Have you ever wondered why there aren’t more White Nationalists?
There have been dozens of failed experiments in racial ‘equality.’ From the period of decolonialization to the fall of White South Africa1 we have seen these policies fail again and again. In the United States we have engaged in over fifty years of racial egalitarianism with disastrous results. Our once proud industrial cities are turned into ruins2 and White Americans are subject to brutal crimes day after day.3 4 5
The reasons for our decline are well documented – the ascendancy of Jewish influence, the piece-meal sale of our nations by international corporations, and the mass migration of non-Whites into our lands.6 What remains less clear is why fewer White people have become explicity pro-White in their politics.
On January 20, 2009 the first black President of the United States was sworn into office. The man stumbled over the words of his inauguration oath and grinned.7 President Obama had been voted into office by 43% of the White electorate.8
If we have any hope of creating a successful race-based political movement, we need to understand the 43% of Whites that elected President Obama. Why do they often deny the reality of race? Why can’t they see the failure of racial integration and multiculturalism?
There are many ways to analyze this phenomenon. Rather than examining voter turnout, media influence, and other general areas, let us instead examine the life of a specific White liberal.* The case study of an individual will provide both character traits and environmental influences that may help us determine possible origins of the ‘White liberal mentality’.
The obvious candidates for our study will be politicians, celebrities, and writers. Not only are their personal lives more accessible to the researcher, but the vast majority are politically liberal. So now we have another question. Why do wealthy, famous, and prominent individuals lean heavily to the left?
The Jewish stranglehold in media and academia is the big reason.9 10 Anyone who takes a pro-White political position would be confronted with academic dismissal, media blackout, and threats of physical violence. White advocates such as Kevin MacDonald and Jared Taylor are frequently targets of such methods.11 12
Yet, this only explains the passive acceptance of the liberal orthodoxy. This does not explain why so many intelligent and prominent individuals are not only acceptant of ‘cultural marxism’ but also its advocates. At ‘elite’ universities a full 87% of faculty self-identify as liberal.13 Robert Jensen, journalism professor at the University of Texas, has gone so far to say, “I want to live in a where I can at least imagine that someday I will be able to stop being white.”14
But again, we need to know why these people have such views. So we return to our strategy of studying the life of an individual. But which individual to study? The individual should meet several criteria. The first is a ‘healthy’ childhood. Anyone with a traumatic or abnormal childhood should be excluded from our study. A second criteria should be outspoken support for liberal and left-wing causes, especially of a non-White type.
After a short search I found someone who met these requirements. The subject of our inquiry was born in Marshalltown, Iowa on November 13, 1938. She was raised in a Lutheran household, was fond of animals, and was voted Most Likely to Succeed in high school. On September 8, 1979 her body was found decomposing in the back seat of her car, parked in a Paris suburb. After a life of left-wing political activism, a string of failed marriages, and mental instability, Jean Seberg was dead.
Continue to Part Two.
*I use this term in its American meaning – not the European.
1. Jewish Activists and White Institutions
2. Detroit’s Beautiful, Horrible Decline
3. TNB: Random Violence
4. TNB: Blacks in Charge
5. TNB: Dating Blacks
6. Culture of Critique, by Kevin MacDonald
7. Obama takes oath again…
8. What we didn’t overcome
9. Jews in popular culture and media
10. ‘Six out of ten Ivy league presidents have been Jews’
11. ‘Left targets Kevin MacDonald Again.’
12. ‘American Renaissance conference cancelled’
13. ‘87% of elite university faculty are liberal’
14. ‘The Anti-White Ascetic-in-Residence…’
1. “stumbled over the words of his inauguration oath”
2. “voted into office by 43% of the White electorate”
1 and 2 are related. Obama didn’t stumble over his words, closeted homosexual Republican Supreme Court Justice John Roberts – appointed by Republican George W. Bush and confirmed by a Republican Congress – flubbed his lines. But sad partisan hacks cling to minutia like this, not because it reflects poorly on Obama or blacks, because it absolved them of their own crimes against white people.
Why did so many white people vote for Obama, nearly half? Well, did you see the competition? McCain and miscegenator Palin? Why would white people vote for more immigration – McCain’s number one issue – or insane fanatical Zionist warmongering – Palin?
McCain chose Palin under duress; he wanted his right hand man, fanatical Zionist warmongering Jew Joe Lieberman – a liberal, baby-killing, pro-big government, pro-immigration, anti-white people career Democratic politician who voted for Wall Street bailouts and every Jewish cause imaginable.
But somehow people are complaining that half the white people didn’t vote for the Israeli-controlled, pro-immigration, pro-illegal immigration, pro-war for Israel Republicans?
Some people are obsessed with Negroes. I don’t see how they are even a problem, it’s the Jews.
Republicans – led for years by Zionists, globalists, immigration fanatics, with a long time gay Jew chairman – Ken Mehlman – now a Negro – race traitors like Karl Rove, with an establishment promoting candidates like Giuliani – and “conservatives” are going to point fingers about “race traitors?”
“Liberal orthodoxy” – what, like the Republican party?
GOP partisan hacks think NPR is the problem and that we should all watch FOX news and listen to Rush Limbaugh. I know – let’s find some race-conscious Jews to be our allies!
lulz
Is focusing on celebrities really the best choice? Seems to me they do whatever is fashionable and float wherever things are easy. As far as the academe goes it has simply become self selecting for totalitarianism, hasn’t it?
I agree with See Something Say Something in that the choices were pretty lousy. On one hand you had the Magic Mulatto with connections to domestic terrorists and anti-White bigots. On the other you have a neocon war fanatic who seems to have a love affair for Senator Lieberman and all things jewish; jewish wife, jewish kids complete with a pitiful looking adopted Bangladeshi kid they paraded around like some kind of fashion accessory. I think people voted for Obama because they mistakenly believed he wasn’t a sock puppet for the Synagogue of Satan. It should be evident to most Americans now with the anti-war party dominating Congress and a President who campaigned on removing our troops from Iraq, that the whole thing was a sham.
Good piece, Sam. I believe part of the problem is, essentially, religious. This goes to human nature: most people need to “worship” something.
For example, many libertarians seem to almost literally worship the market. They would of course deny this, often posturing as iconoclastic atheists. Yet their belief system seems to come down to “if the market says that something should be done, then it shall be done. If the market says that something shall not be done, then it shall not be done. It is so written, verily I speak unto you…”
Never mind that the market doesn’t even pretend to tell us, as a society, how we should organize ourselves. The market doesn’t pretend to answer all questions of ethics, morality, or values. The market simply says that some things will be profitable, and other things won’t be. It does not represent itself as God, it does not pretend to answer all questions. Again, it only pretends to answer one question: is a given endeavor profitable or not? Yet to the libertarian, it answers *all* questions. Utterly ridiculous. Keep in mind that libertarians tend to be of above average intelligence, yet these fairly smart people have a religion without realizing it.
Similarly, multiracialism provides a religious framework for its adherents. This framework is far more comprehensive than that of the libertarians. For example, they have their own Calvary (Auschwitz or the Middle Passage, take your pick), the suffering Jesus, or Moses if you prefer (Martin Luther King), Original Sin (slavery) and so on. They have an entire canon, complete with shrines, saints and martyrs – and of course heretics. Like the Christians, they are universalists. Every Negro is precious in their sight. These people carry the Good News, and care not a whit for the suffering, murder and rape that they leave in their wake.
Historical fact means nothing: only whites have engaged in conquest (forget the Mongols, the Turks, The Arabs, and numerous other brutal invaders of our beloved Europe). Only whites truly sin, and therefore only the destruction of whites, dissolving themselves into oblivion, can offer ultimate redemption.
In short, these people are functionally insane. Logic means nothing, facts mean nothing, reality means nothing.
Now, this is not to say that all multiracialists are like this. For some, it’s just a good career move. Others are engaged in what Yggdrasil would call status yearning, perhaps trying to differentiate themselves from their lowbrow roots, or in the alternative playing the role of “light unto the hicks.”
Yet personal motives aside, there is no question that a multiracial narrative has been created, from sin to redemption, a de facto religion.
We must accept that, as insane as these bastards are, this narrative does in fact have a certain power. The idea of reconciliation is APPEALING. The idea of “coming together” is APPEALING. The idea of everyone “getting along” is, well, appealing. The idea of fair play is appealing. Any narrative that offers redemption, well, that’s going to be appealing too.
We must face this: the multiracial narrative, essentially religious in nature, does have real appeal. It is no accident that it so closely parallels other appealing narratives, like universalist Christianity.
On the other hand, our vision also has appeal, or at least it could. The idea of organic communities with their own culture, singing their own songs, controlling their own destiny, linked to the past and yet with a vision of the future, this is appealing too. It can be tremendously appealing…but we have failed to develop a comprehensive narrative that takes our vision where we need it to go. The Leftists create a religion, we cite facts and figures. They create a vision that bypasses reality and all of the murders and rapes…we cite the murders and rapes that their narrative bypasses. See how it works? See why one side wins?
It is not enough to critique, one must also provide a compelling vision, a narrative, a de facto religion. The Left understands this, the Right does not. Think of the beautiful, compelling narrative that we could create, the story of our people! The struggle, the journey, the strength and sacrifice, the yearning, the hope. All of it. The Nation!
What is it to be human? To be European? To be ourselves? The narrative must encompass it all. American whites had a narrative at one time, but it was flawed, and fell quickly to the Jewish/Multiracial attack. We need something better, deeper, broader – stronger and more compelling. Truer! Once we find this, once we find ourselves in the truest sense, we will be able to take back all of our lands. And I mean all of it, every last square inch. Sounds impossible today, no? Sure it does, precisely because we have not found ourselves, our vision. Until we do, we will lose out to those that have. It amazes me that almost nobody on our side is even asking these most fundamental questions.
Who is working on this today? Guessedworker comes to mind, maybe a few others. We’ve got the talent, but we have not yet fulfilled our purpose. We can and we will. But when?
Trainspotter +1!
Very nicely said!
After Bush, any nigger would look good to 43% of White Americans LOL. :o)
Trainspotter,
Good post. Vision is key. It’s so overriding there is simply no contest.
It can’t be said enough until such time as everyone who is now doing critiques spends some time sharing their unifying vision.
WN remains bogged down in negativity and ‘anti-ism’ which will continue to hinder progress until that is changed.
I’m working on articulating the vision as are others.
In regards to the article, I support the general intention of looking into how mindsets are formed. However:
1. Why focus on the 43% who vote for Obama? This is the wrong direction. A certain percentage will always vote for the political left, just like a Bell Curve.
It would be far better to focus on those who support European ethno-culture and expand what works, not try to reach out to those who are the hardest to reach! Accept that there is a genetic basis to political views and move on.
2. Why is it that one is supposed to exclude those who have traumatic childhoods from the sample used to examine race traitors? Is the idea that trauma leads to that? That’s completely unlikely.
It’s just a biological characteristic that some will inherit of seeking novelty in certain ways, including supporting underdog movements. Ms Seberg is clearly an example of that.
The better question is how can culture sway those who are prone to be swayed so that a power base can be established.
Among the 43% who voted for Obama, there have to be at least a few who did so because they didn’t like Juan McCain and divorced race from their decision. If Tom Tancredo or Ron Paul had been only the other viable choice, I would wager that that 43% number would be substantially lower.
Who here if given only choices between Alan Keyes or Walter Williams and Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden would choose one of the latter?
I agree with the man. Trainspotter +1 more. Vanishing American used to write along these lines. The blog is still up.
Old Atlantic, do you know what happened to Vanishing American? It is lamentable that she stopped blogging. VA was one of my favorite blogs. I hope she is all right.
It was the surplus wealth, strategically deployed for operant conditioning on those who wanted to “advance professionally.” Quite simple, really.
Seems to me that Whites are just not as ethno-centric as other Races.
However this is no excuse to just throw in the towel. We have to work with what we have.
(I imagine that there are a suit of genetic codes that control this, some Whites are gifted to have a more ethno-centric genetic code… those are the folks that become White Nationalists. Others who lack this suit of traits are the ones who become loony liberals. )
Trainspotter,
That was a smashing post… until this bit:
What is it to be human? To be European? To be ourselves? The narrative must encompass it all. American whites had a narrative at one time, but it was flawed, and fell quickly to the Jewish/Multiracial attack. We need something better, deeper, broader – stronger and more compelling. Truer! Once we find this, once we find ourselves in the truest sense, we will be able to take back all of our lands. And I mean all of it, every last square inch. Sounds impossible today, no? Sure it does, precisely because we have not found ourselves, our vision. Until we do, we will lose out to those that have. It amazes me that almost nobody on our side is even asking these most fundamental questions.
Man, all you’re offering people here is tired old ultra-nationalism. For better or worse, people have seen what the result of that is and they instinctively (and rightly, imo) balk at it.
Is this really what it means to be human? Really? Well, whatever. I can accept that you — and your compatriots here — feel that strongly about race. I don’t think it’s necessary, and in fact I think it’s something of a burden, but okay, whatever. I’m quietly confident that the vast majority of your kind will never feel so strongly about it — and particularly not if they’re offered a competing, much milder alternative (which I like to think I can provide, and which I sincerely hope the “Alt Right” can). But understand this: you’re attacking the enemy where they’re strongest. Yes, they may be degenerates, and faggot lovers, and economic alchemists, but the one thing they’ve gotten right over the past fifty years is PEACE. It’s a pity that time has a way of diminishing this, but dude, can you seriously not appreciate what a sublime achievement peace in Europe has been? For example the fact that war between, say, France and Germany is today all but unthinkable? Unthinkable, T; that’s something, feller. You can hate the left for a million good reasons but there’s no denying that this they have gotten very, very er…right. Now, you might respond that that’s easy for you to say, Silver, because you’re not one of us. That’s a fair point, but then consider that I wouldn’t tolerate what you’re selling for my countries of ancestral origin, either. In fact, as devoted as I am to racialist “principles” (insofar as those exist), I’d rather see those countries irreversibly niggerfuxated [to forestall the obvious retort: they already are, bahahaha] than to see them go down the road you’re attempting here to inspire your people to follow.
What the white libs and their religion advocate is genocide of our race, the White race. They have no moral standing above us, its all in their minds. So we must remind them that they are party to genocide, and we must continue to do this. Yes they are insane, but their religion is miles wide less than an inch deep, in time their confidence in their failed god will end, and then real change will occur.
It’s difficult to have racial unity in a country where a great deal of the European ethnicities have crossbred with one another. I don’t think White America has been quite as united over the decades as people wanted us to believe. Germans, Italians, English, French, etc. all think differently and have one unifying culture and religion. The Anglo-Saxon culture provided a shell that contained common elements but now that nonwhite immigration has broken that model there needs to be a better way to appeal to the Pan European identity.
“It’s difficult to have racial unity in a country where a great deal of the European ethnicities have crossbred with one another. I don’t think White America has been quite as united over the decades as people wanted us to believe. Germans, Italians, English, French, etc. all think differently and have one unifying culture and religion. The Anglo-Saxon culture provided a shell that contained common elements but now that nonwhite immigration has broken that model there needs to be a better way to appeal to the Pan European identity.”
__
If I may add, many of us ‘Eye-talians’ have fully assimilated in to the Anglo-American culture and civilization,
and
…as well *love and respect* our Anglo-Celtic and other NW European brothers,
and
…are very happy and honored to live in the great civilization they and their/our forefathers created.
*This is a video of one of my favorite songs that captures the undistilled essence of the America that I remembered growing up… an America where friends and family meant more than anything else. It also expresses how I and many of my friends/family felt, and still feel, toward the traditional WASP culture that made America the great nation that it became –
White liberalism, in my view, is a form of deviance. Other races are never extreme outgroup altruists like so many white people. White liberalism is to politics what masochism is to sexuality. Just as the pathologies of blacks and browns manifest themselves in aggressive sadistic violence with a will to dominance, so the unique white pathology might very well be psycho-sexual submissive deviance. The same trait in whites which leads them to fawn over blacks and vote for blacks, is the trait which leads white men to take their wives to swingers’ clubs and watch them get gangbanged by mandingos.
Is this evolutionary maladaptation or conditioned pathology? Maybe a little of both. I do know that of all the white liberals I’ve ever been acquainted with, the majority of them have had some family issues. When an individual’s connection to his family is tenuous and he’s experienced alienation, this alienation from one’s family might extend to one’s extended family, the racial ingroup. The individual becomes atomized. Add to this the wicked brew of liberal and feminist college indoctrination of whites, the ensuing divorce rates, children raised in broken homes (white boys without fathers at the mercy of white-male hating feminist mothers), and of course the non-stop anti-white media campaign, and that might account for a significant degree of our malaise.
You might want to take a look at a book called Privilege.
It’s about rich girl Sasha Bruce. I think it is right where you are going with Jean Seberg. I read it about 15 years ago.
Polygynous Evolutionist,
1. I’m focusing on race-traitors because until this point I have never made a serious attempt to understand them. Alot of them seem to be delusional and close-minded. The masses of ordinary White people, I think, are easy enough to understand. If there was a real dialogue about race in the media, they’d be on our side. White race-traitors are probably a lost-cause. We shouldn’t try to convert them – only to understand them. (Know your enemy.)
2. I wanted to examine someone with a normal childhood from the White America of the 1950s and earlier. If you take someone with a severely abnormal childhood they tend to behave abnormally in later life. I.e., sexually abused children usually become sexually obsessed adults, physically abused children tend to become sociopaths, children from families with a history of mental illness are likely to inherit the disorder, etc.
Lastly, the aim of figuring out how to convert the White masses is an important goal, and Wikitopian has posted a few tips on how to argue our case to the uninitiated.
Silver, the same sort of logic you apply towards White nations should be more fittingly applied towards Israel. We have an illegal nuclear armed terrorist state in the Middle East that by their actions threatens to drag the whole world into WWIII. The only possible solution to peace is to restore Palestine to its former nation status and relocate the Jews to a smaller tract of land within Israel. Peace can only be maintained by disarming their armies and with a UN peacekeeping force taking its place. Massive inflows of immigration into the Jewish held areas reducing them to a minority will further curb any murderous impulses they might have. Later on policies can be implemented to encourage miscegenation among the population and breed out those pernicious traits that make Jews hated the world over.
Richard
What a perfect summation of Magic Mulatto. Brevity the soul of wit; nailed it.
‘For example the fact that war between, say, France and Germany is today all but unthinkable? Unthinkable, T; that’s something, feller. You can hate the left for a million good reasons but there’s no denying that this they have gotten very, very er…right.’
If France and Germany manage to maintain their native white populations, then peace will be excellent – no more wars between brothers.
If France and Germany are over-run by Arabs and dark-skinned Turks, why should whites care whether France and Germany are at peace?
Peace is only meaningful if one’s genes live on. If one’s genes go extinct due to lack of breeding opportunities, war and peace are equally bleak.
SJ
The only sensible plan, and it’s urgent, before the crazy Zionuts start WWIII.
@The Man and PE: thanks, I appreciate it. I’m very glad to hear that there are more people working on this most fundamental of problems. I plan to contribute some things myself in the (hopefully) not too distant future. I’m hoping to have more time to concentrate on this later in the year.
@Silver: you are misunderstanding part of my post. I am not advocating a return to “tired old ultra-nationalism.” Tired old ultra-nationalism didn’t prevent us from arriving at to our current sorry state of affairs, so I don’t see it as a solution per se.
In fact, I don’t see any prior narrative/value system as being sufficient to cure what ails us. By definition, no prior system was sufficient to prevent us from reaching our current crisis. After all…we’re here. This has really happened, it’s not just a bad dream.
Therefore, perhaps to be a bit oversimplistic about it, no prior system has passed the ultimate test of survival, at least from our perspective (as whites). All were displaced by other systems, leading us to the disastrous contemporary status quo. Since none were sufficient…they are by definition insufficient. We must do better. I hinted at this when I mentioned that the old American narrative/value system quickly collapsed under the Jewish/liberal/multiracial attack. So we can’t go back, we must instead do better.
We need something fresh, and something that accounts for the mistakes and failures of the past. Something that will not only help us win, but will be able to survive against competing visions/value systems that will inevitably seek to displace it. This is why it must be so broad in scope…there must be no chinks in the armor.
This is not to say that the past should simply be buried and forgotten. Not at all. We may, and I believe we will, be able to salvage important components of past value systems. In fact, I see this as both necessary and pretty much inevitable. But we also need something new, and the best of the past must be integrated into this new vision. This new vision/system must encompass an incredibly broad range of issues, from values and ethics to human nature and economics. That’s just for starters. Ignore an important area, and enemies will pour through the gap and undermine or displace you.
Yep, it’s a big project. It’s gonna be one helluva vision, that’s for sure.
I’m not sure what gave you the impression that I was advocating ultra-nationalism as the solution. The point of my post was more to raise questions than to answer them. We need a vision, a narrative that gets us where we want to go. I was attempting to convey the sheer breadth and depth of this objective. “Tired old ultra-nationalism” doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of our problem and, as noted above, was insuffient to protect us from our current predicament. In fact, and I suspect that you would agree with this, one could plausibly argue that it had a good deal to do with getting us into our current existential crisis.
Again, we must do better than that. Far better.
The Jewish stranglehold in media and academia is the big reason.9 10 Anyone who takes a pro-White political position would be confronted with academic dismissal, media blackout, and threats of physical violence. White advocates such as Kevin MacDonald and Jared Taylor are frequently targets of such methods.
Yet, this only explains the passive acceptance of the liberal orthodoxy. This does not explain why so many intelligent and prominent individuals are not only acceptant of ‘cultural marxism’ but also its advocates.
Huh? You forgot the carrot. People who advocate what their masters want advocated get the carrot, or at least, a better shot at it.
It’s common for WNs to want to explain away the media’s influence (at least I see it as common, based on how often they try to do so), but I don’t think it’s possible.
Wild shot in the dark, but maybe it’s because WNs would rather see an ethnostate as the prize, than a TV station? More romantic?
Sorry, that isn’t the hand we’ve been dealt. The prize is a TV station.
Seems to me that Whites are just not as ethno-centric as other Races.
However this is no excuse to just throw in the towel. We have to work with what we have.
(I imagine that there are a suit of genetic codes that control this, some Whites are gifted to have a more ethno-centric genetic code… those are the folks that become White Nationalists. Others who lack this suit of traits are the ones who become loony liberals. )
I suppose ethnocentrism takes a back seat to immunity to indoctrination as the trait that most determines who’s an ethnopatriot.
I also suppose whites are not simply less ethnocentric than (“all” being implied) other races, at least not in terms of nature. The default assumption would be that, as with most traits, whites fall between blacks and yellows a la Rushton. I certainly see this with collectivism, a related trait. Many WNs and race realists are fond of asserting that blacks are more collectivist than whites, which is a real laugh. SURE, American whites and American blacks have radically different NURTURES in this regard and that produces a visible difference in racially explicit collectivist behaviors, but c’mon, blacks more collectivist than whites? Post-Katrina, who was going ape and who was collectively rebuilding their homes?
Take a look at American black culture, say rap. See many signs of a collectivist nature there? Or, do you see signs of hyper-individualism?
Amren has a rap sheet for black politicians a mile long. It was labeled “blacks in charge” last time I checked. The basic formula is hyper-individualism in an ethnocentric wrapper; black voted in, black sells out for personal gain, black gets caught. It’s the standard for blacks IMO.
Who got caught with a stack of cash in his freezer again? Ethnocentric my arse.
The default assumption would be that, as with most traits, whites fall between blacks and yellows a la Rushton.
Why should that be the default assumption? According to n/a’s posts (like this one), the Asian/White/African alignment of traits is not as consistent as Rushton claims, even though some on the Internet are convinced Rushton is infallible.
“MGLS
Old Atlantic, do you know what happened to Vanishing American? It is lamentable that she stopped blogging. VA was one of my favorite blogs. I hope she is all right.
”
Sorry, I didn’t see your message. She had a comment at Stephen Hopewell just recently.
http://heritageamerican.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/1002/