Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old September 15th, 2009 #81
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klaas Ebbe View Post
We're in agreement on the definition of White Nationalism. See below. I think we should move on to the next question: What steps should be taken to ensure the permanence of a WN revolution?
That is a tricky thing. Ultimately there is no guarantee, of course. Short of that, we can physically exterminate all non-whites. Or remove them from our continents. That deals with the external threat. For the internal threat - the threat of some neo-sicko-liberalism recrudescing, we could provision against it institutionally thru the institutions I mentioned - Defenders trained in an Aryan Racial University of some sort. Details would have to be puzzled out. I hear that Mandarin Chinese and Prussian bureacracies were particularly notable, historically, for the honesty of their offices. Those could be studied for pointers - that is what Calhoun would do. And like I said, we could take Mencken's joke suggestion about random annual sacrifices seriously, so that anybody who wanted to work for the small, efficacious over-state would run a small but real risk of forfeiting his life as the necessary tribute to human scheming and perversity and intellect's attempt to overcome it. Now, if we could create a functioning HONOR CULTURE (bringing back, in new form, some of the best parts of Hitler's German and our own Confederacy), and if this entrenched over time, I think it would be reasonably self-sustaining. To expect more than that would be utopian. It doesn't matter what form of government, the answer is always "if you can keep it." Life is struggle, as Hitler said. Each generation must relearn and recommit - but this is a lot easier to do when, per Burke, the solid traditions are in place, and people love them. The White race now reexamines its own history, finds certain things wanting and, unper Burke, creates new institutions and practices, which in time themselves become traditions.

Quote:
Nothing to argue with here. White Nationalism is the idea that Whites should secede from the United States and create a Jew-free, White ethnostate. As I said above, that's the minimum we should rally around. The various other differences that divide pro-Whites can be left to the political process once the ethnostate is established.
That begs the question of whether discussing the state we seek beneath the racial composition level attracts or repels people. My suggestion is that the vision of a White racial state obeying known economic laws and the time-honored principle of subsidiarity will give both the individual and the state the proper scope, and prove attractive to more people than it repels, and help our cause more than blank recitations of mud crimes and exhortations to love our race.

If we're going to tap around the edges of the faileocons, why ignore the potentially huge market of people now learning from the libertarians to hate the Fed, love the idea of secession, and love the idea of getting to make the adult life-decisions the ZOG overstate has usurped from them?

We say to these whites, yes, Ron Paul and the libertarians have many good ideas, but unlike them we can put them in their proper context: an all-white nation. Be serious, you know that negroes are unfit for any kind of personal liberty. All the good things and problems the libertarians identify are only available and can only be solved in a White context. If you want to be an adult in all these other areas (money, schools), why not go the whole hog and just admit we want an all-White nation? I mean, if that weren't the real bottom line, isn't it obvious that the feds wouldn't have banned White free association? Libertarians offer some economic freedom to white people, but only white nationalism offers true and full political adulthood to the race that made this country - and the rest of the successful world.

That's how I'd argue to libertarians. I see less need to attack them because libertarianism while only workable by whites is not intellectually tied to race. Therefore, you can ignore race as a libertarian without truly being a fraud, at least theoretically, whereas conservatism is utterly and wholly inextricable from race, and anyone who pretends otherwise is an out-and-out fraud or sellout. I don't see the libertarians as our competitors. Our competitors are the conservatives because we come from the same background and premises, making our cases hard to distinguish. Because conservatism is logically built on race, the average guy will assume things the conservative is not willing to say publicly for PC reasons, even though in fact the conservative will never actually defend them in real life. This has the effect of making WN, who will put the whole thing out there, appear extreme or redundant, keeping their natural allies - normal people - in the camp of the pseudos - the paleoconservative weaklings and the neoconservative boughtlings. Thus, I advise we use bait with the libertarians (people, not their name writers, who should be fought with), and bashing with the conservatives, who should be exposed as profiteering frauds.
 
Old September 15th, 2009 #82
andy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 12,833
andy
Default

Can WN's campaign in the mainstream ? Most in this thread seem agreed that political theories as we know them only apply to white people.Of course other races can and do espouse them but at base if its not whites your directing your political message to you are wasting your time.The whole concept of the USA can only be a white thing as it were.The "melting pot" would seem to historically refer to different white tribes as opposed to the modern concept of bantu, semite and coolie.
I think Americans taking a stand for the race are handicapping themselves even using the term "white" as a definition.What is an American ? Surely the only definition that can be made is an Aryan.The typeformers,the creators,the builders,the engineers,every good and decent thing that has come from America has been created and developed by whites.
I think American activists need to look at the rivals,just as Buchanan and Paul are two steps removed from WN's the same is true for WN's in the other direction.Is it absoloutely essential to scream white power when saying in a calm voice States Rights ?
__________________
The above post is as always my opinion

Chase them into the swamps
 
Old September 15th, 2009 #83
Mike Parker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
Mike Parker
Default

If as Klaus says Greg agrees with Alex about Jews and conservatives, why did Greg come here a week ago and make the 4 posts he did?
 
Old September 15th, 2009 #84
Hunter Wallace
Member
 
Hunter Wallace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 251
Hunter Wallace
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Parker View Post
If as Klaus says Greg agrees with Alex about Jews and conservatives, why did Greg come here a week ago and make the 4 posts he did?
I've spoken to Greg and we agreed on three basic points:

1.) Naming the Jew.
2.) The need for a White ethnostate.
3.) The worthlessness of conservatism.

Greg was trying to explain the actions of Sam Francis, Pat Buchanan and Jared Taylor. He wasn't endorsing their various strategies. Huge difference there.

We had a few laughs about the cryptos who think they can "sneak up on the Jews" through aracial conservatism. I don't know how anyone got the impression he isn't on our side.
__________________
Occidental Dissent

"A functioning police state needs no police."
—William Borroughs
 
Old September 15th, 2009 #85
Hunter Wallace
Member
 
Hunter Wallace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 251
Hunter Wallace
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
That is a tricky thing. Ultimately there is no guarantee, of course. Short of that, we can physically exterminate all non-whites. Or remove them from our continents.
You're right. There is ultimately no guarantee that the social forces which subverted the White Republic established by the Founders won't resurface at some later date in a WN ethnostate. Fortunately, we have the benefit of 220 years of hindsight. There are obvious lessons to be drawn from American history that weren't perceived by our predecessors.

The thorniest problem of all (which can serve as our starting point) tends to be only dimly perceived by American WNs: how to permanently maintain a high level of White racial consciousness in a racially homogeneous ethnostate. Expulsion of all Jews and non-Whites from the U.S. and Canada would eliminate several problems for us, but would create an even larger one in perpetuating our own highly racialized identity in future generations. Without Jews and non-Whites to interact with on a daily basis, the racial consciousness of our successors will wane and soften, as it did in the past outside the South.

How do you propose we address this problem?

Quote:
That deals with the external threat. For the internal threat - the threat of some neo-sicko-liberalism recrudescing, we could provision against it institutionally thru the institutions I mentioned - Defenders trained in an Aryan Racial University of some sort. Details would have to be puzzled out. I hear that Mandarin Chinese and Prussian bureacracies were particularly notable, historically, for the honesty of their offices.
1.) We could inculcate White students in our racial ideals through the public schools and universities.

2.) We could pressure the churches to racialize their theology.

3.) We could regulate the mass media to ensure that news and entertainment conforms to standards of racial deceny.

4.) We could establish your caste of Defenders/Guardians and charge them with the task of disrupting counterrevolutionary activities.

I don't see how libertarianism fits into this scheme though. Libertarianism cuts against the grain of all of these proposals.

Quote:
Those could be studied for pointers - that is what Calhoun would do.
Calhoun was a republican, not a liberal. If I remember my history correctly, he didn't have much of a problem suppressing anti-slavery speech. For Calhoun, 'freedom' meant the right to legislate, not the absence of the initiation of force. During his tenure in the Senate, there was a famous contest with John Quincy Adams over the gag order that prohibited anti-slavery resolutions from being tabeled and read into the congressional record.

Quote:
And like I said, we could take Mencken's joke suggestion about random annual sacrifices seriously, so that anybody who wanted to work for the small, efficacious over-state would run a small but real risk of forfeiting his life as the necessary tribute to human scheming and perversity and intellect's attempt to overcome it. Now, if we could create a functioning HONOR CULTURE (bringing back, in new form, some of the best parts of Hitler's German and our own Confederacy), and if this entrenched over time, I think it would be reasonably self-sustaining.
We used to have such an honor culture in the Old South. It was popularized by Sir Walter Scott novels. I'm not so sure though that aristocratic trappings can be perpetuated in a liberal democracy with a mature capitalist economy. History suggests otherwise. Social leveling and irreverence seems to be an inherent feature of the system.

Quote:
That begs the question of whether discussing the state we seek beneath the racial composition level attracts or repels people. My suggestion is that the vision of a White racial state obeying known economic laws and the time-honored principle of subsidiarity will give both the individual and the state the proper scope, and prove attractive to more people than it repels, and help our cause more than blank recitations of mud crimes and exhortations to love our race.
Any White ethnostate is highly likely to simultaneously be a Spartan garrison state. The rump of the degenerating Union will remain a potent military threat. The expulsion of legions of non-Whites and Jews from our borders will invariably creates enemies for us all over the world.

The history of the Confederacy is worth revisiting: a state founded on the principle of decentralization was forced by necessity to centralize. As a practical matter, a White ethnostate will need a strong central government to repel its enemies, at least for many generations.
__________________
Occidental Dissent

"A functioning police state needs no police."
—William Borroughs
 
Old September 15th, 2009 #86
Hunter Wallace
Member
 
Hunter Wallace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 251
Hunter Wallace
Default

Buchanan on protectionism:

http://www.takimag.com/article/the_r...protectionism/

Lew Rockwell on protectionism:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...ves/35832.html

LRC crony "Manuel Lora" on protectionism:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...ves/35836.html

LRC crony Gary Barnett on protectionism:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/barnett/barnett13.1.html
__________________
Occidental Dissent

"A functioning police state needs no police."
—William Borroughs
 
Old September 15th, 2009 #87
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klaas Ebbe View Post
I've spoken to Greg and we agreed on three basic points:

1.) Naming the Jew.
2.) The need for a White ethnostate.
3.) The worthlessness of conservatism.

Greg was trying to explain the actions of Sam Francis, Pat Buchanan and Jared Taylor. He wasn't endorsing their various strategies. Huge difference there.

We had a few laughs about the cryptos who think they can "sneak up on the Jews" through aracial conservatism. I don't know how anyone got the impression he isn't on our side.
I have no doubt he and TOQ are on our side. I don't agree with their refusal to ostracize and attack Buchanan, Vdare and Taylor. To show respect to those who never show respect to WN, who never acknowledge it openly, is to show weakness. It is correct to attack Buchanan, not to praise him. We are the real thing. Buchananism is nothing and leads nowhere.
 
Old September 15th, 2009 #88
Hunter Wallace
Member
 
Hunter Wallace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 251
Hunter Wallace
Default

How about taking a shot or two at your old friend Lewpus? He's far worse than Taylor or Buchanan.
__________________
Occidental Dissent

"A functioning police state needs no police."
—William Borroughs
 
Old September 15th, 2009 #89
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,342
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klaas Ebbe View Post
The thorniest problem of all (which can serve as our starting point) tends to be only dimly perceived by American WNs: how to permanently maintain a high level of White racial consciousness in a racially homogeneous ethnostate. Expulsion of all Jews and non-Whites from the U.S. and Canada would eliminate several problems for us, but would create an even larger one in perpetuating our own highly racialized identity in future generations. Without Jews and non-Whites to interact with on a daily basis, the racial consciousness of our successors will wane and soften, as it did in the past outside the South.

How do you propose we address this problem?
If the price of losing racial consciousness is not being around other races, geez, where do I sign up? I don't see whites occupied with things other than racial conflict as a bad thing but a good thing.

Of course, white citizens' racial understanding will be more theoretical and intellectual if the other races aren't around, except as travelers/visitors/ambassadors, but that's not a problem, not compared to what we have now. The solution is simply to diffuse the knowledge of racial differences through the various media. Without any jews to stifle the facts, the default setting will be racial normality. Whenever the issue arises, whites will have common knowledge to aid them, rather than multicult communist slogans about diversity.

Quote:
1.) We could inculcate White students in our racial ideals through the public schools and universities.
Do we want public schools? I don't. Apart from the academy for the Defenders. Still, in the transition from ZOGworld to Whiteworld, there might be a period in which ZOG's PS were used as an existing transition belt to spread the new racial orthodoxy - ie, the facts about race rather than lies.

Quote:
2.) We could pressure the churches to racialize their theology.
All we have to do is 1) yank their tax status privilege; 2) convey to all religious leaders that preaching against the racial basis of the state is a capital crime. That should be enough.

Quote:
3.) We could regulate the mass media to ensure that news and entertainment conforms to standards of racial deceny.
This falls under the purview of the Defenders/intellectual or media division. No one is allowed to preach against the racial basis of the state, as we know from history that threatens all of us collectively. There also needs to be a reintroduction of a production code, as Hollywood used to follow in the mid part of the 20th century. The new state recognizes media as a form of politics, and does not allow enemies of the race to undermine people through preaching race mixing or immorality (promoting homosexuality, for instance). This is a tough area. People will feel they are stepped on. However, the social costs of allowing people to trash our race and basic Aryan morality are too high to let these go on. It is obvious there is a lot here that would have to be worked out.

The expression of White differences through independent (micro)states built around different tendencies has to be balanced against collective racial defense, the basis of the new order. Is this vision even possible? Somehow it must be possible to combine a high degree of individual freedom with collective racial defense. Altho the idea of a monofunction over-government is appealing in that it would be light on the people (inexpensive to fund), it would involve the state in a number of non-military areas including trade and media and education. What, then, will be left to the microstates to decide? I just don't see any way around the signal political fact that "media is politics," as the jew billionaire said. It simply cannot be left open to subverting minorities. In fact, defending against intellectual subversion through the media might be the larger portion of the Defenders' task, since MAD would take care of foreign nuclear powers, and the continent would be physically free of muds.

Quote:
4.) We could establish your caste of Defenders/Guardians and charge them with the task of disrupting counterrevolutionary activities.
I don't see any way around their being the prime enforcers of a racial code and a basic moral code (in the media).

Quote:
I don't see how libertarianism fits into this scheme though. Libertarianism cuts against the grain of all of these proposals.
The word's a red herring, I just use it for shorthand, and to give proper credit to people who have demonstrated there are better ways than government regulation to solve human problems. We want a racial state, not a libertarian state, which I doubt is sustainable. But we can still make use of libertarian insight by getting rid of the huge tax burden the modern state places on White men in the name of keeping them safe. We need to liberate the White man from government taxes second only to liberating him from nigger crime and jewish lies. For those who disagree, and who want the government taking care of them like they're retards rather than adults -- those who seek in a White state a government with the same functions ZOG exercises today -- that's why I think microstates would work. The race and morals is off the table - no one is allowed to mess with that, we will kill over it. For the rest, the mundane functions ordinarily -- but as the libertarians show, not inevitably -- associated with government, let White men divide and separate and arrange themselves as they see fit. I want to live in a no-tax minimalist state that leaves me alone. I don't mind paying a little bit more for imports in order to pay for the over-state, which looks out for my collective racial interests. But I don't want any part of the modern regulatory apparatus, which is a form of slavery, any more than I want continued veiled jewish tyranny. Let the whites who enjoy working half their live for the government form their own state. Let them keep on turning over half their salary in exchange for the illusion of safety, education and so many other things.

Quote:
Calhoun was a republican, not a liberal. If I remember my history correctly, he didn't have much of a problem suppressing anti-slavery speech. For Calhoun, 'freedom' meant the right to legislate, not the absence of the initiation of force. During his tenure in the Senate, there was a famous contest with John Quincy Adams over the gag order that prohibited anti-slavery resolutions from being tabeled and read into the congressional record.
Interesting. I was thinking of him in connection not to speech but in ways of polling the true interests of the community. He had some ideas that have never been tested but could be in a microstate. Different states will allow them to pursue their different ideas, within a uniform racial context so that they aren't disrupted with mere animal concerns of self-defense. White genius, scientific and artistic, can flourish if white talent isn't wasted through suppression, affirmative action, and diversion into technical fields rather than letters.

Quote:
We used to have such an honor culture in the Old South. It was popularized by Sir Walter Scott novels. I'm not so sure though that aristocratic trappings can be perpetuated in a liberal democracy with a mature capitalist economy. History suggests otherwise. Social leveling and irreverence seems to be an inherent feature of the system.
Maybe. We can't force people to want the right things. We can remove the jews and muds, keep the media free of moral/racial subversion, provide materials to offer their young true-contexting and technical instruction. Beyond that, if they're not White, well, they don't want to be.

If people follow authority, and if they know the over-state functions NOT as their parents and lecturers but truly as their defenders, even to the point of willingly sacrificing a number of their members each year as a testament to the seriousness of their commitment, then this will tend to promote honor over money in the eyes of the population. There will be desire to get one's kids into the National Race Academy, like that top Japanese college.

Quote:
Any White ethnostate is highly likely to simultaneously be a Spartan garrison state. The rump of the degenerating Union will remain a potent military threat. The expulsion of legions of non-Whites and Jews from our borders will invariably creates enemies for us all over the world.
Yes, perhaps initially. If a White state rose out of a continental collapse, it would certainly be worried about little but preserving its physical existence. My words are toward the after-party, when physical defense concerns have been eliminated on the North American continent from the north pole to Panama.

Quote:
The history of the Confederacy is worth revisiting: a state founded on the principle of decentralization was forced by necessity to centralize. As a practical matter, a White ethnostate will need a strong central government to repel its enemies, at least for many generations.
Depends on the circumstances. If the north had followed the law, the South never would have had to centralize. If you're under attack, of course you need a strong defense. The circumstances will make the ethnostate until the ethnostate can remake the circumstances. I don't necessarily think that there would be decades-long battles. We have different tools today. In the right hands, change can happen extremely quickly. Katrina hits New Orleans, and a day later, niggers lose their civil right to maraud in white neighborhoods and instead find themselves being shot. That's how change works, many times.
 
Old September 15th, 2009 #90
steven clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,701
steven clark
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Congratulations on nearly getting the formatting correct, I know that's not easy for you, for some reason.

The mentality behind your post... It never ceases to amuse me that your type thinks it is looking down on the Buchanans and Ingrahams. Let me ease your mind: Buchanan and Ingraham have far higher IQs than you do, and a multiple of seven figures more than you do in the bank. They're fully aware that you go against the jews on race or Israel and you run a real risk of being thrown off and under the gravy train.
I don't look down on Buchanan, Ingrahm, etc. I think in their own way they are brilliant and articulate. I'll certainly agree they make more money than I do, and I know where they stand. It would just be nice to get some honesty
from them.

I think a lot of white society knows who runs it, and there is resentment, but it is unarticulated and leaderless. For all acknowledgement that the recent rally in DC had a lot of Glenn Beck types and was pro ZOG, it also showed
people were angry, and millions of people don't like Obama.

There are some people who name the Jew. Frank Weltner was one of them, and his radio show was thoughtful and tried to get people to think. Frank
has washed his hands of white America, and said the only real choice left
is for whites to form their own churches and get tax-exempt status and
go from there.

When you talk about a HS curriculum, do you have a definite program, or
merely a reading list?
 
Old October 22nd, 2009 #91
strelnikov
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 46
strelnikov
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Johnson View Post
I posted this as a reply to Alex's VNN article on Buchanan, but it never appeared, so I am posting it here.

I always love it when Alex writes an essay. I don’t have time to sift through the discussion forum looking for his little gems. That said, I strongly disagree with his attitude here.

Pat Buchanan will not save us. Nor will Ron Paul. Nor will any politician. Nor will we be saved by race realist policy wonkery. I see no salvation for our race short of creating a new political system, either by replacing the US system as a whole or by seceding from it.

But Buchanan the writer and commentator has his virtues and his uses.

1. Linder constructs his argument about strategy in terms of crafting a message that gets to dim ordinary people. I am not sure that is the right audience. Historically speaking, dim masses don’t count for much, because they are easily controlled by elites with access to political power and the power to shape attitudes through education, religion, and the press. How would Linder’s strategy change if white nationalists focused on changing white elite opinion?

2. The white elites in the US are not dim. If dim is the average, the elites are above dim. Some of them are fiendishly intelligent. The white elites in the US can, however, be characterized by high degrees of individualism, conformism (the two actually go hand in hand), materialism, and insecurity about their status. The richer they are, the more insecure they are, because the more they have to lose.

3. They can lose status, of course, because in the US, status depends more on achievement than birth. In more traditional societies, one has status through birth, whether one is a street sweeper or an aristocrat. Here, one’s status is “earned.”

4. Now, in both kinds of society, it is other people who “grant” one’s status. If nobody will treat an aristocrat like an aristocrat, then he has no status. But for whatever reason, in a country like England, an aristocrat like Sir Oswald Mosley might take very radical political positions, and even go to jail for them, but enough people still recognized him as an aristocrat that his social standing was never destroyed. In the US, we are much more individualistic. We grant or withhold status based on what each person does or says, not who his parents were.

5. At first glance, that seems like a great system. There are certainly fewer barriers to upward mobility. In the United States, money buys anything.

6. Unfortunately, money also guarantees nothing. Thus the people who fight hard for upward social mobility are also haunted by downward mobility. They know that the very individualism that allowed them to rise also allows them to fall back. For if their business partners, social contacts, and others turn their backs on them, they can easily be ruined, and whether this happens is merely a matter of individual choice, based upon nothing more stable than calculations of self-interest.

7. Tocqueville long ago observed that American individualism goes hand in hand with a high degree of social conformity. Why is this? Here is my theory: human beings are social animals, with a need for social approval and recognition. In individualist societies, however, the extension of social approval and recognition is highly conditional and constantly re-evaluated. Therefore, one has to be more attentive to gauging and conforming to public opinion in individualistic societies. Thus a high degree of individualism and social mobility promotes a high degree of social conformism, because people also value social approval and social stability. (The ambitious love upward mobility, but once they get theirs, they want to hold onto it.)

8. This is why social mobility in individualist societies is most available to people who combine intelligence and ambition with a shallow, extraverted, conformist personality type. Frat boys with MBAs.

9. Furthermore, the more ambitious one is, the more one needs social approval and recognition, because one needs to secure the cooperation of more people to do bigger things. Thus as one approaches the pinnacles of the white money and power elites, one finds individuals who have higher and higher levels of ambition, aggressiveness, narrow cunning intelligence, extroversion, social conformism, and a pathetic, childlike insecurity.

10. No sane society should be ruled by people like this. But we were far better off when we controlled our own “symbolic realm” — the realm of ideas, ideals, honors, and opinion that governs the granting and withholding of social status.

11. Unfortunately, that realm has now been captured by an alien, hostile elite, the Jews, who have rigged a new status system to reward whites who betray their own kind and promote and engage in race-destructive behavior. The segment of society most controlled by this hostile elite is the entertainment industry, which is thus on the cutting edge of race destructive white behavior. Whites in Hollywood attain status through anti-natalism, feminism, homosexuality, miscegenation, adopting non-white babies, and the like. Where Hollywood goes, there goes America, if the Jews who are scripting our dispossession and extinction have their way.

12. The strategic question of White Nationalism, therefore, is: How do White Nationalists change elite opinion when our plutocrats tend to be shallow, extroverted, and insecure about their status, which happens to be determined by our polar opposites, the Jews?

13. The problem is compounded when White Nationalists themselves aspire to attain or hold onto elite status. Aside from the personal benefits of such status to White Nationalists, such status is also beneficial to the movement, since elite members have greater access to the elite.

14. I believe that this is the context in which one has to understand the strategies of such people as Samuel Francis, Patrick Buchanan, and Jared Taylor. If I wanted to (a) promote white nationalism to status-conscious, insecure elites, and (b) maintain my own status and thus access to these elites, I would give a wide berth to the Jewish Question, since the Jews now control the status system in our society, and if they felt sufficiently threatened by people like Francis, Buchanan, et al., they would shut them down and destroy any access they might have to their preferred audience.

15. If I were Francis, Buchanan, etc., I imagine I would play the following dangerous game with the Jews. Because they would work to shut down and marginalize anyone who was openly impervious to the Jews, one would have to signal a certain porousness to them, specifically by cooperating with whatever marginal Jews will associate with White Nationalism, e.g., Michael Hart, Michael Levin, Marcus Epstein, Paul Gottfried, etc. These Jews obviously think they are getting something by cooperating with White Nationalists, if only the chance to spy on our gatherings.

16. But we have to give White Nationalists some credit too, for they might think they are using these Jews to advance White Nationalism. Maybe they are foolish or naive to think this, but that is probably what they think.

17. If Francis et al. were merely working as fronts for the Jews, in order to mislead and sabotage White Nationalism, then why would they have any public affiliation with Jews? Wouldn’t that blow their cover? Wouldn’t that make their task more difficult?

18. The mere fact that at people like Buchanan, Francis, and Taylor interact in a collegial fashion with certain marginal Jews does not constitute evidence that they are working for the Jews. It does not follow simply as a matter of logic. In fact, it would make more sense for them not to associate with Jews.

19. It is certainly reasonable and prudent to be suspicious of the judgment of White Nationalists who think they can manipulate Jewish opinion to advance our cause. It is certainly reasonable to be cautious in dealing with such people. But suspicion is not proof, and using such people cautiously does not mean that they cannot be used at all.

20. As an introvert, I have little patience for extroverts, and highly extroverted, status-insecure elite members like George W. Bush strike me as especially soulless and contemptible. Frankly, I wish we could save our race without dealing with such people. In my darker moods, I wonder if a race that allows itself to be led by people who put trivial issues of personal status ahead of collective survival can be saved, or even if it deserves to be saved. There is something disgusting about people who have all the money in the world and permit themselves less freedom to speak their minds than a truck driver or short order cook. As N. B. Forrest once asked on VNN about Mel Gibson: How much money does one need to give the Jews the finger? I wish I could shame these people, but I cannot, for their sense of shame is held captive by our enemies. Thus I have little patience for efforts to soft sell these people on their own race’s survival. What kind of people need to be soft-sold their own survival?

21. That said, Pat Buchanan has his uses. I recommend his books to skittish, insecure, status-conscious mainstream conservatives to nudge them in the right direction. If they like Buchanan and become comfortable advocating his take on the world, then perhaps they can be brought further still, by reading Sam Francis’ Essential Writings on Race, then American Renaissance, then maybe Kevin MacDonald.

22. Even if Alex’s worst suspicions about Buchanan are true, that would in no way lessen the value of his books. Even if the Jews are using him to mislead, we can still use him to wean people away from mainstream Republicanism in the direction of White Nationalism. To think that such attempts would be doomed to failure is to underestimate our own power and to ascribe to the Jews some sort of occult force of invincibility that they simply do not have. That is how losers think.

23. I do not think Pat Buchanan is our competitor. I do not think he is our enemy. And even if he were, we are strong and clever enough to use him for our own ends.

An afterthought: The depressing truth I am struggling to come to grips with is that our race must be saved IN SPITE OF ITSELF, and AGAINST ITS WILL. No healthy organism needs to be provided with a moral justification for its survival. But white people do. From a biological point of view, this is morbid and decadent. But since we are not in a position to simply remove this weakness, we have to deal with it. That is the most important strategic question.
Buchanan coined the phrase "Congress is Isralie occupied territory."
 
Reply

Tags
faileoconservative, whino

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:20 AM.
Page generated in 0.15468 seconds.