District of Corruption
In 2008, I voted for Ron Paul in the Republican presidential primary. There has been some buzz on the internet that Paul might run again in 2012.
If he continues to pick unnecessary fights with conservatives on the basis of libertarian purity, he will only further isolate himself and end up as another discredited perennial candidate.
(1) The Ground Zero Mosque – A few months ago, Ron Paul came out in defense of the Ground Zero Mosque. Paul threw his support behind Barack Obama and loaded any future presidential campaign with a huge albatross that will limit his appeal to Christian voters.
(2) Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell – Earlier this year, Ron Paul voted to repeal the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. If he runs again for president, Paul is now saddled with that albatross as well, and can look forward to spending much of his time explaining his support for gays in the military.
(3) Charles Rangel – Most of our readers are aware of the Charles Rangel corruption scandal. Yesterday, the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to censure Rangel. Benjamin Jealous of the NAACP had appealed to the House to “show fairness” in a Politico article.
Ron Paul voted against censure.
(4) Wikileaks – Ron Paul is now making a stand for Julian Assange of the Wikileaks scandal. It seems Paul wants to reinforce the impression that he is soft on national security.
That was the most damaging accusation leveled against him in the Republican primary last time around. It allowed fools like Mike Huckabee and Rudy Guiliani to run ahead of him in an anti-war election.
It is a shame.
If Paul runs in 2012, he could theoretically gain traction with issues like illegal immigration, foreign wars, the national debt, government spending, the size of government and monetary policy. There are a lot of other winning issues that Paul could campaign on like affirmative action. He could have positioned himself at the forefront of the Tea Party as Sarah Palin has done.
Instead, Ron Paul will now get to spend the campaign talking about his support for Julian Assange, Charles Rangel, Bradley Manning, and the Ground Zero Mosque. Lew Rockwell’s fellatio of progressives has been taken to a ridiculous extreme. This strategy of outreach to the Left hasn’t produced any reciprocity from their ranks. Just look at the vicious attacks Rand Paul endured in Kentucky.
If Ron Paul is serious about running for president in 2012, he needs to fire his advisors. He can’t afford to be weighed down by any further albatrosses of this sort.
With all due respect for our host, saying that lack of loyalty to the modern Fed Gov is alienation would have been like saying that opposition to the Crown in the 1770s was alienation because their were so many Empire Loyalists or talk of secession by Fire Eaters was alienation in the 1840s because most people didn’t believe in such “extremism.”
Maybe some “Vanguardists” are unusual but you know not everything the white public does is wise or good or honorable. I imagine that the WN intellectual average is somewhat higher then the general white population (as tends to be the case with people who follow or interact in some manner with politics). This alone can cause a little separation from the general population. The population at large does have a great many flaws. Obviously no one should make this some matter of discourse when trying to influence people but at the same time we shouldn’t pretend like all is well throughout the country.
The moral here, in case you alienated beta Lit majors missed it, is MAKE MO’ CHRISSMISS SHIT. If you say “Merry Christmas” like Abu Khan at Qwik-Mart and make reindeer cut-outs like Discard, you will be accepted by white folks.
Daaaaayum, we WNs are doing so well, we gotta be “accepted by” our “own people”!
Yo, radikal WN Noruz resolution comin achcha, achcha! Tell people merry xmas and solve that bedeviling PR problem between muslims and white nationalists! ITZ FUCKIN COMING BRAH.
Eyyo, big Johnson: that was some harsh jive you pulled on Hunter up there, callin him a pig n all. You aint WRONG in yo assessminz but dayum dawg go easy on a nigga.
On a serious note. Discard, I am interested in becoming the fetishized image of a man. How best to go about it? I can already fell trees, drink beer, shoot guns, drive trucks, and ignore women with their mouths open not for eating. I hear woodworking is manly. How about it? Electric wiring is manly but I saw a Jewess wire her whole house and it put me off forever. Captainchaos I believe shoots deer. I personally find standing in the woods in Winter wearing orange a goofy pastime, but I have eaten nearly raw deer heart & so absorbed its power as in Highlander or some injun fairytale shit. Did you know deer meant simply “animal” in Old English (~ Ger. Tier).
I think Johnson is really Lasha Darkmoon. Who’s with me?
The other day I happened to have a Ukrainian and an American calendar in the same place and made brief compare. In the Ukrainian there were reminders of poets, dissidents, invasions, partisan successes, and mass murders. In the American were reminders of a handful of niggers, then all niggers, then Shoa, Purim, Passover, Rosh Hoshana, Christmas, federal holidays, and of course everyone’s favorite, Elephant Appreciation Day. The Ukrainian calendar was festooned with that lovely folk art of theirs featuring gayly painted easter eggs, tradition costume, doves, swirls, and folk heroes. The American had Mount Rushmore, the Grand Canyon, and other such emblems of meaningless grandeur.
Anyhow, that video of Ewald Stadler is kuhl. There’s another one of him wo er der verstorbene Haider als Freimauer outet, um Gottes willen!
Obviously no one should make this some matter of discourse when trying to influence people but at the same time we shouldn’t pretend like all is well throughout the country.
“I’m not sick. Society is!”
The Fade-Giles interview was classic WN radio. I listened with a girlfriend, neither of us could believe what we were hearing. Fade was also totally flummoxed. When Giles started on Wyatt Earp – “Ahm talkin boudda POSSE.” – the poor girl actually pissed herself from laughing so hard.
WN alienation does become a problem when the alienation becomes so severe it morphs into a generalized misanthropy toward most White people. You don’t have to dig very deeply in self-described vanguard circles on the Internet to find evidence that many within this segment of the WN community have a very low opinion of most White people.
I think Johnson is really Lasha Darkmoon. Who’s with me?
Or she is G.J, either way. That totally cracked me up.
I don’t know who you are, uh, but you sound like Pastor Mad Dog, without the insanity, but with the humor and sarcasm. Priceless! (For everything else, there’s debit or credit White Mastercard.)
Uh is not alienated from society, society is alienated from him. It is not that Uh is bipolar, it is that his medication lacks verve.
“You don’t have to dig very deeply in self-described vanguard circles on the Internet to find evidence that many within this segment of the WN community have a very low opinion of most White people.”
Take a walk around a contemporary mall.
One is sure to see White Women with Black Bucks or maybe even some macho Mestizo.
You may see a White shop-owner employing some brown-skinned ‘illegal aliens’.
(Also recall that Eugenics was ended in the early 1980s. My state, Oregon was the last one to practice Eugenic sterilization. Because of this the general state of the population is declining. An ugly Truth, but a Truth none-the-less)
This is a sick society in need of a healthy dose of palingenetic renewal.
Celestial Time,
I have done so on many occasions now. No one should have any difficulty recognizing a “vanguardist” given their ubiquitous presence in the comments on this website or the long exchanges we have had about the issue.
For the record, “vanguardists” typically have three major characteristics:
(1) They believe “the system” is hopelessly corrupt and advocate withdrawing from the political process.
This is a major point of difference with the mainstreamers who believe electoral politics can be used in various ways to secure pro-White objectives like tightening our immigration laws.
(2) They want to refine their message and increase the points of difference that mark off and distinguish White Nationalists from ordinary people.
This is another major difference. The mainstreamers want to narrow the gap and blur the boundaries. The vanguardists want to expand the gap and sharpen the distinctions. This is why vanguardists pick fights over losing causes like attacking Christianity and promoting fascism and National Socialism in the United States.
(3) The vanguardists are radically alienated from their contemporaries.
This is another big point of disagreement. The vanguardists sound kooky and unhinged to ordinary people. This is largely due to the fact that vanguardism is highly attractive to sociopaths. In contrast, mainstreamers are pretty much ordinary people with unorthodox racial views.
Mainstreamers wince when they see the vanguardists advocating alliances with Iran and North Korea, calling for the destruction of America and Christianity, talking up treason, espionage, and terrorism. The mainstreamers know the anonymous vanguardists are venting their emotions and that their actions are counterproductive and make it harder to spread our message to a wider audience.
I could sit here and elaborate all night on the subject of what constitutes a vanguardist. I have interacted with these people for years and know them inside and out. They are not as difficult to spot as you are suggesting.
You seem to be convinced that a vanguardist is a costume clown. In reality, wearing a costume is just one of many ways that vanguardists mark themselves off and express their alienation from their peers. It is in no way essential to vanguardism.
William Pierce didn’t wear a costume. He was still very much a vanguardist though. He wanted to separate a small cult of true believers from the great mass of White America. They were going to bide their time in West Virginia until a millenarian “collapse” of the system took place. Then the divine elect would mysteriously rise to power.
Mainstreamers roll their eyes at that type of fantasy based thinking. Alienation, role playing, and fantasism are the bread and butter of vanguardism.
I will write more about this latter if I feel inclined to do so.
“This is a sick society in need of a healthy dose of palingenetic renewal.”
I agree as long as quality human material is not written off in the process. Most White Americans are caught up in the general social sickness because they have no choice and don’t perceive other options. Many in this group are worth recovering for purposes of renewal and probably can be recovered as long as nationalists don’t drive them away with contempt and misanthropy. I see these people as more misled than sick.
1) If you think about it you can use almost any event to make a useful political point. If you’re drinking with someone angry at the leaks and saying Assange should be executed you can either
a) spiel the “death to amerikwa” stuff and get into a fight
b) keep quiet to avoid a fight
c) use the opportunity to make a point about how maybe it was neocons inside the governmen leaking it to start a war with Iran.
c) is useful. Use everything that comes up to make a useful point. Start from where the person yoou’re talking to is and spin a useful point off the event and where that person is.
2) “One is sure to see White Women with Black Bucks or maybe even some macho Mestizo.”
Bitching about miscegenation is pointless if not counter-productive as it sounds so ****ing weak. One way to do something useful on that score is fight the good fight over “race is real and it matters” or at least “race is real.” Find places where people push the “race is a social contstruct” line and learn how to beat down their argument. Throw in the IQ differences between races line at every opportunity.
A percentage of the people you’re complaining about will hesitate if they think that decision will mean their kids are going to be relatively retarded.
Right this minute there’s probably a thousand places on the net where someone is saying race is a social construct. Kicking that particular meme to death is useful.
No, Lasha Darkmoon is not one of my pen names. Or my real name, for that matter.
I wonder if Hunter will be so inclined to answer the following questions:
Some questions for Hunter Wallace:
1) Does the US government represent the REAL interests of White Americans, or has it been captured by aliens and traitors and perverted to serve the interests of Jews and a rootless global plutocracy at the expense of White Americans?
2) If the latter is the case, then aren’t patriotic White Americans who reflexively identify with the system in fact mistaken that it is their system rather than a system controlled by hostile aliens? Aren’t they in fact rallying to the aid of the people who are working to destroy them?
3) If White Americans are being destroyed by the American system, and if their patriotism is being manipulated by the parasites out to destroy them, then aren’t Conservative cheerleaders for patriotism working to strengthen the grip of the anti-White system on White Americans? And doesn’t that make patriotards objective enemies of White America and objective tools of the system that is out to destroy us?
Hunter talks a lot about alienation. It is his word, not mine. I think that it is the key to his recent mainstreamer fantasies. He is totally alienated and desperately wants to feel like a part of something, so he is deluding himself about the Tea Party, the Republicans, etc.
But there is nothing wrong with being alienated from a sick society. What is totally nuts, though, is “curing” one’s alienation simply by deluding oneself that the system isn’t hopelessly corrupt. A pig with lipstick on is still a pig. So is a pig waving a small American flag.
Got hog on the mind, Johnson?
Re: The Cat Lady
(1) I don’t believe in conspiracy theories or hackneyed caricatures. I’ve gotten some real experience in mainstream politics over the past year. I have a pretty good grasp on how “the system” works because I have taken the time to get involved in “the system” and see it how it works from the inside.
The truth is that “the system” is still very much representative of White America. Vermont is a Blue State because of the predominance of liberals who live there. Georgia is a Red State because of the predominance of conservatives. Washington is a Purple State because of its demographic composition of liberals and moderates.
If you look at the polls, you will find that White Americans are concerned about issues like healthcare, taxes, immigration, the national debt, schools, foreign wars, the size of government, etc. How this shakes out in each state and district largely determines who is sitting in Congress.
It is true that Jews and Big Business wield enormous power in “the system.” Why is that?
The causes are not hard to discern. These groups are highly organized, well funded, engaged with the political process, adept at tailoring their message, tenacious at building alliances and pushing their point of view. They win victories at the margins. When they lose, they come back to fight another day, as we have repeatedly seen in the immigration debate.
Simply put, Jews and Big Business know how to game the system and make it work to their advantage. In contrast, White Nationalists buy into absurd conspiracy theories, retreat to the internet, and cry into their beer about how the world is against them.
Those who work within the system know why White Nationalists are losers and Jews are the winners. They also know what it would take for White Nationalists to change this imbalance.
The U.S. government represents the interests of White Americans as they see their priorities. It doesn’t represent their REAL interests, defined in racial terms, but it could if White Nationalists were better at spreading their message and constructing a viable resistance to the status quo.
The failure lies in the White Nationalist community, not in the system itself. This is the same “system” which once discriminated against blacks and still discriminates against gays. The difference is that other groups are not led by retards with a tenuous grasp upon reality which explains why they have been comparatively more successful.
(2) The Americans you ridicule are not mistaken. They are correct that “the system” (i.e., republican government) is their system. It is the same “system” (a free and open society) we have always had in America.
The people who identify with “the system” are smarter than vanguardists. They vote, influence their peers, adapt their message, organize, and raise money. To the extent there is any credible resistance at all, they are responsible for it.
“This is our country.”
That is a healthy nationalist sentiment, not a pathological one. The pathology lies in the vanguardists who suffer from the delusional belief that tearing down their country and making life worse for White people will somehow leave them better off. That failed in South Africa and it will fail in the United States for the same reasons.
White Advocates can respond to their circumstances in a constructive way. They could engage the mainstream and work within the system to change things. If they adapted their message in an intelligent way, we have already seen they can achieve a lot of success.
For christ’s sake, even transsexuals are smarter and better at changing their circumstances (i.e., employment discrimination and hate crimes) than White Nationalists. Instead of escaping into a fantasy world, they raise money, lobby the government, and form alliances with other groups.
The vanguardists are the ones who are aiding our enemies. In his last comment, Greg Johnson called “left-liberals” the “objective allies” of White Nationalists. Clearly, they want to empower our enemies and dig us into a deeper hole than the one we are in now. Some vanguardists even go so far as to argue that White people deserve to die.
(3) White Americans are not “being destroyed” by the “American system.” This is the same “American system” that Whites once thrived under when Andrew Jackson and James Polk were President.
Specifically, the major problem is that Jews and non-Whites have gotten better at gaming “the system,” and pro-Whites have gotten comparatively worse at doing so. There has been a spectacular decline from the days of Senator Richard Russell to the heyday of Glenn Miller and Alex Linder. This is largely due to the chaos and intellectual clutter (which Counter-Currents contributes to) that has prevailed on the White Right since the triumph of the Civil Rights Movement.
Objectively, the vanguardists are the ones who are “strengthening the grip” of the anti-White forces in America. They portray White Advocates as kooks and violent psychopaths ready to kill people over ideology and sell out their contemporaries to their enemies abroad.
The vanguardists passionately argue in favor of strengthening the anti-White forces that are gaming the system. They subscribe to the ridiculous notion that empowering our enemies is a secret victory for Neo-Nazis. They want to make White Advocates the enemy of the flag, faith, and nation of the vast majority of White Americans.
The constructive way to respond to our predicament is to expose our avowed enemies as the real threat to everything from “freedom” to Christmas to apple pie. This is not hard to do. Our enemies like Tim Wise really do in fact hate these things and can be provoked into admitting it.
Their hatred of America and ordinary White people on the Left is matched only by that their vanguardists bootlickers in the White Nationalist movement who always rush to take their side.
It’s a tragedy.
The vanguardists start out as White Advocates only to go around the bend in their radicalism and emerge as an outright obstacle to the success of White Advocacy and as the enemy of the very people they claim to represent.
(4) I am involved with the Tea Party. I am also involved in Republican politics in Alabama. I have worked for months (successfully) to advance the restrictionist message in this state.
(5) There is clearly something wrong with becoming so alienated from your contemporaries that you end up like Jim Giles, Harold Covington, or William Pierce: someone so ideological that they cannot even communicate with their own children or family members, much less their neighbors or people who don’t share their views.
There is something wrong with becoming so alienated from America that you start to look down upon and despise the people you once aspired to lead to the point where you side with their oppressors.
Finally, there is something wrong with becoming so alienated, getting so far ahead of the curve, that you are lose your ability to communicate with ordinary people and sway them to our point of view. There is something even more wrong with vanguardists who become so alienated that they become just another obstacle in the way or our success.
Here’s a thought experiment. If you had the power to put Obama back in the White House for four more years of the same or put Ron Paul in the White House, which would you do? And let’s sweeten the pot and stipulate that Paul would have such a mandate and such a cooperative Congress that he could pretty much turn the welfare state back to pre-New Deal Levels, end the Fed, and repeal the income tax. But that’s it. No other changes.
Which outcome would better further the long-term objective interests of White Americans?
Well uh, becoming a fetishized image of a man sounds like a homo project to me, but I can make at least one suggestion: Stop talking like a dumb Negro. 🙂
The point is not making Christmas trinkets so as to ingratiate yourself with racially unaware White people, the point is that I participate in my local community because it’s mine. My father did the same, coaching Little League and so on, and my grandfather was a member of his local KKK. That doesn’t make me the local wise man, but it does give me some credibility when I question the popular wisdom. If you can’t socialize, you can’t evangelize.
Hey, if you put a colon and a closing parenthesis next to each other, you get that little happy face.
Without question, I would put Ron Paul in the White House.
(1) Ron Paul is someone we can work with to secure the border.
(2) Ron Paul is someone we can work with to attack affirmative action.
(3) Ron Paul is someone who can be persuaded to end the foreign wars and bring the troops home.
(4) Ron Paul is someone we can work with to attack Jewish influence over the financial system.
(5) Ron Paul is someone who would appoint good judges to the federal courts.
(6) Ron Paul is someone we can work with to stop the tax and spend pump of transfer payments to non-White minorities.
(7) Ron Paul would be a strong defender of gun rights and free speech.
(8) Ron Paul’s victory, a scenario which I find too good to be true, would embolden Whites and shift the goal posts in a more favorable direction along a whole number of issues. He would defang the “extremist” label.
(9) Ron Paul’s presence in the White House would systematically weaken core Democratic constituencies that depend upon government largesse.
The only argument that I have made against Ron Paul is that he has made strategic miscalculations that impede his ability to win the Republican primary and the general election.
(10) Ron Paul’s agenda would create enormous racial polarization that can be exploited.
Hunter is filibustering and dodging my questions.
Is there any real substantial difference between Tim Wise and Greg Johnson? If there is a difference, I am failing to see it.
Tim Wise would destroy White people because sees them as an obstacle to the progress of his progressive ideology. Greg Johnson, who also claims to be a “progressive,” would destroy all those “patriotards” for the same reasons (i.e., hatred and alienation) while saying he is doing so in the name of their REAL interests.
If you can’t socialize, you can’t evangelize.
Amen!
Wise’s beard is on his face.
Hunter Wallace writes:
I’ll give a free back issue of THE OCCIDENTAL QUARTERLY to anyone who adds at least ten items to the following list.
The list is called: Things of consequence to the American System that have happened to the since Jackson and Polk were in the White House.
Here are some examples:
(1) The Civil War
(2) Reconstruction
(3) The immigration of millions of Jews
(4) The Federal Reserve
(5) The Income Tax
(6) WW I
(7) The New Deal
(8) WW II
(9) Racial Integration
(10) The 1965 immigration reform
(11) Television
(12) The rise of Jewish cultural and political hegemony
(13) The collapse of white birth rates
(14) Feminism
(15) The immigration, legal and illegal, of millions of nowhites
(16) The dismantling of anti-miscegenation laws and the promotion of miscegenation
(17) The dismantling of America’s industrial economy
(18) The steady erosion of white middle and working class standards of living
(19) The collapse of American public and private education into anti-white indoctrination
(20) The rise of a culture of nihilism and expressive individualism
Here’s a salient change: The American political-economic-cultural system, unlike the system in place when Polk and Jackson were in power, is promoting the extinction of the White race.
Hunter, are you really this fucking stupid?
The Paul presidency of my thought experiment would simply put this Jew-dominated, anti-white genocidal system on firmer economic footing. How would that be in the long term survival interests of White Americans?
Greg is asking a leading question here. By adding “but no other changes” to his question, he is waiting for the opportunity to come back and say “so, you’re ok with the racial situation then?”.
Essentially, he is trying to get the discussion into the old “worse is better” track. In that respect, he is right; worse is better. We want incrased polarization. However, as Hunter correctly pointed out under point 10 of his answer, a right-wing president will also create polarization, but with the added bonus of White America being stronger, rather than weaker.
Instead of empowering our enemies, and leave us weaker, we empower political forces who (although they may not think exactly like us) will make White America stronger and still provoke the brownies into raising hell and thus radicalizing Whites.
It’s like playing chess: you need to think several moves ahead.
Erik, conservatives being what they are, they tend to allow partial victories to make them complacent, a complacency that the left and the Jews tend not to fall into because they never lose sight of their long term revolutionary and radical goals. So I am one move ahead of you here.
Ron Paul on immigration:
“My approach to immigration is somewhat different than the others. Mine is you deal with it economically We’re in worse shape now because we subsidize immigration. We give food stamps, Social Security, free medical care, free education and amnesty. So you subsidize it, and you have a mess. Conditions have changed. And I think this means that we should look at immigration differently. It’s an economic issue more than anything. If our economy was in good health, I don’t think there’d be an immigration problem. We’d be looking for workers and we would be very generous.”
more:
“I see the immigration problem as a consequence of our welfare state. We encourage people not to work here, but the welfare we offer the people who come–they get free medical care. They get free education. They bankrupt our hospitals. Our hospitals are closing. And it shouldn’t be rewarded. That means you don’t give them citizenship. You can’t solve this problem until you get rid of the welfare state, because ***in a healthy economy, immigrants wouldn’t be a threat to us.***”
I’m not at all convinces that Paul would seal the border if he got his way about the welfare state.
Greg,
Here’s a challenge: I would be more than happy to debate you on any of the issues listed above. Within three paragraphs, I predict my level of historical knowledge on each of these subjects (particularly with regard to the nineteenth century) will be shown to vastly exceed your own.
I have spent years debating these topics on the internet in thousands of conversations with hundreds of people who are far more educated about these issues than you are. I can quote historians from memory who you have never heard of.
Your list DID NOT include:
(1) The passage of the first anti-miscegenation laws in Western history.
(2) The creation of race based chattel slavery in the America’s and the construction of a racially defined White American ethnic identity around it.
(3) The history of exclusion of blacks and other non-Whites in the military from the Continental Army to the Korean War.
(4) The dozen or more naturalization acts that restricted citizenship to Whites; something which had no parallel in contemporary European countries.
(5) The myriad laws and customs which were the foundation of white supremacy in North America for three centuries.
(6) The expulsion and extermination of the Indians from King Phillip’s War to Wounded Knee.
(7) The Trail of Tears.
(8) The Dred Scott decision.
(9) The “cornerstone” of the Confederacy.
(10) The rise of the Ku Klux Klan and White League.
(11) The overthrow of Reconstruction.
(12) Plessy vs. Ferguson and the rise of the Jim Crow system.
(13) Sundown towns.
(14) Charles Davenport and the American eugenics movement.
(15) Buck vs. Bell
(16) Manifest Destiny.
(17) The Texas Revolution and race war with Mexico.
(18) The New York City Draft Riots and the Atlanta riots.
(19) The First and Second Red Scares.
(20) Joe McCarthy.
(21) Japanese internment in the Second World War.
(22) The race war against the Japanese.
(23) The end of the Second Bank of the United States.
(24) The Immigration Act of 1924.
(25) The Passing of the Great Race and Birth of a Nation.
(26) George Wallace and the Civil Rights Movement.
(27) The MLK assassination.
(28) The RFK assassination.
(29) Leo Frank.
(30) Little Rock and Oxford.
(31) The Religious Right and the American family movement.
(32) The rise of the NRA.
(33) Ronald Reagan.
(34) The export of Nordicism and eugenics to Western Europe.
There is nothing inherent in the “American system” that leads to any specific political result. Your rage against “the system” is an import from the counterculture Left shared by other beatniks in your artsy San Francisco environs.
In reality, American history has waxed and waned relative to the power of specific groups. Blacks used to be disorganized and powerless. That is no longer the case.
Gays used to be in the closet. Now they are out in the open.
Whites used to rule every Southern state with an iron fist. That is no longer the case. Now White racialists hide out in bunkers in Idaho. They used to build statues of them in Congress.
The fact is, it can be easily demonstrated that White racial consciousness has thrived in the United States to a degree that is matched by no other Western society, with the possible exception of South Africa.
The whole idea of a “White Republic” is American in origin. America was a “White Republic” until 1964. The memory of the White Republic lives on in our culture to this day.
Greg,
Seriously, are you really this fucking stupid? Do you seriously believe “the system” has always been a paradise for non-Whites in America? I forgot to mention the Chinese Exclusion Act and the Lincoln assassination above.
That’s just one of many examples that come to mind which you conveniently omitted from your anti-American narrative. You obviously know very little about the history of this country.
Your ignorance of American history is remarkable given the extent of your knowledge about obscure European artists and philosophers. It is definitely not one of your strong points.
There is nothing uniquely evil about America. Only a fool would argue that, say, Canada or France has been stronger on White racial identity than the United States. The decline of the United States is unremarkable relative to the history of other White countries.
Greg,
I am aware of the threat of complacency. However, I believe that if a hard-right/conservative administration were to carry out even small positive steps, the brownies would scream and riot, thus radicalizing whites, just as both Hunter and I have argued. You can have polarization caused by stronger Whites or caused by weaker Whites. For me, the choice is simple.
So Hunter does acknowledge that something of substance has happened since the time of Polk and Jackson. I guess that’s progress.
Hunter has a pattern when dealing with inconvenient facts. He rushes to Wikipedia and rustles lists of historical events that indicate that the inconvenient fact did not have to be. Therefore, he feels entitled to ignore it.
Well, I’ll grant that no historical facts are inevitable. But once a fact is a fact, it is . . . a fact. America did not have to become a soulless, rootless, raceless system hell bent on the consumption and liquidation of the white race. It didn’t have to be. But it is now. And only fools and fantasists ignore that fact.
Fortunately, continued existence of this system is not inevitable either. It can be destroyed. But to destroy it, the main supporters of the regime need to realize that they are also its main victims. Conservative patriotards stand in the way of that. That is why they are enemies of the White race.
What happened between Theodore Roosevelt and Barack Obama?
“The system” itself didn’t change much. America remained committed to a republican form of government and the free enterprise system. In one era, white supremacists ruled with an iron first. In the next era, they were reduced to hiding out in bunkers in Idaho and dreaming about the collapse of Western civilization.
So what changed?
Jews became wealthier. They became better organized and applied political and economic pressure to knock down barriers to their advancement. They formed alliances with other groups like blacks and then new partnerships with Hispanics and homosexuals.
Blacks copied this model. They also became better organized. They built alliances and worked within the system to change their circumstances. In particular, Martin Luther King crafted a moderate rhetorical message and pushed softly to advance a radical agenda. He provoked his opposition into polarizing overreactions in Selma and Birmingham.
As blacks and Jews became more sophisticated in their methods, white supremacists correspondingly grew less sophisticated in both their tactics and rhetoric. Blowing up black churches and federal buildings had exactly the opposite of the intended effect.
I pointed out above the tremendous decline in the White Right from Senator Russell to the earliest stirrings of the Duke campaigns. White Nationalists increasingly began to resemble other degraded, ghettoized minorities like blacks in the Jim Crow era.
There was a time in America when blacks were similarly alienated and obsessed with foreign ideologies like communism. W.E.B. DuBois eventually abandoned America and became an open communist. Blacks also entertained wild fantasies about secession and black empowerment.
It is a sobering thought that blacks are infinitely more sophisticated than White Nationalists. They have their own publications. They have any number of mainstream organizations. Blacks even have their own television channel that caters to their racial identity.
Hispanics are not far behind them. They have their own television channels, organizations, and lobbies which push their interests. The “mainstreamer” wing of the Hispanic community is similarly far more influential than their vanguardists.
If White Nationalists had a clue, they would take a hard look at what their enemies are doing and draw the appropriate conclusions. Unfortunately, that is easier said than done.
Anyone who has followed my internet saga over the years is well aware of the extent of my knowledge about racial identity and American history. I’m the closest thing to an expert on the subject in the pro-White blogosphere.
If I seriously wanted to, I could sit here and brainstorm anywhere from 100 to 150 incidents that contradict Greg Johnson’s stupid little narrative in less than an hour. Those were just a handful of examples that come to mind off the top of my head.
Johnson can keep promoting this stupid canard of his that America is a “soulless, rootless, raceless system hell bent on the consumption and liquidation of the white race.” It doesn’t make it true.
In reality, there was never a society that more closely approximated the ideal of a White Republic than the United States. Whiteness and republicanism are two core components of American ethnicity. The other major ones are Christianity and the English language.
It is really absurd, galling even, to sit here and listen to a Neo-Nazi carpetbagger like Greg Johnson talk down to ordinary Americans.
(1) This alienated cosmopolitan nomad has no roots whatsoever in any real existing community anywhere in America. I mean honestly … just a few months ago he was living in Atlanta, GA and now he is living in San Francisco, CA … two of the most rootless cities in America.
Now he spends most of his time on the internet talking up Harold Covington’s fantasy of a Northwest Republic. People with real roots in their communities don’t cut and run. They make a stand and fight for their homes.
They certainly don’t make a point to emphasize just how rootless and alienated they are by worshiping Hitler and talking up North Korea all day and ridiculing the religion of their ancestors. Does anyone reading Counter-Currents honestly believe that Greg Johnson exemplifies someone with “deep roots” in the culture and soil of any particular place?
If so, you need to get your head checked. Greg Johnson’s idea of “tradition” is something called “total totalitarian retro-avantgardism.” I bet Big Von wishes he would have thought of that one.
(2) Who is Greg Johnson to label anyone a soulless materialist? I mean we are talking about an atheist homosexual here who substitutes a nihilistic fantasy of blowing up a planet dressed like Darth Vader and creating “a god-like race” of Elves through eugenics for religion and tradition.
Anyone who knows Greg Johnson can’t help but laugh at his attacks on “materialism.” I know people who have seen the dollar signs in the whites of his eyes light up when the subject of money has been raised. If Johnson is against “materialism,” why has he spent the last six months talking about “his money” and “his job”? This is a guy who is on a crusade against his former employers over money.
I don’t anyone who talks about money as often as Greg Johnson has over the last few months. This hypocrite has built an entire racket and ideological framework around his own financial self interest.
Let’s see Johnson repudiate “materialism” by ceasing to solicit White Nationalists for their money. Fat chance of that ever happening. This is someone who would throw his own friends under the bus in a New York minute for an opportunity to appear on Who Want’s To Be a Millionaire.
(3) Finally, there is no substantial difference between “progressives” like Tim Wise and Greg Johnson in terms of the annihilation of the White race. Wise is a partisan Democrat and Johnson is a supporter of Barack Obama.
The only people who dislike America more than Tim Wise and his associates are vanguardists like Greg Johnson and Alex Linder. Wise and Johnson are both convinced that “worse is better” for ideologues like themselves. They have the same set of enemies: the White conservatives trying to change our immigration policies.
In the case of Wise, changing racial demographics leads to a more “progressive electorate.” In the case of Johnson, changing racial demographics leads to an electorate (in his fantasy world) more receptive to Neo-Nazis who will benefit from the inevitable “collapse” of the system.
When Greg Johnson puts down roots in a small town, gets a real job, stops begging others for money, takes up religion and gets over his aversion to the customs of his fellow citizens … then he can lecture others about their failings.
Reading Hunter Wallace is like having a fever dream. In one’s delirium, bits and snatches of one’s day come back in disjointed and garbled form. It is the closest approximation in my experience to the kind of Joycean associative fugue state word-salad that he is emitting now.
The world hasn’t yet realized that Greg Johnson (aka The Cat Lady) is a Nietzschean superman. The Darth Vader of Counter-Currents (after he acquires nuclear weapons from North Korea) will make all those hayseeds pay.
Here comes Greg in his “sexy uniform”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajMsfw8-RUY
Whoops.
I meant this one:
The problem here is less “the system” than it is White Nationalists objectively sucking at playing the game.
From Hunter’s list of 34 items:
(24) The immigration act of 1924
– Need I remind you that in 1965 the Congress, at the behest of Jew Emmanuel Cellar (and wing man Teddy Kennedy), passed immigration legislation that completely overturned the system of Eurocentric racial and ethnic quotas and brought the third world to our shores?
This happened when the country was still 90% white with politicians and an electorate demonstrably more pro-white than today. Better is better, right? If non-white political successes are chiefly due to their ability to organize and game the system then how do you explain the passage of this bill before they were even here to to do any serious system gaming? Ditto for pro-black civil rights legislation when blacks were barely 9% of the general population and when segregation ruled in the South and and an unofficial system of racial apartheid reigned in the North.
Did they merely game the system to their benefit? Or, did they receive massive amounts of money, assistance, and favorable media coverage from a third party?
(33) Ronald Reagan
– You mean that great conservative who signed an amnesty legalizing 3.5 million non-whites and who signed the family reunification act of 1986 that put in place the system of chain migration that we suffer from today? Ronnie also signed the MLK holiday proposal.
I have an honest question for you, Mr. Johnson, and this comes from the fact that I’m a relative n00b: if the current American/Zionist political/economic system collapses or is systematically dismantled, what does the ‘worse is better’ position expect the reaction of the rest of the world to be while White Nationalists attempt to fill the power vacuum? Specifically, wouldn’t the collapse of the system and the military it empowers leave us completely open to outside threats? And if that system fractures, what of the doomsday-scale weapons our government controls en masse distributed across the States? I’m not asking this with preformed conclusions – I just have not seen this addressed yet in my limited experience.
Elijah,
What happened when the USSR collapsed? All sorts of bad things, but none of them amounted to Armageddon, and all of it was definitely worth it from the point of of the many captive nations who regained control over their destinies.
A collapse is inevitable. All civilizations come to an end, and the US has a particularly fragile and unsustainable system. You couldn’t make America last if you wanted to. And you should not want to: If the system continues for 100 years, whites will be all but extinct on this continent.
America will fail, America deserves to fail, and no matter what the outcome, it is bound to be better for whites on this continent and around the globe than if America did not fail.
I hope WNs are organized well enough to grab significant chunks of US territory when the system comes to an end.
Patriots who want this system to continue for 100 or 200 years are fools–patriotards–who are objective enemies of the white race.
Hunter Wallace, by promoting their folly, is an objective enemy of the white race.
For all of you people who dream about building a White Republic in North American, Hunter Wallace has news for you:
Get the message people, then hang up the phone.
Ed the Department Head says: “Greg and Will Williams are making some painfully excellent points. Loyalty to the modern anti-White US Gov is…nothing to be proud of…”
—
Careful, Ed, “Hunter” hates it when those watching him debate score it for his opponents.
I saw where “Hunter,” the historian, belched out this “brief history”:
“William Pierce didn’t wear a costume. He was still very much a vanguardist though. He wanted to separate a small cult of true believers from the great mass of White America. They were going to bide their time in West Virginia until a millenarian “collapse” of the system took place. Then the divine elect would mysteriously rise to power…
“I will write more about this latter if I feel inclined to do so.”
—
Save it, “Hunter,” you hysterical historian.
We “vanguardists” can write our own history, thank you.
Hunter wants us to “play the game.” But the game is crooked. And even if it were fair, the house always wins in the end. Better to kick over the table and start our own game.
Or, if we don’t have the power to do that, better to withdraw, build out strength, and wait for the gangsters to fall out among themselves, start cutting throats, and generally reduce the problem to something more manageable. Then we can start our own game.
Greg Johnson couldn’t seize control of his apartment building if his life depended on it.
Johnson comes to Tuscaloosa to start a new game:
(1) You objectively suck at politics.
(2) That’s why you lose.
(3) You are not going to “kick over the table and start our own game.”
(4) Instead, you are going to sit in the stands and gripe about how unfair the officials are.
(5) Greg Johnson gets tough and practices his war cry in preparation for the collapse:
MossadDid911 says: “Wallace is correct to mock the ‘hide in a bunker waiting for the collapse’ mentality.”
That kind of thinking is mockable, all right, and applies to those Internet “vanguardists” who are actually in hiding. I can only think of one of those.
“Hunter” is flat-out wrong to glibly ascribe that bunker mentality nonsense to Dr. William Pierce, as he likes to do repeatedly. Dr. Pierce traveled all over the country speaking to groups, even was invited to Germany to address the ultra-right NDP convention, and to England to address the Hard Right BNP’s big convention. The BNP was so impressed with our National Alliance Membership Handbook that the leadership asked Dr. Pierce if they could adopt it for their own cadre. It’s from that Handbook that I quoted the NA’s goals for “Hunter” in the OD Nagging Little Voices thread just a day or so ago. He must have missed those five goals since he never thanked me for doing all that typing.
Would a couple of Europe’s largest and arguably most successful Hard Right political parties like BNP and NDP invite Hard Right “Hunter” to come address their membership cadre with his anti-“vanguardist,” mainstreamer” line of patter? Would “Hunter” go give those Hard Righters the same goofball, Covingtonesque history lesson about Dr. Pierce that that he gives his fans here at OD?
.
Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed Hard Right “Hunter” has a hard time admitting when he’s wrong about something?
“Don’t bother with football watchers. We need to recruit the wealthy and the educated, the elites. If we do that, the TV crowd will follow. Unless you can afford a TV station, you cannot influence the TV crowd, it’s that simple.”
People who are suited to the task should go after the educated and people who are suited the other way should go after the football crowd *except* you don’t go for all of them. You go for the NCO types. If you get them the rest will follow (eventually).
Greg Johnson said: What happened when the USSR collapsed? All sorts of bad things, but none of them amounted to Armageddon, and all of it was definitely worth it from the point of the many captive nations who regained control over their destinies.
Greg, I am afraid yours is too simplistic interpretation of what had happened to the USSR in 1991-1992. Vladimir Putin called the demise of the Soviet Union, especially the way it happened, the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century. In simplest terms what happened was that the international Jewry completed successfully dismantling of jew-free empire created almost single handedly by Stalin. Stalinism can be defined as Leninism without the jews: Stalinism = Leninism – Jews.
Stalin preserved the Russian statehood as best as it was possible to do so under the circumstances the Russian Empire found itself after the mess of the Bolshevik revolution. That’s why the Russians regard Stalin today as the second greatest man in the entire history of Russia. Not Ivan The Terrible, not Peter The Great, not Katherine The Great, not Generalissimos Suvorov, not Field Marshal Kutuzov who defeated Napoleon’s Grande Armée, not Feodor Dostoevsky, not Leo Tolstoy, not Vladimir Lenin – but Joseph Stalin. Only Alexander Nevsky – the key figure of medieval Rus, proclaimed “Saint” of the Russian Orthodox Church by Metropolite Macariy in 1547 – came ahead of Stalin in the TV polls conducted just two years ago;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DG9rbkSNYAQ&feature=fvsr
Not a single nation regained control over its destiny, including the Russians themselves, after the collapse of the empire, just the opposite. Over 90% of the nation’s wealth was looted by the Jewish oligarchy. Mass media outlets of the state went straight to the Jewish media magnates like Berezovsky and Gusinsky. Puppet governments were installed in Ukraine and Georgia by the likes of George Soros. East European countries have been quickly incorporated into the jew-controled European Union – they have less control over their destinies today than they had as members of the Warsaw Pact. The people of the former Central Asian republics regained so much control over their destinies that they have flooded Russia ready to work for slave wages, if they are lucky to find somebody who is willing to hire illegal immigrants.
So much for regaining control over their destinies.