubious historical analysis.
I really wish that White Nationalists had gotten their acts together 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago. But it was not to be.
But the fact is that we have more time to get our act together than we have money, sound activists, working institutions, flourishing communities, etc. 2050 is when we are officially a minority in this country. And it will be sometime after that before we become the minority of the electorate.
And why any of that REALLY matters is beyond me, because we know that we are not going to vote ourselves out of this mess anyway.
We have the time to get the right messages, the right people, the right organizations, and a whole host of flourishing communities together and in place.
But we are never going to get there if we listen to Hunter Wallace, because his whole plan is premised on the idea that we can get our message across by shutting up, that we can maximize our influence by diluting money and manpower in the mainstream.
And all of that is premised on the absurd fantasy that the mainstream can’t get along without us, that “we” are electing marginally better system politicians, that “we” are moving the goalposts, etc. No, “they” are doing those things just fine without us. We need to focus on getting our own message out.
But I sense that I am wasting my breath here. Is anybody really in danger of following Brad’s advice? I imagine that he is grandstanding in ‘tardspeak because he knows the bleachers here are full of ‘tards. His best writers and commentators left long ago. I suspect that his best readers have followed.
“His best writers and commentators left long ago. I suspect that his best readers have followed.”
His best commenters were the ones that dabbled here but mostly congregated at Majority Rights. His “best” writers were hardly ever anything to write home about. For myself, his writing has always been the only source of my interest here – and will continue to be. That I disagree with his tack du jour is of little import when contrasted with the fact that he usually has something interesting to say on matters racial which is well written.
Your status based in the merits of your own talent is already sufficiently elevated to only detract from that by ritually bashing Wallace, Johnson.
American democracy is a laughable sham and the USA won’t last much longer; Aristotle explains:
“The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal.”
“Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotisms.”
“Democracy is when the indigent, and not the men of property, are the rulers.”
“Inferiors revolt in order that they may be equal, and equals that they may be superior. Such is the state of mind which creates revolutions.”
“Democracy arises out of the notion that those who are equal in any respect are equal in all respects; because men are equally free, they claim to be absolutely equal.”
“Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of their arms.”
“Men are swayed more by fear than by reverence.”
Captainchaos,
Thanks for the kind words.
Greg: your words certainly aren’t wasted on me. You already convinced me not to give money to mainstream candidates again. As for the rest of it, I’m still thinking about it; in my case, silence in response to your remarks doesn’t indicate 100% disagreement or dismissal, just reflection.
Greg,
I will continue to contrast my approach of realism and pragmatism with your approach of nurturing dangerous fantasies and creating further obstacles between White Nationalists and White America. The fact is, your approach is getting us nowhere, whereas my approach is already producing results.
1.) It sure would have been nice for us to have gotten our act together decades ago. Unfortunately, White Nationalists spent the 1970s holding Klan rallies, the 1980s robbing banks, and the 1990s and 2000s posting anonymous comments on the internet.
Just exactly how do you propose we spend our time in the 2010s? Promoting obscure avant-garde European neo-fascist philosophers, advocating the destruction of Christianity, promoting National Socialism, advocating the destruction of America, advocating the creation of a government with unprecedented power to regulate our lives, and as the cherry on top, refusing to communicate with people in terms of their own experience, and rejecting the “system politicians” who are among the handful of friends we have in Congress.
Anyone with a shred of common sense can see that is a recipe for absolute disaster in the American political context. It will get us nowhere. In fact, by refusing to participate in the hated system (a talking point lifted from the counterculture left), what you propose will actually make our enemies more powerful, increase our marginalization, and demoralize the supporters we already have to the point where they drop out.
2.) Why, pray tell, are Whites likely to be a minority by 2050?
– Because third world immigration is overwhelming us.
– Because those who do have a pro-White perspective are unwilling to take even the most elementary necessary steps to end their marginalization.
Just how bad are things in the White Nationalist movement: if communicating with you is any indication, it is telling that it is a struggle here just to point out the important of the most elementary principles of communication, and that simply believing in “ideas” is insufficient to motivate anyone (including yourself) to act on your own principles.
3.) Keep spreading the lie that “we can’t vote ourselves out of this.” There are more people in the House of Representatives right now who are for cutting legal immigration than expanding it. We now have a majority in the House opposed to amnesty and a real shot at a majority in the Senate.
In Texas, which is already a White minority state, we have a supermajority in the the state legislature poised to pass Arizona-style laws. Whites were a minority in Mississippi and South Carolina at one time and we ruled with such dominance there that blacks couldn’t even so much as look at a White man.
If Whites only had the desire to do so, we could change our immigration laws. We could end legal immigration, escalate deportation of illegals, change the 14th amendment, secure the border, pass state laws that are so uncomfortable that Hispanics will leave, gut the Justice Department and stack the courts.
Again, what is your alternative? Nothing but a fantasy of changing the most fundamental values of White Americans. If you proposed such a laughable, pie in the sky, utopian scenario anywhere else in America, you would be laughed out of the room.
3.) The right message is one that is tailored to your audience. The right activists are people who are capable of connecting with their communities. The right organizations are ones that have the power to move the political spectrum.
4.) We can get our message across: by breaking it up into piecemeal bits and pieces, working within the mainstream, achieving what is possible, building confidence, clothing it in the legitimacy of existing ideas, hacking away at the margins and systematically moving the goal posts.
Alternatively, you can propose the create of a Jew-free White ethnostate based on a National Socialist dictatorship in which Christianity has been abolished in favor of the worship of Adolf Hitler as a God. Needless to say, aside from a handful of radical people you encounter in cyberspace, no one is going to respond to that message.
You are going to FAIL in getting our message across.
5.) A tactic is what you can do with what you got. We have the manpower and the money to swing close races in our favor. We can make a political splash right now. And what that happens, it won’t be so easy to demonize us in the mainstream.
Why the hell do you think politicians faceplant themselves before blacks and Hispanics? It is because they, unlike fantasists like you, know how to organize and make politicians pay a political price for voting against their interests.
6.) Ever try to lose weight? Ever drive to a distant city? Ever play football? You win by moving the goal posts at the margins. You lose by imagining you can win in a single leap with a hail mary pass to the endzone.
7.) What’s the point of getting your message out? The only point of it that I can see is to portray White Nationalists as Neo-Nazis who hate America and Christianity and look down on ordinary people. You want to dig us even deeper in the hole.
8.) I’m focused exclusively on telling White Nationalists the practical ways they can act to make a difference in their communities. In contrast, you are over on Counter-Currents lost in a delusional rapture about creating “a god-like race” of elves and “Nietzschean supermen.”
Greg should use more honey and less vinegar.
I challenge Greg to explain in practical terms how he plans to create a White ethnostate. I want to hear him talk about strategy and tactics. I want to see him face reality for once.
Enough of this gaudy rhetoric about how we need a White ethnostate or how Jews are bad. We already know that. We have known that for decades.
Tell us your plan for getting from here to there.
It doesn’t go through Peoria. Where does it go through then? Who is going to create the White ethnostate? How are they going to do it? Where is the constituency for White Nationalism and how are they to be won over?
He says we should reject the system. Now that the system has been rejected, what now? Write books and essays that are so radical that no one will ever read them? Write for obscure websites that have no circulation?
C’mon, I want to see the road map, not talking points. Show me the balance sheet. Show me the EFFECTIVE RESULT that comes from subsidizing these projects.
Hunter, ever since becoming the virtual public persona that he is has engaged in flame war. If it wasn’t Sulla the Dictator, it was Il Ragno, or Linder, or countless lesser lights scattered across virtual time and space. Hunter is good at it, loves it, breathes it, needs it, like a junkie. Practice makes perfect, and he has natural talent too. Enter Greg Johnson, the newbie. He has tangled with Linder, and now Hunter. These might be the only two flame wars he’s ever been in. Nothing compared to Fade the Butcher, who spent his undergrad years engaged in exactly the kind of debate found here in this thread, which is to say literally thousands of these kind of battles. I wonder who is instigating this? lol.