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.
Godan’s,
It is true that I have always thrived on engaging opposing points of view. I have always disliked echo chambers. I enjoy being exposed to opposing points of view. Sometimes I am mistaken.
– Lawrence Auster, for example, was right about the counterproductive level of alienation that exists between White Nationalists and White America. I still maintain that I was right about his bias on the Jewish Question.
– Harold Covington, who I never argued with, is wrong about the Northwest Republic. This idea of his could have potential though if he shifted the “Northwest Republic” to Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana and reoriented his strategy toward combining migration with mainstream politics.
– Guy White, someone else I have sparred with, was less skeptical of conservatives. He was wrong about the Jewish Question, but did make a few good points in that respect.
– Matt Parrott was probably right about secession. It makes no sense to attack American patriotism right now. When I was calling conservatives sell outs, he was trying to engage them, so I will give him credit there. Unfortunately, Parrott now seems to be drifting toward the radical camp and away from his former reasonable positions. He has increasingly been writing about subjects like Freemasonry and the occult.
– Sulla the Dictator was wrong on almost everything.
– Il Ragno was and remains a time-waster. He is a clown that adds nothing of value to debates.
– Petr drove me up the wall on Christianity one time. I later came to my senses after I didn’t have to interact with such a polarizing figure on a daily basis.
– Ian Jobling had the right idea of reaching out and building bridges. He was wrong about the Iraq War, the Jewish Question, EGI, and John Rawls.
– Jim Giles was and remains an unhinged genocidal maniac, but he dimly had the right idea when he argued that running for your state house was the best course of action. Giles hitched that to his AJAN platform though.
– Alex Linder was and remains wrong on almost every point of contention. In hindsight, I see nothing of merit in any of his positions. He is a toxic figure who does damage to our case. As time has passed, I see how wrong he was even about subjects which I formerly believed he made good points.
Greg,
I can understand your POV and that you are angry like anyone who feels disrespected. Everything the Vanguardists predicted as far as ZOG is concerned has come true. Before I became more zealous to guard my racial interests from hostile Non-White encrachment, I met a couple who were Vanguardists, made several WNists statements and invited me to a Klan rally. Their suggestion seemed so off-the-wall that I joked about just having paisley bedsheets and backed off from them, pronto.
It was only when I went back to school and had to take a Latino studies course where I listened to the lector laying out La Raza/Azatlan racial propaganda and basically instructing these kids on the importance of Reconquista via the ballot box that I got my eyes opened. I was already familiar with the Black Power antics of Reverends Al Sharpster and Jesse Jackass and somewhat tolerated it due to misplaced White guilt over Negro slavery. My rationale was that their ancestors were dragged here in chains against their will. But these damn Mestizos were sneaking in, uninvited, working under the table so they could qualify for welfare benefits and they are mapping out strategy to take over the electorate? Then I looked around campus and I saw all these Non-White organizations but none for White people!
I was upset about this, so I wondered what White racial activists were doing and started lurking at White racial boards and was profoundly disappointed by all the cynicism, negativity and apathy when Whites still have the right to vote. They were all saying it was a waste of time. In the meantime, TPTB were Hispandering to beat the band and the Latinos were only about fourteen to fifteen percent of the population. I did notice that wherever they had achieved the larger demographic, they ran a Mestizo challenger against the incumbent and voted against the old guy in favor of the Mestizo no matter how much he Hispandered to them in the past.
This last election, a Mestizo activist bought an ad on Spanish Television which urged Mestizos to punish the Democrat party by not voting at all and other Mestizo leaders became alarmed and made the station retract it and refuse to run it anymore. Furthermore they came on and urged Mestizos to show up and vote, warning that they would make themselves “irrelevant” if they didn’t.
Now, what I don’t understand, Greg and Hunter is this infighting between the Vanguardists and the Mainstreamers with this increasingly disrespectful tone. Hunter, if the Vanguardists manage to put up and set up a White Haven for Whites to retreat to in a SHTF scenario than why isn’t that a good thing? Greg, if the Mainstreams manage to get enough under-the-radar White Nationalists to take office and pull off a freeze on all Turd World immigration and that keeps ZOG from dropping a shitload of Black Somalis (like they did to lily-White Lewiston Maine) right in the middle of your Whitopia than why isn’t that a good thing?
Why can’t we do both? Why shouldn”t Vanguardists encourage Mainstreamers infiltrate and subvert the Repugnant Faux Conservative GOP and turn it into an implicitly White Nationalist party? Why shouldn’t Mainstreamers encourage Vanguardists to set up White Havens in the Pacific NW and other strategic areas?
You know what I think? Even White Nationists are so used to the either-or thinking that the duopoly in government has set up that we have fallen in an either-or trap where it comes to WNism. We need to cooperate with each other so that we can achieve the goal of an established White Haven for non-Vanguardists to retreat to if TSHTF and we need to infiltrate and take over both parties to keep a SHTF scenario from ever happening.
Sorry, gentlemen. Call me a silly woman, call me someone who likes to have her cake ad eat it, too. But I like BOTH of your ideas and think it is totally feasible to achieve both your ideas IF we work together.
Clytemnestra,
What you don’t see to appreciate is the “rhetorical radicalism” of the vanguardists. It is a false radicalism based on wishful, fantasy thinking.
This is the ultimate indictment of the vanguardists: they don’t have the courage of their own convictions. Their position is fool’s gold. It is a false alternative.
1.) Vanguardists are usually remarkable for towing a tough line on the Jews. Yet they do nothing about Jewish power. They gripe about it on the internet, shoot spitballs at mainstreamers, and complain about how bad America is for White people.
Again, I want to emphasize that they do nothing in the real world about the problem. The effective result of their rhetorical radicalism is that lots of anonymous comments are posted about the Jews on the internet.
In this election cycle, two Jews were defeated in the Senate, Russ Feingold and Arlen Specter. Blumenthal was elected in Connecticut in what was a close race for a few weeks. Wyden was reelected in Oregon. Chuck Schumer was reelected in New York.
2.) The most familiar vanguardist proposal of all is the Northwest Republic. Here again we can see the shallowness of the vanguardist position: why aren’t the vanguardists responding to HAC’s call and moving to the Pacific Northwest?
There isn’t a Northwest Volunteer Army. There isn’t even a Northwest Front. HAC himself has admitted that it is only an idea.
It is a struggle to get vanguardists to meet you at a Denny’s restaurant. The idea that these people are going to uproot themselves, migrate to the Northwest, take up arms against the federal government, and win … it is fanciful.
Now, I am not saying it couldn’t happen. It could happen, but it won’t. The pioneers were made out of different stuff. HAC is right that the problem is character.
3.) Vanguardists exacerbate our problems by making the perfect the enemy of the good. They expect nothing less than sweeping, transformative change. They expect people to go from 0 to 90 overnight. In doing so, by setting up unrealistic expectations, they actually hamper our ability to change our circumstances.
I think it would be great if vanguardists would actually create White communities. I’ve been around for almost ten years now. In all that time, I haven’t seen one such community materialize. Thus, I am skeptical of this proposal because it sounds good but appears an unrealistic aspiration.
I don’t disagree that stopping legal immigration is short term political priority number one, but it’s just as important to build racial consciousness in our people. We can’t survive for long by some kind of “implicit” indentity. Either we get explicit that we are a group with interests or we go extinct.
I’m gonna tackle this from a cultural perspective in the morning.
Well, Hunter, and pardon me for my familiarity, but instead of taking the tone that Vanguardists are nothing more than dreamers or visionaries and, because they haven’t demonstrated anything than nothing they say has merit. I can understand that POV to a certain extent.
But if you look at the perspective that a Vanguardist may be an architect or a designer then, instead of looking at whether or not he has done what he has proposed, you can start investigating if what he has proposed is doable. An architect may have a great plan, but he may have no construction skills, so if you get a good man who can read those plans and, where it is necessary make some helpful suggestions based on the materials he has to work with than the architect and the construction engineer can put up a great building.
So, a Vanguardist comes up with the PNW vision. Because he is a visionary, he can accelerate from 0-100 mph from jump street. The more practical Mainstreamer is aware that he has got to shift gears to get from one speed to another. The former has a country and an army to defend it all set up. Instead of bringing him crashing down to earth, it is up to the latter to get the Vanguardist to start using his shift gear to move his idea from here to there in a way that is not going to burn out the engine by discussing feasible ways to put this plan in motion.
Millions of Whites suddenly having a “Come to Jesus” moment and packing it all in for Lily White, ID IS NOT feasible. Select Whites quietly scoping out out new territory, establishing new settlements, and quietly training to set up a new civilization IS feasible. Why can’t a Vanguardist and a Mainstreamer have a beer summit. The Vanguardist or Architect can share his vision and the Mainstreamer or Construction Engineer can discuss the kinds of material that would be needed to construct the building. Then they can work together on pouring a foundation, framing it, etc. ad infinitum.
Though they have a problem putting out WNist warnings, because there they are being frighteningly blunt; Naming the “J” word and yelling the “N” word at the top of their lungs, they are right. Luckily, we have the likes of Kevin McDonald and Steven Sailer etc. to disseminate the WNist message implicitly so Whites recognize WNist warnings without knowing exactly why and instinctively dig in their heels and start resisting. I know, I know. Not nearly as violently as a Vanguardist would like, but this Tea Party is a great start and they are repeating these messages to OTHER unawakened Whites, like: alienated elite, disingenuous white liberal, competitive altruism, disproportionate representation, neocon, dual loyalties, race baiting, Holocaust Industry, banksters, NWO globalists.
Likewise, Greg, I am hoping that you don’t dismiss the idea of either WNists sympathizers or WNists with no paper trail infiltrating political organizations, getting politically active and implement WNist ideas as totally unfeasible. I am hoping that you will sit down on your end and instead of saying it can’t be done, figure out how it can be done. There are going to be setbacks, but instead of getting totally discouraged and disgusted and then engaging in acts of self-sabotage like the late, great David Lane did, you figure out what didn’t work and why and then modify, but never lose focus on the goal of securing the existence of White people and a future for White children. I’m sure you’re a visionary that probably sees the horizon a lot more clearly than most people, Greg, but the last scenario I want to see if me reading your brilliant ideas and concepts that were penned from prison.
Hunter, I love how intensively you are investigating the Tea Party activities and I’m learning a lot about them. This is not my board, but I would like to respectfully suggest that you consider putting up a segment or two on feasibility studies for PLEs. Various people could come in from different angles, discuss what has and hasn’t worked and do some brainstorming together. It may get nowhere, but then again, we might be more successful than we think.
A couple of years ago, did anyone foresee some of the small but significant successes of the Tea Party?
The problem with the vanguardist position is not that they’re intellectual but what they’re intellectual about. Every movement needs intellectuals to flesh out the positions and believes of those fighting. Look at Marx and Engles and later the Frankfurt School for the Left.
The difference with the Left’s intellectuals was they knew and gave voice to the grievences of their audience. Whereas the WN vangaurdists seemingly do everything to show they not only don’t know the audience but actively hate them. In many ways the WN vanguardists come off no different from the Left except thier pro-white. The Left hates and wants to destroy Christianity and so do WN vanguardists, the Left hates and wants to destroy America and so do WN vanguardists, the Left hates and wants to destroy individual Liberty and so do WN vanguardists, the Left wants to control every aspect of our lives through a tyrannical government and so do WN vanguardists…only except WN vanguardists like whites. This makes no sense! The American people are pissed off and rejecting the Left because of their positions that WN vanguardists support albeit from a different perspective.
If WN vanguardists want to be relevant they need to start writing in support of what the American people love and are fighting for-not what they hate and are fighting against.
The Christmas season is upon us and this is the perfect time to point out the Left’s hatred of whites and the West by highlighting their hatred of a sacred tradition of the white West and defend that tradition, not on go tirades against what that tradition celebrates.
WN intellectuals need to be more Chesteron and less Evola, more Founding Fathers and less National Socialists, ect. ect.
WN also need to drop the phony pretense about a new elitism and hierarchy. Not only because the American are fuming at the current elitist hierarchy but ecause they don’t believe it themselves. Every person on the Right I’ve met who talks about elitism comes off as being on the top of it and never underneath it. They ust want to be the elite never those who live under it. That’s why there’s so many micro-Fuhers and no micro-Geobbles. It’s a bullshit posture that no one supports and looks stupid.
We need intellectuals but not those who want to enact exactly what the Left wants.
William Rome says:
“The difference with the Left’s intellectuals was they knew and gave voice to the grievences of their audience. Whereas the WN vangaurdists seemingly do everything to show they not only don’t know the audience but actively hate them. In many ways the WN vanguardists come off no different from the Left except thier pro-white. The Left hates and wants to destroy Christianity and so do WN vanguardists, the Left hates and wants to destroy America and so do WN vanguardists, the Left hates and wants to destroy individual Liberty and so do WN vanguardists, the Left wants to control every aspect of our lives through a tyrannical government and so do WN vanguardists…only except WN vanguardists like whites. This makes no sense! The American people are pissed off and rejecting the Left because of their positions that WN vanguardists support albeit from a different perspective.”
Are the right any better for the White race? Isn’t the GOP Repugnant establishment equally Anti-White or did I only imagine them making the Negro, Michael “I Want To Make Us The Hip-Hop Party” Steele their national chairman? The libertarian “free trade” globalist wing of the GOP supported open borders and endless “guest workers” (who never leave) even when it was clear that more factories and tech industries were being outsourced to China and India and the country was sliding into an economic nightmare. Are the Christian Zionuts cheerleading endless support and wars for Israel our friends? I don’t think so!
Now, what I would like to know is if it is feasible for a “Hunter” to infiltrate the Repugnant Right via the Tea Party and use the economy to stop ALL immigration as an implicit WN then why is not feasible for a “Greg” to infiltrate the Dimmycrap Left via the Anti-War movement and also use the economy to end the flow of blood and treasure to Israel?
Again, both things are feasible if we stop tearing each other down and work together for it, one and washing the other. Some poster here talked about the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result each time. Let’s try some new concepts … encouragement where we can … cooperation when we can … consensus and synthesis, if at all possible.
I don’t think Vanguardists hate ordinary White people or even America. I do believe they hate the former’s passivity in the face of the latter’s going to hell in a hand basket. They strike me as very intense, passionate, albeit impractical-at-times people.
And, I hope you gentlemen pardon me if I make a sexist observation. WNist men tend to be alpha males at heart. They are penned in by this system so the only throats they end up lunging at are each other’s. People stumble, people fall, people screw up and at times they just break. Yet I notice that WNists are much harder on each other than even the Usual Suspects. For example, Tom Metzger and David Duke seem very hard on each other, but I have read both their words and watched their interviews and taken away something valuable. Too much Il Divo Syndrome in the White Nationalist Movement IMNSHO. You can consider yourself the aristocratic elite of a big fat nothing or you can stay focused on a glorious cause, knowing that you may never get full credit for your contributions, that you may be dead before it comes to fruition, but you have laid the groundwork for eventual success.
I think a lot of divisions between the Mainstreamers and the Vanguardists is that they are both so into their ideology that they refuse to even consider that the other’s is workable. I consider myself a “Cafeteria White Nationalist.” I like both ideas, because I believe they are not only feasible but mutually beneficial in the long run.
William,
Good point. I’m sick of seeing them play the “anti-intellectual” card. I don’t object to intellectuals as intellectuals.
Not once have I ever said anything negative about Kevin MacDonald’s work at The Occidental Observer. MacDonald is doing important foundational work and shedding light on a serious problem.
Everything MacDonald does telegraphs that he is “on the side” of White Americans. That’s not true of the vanguardists like Linder.
Why can’t a Vanguardist and a Mainstreamer have a beer summit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_Hall_Putsch
Or: Where some ardent vanguardists learned to go mainstream. Which is not an endorsement of mainstreaming, or: Pissing in the wind.
Just yesterday by the way the anniversary of that infamous one-way Marschroute from the Bürgerbräukeller to the Feldherrnhalle.
Respekt.
William Rome saith, “WN intellectuals need to be more Chesteron and less Evola, more Founding Fathers and less National Socialists, ect. ect.”
Amen and amen.
The midwestern German immigant’s fascination with Hitler is, well, bizarre. My grandfather – a son of the Mayflower no less! – fought the Nazis in WWII. Why on earth would I adopt Nazism? It is insane to an authentic American, even as it makes sense to unassimilated euromigrants.
In other words, the “vanguardists” simply force me to conclude that my forefathers were correct in so far as they rejected the Huddled Masses of Europe, let alone the rest of the world, when they left behind everything they owned and all their friends to start from scratch in the New World. They saw themselves as a people apart from the herd and every time some kook goes off on the evils of Christianity, I thank God for my Geneva and King James bibles.
Blah!
If you want to build the White people: HAVE WHITE CHILDREN. Fantasies of goosestepping and worse are not conducive to family formation, or even getting laid for that matter.
Point us to the willing flocks of white maids, would you?
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?
In other words, all dressed up and nowhere to go.
“But we have the Truth!”
So what?
The main reason that we-have-the-truth proponents get excited is that so much of mainstream culture is dedicated, directly or indirectly, to the proposition that anything mildly smacking of “racism” is complete and utter baloney. What having “the truth” means in this sense is that WNs can provide a fact-based account of their views.
In saying “so what?” to this I’m not suggesting the truth isn’t important or that it doesn’t matter at all; it’s that “the truth,” of itself, doesn’t matter enough. People can very easily assimilate the essential truths of WN without being motivated to change anything much in their lives — just like they can assimilate facts (the Truth!) about the chemical composition of table salt without that becoming the central organizing principle of their lives. To use an example many of you will be familiar with, look at Rob Lindsay.
From what I can tell, the most significant difference between a WN and most other whites (excepting loonie-level anti-racists) is that clear thinking about racial issues dominates a WN’s thoughts — as opposed to those thoughts floating around, loosely organized, somewhere in his mind, but being outweighed in import by competing, usually (but not necessarily) more immediate desires, eg getting laid, landing that new job, buying that nicer house. (An example of non-immediacy would be securing a spot in Heaven for a Christian).
The mainstream approach takes these unorganized thoughts and feelings and channels them into something politically productive, hoping and trusting that the recipient of those fruits likes what he’s seeing and ends up wanting more. Germans in the 30s didn’t have to convince Germans that they have interests as Germans; the debate was about what those interests were and how best to pursue them. You first need to reach the point where whites are comfortable thinking of their racial interests because it’s only at that point that there’s anything approaching a constituency for a more radical message.
Great. We have “… most restrictionist Congress since 1924.” Guess what? Most will be political cowards and do little to nothing to stop the Judeo-bolshevik govt. from keeping the borders wide open. Let’s hear one of them, just one, stand up and say we need to repeal The Immigration Act of 1965 or that we need to make it more fair, and start letting whites into the country. Good luck.
It is going to change. Whites will win out in the end. But it isn’t going to be by some election or succession of elections. What’s it going to take? The inevitable collapse of the system now in place. When that happens, it will be up to whites to show organizational abilities and racial cohesiveness. It’s not going to be “Mad Max” but it’s not going to be something like the Tea Party, which is already being infiltrated by the usual suspects in their usual manner.