Linder on WN Ethics (How to Infight)

[Alex Linder]

We saw, a few years ago, the risible non-aggression pact in New Orleans. The assembled worthies, led by Duke and Black, agreed, loftily, not to criticize signatories, ie one another. It was characteristic of the low Protestant mindset that is the milieu from which WN springs that nobody at the conference audibly dissented from the hypocrisy nor pointed out that such a pact primarily would serve the benefit of protecting wrongdoers. It's the traditional WN way - close ranks against critics, no matter their criticism be factual. It's part cult, part Southern Evangelical-cultural. It is the wrong way.

Here's the right way to do it.

How to Fight with WN You Don't Like

Too many WN are of low character. If they dislike another WN, the mere fact alone will lead them to relax what ought to be high standards. That is, they will circulate any lie or rumor without respect to its truth, caring only that the stick will do damage to their enemy.

This hurts our cause. It is the wrong thing to do. It is the wrong way to act.

WN should refrain from lying about other WN they don't like. They should not allow their organs or facilities to be used to traduce the character of their rivals. Factual criticism, on the other hand, is perfectly valid, and should be allowed to be expressed, and should be expressed.

If so-called WN refuse to conduct themselves honorably, the right thing to do is to ostracize them. To explain the reason for the ostracism in neutral terms to anyone who asks, but on the whole ignore these people, warn others against them, and deny any who seek to use your facilities to promote defective men and organizations.

It is a measure of the low standads of too many WN that they resort casually and immediately to the worst sorts of lies the minute they have any falling out with a party.

WN B falls out with WN C. WN B and his cronies begin the smear:

C is a drunk/homo/womanizer/pederast/crook/drug addict/fed/informant/jew.

It is impossible to overstate how destructive this casual lying is. It prevents WN from developing. We are already in a situation in which our enemy tries to subvert us and smear us to others. When we lie about each other, we make his job easy and our job impossible.

This is the reason that here at VNN you are not allowed to promote Billy Roper's White Revolution, nor Dicky Barrett's organization. Liars and smearmongers may call themselves White nationalists but they detract from the cause. Have nothing to do with them.

Anyone who participates in the smearing of another faction will be verboten here. Anyone who upholds standards will be allowed to promote himself or his circle here.

White is not enough. There must be character and behavioral standards too.

[SPQR]

Originally Posted by Alex Linder

We saw, a few years ago, the risible non-aggression pact in New Orleans. The assembled worthies, led by Duke and Black, agreed, loftily, not to criticize signatories, ie one another. It was characteristic of the low Protestant mindset that is the milieu from which WN springs that nobody at the conference audibly dissented from the hypocrisy nor pointed out that such a pact primarily would serve the benefit of protecting wrongdoers. It's the traditional WN way - close ranks against critics, no matter their criticism be factual. It's part cult, part Southern Evangelical-cultural. It is the wrong way.

Here's the right way to do it.

How to Fight with WN You Don't Like

Too many WN are of low character. If they dislike another WN, the mere fact alone will lead them to relax what ought to be high standards. That is, they will circulate any lie or rumor without respect to its truth, caring only that the stick will do damage to their enemy.

This hurts our cause. It is the wrong thing to do. It is the wrong way to act.

WN should refrain from lying about other WN they don't like. They should not allow their organs or facilities to be used to traduce the character of their rivals. Factual criticism, on the other hand, is perfectly valid, and should be allowed to be expressed, and should be expressed.

If so-called WN refuse to conduct themselves honorably, the right thing to do is to ostracize them. To explain the reason for the ostracism in neutral terms to anyone who asks, but on the whole ignore these people, warn others against them, and deny any who seek to use your facilities to promote defective men and organizations.

It is a measure of the low standads of too many WN that they resort casually and immediately to the worst sorts of lies the minute they have any falling out with a party.

WN B falls out with WN C. WN B and his cronies begin the smear:

C is a drunk/homo/womanizer/pederast/crook/drug addict.

It is impossible to overstate how destructive this casual lying is. It prevents WN from developing. We are already in a situation in which our enemy tries to subvert us and smear us to others. When we lie about each other, we make his job easy and our job impossible.

This is the reason that here at VNN you are not allowed to promote Billy Roper's White Revolution, nor Dicky Barrett's organization. Liars and smearmongers may call themselves White nationalists but they detract from the cause. Have nothing to do with them.

Anyone who participates in the smearing of another faction will be verboten here. Anyone who upholds standards, like John de Nugent, will be allowed to promote himself or his circle here.

White is not enough. There must be character and behavioral standards too.

I agree and it comes down to the fact which is the more powerful, or more important? The promotion of self or the promotion of the cause? Is it acceptable to resort to anything in order to advance the cause?

Too many WN's believe it's acceptable to argue and fight with another with the sole purpose of the cause being the shining light, the beacon that guides them.

It's so true that everything we do, starts with self. It's the way we conduct ourselves that defines us in society.

Too many confuse promotion of self with cause and get stuck in a dreadful mire of muck-racking and dissension.

[Antiochus Epiphanes]

You know what the stereotype of the racial-thinking white person is. They say, oh, they're just making up for some personal inadequacy, maybe a punk teenager who got beat up makes himself feel strong by thinking tough about stormtroopers, or somebody who lost in business blames it on a jew, etc etc. they portray white nationalists as losers essentially.

like most propaganda-- like most stereotypes-- there's a grain of truth in it.

first off, naturally, people who are not sharing in the inducements of the current system, will tend to be more critical of it. they will see some things that the average joe does not want to see.

secondly sure, a socially unfashionable way of thinking, will tend to draw a sample of adherents that are more comfortable being socially disfavored.

neither of these two things is an argument about the truth of the content of WN as a social or poltical idea. just a sort of ad hominem, which even if the stereotype is true, it may be that the premises and conclusions of WN are true as well.

all that said, any "movement" to be successful it must police its own kind, with standards of acceptable conduct, first and foremost amongst themselves. but vis a vis outsiders too, there have to be some standards.

you have to look like you can take out your own garbage. people who would be potential adherents will simply not join if they think we can't take our own garbage. they say if they cant take out their own garbage how will they do it for the nation as a whole?

it gets down to organizational competence. if you dont show it, you wont be able to recruit.

[Tom McReen]

Too many WN are of low character. If they dislike another WN, the mere fact alone will lead them to relax what ought to be high standards. That is, they will circulate any lie or rumor without respect to its truth, caring only that the stick will do damage to their enemy.

This hurts our cause. It is the wrong thing to do. It is the wrong way to act.

WN should refrain from lying about other WN they don't like. They should not allow their organs or facilities to be used to traduce the character of their rivals. Factual criticism, on the other hand, is perfectly valid, and should be allowed to be expressed, and should be expressed.

If so-called WN refuse to conduct themselves honorably, the right thing to do is to ostracize them. To explain the reason for the ostracism in neutral terms to anyone who asks, but on the whole ignore these people, warn others against them, and deny any who seek to use your facilities to promote defective men and organizations.

It is a measure of the low standads of too many WN that they resort casually and immediately to the worst sorts of lies the minute they have any falling out with a party.

WN B falls out with WN C. WN B and his cronies begin the smear:

C is a drunk/homo/womanizer/pederast/crook/drug addict.

It is impossible to overstate how destructive this casual lying is. It prevents WN from developing. We are already in a situation in which our enemy tries to subvert us and smear us to others. When we lie about each other, we make his job easy and our job impossible.

This is very close to what I have pondering over recently.

[Bev]

Originally Posted by Tom McReen

This is very close to what I have pondering over recently.

Did you come to a conclusion? Like, refraining from doing it, perhaps?
--------------


I've noticed this in England. Not so much with the specific insinuations and names that Alex mentioned, but for some reason, we seem to go round in circles accusing each other of being "reds" and "state". The next week, everyone is the best of pals again, but there is always someone ready to cash in on previous tensions.

[alex]

I blame part of it on the "personality cult". In that respect historical NS did do us no favour in depicting Hitler as some kind of "Messiah" who single-handedly solved all the problems.

What is the point of arguing about another persons character, at an internet message board at that, as if that would change anything. Best is to refrain from anything on a personal level altogether and concentrate solely on the politics and political arguments.

[Eilert]

Originally Posted by Alex Linder

If so-called WN refuse to conduct themselves honorably, the right thing to do is to ostracize them.

Good strategy. The Amish use it, and apparently it works.

Originally Posted by Alex Linder

White is not enough. There must be character and behavioral standards too.

Agreed. In fact, I feel that character is a big part of being truly White. It's the difference between white and White.

[DouglasReed]

It's not, purely, or even mostly, a White Nationalist thing, so much as the nature of Internet discussion forums. I hang out on the yachtfourms.com sometimes just to see all the beautiful boats, and you've got flames going on there, never mind what happens in a political forum.

Back in the real old days I posted a lot in the craigslist political forum, which is just a zoo. I argued all the time there that you can never get most people to behave themselves as they would in a real space unless you take away their anonymity.

[Dave from New York]

Originally Posted by DouglasReed

It's not, purely, or even mostly, a White Nationalist thing, so much as the nature of Internet discussion forums. I hang out on the yachtfourms.com sometimes just to see all the beautiful boats, and you've got flames going on there, never mind what happens in a political forum.

Back in the real old days I posted a lot in the craigslist political forum, which is just a zoo. I argued all the time there that you can never get most people to behave themselves as they would in a real space unless you take away their anonymity.

I agree. And the only way the anonymity is going to end is when we begin organizing offline. I am beginning a humble group in my area to practice shooting, talk about issues that affect us racially and begin growing our own food. Basically the 'Kievsky' model of White community/survival. Maybe if we form enough of these small groups we can move on from there to something bigger and more influential.

I'm not too confident with waiting for some benevolent White-elite to save us and our children from the Jewish death star and its simian storm troopers. Much rather be pro-active.

You would think that with the cream of the kosher crop of enemies we have to pick from, we wouldn't need to kick each other in the virtual ass.

[Maxine Grey]

White is not enough. There must be character and behavioral standards too.

Exactly.

At times there will be people that fall below a standard, they are also not to be dismissed. These people can be guided back into civilization.

The catch phrase most use is this Awaking .

Some have a longer road to travel than others. Mentors are few and far between in the WN movement, which I feel this is a great shame.

Notice I used the word mentors, not leaders. Many people I have come across hold the values of the WN movement to the best of a workable standard, but are overlooked due to they are not in the media etc.

Many need to stop idol worship, and reassess why they are WN in the first place.

[Larry Heinberg]

So what happens if a non-white, or a non-WN meets the character and behaviour standards?

So many mysteries!

[blueskies]

Originally Posted by Maxine Grey

Exactly.


Many need to stop idol worship, and reassess why they are WN in the first place.

And that's the crux of the matter; too many worship hip hop figures. post ww2 modern” noise music (see Jew culture counterfeiter)they look to Paul mc Cartney and even as far back as Elvis, Frank Sinatra(movie stars) IQ of 100, as gods.Filthy zog elevates lowest common denominator as idol and as heroes in entertainment industry.

[DouglasReed]

Originally Posted by Lex Talionis

I agree. And the only way the anonymity is going to end is when we begin organizing offline. I am beginning a humble group in my area to practice shooting, talk about issues that affect us racially and begin growing our own food. Basically the 'Kievsky' model of White community/survival. Maybe if we form enough of these small groups we can move on from there to something bigger and more influential.

That's definitely the way to go. You need to have people you can count on when things really start to fall apart, and the skills to survive in that situation. I highly recommend Eric Thomson's writings if you aren't already familiar with them.

[Alex Linder]

Originally Posted by DouglasReed

It's not, purely, or even mostly, a White Nationalist thing, so much as the nature of Internet discussion forums. I hang out on the yachtfourms.com sometimes just to see all the beautiful boats, and you've got flames going on there, never mind what happens in a political forum.

Back in the real old days I posted a lot in the craigslist political forum, which is just a zoo. I argued all the time there that you can never get most people to behave themselves as they would in a real space unless you take away their anonymity.

the internet is a faggoty medium by nature - anonymous, shifty, scummy. we have worked to overcome the cover the internet gives scummy behavior thru our rules, including making people sign up with ordinary names and exerting strong downward pressure on the fantasy aspect. this is not the case at other WN-oriented forums. there is far less virtual fantasy here than elsewhere. less klanfederated snotzis from outer space at VNNF than elsewhere. that is good, sez me.

get out of the internet's what good in it - information. but dont complain it's not what it can't be. typing is not fighting. we are not warriors. should you feel moved to created a genuine real-world body, of some sort, in reaction to the information here discovered, why in many ways i think that would be an appropriate response. i recommend a local network, for self-defense, skills development, and fun.

[JP Sedita]

I know when I was in the USP 1 at FCC Coleman in the B.O.P (federal max prison),
We had legitimate WN convicts affiliated with outside groups.Locked up Order members such as Richard Scutari.

We also had "White Aryan" prison gangs who were only motivated by profit.

I am a patched member of WAR (yes,TT's old outfit).
There is WAR prison group evolved from TT's white aryan resistance.Some dabble in the prison drug trade.I'm sure TT would not approved this evolution of WAR in the federal system.

ARM,,AB,AC,SAC,DWB,
They are not for race and nation.They're the Heroin Brotherhood!

I'll get to the point. USP's are very dangerous places.Infighting is handles with beatings, stabbings, and killings inhouse.
But that's prison.Us aryan guys in prison impose the same sentances on our comrades as we would a member of Paisa or black muslim groups

[Alex Linder]

Originally Posted by JP Sedita

I know when I was in the USP 1 at FCC Coleman in the B.O.P (federal max prison),
We had legitimate WN convicts affiliated with outside groups.Locked up Order members such as Richard Scutari.

We also had "White Aryan" prison gangs who were only motivated by profit.

I am a patched member of WAR (yes,TT's old outfit).
There is WAR prison group evolved from TT's white aryan resistance.Some dabble in the prison drug trade.I'm sure TT would not approved this evolution of WAR in the federal system.

ARM,,AB,AC,SAC,DWB,
They are not for race and nation.They're the Heroin Brotherhood!

I'll get to the point. USP's are very dangerous places.Infighting is handles with beatings, stabbings, and killings inhouse.
But that's prison.Us aryan guys in prison impose the same sentances on our comrades as we would a member of Paisa or black muslim groups

Interesting...

So you would say that there is NO Aryan Brotherhood (or AB-spinoff) group that is genuinely pro-white? And that goes for all the individuals who belong to those groups? They are purely drug gangs, and see themselves that way? And are seen that way by others? So the jewish media presentation is 100% garbage, that these are at least somewhat racist to mainly race-driven with a side dish of drugs?

[Dakota Dave]

Originally Posted by Eilert

I feel that character is a big part of being truly White. It's the difference between white and White.

Could not agree more. How can we look at muds and claim to be superior if we are displaying the same behaviors?

[Crowe]

Sometimes the ones who are called by some as "Smear mongers" have the evidence to back it up. And then you have another group of people who will stand by their man to the very end, regardless of how much evidence is piled to prove whether a specific group or leader has be proven to be doing wrong, or taking advantage of the movement.

I have a personal set of beliefs as what a leader of the WN movement needs to be. And any leader who doesn't fit my predefined characteristics will get no respect from me.

A leader in the movement needs to be:

#1 Honest, and straight forward, and doesn't bullshit people around.

#2 Doesn't straight up lie to prospects just to butter up the message.

#3 Can account for every dollar they receive, as well as list expenses. If they receive more than they need, have the courtesy to say I have an X amount in a pool that I don't have an immediate use for, and can we come to a consensus as to what we should spend this on to better our agenda? If they are honest about the money, then nobody will ever accuse them of being a crook or swindler. If they are in dire financial need, and require some help, just ask, and nobody will fault them.

#4 Be a great speaker, and know how to communicate with people on a personal level. This is especially useful when trying to sway people to our cause.

#5 And finally the most important quality a leader needs. Very strict moral character, meaning that their desire to help our Race and Nation must be above all desires of material gains, because even if they fit all of the above requirements, but lack this one, they will just be bought out by our enemies.

I haven't seen a leader in the movement currently who fits all of the above categories. But that doesn't mean there isn't one. Am I being too picky, or are these reasonable expectations? I expect leaders to set the example, and stand on a higher ground of moral character than your average Joe.

[ohgolly]

Originally Posted by Alex Linder

We saw, a few years ago, the risible non-aggression pact in New Orleans. The assembled worthies, led by Duke and Black, agreed, loftily, not to criticize signatories, ie one another. It was characteristic of the low Protestant mindset that is the milieu from which WN springs that nobody at the conference audibly dissented from the hypocrisy nor pointed out that such a pact primarily would serve the benefit of protecting wrongdoers. It's the traditional WN way - close ranks against critics, no matter their criticism be factual. It's part cult, part Southern Evangelical-cultural. It is the wrong way.

Being Southern has nothing to do with it. You'll find a hell of a lot more Evangelical culture amongst northerners, albeit of the new-Jew variety rather than the so-called Christian type. There just happen to be more Southerners who're WN. You'll find more klan wannabes in the South, and more Nazi wannabes in the north.

Also, please explain the "low Protestant mindset that is the milieu from which WN springs". As opposed to what, exactly?

If you intended to follow your own advice, you wouldn't have posted this crap. You'd have taken the high road that you recommend to others. Perhaps it's your culture, not to?

[Alex Linder]

Originally Posted by ohgolly

Being Southern has nothing to do with it. You'll find a hell of a lot more Evangelical culture amongst northerners, albeit of the new-Jew variety rather than the so-called Christian type. There just happen to be more Southerners who're WN. You'll find more klan wannabes in the South, and more Nazi wannabes in the north.

Also, please explain the "low Protestant mindset that is the milieu from which WN springs". As opposed to what, exactly?

If you intended to follow your own advice, you wouldn't have posted this crap. You'd have taken the high road that you recommend to others. Perhaps it's your culture, not to?

It's my culture to generalize where it's important, and where I can, draw a rational conclusion.

No, I mean what I said - the low, scummy behavior too many WN exhibit is more typical of the South than the North. Think Baptists. They in particular are likelier to be stupid and hypocritical. Think Jimmy Swaggart, Ted Haggard. I don't know if they're Baptists, but they're on that level. These are people saying one thing and doing another. If they ever split with their buddies, they resort immediately to ANY character smear they think will stick, facts be damned. As I say in a different post, read "Don't Call Me Brother." This deals with pentecostals, Church of Christ in specific. It shows you just how SLEAZY the leadership of these people are. Low-end Christianity is not an impressive thing. The leaders are corrupt, and the lay people are too stupid to see it. A direct parallel can be drawn between the poor southern christians Austin Miles describes and the ranks of NA/SF.

The North has plenty of problems too but they tend to take a different from. The North's problems come less from stupidity and corruption than the South's do, and more from self-righteousness and moral crusading - the sanctimonious madmen I've expended much air describing and warning about.

If you don't think there's a huge difference between a north shore Episcopalian liberal and a back-country Alabama Baptist, well, I assure you there is. White nationalist ranks tend to be drawn from the South for historical reasons. It's not surprising that the defects their leaders display are the same as those found in the South. It is very much a low, Protestant, Southern thing to protect corrupt leadership by refusing to allow any criticism of a leader. That is how NA and SF both have always operated. It doesn't work.

My guess is that no movement or cause led by people at the cultural level of Baptists will ever break free from the insane liberals because they simply don't have the intelligence. The vast majority of them will continue to be abused and mocked because they simply lack the brains to figure out what is going on.