Over the past week, I have spent a lot of time exploring the divide within the White Nationalist movement between the “mainstreamer” and “vanguardist” camps. There has been a furious discussion about this issue going on in the comments.
Normally, I don’t write on Sunday, but something happened yesterday of such relevance to this debate that I can’t help but comment on the matter. It appears our friends in the National Socialist Movement are back in the news.
This time around they returned to Phoenix to hold yet another successful police rally:
The NSM is trying to capitalize on White unease over non-White immigration to promote a National Socialist worldview in the United States. As we saw in Knoxville, the messenger is just as important as the message being sent. By refusing to adapt their rhetoric to the experience of their audience, the NSM has once again courted public rejection and associated patriotic immigration reform with Nazism.
It pains me that I have to struggle to point this out: Americans don’t want their immigration reform served with a side order of swastikas, anti-Americanism, and anti-Christianity. If you only separate this combo into its constituent parts and repackage the immigration reform in more palatable terms, you can seize power and get remedial legislation passed right now.
This debate should have been settled twenty years ago by David Duke’s political success in Louisiana. It is a testament to the stagnation of the White Nationalist movement since that time (caused primarily by the emphasis on “spreading ideas” anonymously in cyberspace) that we are still having it at this late juncture.
Both Tennessee and Arizona are great states for us. In the 2010 midterm elections, the Republicans captured control of the Tennessee governorship and state legislature. In the 2011 legislative session, Tennessee will almost certainly pass Arizona-style immigration reform, which has the support of over 70 percent of voters.
Across the Heartland, White America is poised to pass restrictionist laws (much to the regret of our enemies) on the basis of the Arizona model. I have already drawn attention to such movements in Utah, Mississippi, Texas, Iowa, and Wisconsin. More states are prepared to follow which I have yet to cover. I will be returning to this subject next week.
Some in the White Nationalist movement continue to insist that “shutting up and blending in” is not the path forward. In their words, it is “a prescription for oblivion, not progress.” The NSM has taken their advice to heart and continues to press this model in the public sphere.
If everyone in Arizona was equally determined to follow them off the plank into the deepest waters of political insanity, I shudder to think where our cause would be today. Instead of driving over 100,000 illegal aliens out of the state this year alone, we would be welcoming them in ever larger numbers.
Err….USS Liberty story.
Here is a “practical proposal” on Counter-Currents written by Greg Johnson in 2003. In this essay, Johnson talks about things like banning legal immigration, ending birthright citizenship, deporting illegals, and cracking down on employers of illegal aliens … all things which are actually in the works today.
Your point being . . . ?
Now, a film project would a project worth funding, agree 100%.
Edward Burns made The Brothers McMullen for 28K.
(1) All of the above requires “working within the system.”
(2) The hated “system politicians” are the ones who are actually moving the ball forward on these issues.
(3) Vanguardists were incapable of accomplishing any of these objectives. Instead, the worthless conservatives who supposedly always fail are the ones tackling the immigration problem, especially NumbersUSA which waters down the rhetorical message.
(4) As we saw in Proposition 187, there are real differences between “system politicians” and elections have major consequences. If Gray Davis hadn’t been elected Governor of California, there is a real chance that Proposition 187 would have been upheld.
(5) The vanguardist triumph in California (defeat of Proposition 187) didn’t result in any victory for White people. On the contrary, illegal aliens spent the next decade invading and occupying much of Southern California.
(6) You have a long history of setting lofty goals untethered to any practical plan for advancing those goals. You are like a football coach who states that touchdowns would be good for us without calling any plays that take into account the facts on the ground of our dire racial predicament.
RE: Changing the culture through film
Mel Gibson drove the Jews into a deranged frenzy with The Passion of the Christ. This film was the cultural equivalent of the Arizona law.
It is unfortunate that Mel got drunk and let his true beliefs about the Jews slip out in public — he said that the Jews were orchestrating wars among other things, which is the truth.
The reason this is unfortunate is that now Mel is less effective than he would have been had he just kept his mouth shut. Mel might have been able to continue making films that needle and provoke Jews for years to come if he hadn’t let his true views slip out.
Once again, this is proof that taking a soft stance in public works. If Mel told the truth about the Jews in public years ago, he would never have been able to make that film and elicit a reaction from Jews that showed many Christians how much Jews hate them.
Sometimes it’s better to keep the truth to yourself if you get a free hand to operate within the mainstream in return. My guess is that Pat B has been using this approach for decades.
As I have said before:
(1) The current direction on immigration is promising.
(2) But what immigration reformers want stops far short of what White Nationalists want. We want a complete stop to non-white immigration. We want to remove all existing non-whites from our living space, whether through repatriation, expulsion, or territorial partition. None of these ideas are on the menu in the mainstream. Is there a single mainstream politician who would consider any of these sorts of proposals? Because, in the long run, nothing less will save our race.
(3) Those WNs who are interested in political activism on this cause need to immerse themselves in the debates, build up connections and credibility among those pushing immigration reform, stake out positions to the right of the mainstream, and work to move the mainstream in our direction.
(4) I have constantly emphasized the necessity of creating front groups controlled by genuine WNs that engage the mainstream and work to move discourse, people, and resources in our direction. I also argue that WNs can use more mainstream figures to our benefit, eg, Patrick Buchanan, whose books and columns work to bring people in our direction.
(5) I am really sick of the moronic meme that vanguardists are defeatists. If I were a defeatist, I would not be involved with this. But I do think that victory requires that people uphold radical and unvarnished truths as intelligently as possible, and that is what Kevin MacDonald does. That is what I do.
(6) I do think that Hunter Wallace’s proposals are prescriptions for defeat, however, since they amount to the destruction of the WN movement.
(7) Existing trends are moving in the right direction, but they will not continue on to the ends that we want if we shut up, blend in, and spend all our time and money lobbying for something less than what is necessary to preserve our race on this continent.
I am weary of repeating myself here. But I feel it is important, in case there are intelligent people who are being led astray by fantasists and malevolent morons.
You don’t have much of a case to rest. Things got worse in California, the voters reacted with proposition 187, and it got blocked by the federal courts. Not only that, but Pete Wilson had to weather attacks from “conservatives” Jack Kemp, William Bennett and others in the establishment. In the end the system failed the will of the voters and white citizens of California, but the system somehow still works in your mind.
Every state can see what illegal immigration did to the once most prosperous state in the union and as a result most are trying to take measures to prevent the same fate from befalling their states.
1) Elections have consequences:
Boy do they ever!! Republicans controlled both chambers of Congress from 1994 through 2006. Not one piece of legislation was introduced to roll back multiculturalism, illegal and legal immigration, affirmative action, free trade policies that have destroyed the white middle class or to call attention to the horrific black on white crime statistics.
Note: Hunter says that radical political change takes place in times of peace, plenty and goodwill and the fact that no changes benefiting whites were made throughout the booming middle and late 90’s must be some sort of anomaly.
* In 1994 Republicans were elected with the charter to end affirmative action but betrayed the voters. People got excited and active just like you propose but in the end they were rewarded by a big stiff one in their backsides by the conservative establishment. But the system still works for us and the conservatives are our salvation.
* The conservative grassroots despise John McCain yet somehow he wound up winning the Republican nomination in 2008. Almost all major candidates had a history of illegal alien coddling (save for Paul and Romney) but the system works.
* Republicans had the 41 votes to to filibuster the confirmation of radical leftist Jewess and red diaper baby Elena Kagan. Their opposition crumbled in the face of intense lobbying efforts by the Jews to confirm her. Yep, elections have consequences and patriotic, Constitution loving white Americans needed more Crisco oil after than one, too.
* “Conservative” George W. “bring em on” Bush vocally supported Michigan’s upholding of affirmative action laws in college and law school admissions. His reasoning: racial diversity is more important that merit. Conservative screamers took to the airwaves but in the end nothing changed. But the system is a thing of beauty to behold at times.
* The god king of modern conservatism, Ronni Reagan, signed amnesty legislation legalizing three million mostly criminals and misfits from the third world. He also signed the family reunification act that led to the chain migration that will turn whites into a minority well before 2050. Thank God Ronnie and not some liberal was in office. The liberal might have airlifted 10 million non-whites to America.
* Talk Radio
Somehow we are to believe if Lou Dobbs, Limbaugh, Ingraham, Savage, et al., became supporters of amnesty, their listeners would follow suit. It’s only because of the principal and moxy of these stalwarts that most of white America is still solidly anti-amnesty/anti-illegal. If they were spouting vanguardist tripe most of white America would have stopped voting, joined the Democratic party or committed suicide.
* Sarah Palin & Glenn Beck
Every one of their utterances and bodily movements is calculated to raise white racial consciousness to alert whites of the coming danger. They sure are clever but little do they know that Hunter has cracked their secret ways and coded talk. Not only that but erecting shrines to these two coupled with regular ode’s will convince the mass of whites that white nationalists aren’t so darn weird and out of touch after all.
As you can see conservatives have romped from one political victory to the next. There’s no reason, no reason at all to be suspicious or cynical of system politicians or of the very system itself. Only a madman could think such things.
There is already a site which focuses on “working within the system” to stem the tide of immigration and the daily minutiae politics: Vdare.
Looks like my latest comment didn’t go through. Perhaps Hunter is afraid of a debate. This is the first time any of my comments didn’t make it through so I’m sure it’s no accident.
I found this over at Chechar’s blog:
I honestly don’t know how to respond to this. This pithy statement sums up everything about Johnson that I have been referring to.
How about starting with small practical steps forward? You know like being attracted to women, learning how to talk to them, dating a woman and having sex, getting her pregnant, raising a child, etc.
Ordinary people find meaning in their lives in all kinds of ways: religion, starting families, owning property, becoming leaders in their communities and so on. It is unhealthy to be this alienated and out of touch with reality.
No perfected god-like master race of Lord of the Rings elves or Star Trek macrocephalic aliens is going to spring from this sort of radical worldview. In fact, no children at all are going to come from it.
That’s one hell of a pick up line though!
Mr. Dithers comment was stuck in the spam filter. It has been restored.
Speaking of mainstream appeal, as far as I am aware, Jared Taylor has never referred to our illustrious president as a “nigger” – however true and merited this description may be.
I wonder why those badmouthing Hunter’s mainstream approach weren’t at the NSM rally? After all, that’s what they say they want isn’t it?
I’m quite confident that I have the stronger case to make. Just a few hours ago, you were pitching the absurd idea of lining up behind a Satanist Neo-Nazi like Cliff Herrington and the NSM. Their existence accomplishes nothing more than making White Nationalists look like kooks and ridiculous asocial rejects. They associate immigration reform with every Hollywood stereotype imaginable.
But wait … the NSM aren’t “Republicans” and “conservatives.” You support them … even though they accomplish nothing for White people and actually setback our efforts to make inroads into a mass constituency. It is probably not insignificant that you are also a supporter of Alex Linder who defines White Nationalism on the basis of his litmus test of supporting genocide.
(1) California voters had the opportunity to vote on Proposition 187. They voted for it and passed it.
Note: What were the vanguardists doing in California in the 1990s?
(2) Proposition 187 was attacked with the usual legal challenges. Those legal challenges were appealed to the Ninth Circus by Pete Wilson, a “system politician,” who in the radical worldview was no different from Gray Davis.
Note: The vanguardists were wrong that there are no substantial differences between “system politicians.”
(3) Gray Davis got elected and killed the lawsuit.
Note: Elections have consequences. The vanguardists got their way. The inevitable result was a disaster for Whites in California.
(4) Unlike California, Jan Brewer was reelected in Arizona. As Governor, Brewer will take SB 1070 to the Supreme Court were it will survive and establish precedent that will allow other states to pass similar laws.
Note: Meanwhile, the vanguardists will sit on the sidelines, shooting spitballs at the White people who have the shoulders against the back of the vehicle trying to get it out of the ditch. They have absolutely nothing substantial to show for their activity.
Instead, they spend all their time trying to make it easier for Democratic politicians like Gray Davis and Terry Goddard to win important elections. Their position on the issues is virtually identical to the platform of the NAACP, ADL, and La Raza.
There was no failure of the system. We lost an important election. If we had won the election, the appeal would have gone forward, and Proposition 187 might have survived and become a model for other states to follow like SB 1070.
Note: The vanguardists got their way in California. The consequence of this was that the state was overrun by millions of illegal aliens. Los Angeles is now for all intents and purposes an occupied city. Yet there isn’t any thriving vanguardist groups in that state.
The vanguardists seem to have no plan for dealing with the problem aside from parading around in Knoxville and Phoenix in Stormtrooper uniforms. They would be delighted if states like Florida, Texas, and Arizona follow California down the same road to destruction.
Mr. Dithers doesn’t even have his facts right: the Democrats controlled the Senate from 2001 to 2003 after Jeffords switched parties.
This is utterly false.
1.) There were multiple bills introduced by all sorts of Republicans at the state and federal level that addressed the problem of illegal immigration in this time period.
2.) Affirmative action was banned in several states including California.
3.) The largest crime bill in American history was passed under the Clinton administration.
The Department of Justice also kept records of interracial violent crime throughout this period. They are cited in the Amren reports on the subject.
4.) Multiculturalism was repeatedly attacked at the federal and state level with English only initiatives some of which were signed into law.
5.) There have been any number of outspoken opponents of free trade in both Congress and the state legislatures over the years. In his new book, George W. Bush points out that Congress refused to approve the free trade agreements he negotiated with South Korea, Panama, and Columbia.
Pat Buchanan ran for president in 1992, 1996, and 2000 on a platform that addressed almost all of our issues from free trade to immigration to foreign wars to multiculturalism.
It should be noted that Buchanan lost and the vanguardists got their way. Instead of Pat Buchanan, we got President Clinton and Bush. Because of the unpopularity of President Bush, we got President Barack Obama.
As far as the White House goes, that is 18 years of “worse is better” producing results for the White Nationalist movement, as Buchanan, Tancredo, and Ron Paul lost their presidential bids.
Affirmative action is banned in California, Washington, Nebraska, Florida, Texas, and Michigan. Because of the 2010 midterm elections, it is now banned in Arizona too. Bans on affirmative action have been on the ballot in several states like Colorado over the past twenty years.
(1) Affirmative action was weakened in the Grutter case.
(2) Affirmative action has been undermined in multiple Supreme Court cases since Bakke.
(3) Affirmative action was most recently torn down a notch in the Ricci case last summer.
(4) The votes on the Supreme Court for weakening or outright rejecting affirmative action are all from Republican appointments.
Since the Grutter case, affirmative action has actually been banned in several other states.
Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, and Ron Paul all ran for president in the 2008 presidential election. Huckabee, who had a bad record on immigration, famously took the NumbersUSA pledge in the South Carolina primary.
We had every opportunity to defeat John McCain in the 2008 Republican primary. I voted for Paul. On the other hand, plenty of other White Nationalists did not. They sat out the election and let McCain win. Then McCain was defeated by Obama with a chorus of support from the vanguardists.
But much has changed since that time. Amnesty is now a political albatross that even John McCain has backed away from. By working within the system, we gained the upper hand on the issue and forced our views into the mainstream.
Meanwhile, the vanguardists briefly made news last year when James von Brunn shot up the Holocaust Museum in DC. There was a flurry of talk about signing into law tough new hate speech legislation to censor the internet and hate crimes legislation to add stiffer penalties to racialist crimes.
As it happens, the Obama administration did get the hate crimes legislation passed in Congress, the Matthew Sheppard Act.
37 worthless “system politicians” voted against the Kagan nomination. Of course there never would have been a Kagan appointment to the Supreme Court if Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo had won the election or if Republicans still had control of the Senate.
Please note that Senator Glenn Miller of Missouri wasn’t present in Washington for the vote.
According to Mr. Dithers, “worse is better.” Now that we have a mulatto communist in the White House and have effectively lost Los Angeles to Mexico, things should obviously be improving on the vanguardist front. Yet that never seems to happen.
I would much rather have Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin talking to White America than Greg Johnson or Alex Linder. They are far more effective at getting their message across.
(1) There are over 70 members of Congress right now who favor cutting legal immigration and ending birthright citizenship.
(2) Almost half the Union has expressed interest in adopting Arizona-style immigration reform.
(3) Multiple states have banned affirmative action. Several recent Supreme Court decisions have undermined affirmative action. With two more justices like Alito and Roberts, instead of those like Kagan and Sotomayor, we can dismantle affirmative action.
(4) Multiculturalism is under attack across America. This is especially true of Oklahoma which pushes the envelope with each new election cycle.
(5) 51 percent of Americans are now opposed to free trade agreements. This includes 65 percent of Tea Party members.
(6) Support for foreign wars has ebbed to the lowest point in nearly a decade.
(7) Violent crime has declined as a serious problem since the crime package passed Congress under the Clinton administration.
(8) Thanks to conservative talk radio, we can now openly campaign in the mainstream for almost everything we can hope for on immigration.
The vote on the Kagan nomination:
Judd Gregg, Grahamnesty, and the two Maine Senators voted for Kagan. The rest of the caucus – including my two Senators in Alabama – voted against Elena Kagan.
How many vanguardists in the Senate voted against Elena Kagan? Oh wait … that’s right … the vanguardists don’t even have a dog catcher, coroner, or city council member holding elected office anywhere in America.
You work within the system BECAUSE IT’S THERE. Meanwhile, you prepare to work without the system once it collapses. NRA, GOA, Militias range from implicitly to explicitly white. Right now, they work within the system to maintain and extend 2nd Amendment gunrights, and have done a damn good job doing so. Ballots are useful for the nonce, but bullets – as usual – will make the final call. When the Universal JewPonzi collapses, men with guns will be ready to finish off the system and replace it with something far more to my/your liking. Just don’t expect the 4th Reich, ever.
Re: Greg Johnson.
(1) The current trend on immigration is promising … and that is precisely because of working within the mainstream to advance our positions on that issue. It is also happening in spite of the vanguardists who want us to lose in the name of the “worse is better” theory.
(2) The vanguardists always make the perfect the enemy of the good. It is good that we have a phalanx of congressmen opposed to birthright citizenship and cutting legal immigration, but Adolf Hitler hasn’t returned and non-Whites aren’t yet being expelled from the United States on the basis of race.
In football, this sort of thinking is the equivalent of the “hail mary” pass to the endzone. In basketball, it is the full court shot. By refusing to set realistic goals, vanguardists fail to put up any points on the board and give their consent to letting the enemy run up the score.
Let’s speak realistically for a moment: you are not going to expel non-Whites from North America when you are still debating things like amnesty for illegal aliens, affirmative action, and political correctness in the universities. In fact, you aren’t going to accomplish even small goals like securing the border with such a demoralized, apathetic constituency of anonymous people venting their frustrations on the internet.
Ending legal immigration isn’t enough. If you can’t get that though, you don’t even have a shot at deportation. So instead of whining and crying over impossible goals, a more productive way to spend our time would be working within the system to move the goal posts to set up such an unlikely touchdown scenario.
(3) As someone with actual experience in this field, White Nationalists should position themselves within the mainstream and establish their credibility on uncontroversial issues like illegal immigration.
Once they have the legitimacy necessary to be recognized as leaders within their communities, then they should move into more controversial territory. That makes a lot more sense than panhandling and preaching to anonymous alienated people on the internet who don’t even live in your state.
(4) A quick glance at Counter-Currents is sufficient to reveal that you project is aimed primarily at engaging the fringes of our society, not the outer edge of the mainstream. You are not building a bridge to the mainstream. In fact, you are blazing a trail in the opposite direction.
(5) In the essay that initiated whole controversy, Johnson stated his view that the vanguardists are right and we should wait for the collapse of civilization while passing our time reading our favorite philosophers. He doesn’t know why he is being accused of defeatism!
(6) My proposals are prescriptions for victory. I’m absolutely certain that the professional anti-racists who monitor this website are far, far, far more afraid of my recommendations than your idea of hunkering down in a bunker in San Francisco until civilization collapses around us.
Just a thought: when Germany collapsed around Adolf Hitler was that a victory or a loss for National Socialism?
(7) If we “shut up and blend in,” we can start leading our communities on immigration right now. We can get into the thick of things for a change and have some level of control over our own destiny.
Alternatively, we “stand firm” and consciously choose not to fit in and produce the results that we saw in Phoenix yesterday.
P.S. When are you going to write a book on your practical tips for dating women?
Whites will always choose GOP conservatism because of three factors:
1) They don’t realize the system is rigged against them
2) They perceive no alternative to the system and in reality there is not a credible one
3) They have normal lives and responsibilities that are impacted by system politics in important ways
All strains of WN have done a lousy job explaining #1 and providing a credible alternative for #2. That really isn’t the fault of the conservatives; it’s our own fault; someone has to explain it to them they way it was explained to us, and using rhetoric they can related to.
And there is pretty much nothing we can do about #3.
I know for a fact many Whites despise Mr. Dithers’ long list of betrayals but vote Republican anyway because their livelihoods or things they care about depend on outcomes in system politics.
Outside racialist circles, people don’t view everything through the lens of race. So if someone’s taxes might go up or down based on who gets elected, they will vote within the system and maybe even donate to system candidates even if they’re pissed about years of betrayals on immigration and AA. Likewise, abortion laws or gun laws might draw people into supporting the system even if they’re upset about other things. The pro/anti abortion sides alone probably pour millions into system coffers.
People actually have very strong incentives to stay within the system. This is why WN are dead wrong when the say Whites have no reason to ever support conservatives. This is only true if you assume race is the only thing Whites care about. It isn’t. In reality, Whites have numerous reasons to support system conservatives that have nothing to do with race.
The vanguard analysis is often very superficial on this issue because it usually overlooks factor 3. The vanguard analysis often doesn’t rise above “don’t these fools and morons realize the system won’t save them.” That kind of rhetoric will never move people out of the system and will make anyone making statements like that look like fools.
Looks like I forgot to close a tag. WordPress really needs an editor!
I think this sums up Hunter’s M.O. quite well. Refuse to sing in harmony with the Glenn Beck Glee Club, or refuse to be a butt pirate for the Republicons? Well, sir, you are a crazed Nazi who shoots up museums, and you’re completely clueless about how to talk to women and other normal people. Has it been said enough that Hunter likes the straw man approach to logic and reason?
Hunter, please share your carnal knowledge of the opposite sex. I need a good laugh.
Wow, I have just had my masculinity impugned by a guy with boobs and no beard. For once, I’m speechless.
Those aren’t boobs. They’re implicit storage compartments that will be used to funnel fresh recruits away from the next Glenn Beck rally. Hunter is like the Harriet Tubman of the pro-White movement.
In fact, California does have a law that allowes law enforcement to check on people’s immigration status when they are pulled over. When left-wing activists and politicians were confronted with this fact, while they were calling for a boycott of Arizona, none of them had a comment… It was beautiful.
I think the problem with both white nationalists and the Tim Wise’s of the radical anti-racist left is that they prefer ideological purity/being “right” over achieving any actual victory.
To actually achieve victory requires compromise, “working within the system,” building bridges with people who don’t initially share your views, etc.
I hate to give Timmy any credit, but one thing he does that white nationalists don’t do is work within the system, as disingenuous, condescending, and ultimately futile though he may be.
I think a major problem with white nationalists is that we use esoteric language and advance seemingly bizarre ideas.
For example, rather than concretely pointing out to our fellow whites that increased 3rd world immigration will diminish their job prospects and weaken the power of their favorite political party, we use terms and sentences such as “Cultural Marxism,” “diversity is a source of friction and eternal conflict,” “Jewish leftists seek to subvert western civilization,” “Low black IQ’s cannot sustain a 1st world civilization,” and so on.
Are all of these things true? For the most part, yes.
(I’m skeptical of HBD, which distinguishes me from many other WN’s, but that’s another issue)
But will they win the average white person over to our cause? Doubt it.
Remember, we are fighting an uphill battle, and most people have a negative image of us. If we are to achieve success, we’ll need to make common ground with white people in areas that aren’t necessarily white nationalist.
Once we’ve won their trust and have established ties, then we can slowly but surely make them receptive to our agenda.
As recent political trends have shown, there is an abundance of what Kevin MacDonald would call “implicit whiteness.” White people are angry, resentful, and looking for change, and whether they’re willing to admit it or not, much of this anger has to do with race.
We need to capitalize on this, rather than completely dismissing the Tea Party and Republicans as sellouts and wimps. Even James Edwards, who for the most part is spot-on, has fallen victim to this whole “don’t compromise with the system” mentality, in spite of his own mainstream success.
As painful as this might be for fellow white nationalists, we need to:
1) Drop esoteric ramblings about the Jewish Question, low black IQ’s, and other topics that most white Americans find bizarre at best, and neo-nazi at worst.
2) Cease this obsession with ideological purity. While we can make common ground with many white people, most aren’t on board with our agenda. We have to accept this fact, and go from there. We cannot expect white conservatives to advance our agenda over night.
While we may be forsaking the absolute truth, tough. As history shows, sincerity gets you nothing in politics.
3) We must unite and stop this bickering among ourselves. If we succeed, we must support each other’s success. We mustn’t dismiss white success even if it involves “compromising with the system.”
(this is related to ideological purity)
These are just a few suggestions, and I’m sure there are more.
But remember, victory is the ultimate goal.
Are you a homosexual?
Note: I just think it is ironic that you of all people are talking about creating “a god-like race” of perfected Nietzschean supermen. On second thought, it really isn’t it. See Ernst Roehm.
That was almost six months ago. I work out six days a week. If you must know, I weigh 165 pounds now. When I confronted Jeffrey Imm in June, I was 187. I have records going back almost a year. By January, I will be 160 and by February or March I should be cut.
Note: Last time I checked, there was no cure for homosexuality.
There is at least one butt pirate in this thread. It isn’t me.
“I found this over at Chechar’s blog: [Greg Johnson quote]
I honestly don’t know how to respond to this. This pithy statement sums up everything about Johnson that I have been referring to.
How about starting with small practical steps forward? […] No perfected god-like master race of Lord of the Rings elves is going to spring from this sort of radical worldview. In fact, no children at all are going to come from it. That’s one hell of a pick up line though!”
Back in 2006 when I knew zilch about WN, in a forum about child abuse an Indian woman (from India, not from Mexico) demanded that I explained rationally my Goethe-inspired phrase “Only the eternal feminine leads to the Absolute.” She could never grasp that it was a poetic expression with deep roots in German Romanticism.
Pursuing for the “eternal feminine” is pursuing an archetype. It’s like the “City upon a Hill” myth that moved John Winthrop et al to move to America—a mystery for rationalistic historians—and also similar to what Harold Covington calls the mysterious “Awakening” in his futuristic Northwest Quartet. An archetype was finally activated both in the founders of the U.S. and in Uncle Harold’s fiction, just what happened to the Germans in the 1920s and 30s in the real world: the source of unlimited white power (theoretically though I doubt it, it might happen in Arizona too).
I’m talking of the inner core of the psyche; and I guess that Dr Johnson was thinking along similar lines (he can answer himself).
Unlike the Indian woman, this subject is not to be approached through pure reason. Jung says that it’s a blunder to project archetypes onto the real world, e.g., to believe that the archetype of the “Wise Old Man” (think of the Tarot card with that specific image) is real in the form of an earthly guru. Big blunder, since all gurus are charlatans. Nonetheless, the Wise Old Man “exists”, as a symbol. I for one encountered it long time ago, in a 1979 dream. It was an inspiration. Nothing magic or metaphysical, no. Just an oneiric inspiration.
The same with the eternal feminine or (I guess) what Johnson tried to say with “…the creation of a perfected, god-like white race that will give meaning and purpose to this godless, meaningless universe.”
I’ll give you a clue. Yesterday I added more images of Aryan nymphs to the side of my blog and added: “If an ethno-state is indeed created, my dream is that in the far future its people will resemble the paradisiacal world of Maxfield Parrish.”
This is my very personal and subjective interpretation of Johnson’s phrase. This is the archetype that has had an extremely strong grip of my mind since my late teens. Yes: following Jung it would be a catastrophe to project all of it onto a specific woman, like falling in love. (But again, couldn’t falling in love so long ago be Nature’s trick for the perpetuation of the genotype of still more beautiful nymphs?)
Quasi-metaphysical manifestations of the soul are not to be tackled through the left-hemisphere of our brain. The more artistic hemisphere does the trick. Of course, in real life we must start, as you say, with small steps forward. It’s impossible to reach a god-like condition without touching with your hand the black monolith of 2001: A Space Odyssey, so to speak. A cinematic flash-forward of more than 4 million years, from the Australopithecus who grasped a bone to the first compasses of the Blue Danube can only be seen in a movie, or in pictorial art. That’s why at the side of my blog I mixed apparently irreconcilable statements and big evolutionary leaps: links to the very practical—and bloody!—narrative of Covington’s revolutionary novels and the Parrishesque images.
The two very distinct and almost opposite images that appear at the very top of my blog (Daybreak) and at the very bottom (Roman severitas: soon it will be time for Mars and Hephaestus at the Northwest) tell it all to the right-hemisphere of the brain, not to the lefty of course…
We all know that for Hunter there is no gym, no girlfriend, no political activism . . . just as there was no trip to the Bahamas, no law degree, no pregnant girlfriend, no travels in Europe . . . just the pathological lies and narcissism of an internet drama queen.
There’s a racist butt pirate in this thread? It’s not this guy, is it?
The dating book quip wasn’t over the line. But this boob and homo stuff is petty and childish. My recommendation is to delete your last three comments and replace it with a moderator warning.
Okay, can we please not derail this conversation into some petty discussion about people’s personal lives and whether or not they’re homo?
We were actually having a good conversation, until the petty insults commenced.
I see that Greg has finally perfected his political strategy — insult everyone who disagrees with him rather than winning them over.
1.) When I lived in Virginia, I spent months going to the gym. William Rome and H. Rock White can confirm this. In January or February, I will snap a photo and put to rest the lie that I am still overweight.
2.) When I was in Virginia, my girlfriend used to call and text all the time. Once again, William Rome and H. Rock White were witnesses to this. In January or February, I will snap another photo to put this lie to rest too.
3.) There are videos on our YouTube account that show us at political events. Jeffrey Imm has confirmed that I confronted him twice.
4.) Tellingly, you never answered my question. Are you a homosexual?
To hear you of all people talk about creating “a god-like race” of Nietzschean supermen to find meaning in our godless universe should elicit howls of laughter. More than anything else, that statement poignantly demonstrates the complete and utter disconnect between your lofty utopian fantasies and your practical actions in the real world.
I spent a lot of time arguing with Trainspotter about the disconnect between “ideas” and “behavior” over the summer. I repeatedly pointed out to him that subscribing to radical ideas often results in no discernible change in behavior. I pointed out to him that there are already hundreds of thousands of White Nationalists who refuse to take the most elementary steps toward advancing their views on reality.
Look at it this way: what kind of behavior has this idea of creating “a god-like race” of Nietzschean supermen inspired on your part? As a practical matter, what have you do to advance this vision?
I’m closing this thread. Time to write a post for tomorrow.