The Who Question: A Rant Against Fake Revolutionaries

"Patriot" Timothy McVeigh destroys the Patriot movement in 1995 and reelects Bill Clinton in 1996

Alabama

Who is going to create the White ethnostate?

This is one of the most important differences of opinion between mainstreamers and vanguardists in the White Nationalist community. This question keeps repeatedly popping up in the comments.

Here is my position:

(1) White Nationalists are less than 1 percent of the White population in the United States.

(2) White Nationalism is a rhetoric that exists almost exclusively in cyberspace.

(3) White Nationalism will never go anywhere without a mass constituency.

(4) Almost twenty years of experience has shown that using the internet to disseminate a radical rhetoric can only be used to peel off a handful of people at the margins. This is insufficient.

(5) The most important “intellectual task” for White Nationalists at the moment is to figure out how to connect our cause with a mass constituency. That is the challenge of this decade.

(6) In order to connect with a mass constituency, we are going to have to (a) use the internet more effectively and (b) get off the internet and start organizing our communities.

(7) White Nationalists won’t organize as White Nationalists in the real world because of the prevailing taboos and the fear of social ostracism and employment discrimination.

The fact that White Nationalism is too far outside the experience our audience is another important reason.

(8) In the real world, White Nationalists will have to organize under some other label. The choice is between organizing under another label or not organizing at all.

(9) They will have to break up their agenda into pieces like American communists in the wake of McCarthyism, dilute their rhetoric, and push White Nationalism into the mainstream on multiple fronts.

(10) Like “Comprehensive Communism,” “Comprehensive White Nationalism” will never go anywhere. It is too far outside of the experience of White Americans. That is the reality of our present situation.

(11) Roughly 50 percent of White Americans are conservatives. About 20 percent are liberals and 30 percent are moderates.

(12) If White Nationalism is to succeed, then we have to convert at least one or two or those groups of Whites to our way of thinking.

(13) Conservatives largely agree with us on immigration, affirmative action, racial double standards, gun rights, free speech, multiculturalism, and political correctness. We must start there.

(14) The polls clearly show and the agenda of the Obama administration reflects the hostility of progressives to White Nationalists on every single one of these issues.

Fantasies of “leftwing White Nationalism” aside, White Nationalism will inevitably be a rightwing movement, as the only people who agree with us on the major issues are rightwingers. We must accept this.

(15) Thus, White Nationalists will have to target conservatives and moderates. We have to narrow the gap between White Nationalists and White conservatives and moderates.

Essentially, we must turn them into White Nationalists, without neutering their effectiveness in the process.

(16) I pointed out above that White Nationalists won’t organize as White Nationalists in the real world. I observed that we can only organize in the real world under some other label. The sensible label to use is “moderate” or “conservative” to take advantage of the forces of blind partisanship.

(17) In order to lead people to White Nationalism, we must start where they are at today, gain their confidence and establish our legitimacy as leaders, not harangue them from the fringes of society. Organizing and leadership must take priority over rhetorical radicalism.

(18) The bridge to White Nationalism has to be built from the conservative and moderate end of the mainstream political spectrum. Watering down White Nationalism will marginally improve our public image, but it won’t attract the numbers we need to win.

(19) The 20 percent of Whites who are already explicitly racially conscious to some degree (i.e., oppose interracial relationships and immigration) are overwhelmingly conservatives. The presence of so many explicit Whites in the conservative movement is another reason to go the conservative route.

(20) In order to narrow the gap, White Nationalism must reject getting tied down to extraneous vanguardist pet causes like refighting the Second World War, attacking Christianity, measuring skulls, creating an “aristocracy” to lord over “lemmings,” and hostility to American patriotism which makes us the enemy of nationalist minded White Americans.

(21) Fifty years of experience has shown that White Americans react negatively to the use of violence. Look no further than the Emmett Till Civil Rights Act or the Matthew Shepard Civil Rights Act which Barack Obama used last year to expand federal crimes legislation.

(22) We can take “bullets” and “bombs” off the table as our means. The use of “bullets” and “bombs” accomplishes nothing for us but making progressives more look sympathetic and boosting Obama’s poll numbers and increasing his chances of reelection.

(23) Bullets will not work. Bombs will not work. We have decades of experience that shows posting radical anonymous comments on the internet does not work either.

(24) Ballots do work.

David Duke was nearly successful in his campaigns in Louisiana. Even in failure, Duke succeeded in forcing “social issues” like affirmative action and illegal immigration into the conservative mainstream.

More recently, J.D. Hayworth’s failure in the Arizona Republican Senate primary succeeded in changing John McCain’s vote on the DREAM Act.

(25) The system rejecters have no alternative to the system. The only thing that is accomplished by rejecting the system is digging ourselves into a deeper hole and further empowering our enemies.

(26) The fight against the DREAM Act is one example that the system itself is not designed to “kill us.” When Whites are properly organized and motivated, we know that we can defeat our enemies. They know it too which is why they try to keep us disorganized and misled.

(27) We have no choice but to work within the system.

(28) The Tea Party has already shown us the weakness of the GOP establishment. The Duke campaign in the early 1990s showed the weakness of the Republican establishment even back then. Even with the President of the United States campaigning against him, David Duke was nearly elected to high office in the Deep South.

(29) NumbersUSA and the Kris Kobach campaign in Kansas have shown that fighting on separate fronts instead of one comprehensive front can produce decisive victories for our side.

(3o) Arizona has shown us twice now, first with the Justice Department lawsuit against SB 1070, and most recently with the Gabrielle Giffords shooting, how to use polarization to undermine the legitimacy of the mainstream media and defang its rhetorical attacks.

(31) It is a common complaint that conservatives are cowards.

There is some truth to this charge. For many decades, conservatives were cowards, and that can be traced to progressive hegemony in the mainstream media.

The nature of the media in America has completely changed in the last twenty years and especially in the last five years. A politician like Sarah Palin can now run around the mainstream media and land a devastating blow upon it simply by using Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter accounts.

Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage can attack the media through talk radio.

(32) Conservatives became accustomed to giving lip service to the ideals of the mainstream media when progressives controlled almost the entire media.

Human behavior is habitual. It took fifty years for Southern conservatives to stop voting for the Democratic Party. Similarly, conservatives will slowly but surely abandon their habit of cowering before the New York Times now that they have the upper hand in media reach over left leaning mainstream journalists.

(33) Multiple examples have recently shown that the mainstream media has lost its legitimacy and the so-called “lemmings” are tuning it out. The taboo against “racism” is weakening.

Remember the false accusations that the Tea Party spit on the Congressional Black Caucus? Remember Leonard Zeskind’s Tea Party Nationalism report? Remember the One Nation rally in DC?

The only people who ate up that nonsense were progressives.

I can answer the “who” question.

White Nationalists should work within the system and build a bridge to explicit racial consciousness from the conservative and moderate end of the political spectrum. We can do this through incrementally moving the goal posts in much the same way the Left has done.

If we don’t convert White conservatives and moderates to our way of thinking, we don’t even have a shot at creating a White ethnostate in North America.

Thus, we must avoid antagonizing our target audience on irrelevant issues and instead present a constructive, sympathetic face to White America instead of a destructive, alienated one.

That’s my position.

Now, I would like to ask the vanguard: who is going to create a White ethnostate in North America, if not the 50 percent of White Americans who agree with us on immigration, and how do you plan to accomplish this by casting the White majority in almost every state in the Union into the role of our enemy?

I don’t think you can answer that question.

About Hunter Wallace 9628 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

11 Comments

  1. I was about to mention the impact of what an American style BNP could achieve before the Nick Griffin interview appeared. Americans simply do not know how fortunate they are that their free speech actually exists. This is not the case in Europe however where far more draconian laws exist.

    Although the A3P is a start, it won’t cut the mustard. Even leaders like Griffin has too much baggage to move beyond the 15% potential voters they reach (Griffin has achknowledged this himself) . This is also the case with Le Pen’s daughter over-taking leadership of the Front Nationale , swearing to bring in her “own style” while further moderating her party from her fathers legacy.

    It is worthy of note (after the last crushing local electoral defeat) that Griffin suggested the formation of white “civil rights” groups to fight long legal battles if the political front fails because the huge costs involved of canvassing and court battles. I couldn’t agree more that civil rights is what could be done anyway, but there isn’t that “right 6 people” to do it (I’ve also suggested pressure group formations of elite lawyers – it is simply the best and perhaps few chances whites have of legal recognition). Recently, at the last legal trial of the BNP vs 70 state lawyers ( the manyassualts this party had to go through) a breakthrough was made on the legal front that forced the courts to acknowledge that a British identity exists(!), but disallowed for an exclusive party of “British only” because of the inferred racism (a prospect that wouldn’t be illegal in the USA).

    It may have taken whites a 100 years since the shell shock of WW1, WW2 and the post-war cultural marxist bonanza to finally learn from their enemies and finally get their act together. Of course there is always room for many fronts but the potential for mass effect by a professional core is the top priority. The mind boggles as to how the obvious methid has was not done 70 years sooner (have not the NAists come to similar conclusions yet they refuse to take a mainstreamer approach?). I take some comfort in knowing that the next generation of white advocates can learn from the previous generations and finally take some serious action.

  2. You still are dodging the question of projecting HOW the white ethnostate is to be created, without political violence.

    The contention of the vanguard, the true vanguard – and not those fantasizers you keep tarring with the same brush – is that any white ethnostate is an unimaginable political impossibility under the aegis of the Western philosophical paradigm as it has developed since the mid-1700’s or so. Just as the Age of Reason was slowly etablished over time, in the West, so must racial ethnocentrism now be developed into an all-encompassing metaphysical philosophy. This will require a body of thinkers, already present, to lay its intellectual foundations. Just as the American and French revolutions established, politically, what the Age of Reason thinkers had enunciated, so too will we need political violence to establish the white ethnostate.

    The whole point being, that if political violence is eventually necessary, then what you are engaging in with co-opting the mainstream is at best a distraction, and at worst a misleading of our best people. That being said, I see the usefulness of some of our numbers going off in this direction if only to provide cover for those of us who wish to work towards revolution.

  3. Rodger can keep pretending there is no difference between Republicans. Everyone who follows this issue closely knows that even during the Bush years there were Republicans like Steve King, Tom Tancredo, and Jeff Sessions.

    Year after year we hear about these people that are on our side and if only we could elect more Republicans things will turn around. Well, the year of the Republican Revolution in 1994 was a huge disappointment as was the election of George Bush and the congressional races in 2000 and 2002. It looks more like a political campaign to elect more Republicans than anything else. I don’t expect anything this time either and not just from pessimism either. The Democrats control the Senate and Obama has the veto so nothing will be done for next 2 years. The Republicans will push alot of legislation that will make White America happy and most will vote for it, including these corporate Republicans, knowing it won’t make it out of the House. They’ll capitalize on this for the upcoming 2012 election in an attempt to take over the Senate and the White House and if they succeed something tells me they’ll develop amnesia about the last two years and go on with business as usual.

  4. “I was about to mention the impact of what an American style BNP could achieve before the Nick Griffin interview appeared.”

    There are different answers for different countries. A lot of Europe has PR electoral systems which make it a lot easier for a new party to reach the minimum threshold – usually around 5% – whereas in a FPTP system you’re looking at needing 30-35% at a minimum. This is critical because many people won’t vote if they don’t think you’re going to win and you don’t win because people don’t vote. The A3P will have the same problem with this that the BNP does.

    Althought the US has the FPTP system because it’s so much bigger and split up into states the parties are much less centralized than they are in Britain. This makes trying to infiltrate and influence one of the main parties at the local and state levels much more viable than it is elsewhere. This may vary from state to state.

    “Although the A3P is a start, it won’t cut the mustard. Even leaders like Griffin has too much baggage to move beyond the 15% potential voters they reach”

    Even if there is a limit of 15% the BNP can’t consistently reach that figure. I’m sure their message would have cleared the 5% threshold for a PR system but because of the current voting system they need more than an “ok” nationalist message they need to find a message that can withstand overwhelming media hostility. They may get there through a process of trial and error but we’ll see. The A3P will have the same problem of trying to craft a message that can cut throught he media barricade.

  5. nash2z
    “You still are dodging the question of projecting HOW the white ethnostate is to be created, without political violence.”

    Premise 2) You need to create a mass political organization before you can create an armed wing.

    Premise 3) Under the current conditions you’ll never be able to create a mass political organization if you talk about an armed wing.

    Ergo you’d need to create a peaceful mass political organization that can be turned to political violence when it’s big enough.

    In reality you wouldn’t need to do that because if you created a large enough peaceful WN organization to be a threat it would be attacked by the other side and you’d be forced to violence in self-defence.

  6. The “legal way” is exactly one notch above nothing at all. No more. The First World War was the catalyst that ushered in the 20th century. And without it, Communism, Fascism, National-Socialism, and Totalitarian Liberalism – the ultimate victor now ruling over us – would never have come about.

    We are in the same position as the Bolsheviks were when Lenin wrote “What Is To Be Done?” in 1901. Without a major event of some sort the slow death of the System will drag on for decades to come. Fortunately, in this second decade of the 21st century the Great Collapse is finally getting under way. And I believe the repercussions of this collapse – the modern equivalent of the Fall of the Roman Empire – will be felt throughout this century and well into the next.

    This will be our chance to come to power and implement the truly revolutionary changes that need to be made in order to ensure the survival and continuation of the White Race worldwide. Whether or not we will succeed in doing so remains to be seen, but the thoroughly radical, drastic, and fundamental changes needed to make this happen will not be effected any other way. Least of all via the “mainstream way”.

    The System is dying. The Liberal ideology hung itself with its own rope and it’s up to the true Aryan racial revolutionaries to take full advantage of it. But we won’t be the only candidates aiming to replace the crumbling System. However, like the Christians did when the Roman Empire collapsed in the 5th century, and like the Bolsheviks did when the Romanov dynasty collapsed in 1917, it’ll be up to us to make sure that we’re the ones who take over in the white nations of the world. And nobody else.

    To that end, may we be blessed with the appearance of a Mohammed of the White Race when the time comes. Someone who, like Mohammed, will be a political, military, and religious leader all at once.

  7. The State is the problem, not the solution. A White ethnostate will merely recreate the problem.

    At this moment in time I can pretty much guesstimate accurately that there are more white people screwing lady boys in Thailand then advocating white nationalism in a public forum.

    WN is dead and has been dead since it was conceived.

    Quit beating a dead horse. All power to the Tribes, not the State.

  8. The one point I might disagree on is corting conservative votes, if by that you mean economic conservatives who want to bust working class unions and privatize social security.
    What we should aim for is social conservatives. We don’t have to try and sustain the welfare state to get working class votes, but we do need to pay some attention to the economic interest of the working and middle classes.
    What we can offer wealthy economic conservatives is an end to the welfare state and not overly high marginal tax rates. Economically we only have to be well to the right of Comrade Obama.

  9. One other point, we do need to establish consciously pro-white communities at least to the level of PLE’s (Pioneer Little Europes.)
    A white ethno state would be a goal that can develope naturally over 50 or a 100 years, but it will have to be the final goal, as Jeffferson and the others of the America Colonization movement accurately predicted.

    “”Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them.”

    The ultimate goal is seperation, and Jefferson and I agree it is crucial for white survivail.

Comments are closed.