The overwhelming defeat of the Democratic Party in Texas ranks highly among the greatest spoils of the 2010 midterm elections. The GOP now has a near supermajority in the Texas state legislature. That means bills which have failed in previous sessions – notably, immigration bills – now have a much greater chance of passage.
A whole slew of important bills have been filed by Texas state lawmakers. This is real “comprehensive immigration reform”:
– Sanctions on businesses that hire illegal aliens.
– Allowing police officers to check immigration status on the basis of “reasonable suspicion.”
– Requiring state agencies to report on the costs of providing social services to illegal aliens.
– Requiring photo IDs at polling places.
– Denying state funding to sanctuary cities.
– Prohibiting state agencies from printing signs or documents in any language other than English.
– Requiring proof of citizenship to get a driver’s license.
– Requiring Texas employers to participate in the E-Verify system.
– A challenge to birthright citizenship.
Needless to say, the stakes are high. This is our best shot ever at achieving real immigration reform in Texas. We can’t afford to let this opportunity go to waste.
Whites are already a minority in the Lone State State. This legislative session could determine whether Texas follows the Arizona model of driving out illegal aliens or the California model of becoming a magnet for them.
Granted, these are only half measures. In Arizona, these half measures are working at making life uncomfortable for illegal aliens. Since 2007, hundreds of thousands of illegals have fled the state. Many more are expected to leave if SB 1070 (and its inevitable successors) is ultimately upheld in the federal courts.
If these bills are passed and signed into law, they will inevitably invite legal challenges from the Obama Justice Department, the ACLU, and Hispanic activist groups. The national controversy that was set off by Arizona worked to our advantage. An even bigger polarizing national showdown in Texas will embolden other states and active implicit Whiteness all across America.
Victory will encourage Texas state lawmakers to push the envelope even further. Defeat will have just the opposite effect.
A heroine has emerged in the Texas immigration debate. State Rep. Debbie Riddle, R-Tomball, camped out in the Capitol for 36 straight hours to file Arizona-style immigration reform in Texas.
“I would have waited a month if I had to do so,” said Riddle. “The overwhelming majority is saying that they want something done. They want their families to be safe. My constituents want to see that their representative is just as serious about getting the job done this session as they are. They’ve got a real fire in their bellies.”
Texas voters consider immigration the most important issue facing the state. 53 percent of Texans want to adopt Arizona-style immigration reform.
The state cheap labor lobby is opposing all the immigration reform measures. “The bottom line is, Congress needs to act and pass comprehensive immigration reform. We’re sympathetic to the fact that Congress hasn’t acted. We’re frustrated, too,” said Bill Hammond, President of the Texas Association of Business.
As in other states, a coalition of Hispanic activist groups, big business, and labor unions are desperately trying to thwart the will of the people. Politically, their center of gravity can be found in the Democratic Party which is dependent upon the Hispanic vote. The conservative base of the Republican Party is united in its support for real immigration reform.
Gov. Rick Perry, no friends of ours, stands in the way of pushing through several of the most important of these measures. Earlier this year, he went on record saying he opposed bringing Arizona-style immigration reform to Texas. Lately, he has refused to comment on whether he would actually veto popular legislation that crosses his desk.
Fortunately for us, Perry is nursing his own presidential ambitions of following Dubya to the White House. He has a new book out and has been trying to look tough on border security. When Obama landed in Texas over the summer, Rick Perry made national news when he confronted him over his handling of drug violence along the border.
Appearing on the Greta van Susteran show, Gov. Perry recently labeled Obama and the Democratic Congress “abject failures” for their handling of border security. His own record on that subject is rather unimpressive. The most we can hope for out of Rick Perry is that nursing his vain fantasy of becoming president will force this opportunistic politician to sign our bills.
In 2008, the Huckster signed the NumbersUSA pledge in a desperate attempt to court the restrictionist vote. His record on immigration was a sore point with the conservative base.
Get ready for a fight in Texas over immigration early next year.
We are going to invest a lot of time and energy in doing what we can to make an impact on the outcome of this debate. This is a practical way that our Texas readers can do something to move the political spectrum in our direction. The most likely course of action will be to bombard the dithering Rick Perry with faxes and emails to ensure we get our way.
White Nationalists were late to the party in Arizona. In Texas, we know the stakes of inaction. This time around we will have months to prepare for the final showdown on immigration.
The men who died at the Alamo were willing to give their lives for a free and independent Texas. It would reflect poorly upon White Nationalists if we are unable to spare a few minutes of our time to send an email or make a phone call.
And just what should white nationalists do? If you attempt to speak to people about immigration from a racial perspective you’ll be called a Nazi. The trouble with conservative types is that they oppose illegal immigration on a legal, rather than racial, basis. The presence of illegals means laws are being broken and, gasp, the Constitution is being violated. Never mind the fact that they’re an alien race and culture who can never fit in to American society and will only recreate the social problems of Mexico wherever they reside.
If mestizos weren’t so criminally inclined, and if they spoke English and flew the American flag most cons and libs would be all too happy to let them stay. Even today many conservatives admonish illegal mestizos to come in “the right way”. In other words, if they just enter legally all is fine and Rush and Newt won’t oppose them. This merely underscores the trouble with conservative opposition and why they ultimately fail time and again to defend white racial interests.
I agree that at this time WN’s need to stop debating about the Third Reich or seeking meaning in a Julius Evola tome and make immigration the number one topic on the agenda. The trouble is that it’s not so easy when you’re dealing with a white population that is hopelessly brainwashed.
“And just what should white nationalists do?”
What i do is try and move people one step at a time in a WN direction.
The line i take with the sort of people you’re describing is a civic nationalist one saying it takes time for immigrants to assimilate into the national civic values especially if their own background is very different and that means immigration needs to be slow enough and controlled enough to allow people time to adapt fully.
Then i go into the standard line about how the “left” party wants immigrants votes so bad and the “right” party has a fifth column that wants cheap labor so bad that they’re not giving enough time for people to assimilate properly.
This then leads into saying that because immigration has been too much too fast in recent decades it needs to be slowed right down or even halted completely for a while to give the more recent arrivals time to assimilate fully.
nb This argument works on both legal and illegal immigration.
nb You can make this argument without ever saying you believe it yourself – just making the point that even if the proposition nation idea was valid it would still take time for people to assimilate completely.
nb Hopefully while one set of people are making this argument another set of people (or the same set with different hats) are making the HBD argument elsewhere. If both memes are active then they’ll start to combine.
If mestizos weren’t so criminally inclined,
— But they ARE ciminally inclined, and that won’t change.
and if they spoke English
— But they dont, and won’t, since there are so many, they don’t have to, and they dislike gringos, anyhow, so why learn?
and flew the American flag
— But they don’t and won’t (at least honestly) because their true intent is Reconquista.
most cons and libs would be all too happy to let them stay.
— Opinions change with enough accumalated experience to the contrary.
Even today many conservatives admonish illegal mestizos to come in “the right way”
— But they won’t — and that’s LUCKY FOR US.
The Left is the runaway train it can only go on from here as an anti-white movement. True there is global warming and some enviro issues and maybe the homo rackets but truth be it the Left looks like a non-white movement with white managers who play treason as their legitimacy card.
We are this close to introducing the phrase “anti-white” into the “respectable” discourse, once that is done WNs as Hunter describes will have no real purpose except to take up bandwidth.
“The trouble is that it’s not so easy when you’re dealing with a white population that is hopelessly brainwashed.”‘
The way to deprogram cult victims, is to not to argue with them, but to repeatedly point out the inconsistencies and double standards in their fake religions. This level of brainwashing took a long time to put in place, so it requires some effort to undo it.
My advice is to learn to identify where there are double standards, applied to whites and white countries vs non-whites and point them out repeatedly, in a non-confrontational way. You won’t convert people on the spot, but you can shift them little by little.
In the case of Mexico from what I understand, they have very strict laws concerning illegal immigration, but Mexico demands America open its borders to Mexicans.
>We are this close to introducing the phrase “anti-white” into the “respectable” discourse
I am looking forward to that day.
This relatively good news about the Texas legislature is more evidence in favor of mainstream engagement. With majorities that huge, they might actually be able to pass some anti-immigrant legislation, or at least create more national polarization around the issue. However, in looking toward the long term, there is another reason for voting in as many anti-immigrant system politicians as possible at the state level. As conditions deteriorate over the long term, most observers on our side agree that power will devolve to the states. In this case, I want as many governors and state legislators in office as possible with an unfriendly attitude toward immigration. It is the governors and not the Feds who will control the national guards. If the FEDGOV does actually begin to lose power, those state leaders will have a strong incentive to be a lot more responsive to their local people if they want to retain their own power. If they don’t have to worry about the Feds suing them in Federal court, they will pass an Arizona law.
In politics, the right thing is almost always done for the wrong reasons. This is an opportunity to push the envelope on immigration in Texas that is unlikely to come again. The outcome in the immigration debate in Texas will also have a direct impact upon the fate of similar bills in other states like Georgia and South Carolina.
Please keep in mind that if Texas voters pass this bill for ostensibly “civic nationalist” reasons they will inevitably be browbeat as “racists” by the media. That is exactly what we want to happen.
Texas is a Southern state. I’m quite sure that millions of White Texans want to expel illegal aliens for the right reasons.
They might not say it in public, but that is what they are thinking in private. I know for a fact that is true of Whites in Alabama and Georgia.
This is all good news. So what should White Nationalists in Texas do? Those with the interest and aptitude need to immerse themselves in the issue and then articulate a position that is more radical than the mainstream and closer to what we want. They need to say, “Yes, proposal X, Y, and Z is a good start, BUT . . . ”
1. A focus on illegal immigration is a mistake because illegals can be legalized with simple legislation. We have to change the debate in the direction of race (culture is not enough).
2. It is not enough to talk about culture and assimilation, since Mexicans and non-whites are too different from us racially. We really don’t or shouldn’t want to assimilate them.
3. Once illegal immigration is stopped, we need to pursue a cut off of all immigration.
4. Once all immigration is stopped, the debate has to be moved toward repatriation of non-white immigrants who are already here.
That is how we get to the ethnostate: We engage the outer edge of the mainstream, then we move it in our direction. We build trust, credibility, personal relationships there. But we always articulate our message. We always maintain a clear vision of where we want to go. We always move discourse, individuals, resources — and eventually even policy — toward the White Republic, if I may borrow a phrase.
We will not get to the White Republic by “dissolving” ourselves in the mainstream, by ceasing to articulate and promote our agenda, by putting our money and our time at the service of system candidates.
How about, “it’s the ECONOMY, stupid?!” In this economy, there is absolutely NO reason whatsoever to NOT put a freeze on ALL immigration! People are living in tent cities, because the list of jobs that “Americans don’t want to do” is exploding.
If you buy the government bullshit that only 12-15 million Mestizos are living and working “in the shadows” when they are not marching and demand “their rights” under a Mexican flag, then that’s 12-15 million “shovel-ready” jobs that could open up right now without involving another $700 billion stimulus.
Aracial Message of the Day: The boat is swamped; it’s sinking and taking on water that we can’t bail out fast enough. It’s time to eject all these stowaways and pull to shore!
Mr. Dithers: “The trouble with conservative types is that they oppose illegal immigration on a legal, rather than racial, basis.”
I disagree. Polls show that a solid majority of this country wants to stop illegal immigration. I seriously doubt they want to stop it simply “because it’s illegal.”
People get this issue in a very intuitive way. They know that a job for an illegal is a job that a native born citizen doesn’t get. The know that jobs they started out doing when they were younger are no longer there for their kids. They see their neighborhoods, towns and cities transformed over the course of their lifetimes, with new ethnic enclaves sprouting up where english isn’t spoken. They are confronted with public schools chock full of immigrant kids who don’t speak english. They either have to go to great lengths to move their kids to better schools or suffer the indignity of knowing they couldn’t do enough to give their kid a good education.
And in places where the invasion is well underway, like California, they see the Mexicanization of the culture in full effect, in the music, the television, the public sphere in general.
White people might speak in terms like “what part of illegal don’t you get?” which confirms what you’re saying, but I think that for many there’s an underlying sense of their identity being at risk. A sense that their way of life is being replaced. And the replacement way of life – an ugly stew of underclass American and Mexican elements mixing together – ain’t looking so hot. It may not be explicitly about race for them, but it’s damn close. Close enough.
This is a winning issue for white advocates because most white people are already there, waiting for someone to lead.
Greg Johnson is back with more prescriptions of political insanity. His area of expertise is neo-fascist European philosophy. It is really starting to show here. Texas is not San Francisco.
Allow me to explain:
1.) Texas is a White minority state. In other words, whether Texas is saved or lost depends upon the near political future. It could go the way of Arizona or California.
2.) Because of redistricting, the “system politicians” who won last Tuesday will likely ensure Republican control of the House for the next decade.
– In Texas, a Republican supermajority of “system politicians” in the state legislature and a governor will redraw a political map that favors Whites for the next ten years. This gives us more time.
– The redrawing of House congressional districts nationwide by “system politicians” in a way that favors Republicans guarantees that “comprehensive immigration reform” is dead for a decade.
That means the federal government won’t be able to step in and put illegal aliens – which are infesting Texas – on a “path to citizenship.” Again, this gives us more time.
3.) With a Republican supermajority in the Texas state legislature and a Republican governor, we have our best shot ever of passing through immigration bills that can make life uncomfortable for illegal aliens and mestizos in general in Texas.
In Arizona, hundreds of thousands of illegals have already fled the state. If SB 1070 is upheld by the courts, it could produce an exodus back to Mexico or to some other state where it will become a problem there. That’s what we want to happen in Texas.
4.) I agree with the necessity of activating implicit Whiteness. But how do you do that?
The answer is obvious: you push modestly in the mainstream. That will produce a vicious, insane anti-White backlash from the Left that will polarize Whites and Hispanics. As Whites are browbeat by the mainstream media for their “racism,” many will start to wake up. The entire state of Texas will be our platform for racial polarization.
Alternatively, you can post anonymous radical messages on obscure White Nationalist sites like Counter-Currents that no one reads. That will wake up a few dozen people at most while simultaneously crippling their ability to communicate with and influence their peers.
5.) Everything that White Nationalists can hope for on immigration is ALREADY mainstream: ending birthright citizenship, attacking the 14th amendment, deporting illegals, denying social services to illegals, cutting legal immigration, building the border fence, putting troops on the border, etc.
Now, given the above, the reasonable course of action is precisely what I have described: “dissolving” ourselves into the mainstream. Again, everything we want is already possible, so why in the hell should we link ourselves to inane political albatrosses like fascism and anti-Christianity?
Look at it this way: if the communists had decided to “stand firm” on their platform in the 1950s, they would have lost. Instead, they went the implicit route: reinvented themselves as “human rights activists” and “civil rights activists” and “environmentalists.”
They broke their agenda up into pieces, disguised it with the cloak of mainstream ideas, and inserted themselves into the mainstream. We can do the exact same thing in Texas right now with immigration and other issues of interest to us.
6.) If we want to be taken seriously, we should position ourselves within the mainstream, gain legitimacy in our communities, and lead them in a more radical direction by starting where people are today, which is already pretty good on immigration. Pushing from that end is far more effective than crying about how all is lost on the fringe.
7.) Without legitimacy and credibility, White Nationalists are not going to be in any position to move Whites in Texas in a more racial direction. The whole idea of leadership is based on starting where people are today and moving them in your chosen direction.
8.) Greg Johnson isn’t engaging the “outer edge” of the mainstream. Hell, he isn’t even engaging the “outer edge” of the White Nationalist movement! You can’t push anyone in the mainstream from the fringe either. You can only push from within the mainstream.
9.) Any “vision” that is articulated to an audience of Whites in Texas who are concerned about immigration should be adapted to their experience. That completely rules out everything Counter-Currents is doing.
10.) The fastest way to reversing our decline in Texas is to support the “system politicians” who advance our interests (replacing those who don’t), adapting our message to the experience of Whites in Texas, starting where people are today and gaining the credibility necessary as leaders of our communities to move the masses in our chosen racial direction.
By far the best way to racialize implicit Whites in Texas is through polarizing national showdowns of the likes we just saw in Arizona earlier this year.
11.) Greg Johnson is promoting a politically insane agenda on Counter-Currents which will never resonate with Texas voters. Anti-Christianity. The federal government having the power to arrange marriages. Coming on strong with European fascism. Anti-Americanism.
12.) Essentially, Greg Johnson wants us to approach Texas voters with Glenn Miller’s political message. Why anyone listens to him at this point is beyond me.
Suppose everyone in Texas listened to Greg Johnson’s hippie advice and rejected the system. The effective result of that would be the complete triumph of our enemies and a total loss for White people in that state.
The “conservative types” in Texas are Southerners who more often than not oppose “illegal immigration” for the right reasons.
In regards to barb’s points:
1. Their criminality is not the point. Just like Asians’ high intelligence and other good qualities isn’t the point. The point is survival of our race, regardless of our qualities or theirs.
2. Given that the brown hordes absorbed and learned the WHITE man’s language, namely SPANISH, there’s no reason they couldn’t learn English. We want to prevent them from learning English so they don’t assimilate and breed with us. It’s wishful thinking to suppose they won’t learn English like the Africans and Asians before them.
3. Reconquista is the fantasy of a few Mexican losers without the will or ability to win any such war (and it would be a war against the most powerful military in the world vs. some disorganized wetbacks). Again, the worst scenario in the long run is assimilation and an English speaking Brazil in North America.
How you get anything practical: You start by gauging your ability to motivate people on a small scale. If you can’t get 20 people to meet with you in the real world, then trying to micromanage a hypothetical ideology/movement on a national scale is nothing short of lunacy. If you go into something with a thousand points to get across and win someone over to, then your odds of walking away disappointed are much greater than if you were to have just one or two points you wanted to get a consensus on. This little morsel of practicality is something that has alluded WN for years.
You mention “a clear vision of where we want to go.” Can you give a clear vision now?
Disagree all you want but if a had a dime every time a white person said “if illegals would just speak English and obey the law……,” I could quit my day job. What’s lost on them is that most Mestizos won’t do those things because they can’t and I’ve known of a few that won’t because blatant disrespect of American culture is a badge of honor among them. Sadly, there’s lots of airheads who think if Mestizos are marinated in American culture just long enough they will become brown June and Ward Cleavers, or the brown Brady bunch.
And who will tell them that the differences between us are racial and that these differences are immutable? FOX News, The American Spectator, or National Review, Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin? The conservative establishment had almost nothing to do with the anti-immigrant fervor sweeping the nation and aside from a few sincere men and women, most in Congress are cynically using this issue to solicit donations and prolong their political careers but otherwise have no plans to make good on their campaign promises to deal with the problem.
“Worse is better” has notched a victory in this case. The brown cancer has metastasized so rapidly throughout parts of America that virtually no white person save the very wealthy can ignore it any longer. It’s touched all of us in some way. Combine this with their violent crime and their hate whitey pro-immigration rallies and they’ve even convinced many liberals I know that something must be done about it.
Nancy Pelosi wants a vote on the DREAM ACT:
Lou Dobbs is coming to FOX News in 2011:
I live in Texas. We are southern Anglo in outlook and people my age (28) still have severely non-brainwashed pre-baby boomer racist grandparents around.
This is good.
When I talk to people about this sorta thing I just start talking about what my grandparents have said over the years (1 out of 100 “meskins” is a great, hard workin’ person, and the other 99 are completely worthless, etc etc) and Ill be damned: people start laughing and talking about the same kind of stuff their grandparents say, out loud, in mixed company….and, next thing you know, “racism” is PaPa and Granny, not Adolf Hitler.
Be humorous about it, talk about grandparents saying “non-PC” stuff at Thanksgiving, Christmas, etc, and you’ve opened the door. Thats all we need.
1.) It was the conservative base and a handful of Republicans in Congress who defeated “comprehensive immigration reform” under George W. Bush. Not the White Nationalist movement.
2.) The “anti-immigrant fervor” sweeping the nation … you can thank the conservative base, talk radio, and Republicans in the Senate, House, Governorships, and state legislatures for that. Not the White Nationalist movement.
The polarizing showdown over immigration in 2010 … talk radio, Russell Pearce, Jan Brewer, NumbersUSA, etc. The flood of Arizona-style immigration bills coming next year. Also the conservative base.
3.) There was no victory for the “worse is better” theory. White Nationalists are no better off today than they were two years ago. Nothing has changed in the White Nationalist movement.
The change came within the hated mainstream … in large part thanks to Lou Dobbs, Tom Tancredo, Pat Buchanan, Roy Beck and countless others who did the hard work of hammering away at the issue for years until it reached a critical mass with the conservative base.
4.) If “worse is better,” then California ought to be great for us. We got more illegal aliens and Hispanics there than anywhere else. Did “worse is better” pay off in California? Not at all.
5.) Finally, the backlash against illegal immigration, multiculturalism, political correctness … every bit of it has worked to the advantage of the conservatives and the Tea Party, not White Nationalists, who had no interest in building a real world infrastructure and as a result were not in any position to take advantage of the opportunity.
Michael Steele on the way out as GOP Chairman:
Governor-elect Branstand of Iowa, “system politician,” will sign Arizona-style immigration reform in Iowa and crack down on sanctuary cities:
1) “Conservative” George W. Bush demanded amnesty legislation in 2005 and 2006. A coalition of grassroots conservatives, independents and populists should be credited with applying enough pressure on their elected representatives to defeat the legislation.
2) Most people don’t need a conservative pundit to tell them what they already know, viz., that illegal immigration is bad and ruining the country. Sure, a little wordsmithing by someone like Pat Buchanan doesn’t hurt but in the end people would oppose it regardless of what popular conservative scribblers say because they have first hand experience that it increases crime and lowers the quality of life in their community. Don’t forget that Pat doesn’t want immigration stopped; he just wants it temporarily halted so the “melting pot” can work its magic. His bird brained solution would destroy the unique European genotype over time but race and DNA never meant anything to a Christian anyway.
3) You seem to measure success by whether or not a regular white person becomes an avowed white nationalist overnight. Nothing changes a person’s thinking and places them on a rightward (and racialist) trajectory like experiencing first hand the deleterious effects of illegal immigration or an integrated school or neighborhood or losing out on a promotion due to aggressive affirmative action policies. How do you think I got to be the way I am? How did you get to be the way you are?
4) You’re missing the point. Worsening social, economic and political conditions has a tendency to radicalize people in a myriad of ways. Would the American nation been borne had King George repealed the stamp and whiskey taxes and provide the colonists the representation they sought? Deteriorating conditions led to a radicalization of the colonists.
Do you honestly think there would be a tea party phenomena if John McCain had been elected or if the economic crash of 2008 had not occurred? You’re belief that the political status quo is better than a radical left alternative (Obama) would only delay our inevitable minority status and diminution of our political power by a few decades because it would lull people into a fall sense of security. Some solution that is.
5) Correct, we have no “real world” infrastructure. We have ourselves to blame but are also faced with obstacles that most revolutionary movements weren’t hindered with. Firstly, white nationalists and/or “racists” are depicted by the media as the most disreputable people around next to maybe NAMBLA members. Secondly, we have no allies in the major media or at the state and national level or celebrities willing to take up our cause. Further, we have no billionaires like George Soros who can, with his enormous resources, fund and organize a fledgling WN movement.
Most WN’s are working and middle class and can’t afford more than a $25.00 donation every now and then. Moreover, there are no sitting WN’s in either chamber of Congress so I’m puzzled why you always place political failures at the doorstep of WN’s.
Indiana and Utah: please rid us of Orrin Hatch and Richard Lugar.
Another bloody Republican Senate primary election season is taking shape for 2012, with potentially serious intra-party challenges percolating in close to a half-dozen states.
Polls indicate that at least two veteran GOP senators are highly vulnerable to challenges on their right flank — Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch and Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe – and there are rumblings about potential GOP bids against Nevada Sen. John Ensign, Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Indiana Sen. Dick Lugar as well.
Greg Johnson is correct that the last thing in the world we want is for mestizos to be assimilated or for them to bastardize English as they have Spanish.
We don’t want to make it easier for them to function in our society either.
Mr Dithers: Pat Buchanan is possibly the most right wing scribbler allowed to sit at the table in D.C. He’s Jew wise and I’m sure he knows the racial score on Blacks and Mestizos. His asking for a temporary immigration time out is akin to a few nice Blacks asking to go to Little Rock’s Central High School: a foot in the door.
Wolf and HW: in the last couple years I’ve become aware of the near-impossibility of integrating even the smartest and most law-abiding Mexicans into American society. I have been astonished how even the most assimilated can still be Raza at heart.
1.) Even under the Bush administration, there were enough good Republicans to defeat “comprehensive immigration reform.” Working within the mainstream was successful on defeating amnesty and at least got part of the border fence constructed.
2.) The reason there has been such a groundswell of opposition to “illegal immigration” over the past three years is because of the influence of talk radio, not because the problem has gotten worse. Pat Buchanan has done more than anyone else in the mainstream to open up gateways to White Nationalism.
Quite the opposite. Deportations have risen under Obama and there are fewer illegals crossing the border since the economy went into a nosedive in 2007.
I myself found White Nationalism through Pat Buchanan.
3.) I measure progress by incremental changes within the mainstream on immigration. There has been dramatic progress in this area since 2006. The progress began in the second Bush term when the second attempt at amnesty got fewer voters than the first attempt. This was going on before Obama was elected.
It was easy for me to come to White Nationalism. I was raised as a racialist in an area where Whites have always been racially conscious.
4.) What will it take to discredit the “worse is better” idea?
– There is a mulatto communist in the White House. The only success that White Nationalists can point to because of that is marginally more web traffic on Stormfront.
– California is sinking under the weight of millions of illegal aliens. There isn’t a single White Nationalist elected anywhere in that state.
– We’re in the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. Whites still aren’t flocking into the White Nationalist movement.
– Millions of Whites have been robbed, raped, and murdered since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Tens of thousands of White women are raped every year.
– Harry Reid has been elected to the Senate for five consecutive terms. He keeps getting worse but nothing is getting better in Nevada.
How much worse does it have to get before it gets better?
5.) I blame White Nationalists because it is a struggle here to point out something as obvious that you have to communicate with ordinary people in own terms to persuade them of anything. Even that is an uphill struggle!
White Nationalists are so crippled by their alienation that they have been persuaded to believe DELUSIONAL ideas like every victory of our enemies is a secret victory for White Nationalists. In the White Nationalist movement, we have arguments over things like whether it is a good ideal to openly praise Hitler and march around in Nazi uniforms.
Did you see the Glenn Miller political ad? He started his appeal to Missouri voters by insulting them!
Any chance of reviewing The Anti-American Manifesto at Counter-Currents?
Time for another “Hunter Wallace” credibility audit. Read my comment above, then read HW’s reply. He is so palpably emotion driven, so illogical, so inaccurate, so intellectually unscrupulous, so incapable of distinguishing between analysis and parody, how can you believe anything he says? And unless you are here merely to gawk at an intellectual freakshow or car crash — in other words, unless you are unserious — then why visit this site at all?
Maybe if we write enough reviews of Legally Blonde 2 and Batman Begins the illegal aliens will stop invading our country.
Oh wait … I got it. We can militarize the border with the Northwest Volunteer Army.
Senator Glenn Miller (Fantasist-MO) can introduce the bill after taking his seat in Washington next year.
“It is not enough to talk about culture and assimilation, since Mexicans and non-whites are too different from us racially. We really don’t or shouldn’t want to assimilate them.”
It’s not enough *on its own*.
However it provides a psychological stepping stone for people who want to halt immigration but have a hard time breaking out of their anti-white conditioning.
At the same time other people, or the same people wearing a different hat, push the “race is real and it matters” meme.
At the same time other people, or the same people wearing a different hat, push all the double standards and hypocrisy inherent in the multicult to undermine the moral authority of the multicult and the anti-white conditioning dependent on that moral authority.
If an idea is too big to get through the eye of a needle then split it into its component parts and push them separately.
Eventually they’ll re-combine.
The current chairman of the House Immigration Subcommittee, Zoe Lofgren, was that idiot who invited Colbert to testify on behalf of illegal alien farmworkers.
Here’s the next chairman of the House Immigration Subcommittee:
Run for the Border, Steve King’s Coming!
100,000 of 450,000 gone so far …
Arizona immigration law provoked exodus of Hispanics: study
This phase of HWs work is effectively unclogging decades of atherosclerosis buildup from the arteries of the WN movement — sclerotic bromides like it never makes a difference who you vote for, that WNs have no reason to be engaged with the mainstream, and that the only viable path for American WN is to wait for the collapse.
Whatever the tone of HWs commentary, he’s right that American WN were totally unprepared when a lot of White folks got sufficiently fed up with the establishment to elect Old Right candidates like Rand Paul. If WN had been ready in 2008 with a credible organization with a reasonable message targeted to ordinary White folks biggest concerns, some of those Tea Party folks probably would have considered what we have to say.
What we should have spent the last 20 years doing was building up a group like the A3P. Unfortunately we didn’t do that; we weren’t ready to offer people a credible alternative to the system, so the net effect of our lack of preparation was that all these dissatisfied White folks poured their anger and energy right back into the system were they can be controlled and neutered, just like our enemies wanted and planned.
We desperately need a pro-White message that will resonate with the mainstream or we will get no where. No where. And the first step in that is understanding what people are thinking. Elections, voting trends and polls tell us something about that.
Understanding the concerns of the mainstream and then crafting the right message based on those concerns, without diluting our core ideas, strikes me as common sense.
People are basically concerned about money, jobs, education and opportunities for their kids. This isn’t complicated. Money, jobs, education, kids.
Accordingly, IMO we should just take the same appeals Republicans and Democrats have been using for decades, but just add a key twist — we let them know that whatever your concerns, they will never be met unless you embrace White identity.
Yet over at CC you seem determined to double down on aggressive anti-Christianity. Your wing of the movement doesn’t even want to retreat from aggressive anti-Christianity for short term tactical purposes. Hitler himself kept his complaints about Christianity outside the public eye (mostly). Despite his reservations about it, Hitler rarely blasted Christianity in public because he understood it would hinder what he wanted to do and NEEDED to do. Unnecessarily alienating the mainstream guarantees failure.
The conclusion for me is that your wing of the WN movement sees aggressive anti-Christianity as so essential to WN that it can’t be backed away from even for tactical purposes. This in turn makes me question your judgment given that there hundreds of millions of Whites on the globe who identify as at least nominally Christian. And I’m an atheist BTW.
And no one cares about Julius Evola. That’s just a fact. No offense. It’s not even clear to me why Julius Evola is important, and I’ve read every important Western thinker from Thales of Miletus to Michel Foucault. If Evola’s main value is his critique of liberal modernity, well then there are other thinkers who also provide cogent criticism of liberal modernity who don’t believe the strange things that Evola believes and which undermine the credibility of his entire body of work.
There are many other reasons why this phase of HWs work has value, even for WN who reject his approach.
Once again, All this analysis of voting trends tells us what the White people we need to persuade are concerned about in their actual lives, which in turn will help us develop a focused message. If the polls show, for example, that most Whites are more concerned about the economy than they are about immigration, well then that is very valuable information. A group like the A3P can use that information to put more emphasis on their economic ideas (jobs for Americans) and less on immigration. Think marketing. In order to persuade anyone, we have to get their ear first.
And regarding your comment “I don’t know why anyone reads here,” I read here because of HW, but I also keep a very close watch on the comments section. As long as guys like you, Wandrin, Captain Chaos and Notus Wind drop by from time to time, it tells me HW is saying something here worth reading.
LEW writes: “As long as guys like you, Wandrin, Captain Chaos and Notus Wind drop by from time to time, it tells me HW is saying something here worth reading.” Speaking only for myself, the reason I am here is that HW has been attacking me. The reason I have stayed around commenting is because I am convinced that he is promoting fantasy-based proposals that amount to the destruction of White Nationalism. He is not worth reading, but he very much needs to be debunked.
Here’s the bottom line: A year ago, Hunter was defending the very position that I take about the relationship between the vanguard and the mainstream. That position is still valid: There are vanguardists, and there are people with mainstream tendencies, and neither of them is going anywhere. So we need to learn how to work together. We can make life harder for each other, or we can make life easier. If we are serious about our long-term goals, obviously we need to figure out how to do the latter.
Well, I am not going anywhere. And even if I had never opened up my little website — even if I shut it down tomorrow — all those “way out” radical thinkers and opinions that you apparently wish did not exist are still not going away. We’re always going to be here, the bugaboos that you imagine being confronted with by Rachel Maddow or just the creep wannabees at the local TV station. So you’re going to have to come up a way of dealing with it, perhaps a way of drawing strength from it.
Hunter’s opinions have changed so radically because they were never grounded in objective reality to begin with. He hates me now, so he is attacking everything I stand for and do. If I embraced his “mainstream” WN fantasies tomorrow, he would be plumping for the National Alliance by next Tuesday.
Ok; fair enough; Still, if the bleachers here are only full of retards with no value to the movement, why bother to debunk? Debunk to who? Retards that are useless? No need to answer that — those are just rhetorical questions that crossed my mind.
Anyway, I’ll close with this. Despite our underlying philosophical differences, I don’t want you to go away. My main complaint with your work are the elements I and I think most people will perceive as unnecessarily alienating. Here is a specific example. You recently published an essay on CC that said some brilliant stuff IMO; I’m thinking to myself as I’m reading wow I’d really like to send this to people; but, unfortunately from my perspective, you mentioned Alex Linder and Thomas Sowell in the same essay to make a point. Now I can’t use your essay to persuade anyone or move discourse in our direction. Because if I send it to someone and they look up the things Linder has said, the persuasive value of your otherwise compelling will disappear because of an unneeded (IMO) reference to a highly divisive person. That’s my point. I don’t expect you to go away or change anything because of what some random Internet commenter says.
Anyway, best of luck with your project.
1.) I responded to your attack on Counter-Currents.
2.) In July, you came here over half a dozen times attacking me. You went over to Majority Rights and started it up there after the thread was closed here. You spent over two months attacking me on that website.
3.) My proposal is already producing results. Your proposal is a fantasy. Infiltrating the local Tea Party is not a “fantasy.” Using campaign contributions to gain influence over state reps and senators is likewise not a “fantasy.” Voting for “true reformer” candidates is not a “fantasy.” These are all practical ways we can act to reverse our decline.
4.) A year ago, I made a case for a reasonable mainstreamer position. In the last year, much has changed, and that has to be taken into account.
A year ago, we didn’t have the Arizona model. The Tea Party wasn’t the force it would ultimately become either.
5.) We have actually made a lot of progress in mainstreaming our views on immigration. I have documented this. There has been no progress on the vanguardist front.
6.) The way to deal with “vanguardism” is simply to dissolve the “mainstreamer” wing into mainstream politics: instead of calling ourselves “White Nationalists,” we can adopt a new label like “immigration reform advocates.” This is how the communists succeeded in mainstreaming their radical viws.
Everything that we could possibly hope for on the immigration front is ALREADY mainstream. In the mainstream, you can advocate deportation, shutting down legal immigration, and attacking birthright citizenship. Why not simply operate in the mainstream to advance these positions without the albatross of being associated with radical vanguardists?
7.) You have an overly high estimation of yourself. The world doesn’t revolve around you. The most significant development of this year was Arizona’s showdown with the federal government over immigration and the victories of the Tea Party in the Republican primaries.
Greg hasn’t even tried to defend his position that a “metapolitical struggle” which consists of reviewing Batman Begins and Legally Blonde 2 is getting us anywhere.
In fact, in the essay I responded to, Greg said he agreed with the vanguardist position that there was little we could do until “the collapse” of civilization comes along and solves all our problems.
He keeps repeating the empty assertion that I am wrong and supporting “system politicians” accomplishes nothing. Just read this post on Iowa or the one before it on Texas. Read tomorrow’s post on Tennessee and Monday’s on Georgia.
We can make progress by working within the system. It is no insignificant matter that Steve King is going to be in charge of the House Immigration Subcommittee and Zoe Lofgren won’t be.
I always try to write posts now around specific places. This helps keep us focused and grounded in reality.
The Tea Party has shown that organizing around an uncontroversial position like cutting spending, reducing the size of government, and lowering taxes can quickly morph into something else.
HW continues to make two claims:
(1) The positive trends we are seeing toward immigration restriction have been accomplished by people in the political mainstream, not by White Nationalists.
(2) This proves the wisdom of White Nationalists “dissolving” ourselves in the mainstream, which means: not articulating our goals and “everything we got”–money, time, everything–behind system politicians.
Every once and a while, he tosses in the notion that we don’t have to work to raise racial consciousness or radicalize our people, because the left will do that for us by calling moderates “racists.”
My answer is simple: Claim (2) does not follow from claim (1)
If things are moving in the right direction without the participation of WNs, then there is no need for WNs to parrot the current mainstream immigration restrictionist line. The mainstream can take care of itself.
If WNs want to get involved in the groundswell for immigration reform, then the best thing to do is to work to racialize and radicalize the mainstream debate, i.e., to position ourselves on the outer edge of the mainstream and move discourse, people, and resources in our direction.
What possible motive would one have to leave the racialization and radicalization of our people solely in the hands of the enemy?
Hunter writer, revealinglt:
I ask: Is there nothing more that WNs hope for on the immigration front? What else might WNs want on the immigration front that Republicans are not offering?
Err, that should have read “revealingly.”
I am glad that ordinary people are supporting system politicians pushing immigration reform, if they don’t know any better. Apparently there are large numbers of people who don’t know any better who are now pushing for mainstream immigration control proposals. The people who don’t know any better might just stop illegal immigration, and as I have said before, that is really the only thing happening in politics today from which we White Nationalists have anything to hope.
But White Nationalists do know better. We know that stopping illegal immigration is not enough, because non-whites are coming here legally too. We know, moreover, that stopping all immigration would still not be enough, because given higher non-white birth rates, whites will still be demographically swamped.
So my proposal is this: Let the vast number of good people who don’t know any better keep pushing for a halt to illegal immigration. They have been doing just fine without us.
The small number of people who do know better — we White Nationalists — need to articulate our agenda; we need to reserve our scarce funds and manpower for pursuing our agenda; we need to engage and radicalize the mainstream; we need to bring the mainstream toward the White Republic.
LEW, your point RE Tards is well-taken.
RE Linder: You worry too much about “linkages.” I suggest you share the essay and see if anybody objects to a reference to Linder. I suspect that nobody will. And what if they do? My suggestion is simple: Use Linder so that you can stake out your position as sensibly moderate, not like people like Linder and Pierce. You can tell them that eventually, events may spin out of control and the country will start listening to maniacs like Linder. The only way to do that is to listen to moderates like you before it is too late. It is persuasive, and it is also true.
One more thing: It was people like Linder and Pierce, not people like Sam Francis and Jared Taylor, who were more persuasive to me in the long run, in spite of their unattractive excesses.
Hunter acts as if nobody has ever been persuaded by a radical message. I know that is not the case. I have heard that during Pierce’s tenure with the National Alliance, as many as 20,000 people were members at one time or another. Many left, of course, for whatever reasons.
There is a speech by Pierce, “Out of the Darkness” at NationalVanguard.org that makes a very good case for vanguardism against the kind of buffoonery being promoted here. I highly recommend it.
Here is the Pierce link: