← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Okiereddust
Thread ID: 11958 | Posts: 81 | Started: 2004-01-17
2004-01-17 20:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]True enough...we'd be accomplishing a lot more by telling open minded right-leaning GOP types about the evils of neoconservatism. We really could win converts that way by starting with a hardcore Reaganite who may have been sympathetic to Buchanan in '92 and '96, and taking them from there down our own ideological roads.
True enough. These people under the surface are livid about things, I think. If they knew something could be done they'd could really be persuaded to do something.
The problem is that none of the GOP venues allow us a voice. National Review and just about every other "conservative Republican" rag doesn't seem to allow anything to the Right of Comrade Sandalio to appear in print, and the less is said about NR's most visible internet counterpart the better. Well I think that's part of the problem. We don't say much, outside of our little forums like this. No one hears us, and it would appear to some extent, we're content with maintaining a more gentile-righteous/smarter than thou attitude on our little forums, epitimized by VNN, than ever really doing anything.
The neos won't let us have a voice in the GOP "big tent" (a big tent that spans the spectrum from George W. Bush to disciples of Leon Trotsky) because they want their flock of sheep to believe that they are the one and only alternative to "Bill and Hillary" (as if it makes any difference whether we get a Wolfowitz or an Albright in the Defense/State Departments).[/QUOTE]
Well to some extent, let's face it, it would appear the neo's are right in being the only alternative. They've always argued that letting the WN movement ideology is poison,:hitler: and letting hard-core WN's into any serious movement, in any remote shape or form, is the death-knell for the movement. :wallbash: They argue that WN's are psychotics who can't get along with and hate everybody else and each other equally.:starwars: And the current state of WN bears this out 100%. :disgust:
There are paleo's who would argue that maybe we should just have aRATor right our meek confession of failure to JR and slink back to FR. :cry:Or at least go LP lite ala Mercuria. I can't really abide that, but I think it is fairly obvious now that, as I told Triskelion, the fact of the matter is that right now the neo-Nazi Linderites and neo-con Kristolites are working together, at least unintentionally, to oppose the resurgence of the only real practical possibility for national revitalization - the paleoconservatism of people like Samuel Francis. :thumbd:Until we're willing to face that fact and draw up an appropriate coarse of action I doubt our activities will ever amount to very much in practical terms. :sad:
2004-01-17 21:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]To some extent paleoconservatives themselves are much more to blame than "Linderite neo-Nazis" for the failure of "Sam Francis paleoconservatism" to be a viable alternative to neoism and liberalism. By refusing to seriously address the issues of race, ethnicity and religion, paleoconservatives pulled the chair out from under themselves. A glance at Chronicles shows that apart from Francis's column, race is never addressed and immigration is never framed in racial or ethnic terms (even Francis columns there are watered down compared to what he does for CCC, Occidental Quarterly, or even his syndicated column). They do carry Francis though. And you can't blame tiny little Chronicles magazine for quashing Sam Francis. The story that Chronicles isn't rad enough, we'll just have to stick with VNN, that so many nationalists cite sounds as lazy as the regular myths of the VNNers themselves.
Sobran seems to be persona non grata, and the Jewish question is never seriously addressed at all (Chronicles was hardly any more friendly towards MacDonald than the neos). And one can't help but notice that for every politically daring statement VDARE makes there are always a dozen retractions and apologies (for instance, Brimelow felt the need to edit a Francis column defending Zundel with the qualification "editor's note: the Zundelsite is pretty dangerous stuff" or some nonsense like that).
Well they don't take all the risks you think they should. I don't knowall the reasons, sometimes - Sobran seems to have become generally shunned since his IHR appearance. But I think that's because Sobran is sort of a loose cannon anyway, who is all over the board with his anarchism anyway. For serious people like Kevin Macdonald, Vdare at least still shows its willingto take risks.
And again, you're back to Chronicles whining. There are all sorts of alternative venues, Occidental Quarterly, Amer Ren., Middle Amer. News. Of course it seems a lot of paleo's on this forum, like the Linderites, always can find something to criticize from our little internet holes in the wall.
The way in which "dealing with race seriously" is different than Linder's "name the jew" is always rather elusive in practice, seeming to always practically exclude anyone to the left of Linder. .:unsure:Maybe the difference is actually too elusive for real practical politics. To an extent they almost become like the differences between Polinco and VNN - more just differences of style than of substance.
Through their refusal to deal with what is perhaps the most important issue facing the West, paleoconservatives have made it possible for your "Linderite neo-Nazis" to be the ONLY voice (however puerile) that deals with these questions. Had paleoconservatives dealt with race somehow, moderately and intelligently, then those on the far right would not be faced with a choice between selling out by voting GOP vs. VNN antics. This doesn't mean that every paleoconservative statement must deal with race, the Jewish question, etc. but these are questions that any movement which claims to understand and know how to deal with America's problems MUST address.[/QUOTE]
Dealing with race, "moderately and intelligibly". Duh right. Take that Linder et. al. But I agree with you. And if a gorilla could pass the SAT, I'd say we should lt him into college.
I don't know. Really the NA site has always had people that could deal with race moderately and intelligibly on their own. Strom, Yggy, Pierce, etc. along with quotes from people like David Duke. If that by itself is the main and determining criteria for a movements success, then one should go with them. But to my mind, that means admitting that this "moderately and intelligibly" stuff is sort of a chimera. Clearly running anarchic WN organizations and the type of people therein is not going to be something done by the type of people who write for Chronicles, even if was a Chonicles edited by Kevin MacDonald himself.
If that's what "dealing with race seriously" means, (i.e. writing a magazine that will pass muster with VNN posters) can one really blame Chronicles for demurring and passing on such an opportunity? I don't know, if Linder is the only real serious answer, let's all just throw our essay pads away and start studying Rockwell's pamphlets on how to move our rhetoric, progaganda, and agitation down to the level of the common man.
Franco I'm sure will be happy to conduct training courses. ;) :wacko:
2004-01-18 21:51 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust] I think it is fairly obvious now that, as I told Triskelion, the fact of the matter is that right now the neo-Nazi Linderites and neo-con Kristolites are working together, at least unintentionally, to oppose the resurgence of the only real practical possibility for national revitalization - the paleoconservatism of people like Samuel Francis.[/QUOTE]
On the contrary, Francis' writings have pratical value only in so far as they lead people here or to Linder/Stormfront. That probably doesn't happen very often, but even if it only happens occasionally, it's better than nothing, and it at least elevates Francis' writings above those of his colleague Thomas Fleming (whose writings have no practical value). And the same thing could be said about the writings of Brimelow, Buchanan, Taylor, etc. -- their work has pratical value only in so far as it leads people out of paleoconservatism all together and further to the Right than they themselves are willing to go.
2004-01-18 22:15 | User Profile
Okie, are you ready for Rockwell?
.......
In 1956, I sold out the magazine I had successfully started for the wives of Service men all over the world, ("U. S. Lady" Magazine) and put all the money into an effort to "unite" the conservatives. I formed the "American Federation of Conservative Organizations," innocently believing that, if only we could get the right wing together, we could easily conquer the left.
By this time, I had plenty of opportunity to look over the activity of the "right wing" - the conservatives, and had come to the conclusion, in my total ignorance of the real nature of the case, that all they needed to succeed was an organizational drive to get them "together", with a business-like PLAN. I had found that there were dozens and maybe hundreds of very rich men, like H. L. Hunt of Texas, and Robert Welch of Boston, who felt much as I did, and who, together, could pool enough money and resources to swamp the Marxist- Zionist Jews and left wingers. There seemed to be plenty of talent and ability, and actually a majority of our people over on my side of politics, so that common sense seemed to force the conclusion that it was only a lack of determined effort to put this TOGETHER which permitted the left-wing minority, sparked by the sub-minority of Jews, to keep winning victory after victory and send America down the path to Marxist socialism and racial disintegration.
I realized, even then, that talking and educating are useless unless they are directed at the only worthwhile political goal, POWER. But I reckoned without any knowledge of the human content of the "right-wing", in those days. From the millionaires to the scared little people who attend the endless pitiful "conservative", "100% American", "old-fashioned", "constitutional", "state's rights" meetings, I learned by bitter experience, that the human material of the right wing consists 90% of cowards, dopes, nuts, one-track minds, blabber-mouths, boobs, incurable tightwads and worst of all, hobbyists - people who have come to enjoy a perverted, masochistic pleasure in telling each other forever how we are all being raped by the "shhh-youknow-whos", but, who, under no conditions, would think of risking their two cars, landscaped homes, or juicy jobs to DO something about it.
Knowing none of this, however, and being full of my usual enthusiasm and drive, I paid for a series of radio spots before and after rightwing commentator Fulton Lewis' show, announcing a Washington meeting to organize the rightwing.
The response seemed to be gratifying. Hundreds of people called and I arranged with one of them, Sam Jones, the correspondent of Bill Buckley's National Review, to use the lovely old Virginia mansion in McLean for our first meeting.
Of the hundreds who called, only about fifty showed up at the meeting.
I addressed the meeting in the best "conservative" style lecturing "nicely" on the need "to get together" more than anything else, and receiving little flurries of polite applause.
How I shudder now to think of all that feeble, useless, stupid "niceness", while our race and our whole world are being brutally destroyed!
From time to time somebody in the audience would ask "what about the Jews?" And there would be snickers and shifting around of feet, like grammar school kids when somebody mentions the word "sex". Then I would scold this "bold" character for such a "disgusting display of prejudice", making my righteous love of the wonderful Jews very clear, and even sharing knowing winks with some close friends at my "clever" deception.
The Jews would not have disturbed such a meeting for anything in the world. We, like a million other "conservatives", were giving ourselves the illusion of "fighting" treason, subversion, Communism and race-mixing (the Jews) without doing anything and without hurting the enemy himself. If we did NOT have such silly little secret meetings, we would eventually build up such a pressure of frustrated patriotism that we just might have done something forceful, and therefore effective.
A little collection was taken up; we passed out membership cards, and then stood around babbling, as is the inevitable custom after such "battles" with the enemy.
Everybody congratulated everybody else at this new and terrible assault on the "Eskimos", as John Kasper called them then, and we went home all aglow with the great "success".
I poured out my time and money in an all-out effort to organize the rightwing "nicely", as the "American Federation of Conservative Organizations", and publish a national conservative paper.
We held meetings in the best meeting rooms in the Statler and Mayflower Hotels. I had beautiful stationery engraved in gold. I used all my skill in art, writing, organizing, promoting and leading - the same skills that are now serving the American Nazi Party - but were useless then. The basic premise - the premise of conservatism - was wrong.
Although it is made to appear so, the battle between the "conservatives" and "liberals" is NOT a battle of ideas or even of political organization. It is a battle of force, terror and power. The Jews and their accomplices and dupes are not running our country and its people because of the excellence of their ideas or the merit of their work, or the genuine majority of people behind them.
They are in power in spite of the lack of these things, and only because they have driven their way into power by daring MINORITY TACTICS. They can stay in power only because people are afraid to oppose them - afraid they will be socially ostracized, afraid they will be smeared in the press, afraid they will lose their jobs, afraid they will not be able to run their businesses, afraid they will lose political offices. It is FEAR, and FEAR alone that keeps these filthy left-wing sneaks in power - NOT ignorance by the American people, as the "conservatives" keep telling each other.
Our right-wing "fighters" keep assuring each other "ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free". But the truth is that any SLAVE knows the truth, but what good does it do him, unless he can somehow get the POWER to FORCE his way to freedom. It is not the truth that will make us free in America, because millions already know the truth and hate bitterly what is going on, but they are AFRAID even to admit they know the truth. Ten million signed the petition for Joe McCarthy - and they are not all dead. But they might as well be, as long as the right wing spends all its time and money trying to "win" another ten million instead of getting the ten million we already have to STAND UP! We have plenty of people, money and facilities to take America back from the traitors tomorrow morning if all the people who already know what is going on, were not AFRAID anymore and would STAND UP!
As long as the right-wing confines its fighting to being "nice", the great masses of the public will bow down like sheep to the left-wing which is NOT nice - which uses smear, economic persecution, legal harassment, and finally physical terror to maintain its domination of our national life and culture by FORCE. The force is disguised, of course, in checkbooks, judge's robes, rigged party conventions, etc. - but it is still either the force itself, or the threat of force which has America down and AFRAID.
No amount of papers and pamphlets, were they all masterpieces of propaganda - and no amount of talk and meetings can stop this growing left wing force and the POWER and FEAR it inspires - much less drive it back and finally destroy it.
But in 1955, I still imagined we could "sneak up" on the Jews, like the rest of my "sissy" friends. We would build a great "grass-roots" membership by not mentioning the Jews at all, even praising them - and then, while they suspected nothing, we would get stronger and stronger until finally one fine day we would wipe the smiles off our faces, spin around on the surprised Hebrews, and let them see just what we had in mind!
I found this coward's dream being promoted everywhere I went. Every conservative I met would draw me aside and groan about the latest outrages and treason of the "you-know-who's", and describe to me the latest plans to sneak up on the tormentors.
And I was as much a part of this childish illusion as anybody else. I spent literally hundreds of hours discussing the methods for this super-sneaky revolution.
And the only thing I gained from it all was the final discovery that it was - and always has been - impossible to beat terrorists by talk. One must dislodge such evil usurpers by the same weapon that got them in POWER. Theirs was and is secret and disguised. Ours, by nature, must be open, legal and honest. But it must still be POWER - not talk of pamphlets or sneaky dreams - and it involves, therefore, RISK.
I also learned to know the people my wife and I came to call the "die- hards" for some obscure reason I can't recall. These were the perennial "patriots", the eternal attenders of meetings, the inexhaustible talkers and babblers, the super-clever know-it-alls who are going to "throw the election into the house this time", etc., etc., and the disgusting hobbyists who discharged their pent- up "patriotism" once a week or so in the masochistic orgasm they seemed to obtain by flagellating themselves with the latest outrages of the Jews. These people seemed to have been "fighting" the Jews all their lives - years and years and years. Their standard reaction to anything they didn't think up themselves - a new plan for sneaking up on the Jew--was "I was fighting this thing before you were born, son" - and this was supposed to send the upstart packing.
As if people who had spent forty or fifty years fighting so monstrously unsuccessfully had any business daring to open their mouths at all!
As the months wore on and we began to see our small savings diminish with no signs of any real progress, I began to get a case of the "desperationitis" so common to the right wing. I had begun to meet a large, unorganized, but regular circle of "patriots" which exists everywhere, and discuss all kinds of "trick" methods of "spilling the beans" on the Jews, all at once. There were endless plans for dropping "the whole story" out of airplanes by the millions on the public while the helpless Jews watched the leaflets flutter down in rage. There was talk of a plan to raid a TV network station, hold the personnel at gunpoint while one of us - nobody cared to discuss exactly who - would present to the breathless millions the documents and facts on the Jewishness of Communism - which we have so abundantly but which mean so little as long as we reach only each other. There was even a scheme for sending aloft huge signs on balloons, tied to inaccessible places, which would "squeal" on the Jews from the sky while they scrambled madly to get them down. These wild ideas are actually - as you read this - being discussed by otherwise intelligent people somewhere - people who are simply too overwhelmed by their own timidity and ignorance to see that even if they DID these nasty tricks on the Jews, there would be NO RESULT at all.
People are more inert than it is possible to believe, even after you discover this fact. It takes an incredible amount of propaganda, repeated over and over and over and over to move them even a little bit. This is one of the reasons Joe McCarthy told me he wouldn't even attempt to tell the whole truth. "They'd simply put me away as a lunatic" he said, 'and the public would forget what it was all about". And he was probably right.
The idea that there is ANYTHING EASY that can be done, which will send the Jew traitors scurrying for Israel like rats, while we walk triumphantly into the White House, is one of the worst self-delusions which has been keeping the right wing babbling and conspiring while the Jews have been laughing at us and trampling all over our Constitution, our rights, our traditions, our dignity and our White Race.
Anybody, when he first discovers what is going on, might be forgiven a certain period of nourishing this childish delusion. But when he sees the Jews starving the families of his fellow sneaks, railroading them into jail, shipping them to mental health "hospitals", smearing and blasting them for just the teeniest weeniest little attempt to stand up to Jewish power, he ought to get the idea in no more than a few years. Any man who spends thirty or forty years pretending to imagine there is such an easy way while our country and our White Race go down and down and down - is not a dreamer - or ignorant. He is a coward!
"Conservatives" are the world's champion ostriches, muttering to each other down under the sand in "secret", while their plumed bottoms wave in the breezes for the Jews to kick at their leisure. Conservatives are fooling nobody but themselves.
One of the conservative leaders I contacted was William F. Buckley, Jr., the publisher of National Review. My friend here in D. C., Sam Jones, was his correspondent, and we got together at a meeting in New York. It was an intellectual thrill, just talking with Buckley and his staff. There is more pulsating brainpower and genius than any place else on earth I have ever been. Bill, himself, is personable in the extreme, and brighter than all the rest. But his staff contains three or four Jews, one of them particularly Jewish-looking, and the atmosphere there is different than with other "conservative" groups.
Buckley is extremely cagey on the Jewish question and even when you get him alone, it is difficult to elicit information as to his awareness. The best you can get are guarded implications from which you are at liberty to infer what you want. I have since learned the reason for this: Buckley's millionaire father had a major interest with the Jews in Israel, and the result, even today, is that Buckley's anti-liberalism and anti-Communism stop at the borders of Israel and the Zionist meeting halls.
However, at the time, I too was playing this silly "I've-got-my-eyes- closed" game, so I felt that much could be accomplished by helping Buckley, and I agreed to promote National Review for him. He deposited a thousand dollars in a Washington bank to my account and I started on a project designed to get mass circulation for National Review in colleges and universities.
In those days, however, I was heavily involved in my own effort to launch A. F. C. 0. and the newspaper, and I am ashamed to have to admit that I did a rotten job for Bill. I made some efforts, but they were without the drive and full enthusiasm necessary in such a promotion, and nothing happened. I returned the money to Bill, less expenses, with a guilty conscience. Outside of being too cagey on the Jewish question, which is, of course, his privilege, Bill Buckley was 1O0% square as a man, and unlike the situation with other right- wingers with whom I have worked or tried to work, my failure to accomplish anything with Buckley was entirely my fault.
In spite of all the money I poured into it and all the work and inspiration I gave it. My effort to "unite the conservatives" and beat the champion sneaks of the world - the Jews - by sneaking, didn't work. I ran out of money and went to work for two right-wing millionaires, first Bob Snowden of Memphis, Tenn. and Hughes, Arkansas, and then Russell Maguire, (who used to publish Mercury Magazine - I was his assistant).
Maguire talked a good fight. But when the real fight began, he took off. I have exposed the whole ugly story in a previous book, (without libel suits by either of them), but I will not repeat it here.
Suffice to say that these millionaires, while sincere, simply did not and probably still do not really believe that we are in deadly danger. They figure there will be some easy way of saving their enormous wealth, short of "coming right out with it".
Many right-wingers are sincerely concerned, I know, about my battles with men such as Maguire, Snowden, Welch, Hargis, et al., and my revelations of what they really are. "They are doing good", I am told, "why not let them go about their business their own way. They are helping. Don't hurt them".
I maintain they are only giving the appearance of helping - but are actually hurting.
Before a mass of people will rise up and do anything effective and forceful about a tyrannical situation, there must be built up a certain emotional pressure. A firecracker has not the force of a rifle bullet because it explodes harmlessly in all directions. But the gas from a rifle bullet cannot escape, except by forcing the bullet out at terrific speed, because it is confined, directed into useful channels.
As long as Welch and all the rest of his ilk, rich and poor, can give themselves the illusion of "fighting the Jews" by exploding the pressure inside of them verbally and harmlessly, in all directions, and without ever hurting a Jew traitor, they keep the pressure we need to get mad and fight from ever building up.
The Jews know this, and permit these hundreds and hundreds of harmless rightwing organizations to spout endlessly in silence behind the Jewish "paper curtain". They don't reach any significant number of people outside their own group. Even when they do, their approach is so feeble and so psychologically wrong that they win only a few rare types.
They never, never get out into the public, into the streets, and reach the masses with an inspiring and driving masculine movement, which alone can win the hearts of the masses! They pass literature and talk only to each other.
If just one tenth of the money which pours every year, year after year, into such "fire-cracker" movements were to be contained, directed, and used behind an ideological bullet forced out by fighting men, the Jews would stop at nothing to crush and destroy that deadly "bullet". Even without that money, with only a few grains of "powder", but confined and directed with force, we have already earned the all-out hate of the Jews, the only sure sign that we are not firing the eternal rightwing "gas" at them, but the deadly bullets which they know will eventually destroy their illegal, tyrannical power.
This does not mean that we must work ourselves up to a "pitchfork-and- barricade" revolution by violence. This old-fashioned attack won't work, as our side learned in the Civil War and the Klan prosecutions.
There are plenty of people already awake in America. They are afraid and they are frustrated by their inability to do anything about the terrible evil they see growing.
Mercury magazine did indeed "inform" a lot of people. So does the Birch Society. But we don't need any more informed people who won't stand up and FIGHT to oppose tyranny!
Such things as Mercury and the Birch Society also kept the "steam pressure" of emotions down in millions of Americans who were already informed - who feel that as long as such things as Mercury are published and Welch is petitioning to impeach Earl Warren, "something" is being done. These good people are fooled by the constant advice to "write your senator" into imagining that we can somehow petition or talk our way out of tyranny. Worst of all, these papers and societies are financial "leaks" which keep the rightwing bled to death and anemic. There simply is no money for the battle, no money for the bullets and powder, because it has all been spent on fire-crackers, uniforms, the band, pictures of the enemy, exciting rallies, and bed-time stories for the troops.
You can't get these myriad stamp-licking and squawking societies together - as I found out - and every experienced "patriot" knows. And even if you could, they would be worse hitched up together than they are squabbling separately. As Hitler puts it so masterfully, "eight lame men walking arm in arm do not make one gladiator".
These weak rightwing leaders, who, for forty or fifty years have been preaching a million different tricks to avoid the desperate, dangerous fight which is always the price of any victory, are approaching the end of the road. They cannot much longer pretend that we can save ourselves with their sugary nostrums. When the patient feels the death rattle in his chest, as white America can feel it now, our people will become disgusted with the quack physicians and their sugar syrups and pills, and will welcome our rough and tough, but powerful medicine.
Our motto here is "White man, stand and fight for survival with us, or stand out of our way!!!"
...........
Our nation and our people are perishing from an overdose of political sneaks, demagogues, liars and cowards. The people may not be able to articulate that thought in these words. But they know it in their hearts. They long for a man to come forth who disdains compromise, sneaking, demagoguery and slick lies. They want to hear a man say - nay, shout - what is in the hearts of the people without fear and without compromise. They want a real LEADER, not another slick politician. They will accept, vote for and cheer a substitute only so long as the real thing is unavailable. The light of the moon is appreciated only when there is no sun.
Before such a strong leader can come forward and reach the hearts of millions of the people, the people must first be made ready for the battle that will be made inevitable by any such a leader. The Jews, Blacks, Communists, liberals - and the entrenched Kosher Conservatives - will fight desperately to prevent such a man from coming forward, because they know it will mean their own death knell as "leaders." They will fight with furious passion against the leadership of an honest man, because it will expose their own miserable failure and cowardice.
The people already sense this. But they do not yet want the all-out, bloody battle, in which they would probably lose their color TV, their two cars and their electric lawnmower. They still hope they can win by some EASY way. And George Wallace (as I write) represents that hopeful, "easy" way, to America's millions.
But the enemy cannot allow the victory of a Wallace because they know Wallace would be only the forerunner of a new, all-out "Hitler" -IF he won.
At the same time, Wallace has built into his campaign the same weaknesses and guarantees of destruction as the Birchers, etc.; he has insisted on trying to win a life-and death battle the same way we are "fighting" in Vietnam - by fighting only on terms and grounds allowed by the enemy instead of fighting on the grounds of RACE, on which he could unite the squabbling and divided "right", he fights on the untenable grounds of "states' rights", "segregation' and the rest of the Kosher Conservative shibboleths which are so easily demolished by the brutal enemy.
The clever campaign and pressure of the Jews upon America first produced such compromising economic kosher "conservatives" as Buckley. When he was unable to stop the Jewish juggernaut (because he was with it), the few who could see the need for something more flocked to the banners of the Birch Society. But today, that too is failing, because the Birch Society also consorts with and "loves" the enemy - the Jews - and gives patriots' contributions to send Negroes to college on scholarships, all the while calling honest men who name the enemy "Communist agents provocateurs"!
The next phase of this American movement toward the right must be and is "Wallace-ism" - the covert and sneaky racism, which is now the fashion in the South and conservative circles.
For the same reasons that Buckleyism and Welchism failed, Wallace-ism will also fail.
We can't win in Korea and Vietnam when we won't fight, and we can't win here in America either when we not only will not fight, but we won't even name the enemy.
Are we not damned fools to continue to let the enemy dictate the terms of the struggle?
Are we not idiots to continue to fight on the enemy's brutal terms when we suffer nothing but defeat, and see the end only months away?
Are we not worse than mad to tolerate almost nothing but Jews and "ex"-Communists or pro-Communists like Liebman, Goldwater, and now Reagan, to lead us, when there are millions of pure, unadulterated Americans willing and capable of leading? How long will we continue to believe we can "out-sneak" and out-wit the Jews by "smart" demagoguery, when they are the world's champion sneaks and demagogues?
For every sneaky lie we can tell, (such as that we are "not racists",) the Jews can tell ten much better and more convincing lies. How long before our masses of great Americans get mad enough to say, as we must, "To hell with all the pretense and fancy talk! It's time to name the damnable Jewish, Zionist, "nigger" and Communist enemy, fight him, and kill those who are trying to commit treason, enslave us or kill us! It's time to fight!"
The answer to that question is that it will not be long. Wallace must have his day. The people must learn that our race of people can't win by any kind of sneaking - even when it is considered clever sneaking, such as denying that one is a "racist", and even saying that "racism is evil". Wallace-ism is a phase that must be grown out of, as a teenager passes through immature phases of development. Racism is not only not "evil" - racism is our only hope!
America will soon be ready for a leader who has gone through hell to preach pure racism, to fight for our White people, as a race, without any pretty excuses or cover-ups.
The people, when they have been robbed of their savings by inflation and economic catastrophe, when "niggers" are raping their mothers, wives, sisters and daughters, when their country is in flames and being looted by "nigger" mobs, when Jews have become only a tiny bit more arrogant and monopolize everything, parading around as our teachers, musicians, comedians, actors, philosophers, writers and finally our owners - when the people have had only a little more of this, then the radical racial stance and record of the American Nazi Party will bring us the hearts and love of the masses of Americans.
It is tempting for a rightist political group to make all sorts of compromises right now in order to attract, hold and gain the financial support of large numbers of people who do not yet see the desperate need for radical measures.
This is what all the big, successful rightwing organizations are now doing. They say everything calculated to bring them flocks of frustrated people, and they avoid saying anything that might shock and distress these flocks of poor, frustrated Americans, even though they may know that our people need to hear and know the bloody, deadly and dangerous truth.
These presently "successful" rightwing organizations, including the Wallace promoters, are like a mother who is too chicken to take her son to a dentist to have his tooth pulled when it is rotten and diseased, but instead gives him doped-up soothing syrup. None of these "soothing syrup" patriots dare to go after the deadly germs which are causing the trouble, recommend killing the germs (which represents the Jewish traitors in our midst) and getting rid of the aching tooth. (Which, in this analogy, represents the twenty million "niggers" causing America the worst "ache" we have ever had.)
But the time comes when even the worst coward about going to the dentist can no longer fool himself with soothing syrups, and scrambles in to a real dentist to have the radical treatment which alone can solve his problem - to have the tooth jerked out and the germs of decay KILLED.
Nothing less can stop a real tooth-ache.
And nothing less than killing the enemy germs and extracting the "nigger" hell-raisers can stop the disease and pain which is killing America and the White Race.
Our job is to be good dentists, remain steadfast and keep our pliers and germicide ready to extract the black aching tooth and disinfect our Nation of the germs of Jewish treason and decay, when the patient is ready.
Fifty years of "conservative" failure is enough!
.........
G. L. Rockwell
2004-01-18 22:39 | User Profile
Ruffin, great post, and right on topic.
Rockwell and the Nazis were right; No doubt about it.
As an aside, I don't see how any who cares about the survival of the West can stomach the bland and phony writings of a Thomas Fleming or a Russel Kirk after reading material by men like Rockwell, Pierce, and Duke. Heck, the other day, I actually read some material by Tom Metzger, and it had more raw insight and practical applicability to our current situation than the works of Kirk and Fleming combined.
2004-01-19 02:47 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]1. It's not due to our lack of trying. In case you're forgetting, establishment conservatism kicked us out and relegated us to invisible venues, we didn't leave on our own accord. I'm sure Sobran and Francis would be more than happy to have NR carry their columns again, just as we'd probably be winning more converts at a GOP stronghold along the lines of a (relatively) censorship-free late 90's FR.
I understood you up to the bold. Quite correctly paleoconservatism has gradually been kicked off the main conservative venues just really as we've been watching, in the last few years, as neoconservatism has solidified its grip over mainstream conservatism. It really wasn't that long ago when we could post Sam Francis, Joe Sobran, or Vdare articles at Free Republic. Often we could get the same articles off the Townhall.com website. All this of course has quietly ended.
I thought this is what you meant. But then you say what you really mean is not that paleoconservatism, especially anything to the right side of it, doesn't get to talk to the "old schol conservative" but that he won't listen to us when we do talk.
Populist, bottom-up politics seems to be a thing of the past. Those who control the mass media and political apparatus decide what the public at large gets to hear and gets exposed to, because 90% of the public follows the sanctions of what venues have the official stamp of approval and which bear the "lunatic fringe" stamp. Increasingly many people, publications, and ideas fall into the later category (it says a lot when even Pat Buchanan or Paul Craig Roberts' lukewarm protests are just barely tolerated by the establishment these days).[/QUOTE] Politics is always changing, that's for sure. But there are always the breakthroughs. Duke and Buchanan in the early 90's remember scored great breakthroughs, but these breakthroughs petered out, probably because there was no organization built to follow up on their victories, and sustain ther momentum.
2004-01-19 03:08 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]To some extent paleoconservatives themselves are much more to blame than "Linderite neo-Nazis" for the failure of "Sam Francis paleoconservatism" to be a viable alternative to neoism and liberalism. By refusing to seriously address the issues of race, ethnicity and religion, paleoconservatives pulled the chair out from under themselves.
This statement that paleoconservatism "pulled the rug out from itself" by refusing to discuss race enough is of course an article of faith among WN's, it seems to be one of those "myths of White Nationalism". Once a person/group drifts remotely close to the appearance of friendliness to one of WN's positions, it seems they are immediately attacked every time they seem to retreat slightly, and are constantly berated for not discussing race and "the jew" enough.
This tendency is understandable by VNN fringe types who care about nothing put perpetuating their own myths, but its always puzzling to see more sober people like yourself drift into it.
Through their refusal to deal with what is perhaps the most important issue facing the West, paleoconservatives have made it possible for your "Linderite neo-Nazis" to be the ONLY voice (however puerile) that deals with these questions. Had paleoconservatives dealt with race somehow, moderately and intelligently, then those on the far right would not be faced with a choice between selling out by voting GOP vs. VNN antics. This doesn't mean that every paleoconservative statement must deal with race, the Jewish question, etc. but these are questions that any movement which claims to understand and know how to deal with America's problems MUST address.[/QUOTE]
And really so what, that the "Linderite neo-Nazi's" now have the issue all to themselves? What have these guys done, and what will they do, except rave from their keyboards? Answer - absolutely nothing.
I can't quite go along with Heritage Lost when he stated by implication groups like VNN and the NA are the biggest enemies of white resurgence in this country, but at times he seems close.
Any objective Chronicles observer might suspect them choosing such an editorial policy deliberately to get chase off these politically impotent windbags, and suspect if there won't so many VNN people lurking that they'd be a lot more forthright on race.
2004-01-19 03:33 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]Okie, are you ready for Rockwell?
....... Many right-wingers are sincerely concerned, I know, about my battles with men such as Maguire, Snowden, Welch, Hargis, et al., and my revelations of what they really are. "They are doing good", I am told, "why not let them go about their business their own way. They are helping. Don't hurt them".
I maintain they are only giving the appearance of helping - but are actually hurting.
Typifies the hardline WN mentality.
- Before a mass of people will rise up and do anything effective and forceful about a tyrannical situation, there must be built up a certain emotional pressure. A firecracker has not the force of a rifle bullet because it explodes harmlessly in all directions. But the gas from a rifle bullet cannot escape, except by forcing the bullet out at terrific speed, because it is confined, directed into useful channels.
As long as Welch and all the rest of his ilk, rich and poor, can give themselves the illusion of "fighting the Jews" by exploding the pressure inside of them verbally and harmlessly, in all directions, and without ever hurting a Jew traitor, they keep the pressure we need to get mad and fight from ever building up.
The Jews know this, and permit these hundreds and hundreds of harmless rightwing organizations to spout endlessly in silence behind the Jewish "paper curtain". They don't reach any significant number of people outside their own group. Even when they do, their approach is so feeble and so psychologically wrong that they win only a few rare types.
They never, never get out into the public, into the streets, and reach the masses with an inspiring and driving masculine movement, which alone can win the hearts of the masses! They pass literature and talk only to each other.
If just one tenth of the money which pours every year, year after year, into such "fire-cracker" movements were to be contained, directed, and used behind an ideological bullet forced out by fighting men, the Jews would stop at nothing to crush and destroy that deadly "bullet". Even without that money, with only a few grains of "powder", but confined and directed with force, we have already earned the all-out hate of the Jews, the only sure sign that we are not firing the eternal rightwing "gas" at them, but the deadly bullets which they know will eventually destroy their illegal, tyrannical power.
Typical confusion. He tiptoes up to violence all through 1. then when he gets there in 2. he backs down
There are plenty of people already awake in America. They are afraid and they are frustrated by their inability to do anything about the terrible evil they see growing.
Mercury magazine did indeed "inform" a lot of people. So does the Birch Society. But we don't need any more informed people who won't stand up and FIGHT to oppose tyranny!
I see. Everyone is the enemy except the most extreme. Typical radical WN hufing and puffing.
Such things as Mercury and the Birch Society also kept the "steam pressure" of emotions down in millions of Americans who were already informed - who feel that as long as such things as Mercury are published and Welch is petitioning to impeach Earl Warren, "something" is being done. These good people are fooled by the constant advice to "write your senator" into imagining that we can somehow petition or talk our way out of tyranny. Worst of all, these papers and societies are financial "leaks" which keep the rightwing bled to death and anemic. There simply is no money for the battle, no money for the bullets and powder, because it has all been spent on fire-crackers, uniforms, the band, pictures of the enemy, exciting rallies, and bed-time stories for the troops.
You can't get these myriad stamp-licking and squawking societies together - as I found out - and every experienced "patriot" knows. And even if you could, they would be worse hitched up together than they are squabbling separately. As Hitler puts it so masterfully, "eight lame men walking arm in arm do not make one gladiator".
Well I do sympathize with Rockwell's practical frustrations in dealing with these kind of people, having personally experienced it. But his critique is all of. These people are acting and being kept together. So you can't confuse them of inaction. Its just their leadership's strategics are ineffective.
And Rockwell really, for all his huffing and puffing, is as clueless here as Welch.
Our job is to be good dentists, remain steadfast and keep our pliers and germicide ready to extract the black aching tooth and disinfect our Nation of the germs of Jewish treason and decay, when the patient is ready. .........
G. L. Rockwell[/QUOTE]
In other words - just sit around on our big fat asses and WAIT for the "spontaneous revolution from below. :lol:
For better or worse though, I do see what the real the strategy of Linder et. al is now.
What a windbags. Rockwell, and all his current VNN-Linderite successors. I don't think Abe Foxman himself could devise a better strategy to inactivate WN frustrations (not that it isn't necessarily his handiwork n the first place).
2004-01-19 03:53 | User Profile
[URL=http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_constitution&Number=1212789&t=-1#Post1212789]http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_constitution&Number=1212789&t=-1#Post1212789[/URL] Okiereddust (agitator) 01/18/04 08:51 PM Re: Billboard Advertising White Supremacist Group to Remain in Sumter [ To: themalcontent | Post 1212789, reply to 1212001 ] (Score: 2)
Typical Nazi.
By their fruit ye shall know them..........
2004-01-19 04:15 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]By their fruit ye shall know them..........[/QUOTE]So that was you Ruffin? I figured it was some guy who didn't know squat or his mouth from a whole in the wall about the NA.
And you guys call paleo's "canny" :lol:
2004-01-19 04:23 | User Profile
No, anyone who wants to see endless nazi-hunting on the internet only has to search under Okiereddust, Mr. "Paleo".
2004-01-19 05:12 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]No, anyone who wants to see endless nazi-hunting on the internet only has to search under Okiereddust, Mr. "Paleo".[/QUOTE]You poor :crybaby: baby. :yawn:
2004-01-19 06:15 | User Profile
My, what nostrils you have, grandma. :whstl:
2004-01-19 08:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]On the contrary, Francis' writings have pratical value only in so far as they lead people here or to Linder/Stormfront. That probably doesn't happen very often, but even if it only happens occasionally, it's better than nothing, and it at least elevates Francis' writings above those of his colleague Thomas Fleming (whose writings have no practical value). And the same thing could be said about the writings of Brimelow, Buchanan, Taylor, etc. -- their work has pratical value only in so far as it leads people out of paleoconservatism all together and further to the Right than they themselves are willing to go.[/QUOTE]
Couldn't disagree more. The only stops further to the right of paleoconservatism is pure libertarianism and anarchy, and as a paleocon I would argue that there's not much 'real' practical value to be found there. Well, libertarianism maybe, but certainly not anarchy.
As to Francis' writings leading to Linder or Stormfront, I won't knock the latter destination as Don Black has always been kind and professional towards this site and board. But if it's the former then we'd all be well advised to invest in Pepto-Bismol stock 'cause there's gonna be a whole lot of nausea to be combatted. Lord help us, please.
2004-01-19 08:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]You poor :crybaby: baby. :yawn:[/QUOTE] Okie, I do not know if you fully read or understand the Rockwell post by Ruffin or not, but my question to you is this, are you Jewish or have family that is? I am not, and do not have family that is, or married to or living with such. In 1958 as a second grader walking home from school, I was attacked and beaten unconscious by Congoid teenager's, this is the price for intergration in a Jewish strong hold which is the NYC terror I grew up in. Jewish Tikum Olem is heady stuff, especially when you suffer it personally, with no peace and few places not to have to live with Multi-cult madness Jew's have fully instigated. The NAACP was founded by Jew's and one mallato named W.E. Dubois, who was a rear end lover, communist who hated white's as he could never be one it drove his hate.. Since I have come to O.D. you don't seem to get it..On eve of Mike King day, who do you think is responsible for this filthy so called "Holiday" etc.? Who was Mike's rear ending secretary? [url]http://etherzone.com/2004/stang011604.shtml[/url] this by Allan Stang who was in some interesting history with a Congoid women who helped him.. Lastly, you can think all you want that some one who reads Linder is Fringe and that you can put them a box.. Let me tell you the people are pissed off and people in the know, not your garbage man, grocery store clerk etc., but the most educated and well read men we have, who earn a living, and some are retired too, of course some whites are at all level's of the economic white society are very concerned, thus are willing to hear W.N's, but my point is the upper middle class are not stupid any more about this subject of Pollard/treason taxe's and white displacement with loss of country. I read a letter at VNN from a retired Army man and WW2 vet to Linder thanking for opening his eyes.. Okie, VNN truth rings Louder than any one yelling your on the Fringe, in the state we are in today we need our voice heard. I have not promoted VNN on O.D. and O.D. is the only forum I post. Okie, I called a Radio show for the first time in five years at least. I was doing fine till, I mentioned that that Bombing of a Christian Orthodox country that was fighting off a Muslim invasion of criminal's wrong, the host agreed with that, then I said, you know the general running for president was at Waco, and because of his actions Christian Europe is now physically smaller, so far so good I am still on Air, then I stated isn't it amazing that he is a Catholic all his life and like Madaline Alldumb evil, he suddenly finds his Jewish roots and has five grandparent's who were Rabbi's.. I was hung up on and called a hater.. What did I state that was not true?
2004-01-19 08:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Smedley Butler]Okie, I do not know if you fully read or understand the Rockwell post by Ruffin or not, but my question to you is this, are you Jewish or have family that is? I am not.... What did I state that was not true?[/QUOTE] What did you state that was't true? What did I state that wasn't true. (Yes, Yes - answering a question with a question...)
To answer your question, I'll have to check with Abe Foxman and get back to you :lol:
2004-01-19 08:53 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]My, what nostrils you have, grandma. :whstl:[/QUOTE]If we're going to compare noses, at least I don't have a big hook in mine like you do.:whstl:
2004-01-19 09:20 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Smedley Butler]Okie, I do not know if you fully read or understand the Rockwell post by Ruffin or not, but my question to you is this, are you Jewish or have family that is? [/QUOTE]
Smedley,
As one who knows Okie I can assure you he is not jewish and most certainly does get it. Where others here or elsewhere want to find fault with him is because he doesn't flinch in throwing the contradictions and hypocracies of the lunatic fringe right back in their faces. Having grown accustomed to ranting and raving in their little safe zones unchallenged, that same lunatic fringe squeals like children sent to bed without their supper when they are forced to make a true defense of their positions.
Now with all due respect, I'm sorry but nihilistic ranting on a website accomplishes extremely little and may very well impede any accomplishment whatsoever. We need serious and sober-minded men who will enter this great ideological arena with humility and enough foresight and wisdom to know a true purpose and how to recover and build upon the rich heritage of Western Christendom that is ours to reclaim and carry forward. The clock is indeed ticking and there is no time to waste on petulant cry babies and whining infants. Will the real men please stand up and be counted?
2004-01-19 09:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Smedley,
As one who knows Okie I can assure you he is not jewish and most certainly does get it.
Oh vey!!! ;)
Now with all due respect, I'm sorry but nihilistic ranting on a website accomplishes extremely little and may very well impede any accomplishment whatsoever. We need serious and sober-minded men who will enter..... Will the real men please stand up and be counted?[/QUOTE] Tex, we finally get an appreciable amount of females posting here, and then you go off like this.
Women, Tex was just saying that real men should learn to stand up, not only to be counted, but to graciously and chivalrously yield their sits to the weaker sex. Your appreciation is most welcomed of course. ;)
2004-01-19 09:55 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Couldn't disagree more. The only stops further to the right of paleoconservatism is pure libertarianism and anarchy, and as a paleocon I would argue that there's not much 'real' practical value to be found there. Well, libertarianism maybe, but certainly not anarchy.
As to Francis' writings leading to Linder or Stormfront, I won't knock the latter destination as Don Black has always been kind and professional towards this site and board. But if it's the former then we'd all be well advised to invest in Pepto-Bismol stock 'cause there's gonna be a whole lot of nausea to be combatted. Lord help us, please. [/QUOTE] Aside from the ideological considerations of differences between WN and Paleoism and with other boards, I do want to question what is the motivation behind this persistant questioning of paleoconservatism. Paleo's may not talk about race as much as WN like, but anyone is either crazy dishonest saying that our country wouldn't be a vast improvement, if paleoBuchananites controlled our government instead of neocon Bushies.
The WN refusal to recognize and participate constructively in the paleo dialogue and coalition is a sign of their inflexible absolutism, puerlism, and other totalitarian traits of theirs. To the extent they are significant at all, as a result of such they are a terrible negative contribution to those fighting neocon power - intentionally or not. I bring up "intentionaly" because I get the felling that many WN's would just as soon see neo's gain total power, as ruffin's Rockwell article seems to hint. They figure it will hasten the reverse swing back to the far right.
To my mind, anyone that doesn't honestly do all he can, right now to oppose neocon power is a traitor not just to his cause, but to his nation and people.
Of course many WN's, lets face it, have shown themselves (oddly enough a lot like the neocons) to care only about the furtherance of "the cause" (i.e. their own power) caring little about their nation and people.
2004-01-19 17:30 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]The WN refusal to recognize and participate constructively in the paleo dialogue and coalition is a sign of their inflexible absolutism, puerlism, and other totalitarian traits of theirs. To the extent they are significant at all, as a result of such they are a terrible negative contribution to those fighting neocon power - intentionally or not. I bring up "intentionaly" because I get the felling that many WN's would just as soon see neo's gain total power, as ruffin's Rockwell article seems to hint. They figure it will hasten the reverse swing back to the far right.
To my mind, anyone that doesn't honestly do all he can, right now** to oppose neocon power is a traitor not just to his cause, but to his nation and people. **
Of course many WN's, lets face it, have shown themselves (oddly enough a lot like the neocons) to care only about the furtherance of "the cause" (i.e. their own power) caring little about their nation and people.[/QUOTE]
This pretty much sums it up rather concisely, Okie. Well done.
Everyone here agree? As a caveat before certain folks get all bent out of shape, I continue to maintain the belief that there is productive value in maintaining dialogue with serious-minded white nationalists, but please note the emphasis is on the word 'serious'. Surely Linder doesn't speak for everyone in that camp.
2004-01-19 18:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Everyone here agree? As a caveat before certain folks get all bent out of shape, I continue to maintain the belief that there is productive value in maintaining dialogue with serious-minded white nationalists, but please note the emphasis is on the word 'serious'. Surely Linder doesn't speak for everyone in that camp.[/QUOTE] Really why would anyone get bent out of shape? Surely almost anyone would agree that the pernicious neocon influence is our number 1 enemy, and claim they are in their own way, fighting it.
2004-01-19 19:07 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Really why would anyone get bent out of shape? Surely almost anyone would agree that the pernicious neocon influence is our number 1 enemy, and claim they are in their own way, fighting it.[/QUOTE]
Quite simply because there is a certain contingent in and around our board that views any criticism of Linder as the most grave offense known to cyber-discourse and not tolerated under any circumstance. That fact also answers your second question, I think. I don't pretend to understand it, but it is a great misfortune and needs to be rectified. Way too much of our talent is bogged down in that swamp.
Just my or your stating that fact may cost us a great portion of our membership and/or activity, but so be it. There are moral absolutes, right and wrong and some principles are worth maintaining whatever the cost. I'm perfectly willing to let OD die on that hill. I would implore any and all who agree with me to get active so we can move forward.
2004-01-19 19:58 | User Profile
"let's all just throw our essay pads away and start studying Rockwell's pamphlets on how to move our rhetoric, progaganda, and agitation down to the level of the common man."
I think that IS the right tactic, i.e. to worry about establishing a presence on the streets of America, more so than on the Internet (although both are obviously necessary - yet our Internet presence is largely established and about as effective as its likely to get, in so far as posted text can ever be effective in a nation of nonreaders). It seems to be what the BNP is doing in the U.K., and they are winning a lot of town council seats that way (and are expected to win many more this May). Its just that the Internet is so much easier and safer....
A few weeks ago, I was in the process of distributing 150 National Alliance flyers on the subject of how heterosexual, non-IV drug using Blacks, according to the U.S. Institute of Health, are 14 times more likely than heterosexual, non-IV drug using Whites to be HIV positive. I'd placed about a hundred of these flyers on car windshields before a Santa Clara County sheriff's deputy drove up and told me that he'd refrain from arresting me if I ceased what I was doing and went home. Ordinarily, I'd ask "on what charge?," but seeing as how I'm already on felony probation, I decided to comply.
A couple days later, three Campbell police officers visited my home; two detectives and a uniformed officer. I recognized the two detectives from my time working at a nearby motel; they were often involed in murder investigations, as well as rape and bank robbery cases, which gives one some idea how seriously the state takes the distribution of patriotic flyers. They said they were looking at a way of prosecuting me, but that they were having a hard time finding any law I was actually in violation of, and asked me for copies of any flyers I might have (I gave them ones I had on hand about aid to Israel and Mexican immigration). They said one of my neighbors had turned me in and thus expressed concern for my safety, what with all the Black and Mexican gang-types who live in it (although I suspect that was just an attempt to intimidate me; why would they need to be tipped off by a local resident when I'd already spoken to the Sheriff's Department?).
In any event, when merely distributing a few flyers gets you treated like a major criminal and harshly criticized by the local media (I was denounced in the pages of the San Jose Mercury News as "a cockroach," by a spokesman for the NAACP, something I am rather proud of, even if, due to the fact I wasn't charged with a crime, they weren't able to identify me by name), then most are going to be a Hell of a lot more comfortable with posting intellectual treatises on the Internet. After all, I've already lost two jobs due to my beliefs/activism and have been unemployed since December of 2002 (and without full-time work since July of that year, when I was laid off due to the recession). Its difficult to organize our people effectively when they constantly hold out the threat of taking away your job, evicting you from your apartment, sending the local nonWhite thugs in your neighborhood to harass and intimidate your wife and self, vandalize your car (my car is literally covered with key marks - every panel has them - and its been repeatedly egged and had paint dumped on it, etc., merely for having a Confederate flag decal and a "Buchanan Reform 2000" sticker, along with several anti-war stickers I've put on in the last year), etc.
The one thing which gives me hope, however, is that I have yet to encounter a single working class White man (and not very man women) who doesn't agree with our message (and here, in the "liberal" Bay Area). Students and chronically unemployed loafers who smoke weed in their parents' basement don't count; I mean White men & women who work for Wal-Mart, medical & dental assistants, auto mechanics, plumbers, construction workers, etc. - they virtually ALL hate Blacks (whom they unselfconsciously refer to as "niggers"), Mexicans and Asians, and it generally takes very little persuading to get them to see that "the rich" (whom they also hate) is really just a codeword for the Jews and their White henchmen. I think this is why the government is so sternly opposed to patriotic activism at the level of the neighborhood community, i.e. because of its enormous potential for success. And that's why we need to pursue it ever more vigorously than we have been. I know that once I get off probation, distributing flyers is going to be my main form of recreation, as it were.
2004-01-19 20:23 | User Profile
"Politics is always changing, that's for sure. But there are always the breakthroughs. Duke and Buchanan in the early 90's remember scored great breakthroughs, but these breakthroughs petered out, probably because there was no organization built to follow up on their victories, and sustain ther momentum."
If I may interject, Duke and Buchanan both made huge mistakes that greatly reduced their effectiveness. Duke, following up on his 39.5% showing in the 1991 Louisiana gubenatorial race, instead of seeking the 1992 Republican Presidential nomination (which did nothing but split the anti-Bush right between him and Buchanan - particularly in Mississippi, the only state where both Buchanan and Duke broke into double digits), should have instead run for a seat in the U.S. House. He probably could have become the first WN congressman in decades. Buchanan should never have backed Dole, once the GOP establishment stole the nomination from Pat and handed it over to that clown. He should have gone across town to the U.S. Taxpayers Party convention and accepted their presidential nomination. He was upset that Perot lied to him and thus wasn't going to be the Reform Party nominee in '96, but he should have made a run anyway. I suspect Pat would have regulated Perot to 4th place (seeing as how he'd steal many of Perot's voters and add to that pile a bunch of his own). By Election Day, it was clear Dole wasn't going to beat Klinton (I admit I would have voted for Dole had he any chance of disloding the Arkansas cretin). Instead, I was left to pull the lever for Howard Phillips, who got 0.2% of the vote, for 6th place....
2004-01-19 20:39 | User Profile
"Paleo's may not talk about race as much as WN like, but anyone is either crazy dishonest saying that our country wouldn't be a vast improvement, if paleoBuchananites controlled our government instead of neocon Bushies."
Indeed! Coming at this from about as national socialist a perspective as is possible, I think its extremely foolish to perceive the good as the enemy of the perfect. I would be extremely willing, for example, to participate in a revolution (assuming electoral politics are irrelevant now, which may or may not be true) where national socialists came to be part of a broader coalition government that included paleos and even libertarians. Anything is better than the not-so-slow slide to White extinction the current regime is taking us on.
2004-01-19 22:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust] I don't know, if Linder is the only real serious answer, let's all just throw our essay pads away and start studying Rockwell's pamphlets on how to move our rhetoric, progaganda, and agitation down to the level of the common man. [/QUOTE]
Kevin got to this before I did, and covered it well, so I'll only touch on the obvious problem here.
First, I doubt Linder is viewed anywere as "the only real serious answer", his numbers are down. From what I've seen the BIll White fiasco is still lingering, which is why his numbers are down and lots of us barely skim VNN anymore.
I'm not saying that party is over but it's wings have been clipped. Unless another white knight Moran II?) shows up, Linder will simply hold a small niche and the torch will go elsewhere.
Second, do you really think agitation down to the level of the common man is easy? In America, with Fox and CNN and billion-dollar corporations spending small fortunes weekly to keep a lock on what the "common man" thinks? You're talking about a war for the soul of our people as if it's a small, untidy chore instead of a battleground for the future of one of the planet's major races.
Working stiffs is my beat, pal. It ain't the easiest street in town but if the white race don't take it, it's got no future for "essay pads" anyway.
2004-01-19 23:01 | User Profile
There is undoubtedly enough common ground among paleoconservatives, WNs, paleolibertarians, etc., to keep all of us more than busy for quite some time. We need to determine which goals ALL true right-wingers have in common, then begin working toward their attainment.
Do any paleoconservatives, libertarians, or WNs approve of US aid to Israel? I doubt it. So, there's one goal we can all agree on: no more taxpayer aid to Israel.
How about gun control? How many of us think we're not good enough to decide for ourselves what kind of firearms we should be able to legally own? Very few, I would think. Thus we have another goal: an end to unconstitutional restrictions on the kinds of guns we can buy, own, and carry.
Imagine if all genuine conservatives and libertarians could just quit their bickering long enough to unite in pursuit of the above two goals. If just US aid to Israel and gun control alone could be ended permanently, those would be STUNNING accomplishments. There would be plenty of time left afterward to argue about other issues, but something would have already been done besides merely bitching to each other.
Perhaps we could invite people from VNN, Vdare, Stormfront, and/or other boards to participate on an online discussion in order to find some common ground? I mean, we have to start taking steps toward unity and concrete action at some point. Why not do it now?
2004-01-19 23:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Quite simply because there is a certain contingent in and around our board that views any criticism of Linder as the most grave offense known to cyber-discourse and not tolerated under any circumstance. [/QUOTE]
There are such people, but I am not one of them. I have been a paleocon most of my life (really a Lew Rockwell, Sobran-style paleo-libertarian). Furthermore, I grew up attending Southern Baptist churches, and I'm presently in the process of converting to Roman Catholic. At the same time, however, I am willing to recognize that there is a lot of truth in the Nazi/WN critique of the paleocon position.
2004-01-19 23:29 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]Imagine if all genuine conservatives and libertarians could just quit their bickering long enough to unite in pursuit of the above two goals.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, Angler. Hence my point that if we can identify specific obstacles or hindrances to that greater effort we should move to excise the cancer. How much stronger is the body when it's cancer free? To paraphrase scripture, if the hand is causing offense then cut it off. Then we are able to move forward without being distracted by those that only suck the life blood out of any upstart ecumenical movement.
2004-01-19 23:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]At the same time, however, I am willing to recognize that there is a lot of truth in the Nazi/WN critique of the paleocon position.[/QUOTE]
That's a fair statement, VF, and likewise there are valid truths in paleocon criticisms of national socialism. That's what dialogue is all about and has been an active dynamic for quite some time here at OD. But there is no possibility of constructive discussion with totalitarian nihilists whose main goal is to build a little cult of personality and destroy everything outside of it. It's my opinion and my opinion only that that is not productive if one has the desire to attain real world, positive gains. It's always been my hope that OD attracts the sober-minded, responsible, leader like men among us.
2004-01-20 00:17 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident] In essentials, unity In non-essentials, liberty [/QUOTE] I know you don't mean to say that religion is non-essential per se, but that it's non-essential for unity among those who (largely) agree on the rest. But then it looks like a circular logic statement.
2004-01-20 00:51 | User Profile
We've been over this and over this. There's far more to unite than divide the various factions of actual conservatism (as opposed to the hijacked pod-thing that passes for such nowadays) whether WN or paleo, but both sides would rather savage each other over minutiae. (I know, I know, now we'll argue over whether or not the differences are minutiae or in fact fundamental) Just my opinion, but I think it's due to the fact that it's easier to tinkle in your flawed, but still allied, fellow travellers' oatmeal than actually do something. Me, I'm simply at a loss as to what exactly to do, which brings me to another reason readership has fallen off at VNN and yes, unfortunately, here. In VNN's case, I was willing to give Linder the benefit of the doubt, mostly due to the momentum of the Chester Doles fundraiser, but that momentum fizzled with a wet squelching noise and VNN's been in phone-it-in mode ever since, with not much else on display besides the Romper Room stylings of the forum and variations on "kill all the Jews and then we'll talk." Okay, what else ya got? The other thing is, and this is what I suspect is causing the drop-off in numbers here mostly, that a lot of people have vented their spleens and been awakened and are wondering, "Now what?" That ennui, coupled with general malaise over steadily worsening (though skillfully obfuscated) conditions has driven a lot of right-thinking folks to simply go away. I haven't seen hide nor hair of several of our more thoughtful and eloquent posters for some time now. Palecon Avatar, Wintermute and il ragno are some that immediately come to mind.
I think folks are desperate for White leadership and White solidarity. Places like this have given us an electronic simulacrum of the latter. The Doles fundraiser was a small, but concrete attempt to branch out into the Real Worldâ⢠and by golly, it worked! I can appreciate what effect the loss of "sugar daddy" Moran had, but what should not have been lost sight of was the fact that $54,000 of that $79,000 came from regular Joes, and in a very short amount of time, really. Seeing the good will and electricity that effort generated squandered was a blow, at least to me. As for the former, leadership, well, that's nowhere to be found and that, I think, has caused a bit of moodiness around these here WN/paleo parts.
Perhaps we're all coming to grips with the fact that if you want something done right, you've gotta do it yourself, but nobody seems eager to stand up and take the first beanball to the noggin in the process.
2004-01-20 01:38 | User Profile
[QUOTE]eight lame men walking arm in arm do not make one gladiator[/QUOTE]
Evidently our prescient Uncle was here adumbrating the OD forum. It is truly evident that eight PaleoConservatives do not make even one neoKahnservative. But keep trying fellas. I aver that one Texas Dissident walking arm in arm with one OkierSomethingOrOther in the good company of one Sertorius, almost, but not quite, make one Jim Robinson.
2004-01-20 03:11 | User Profile
[QUOTE=MadScienceType] I can appreciate what effect the loss of "sugar daddy" Moran had, but what should not have been lost sight of was the fact that $54,000 of that $79,000 came from regular Joes, and in a very short amount of time, really. Seeing the good will and electricity that effort generated squandered was a blow, at least to me... [/QUOTE]
Exactly. There was a feeling that momentum was building, which it was, then it seems to have just plain dissipated.
It was not the "regular Joes" who let everyone down, as usual. The lameness of our intelligencia might be a plus. What's gone on among both WN and paleos over the past couple years amounts to a leaderless resistance with a new twist. With a Fleming in charge here and a Linder in charge there, you're on your own anyway. The sooner the regular Joes get this in their heads there will be a real movement by real people.
Ben Franklin saw this happen the first time. The Continental Congress was dragging its feet in Philly, and old Ben told them to whip up a constitution or something quick before the people realized they were in perfect shape without the Continental Congress. We're probably better off without our "elite" too.
2004-01-20 05:05 | User Profile
"With a Fleming in charge here and a Linder in charge there, you're on your own anyway."
Fleming is SUCH a great wordsmith; its a shame he won't put that ability behind a program more radical than be-a-traditional-Christian (not very appealing for WNs who so often lean towards the Atheist/Agnostic side of things). Tom Fleming could be another William Pierce or Ygg, if only he'd be a little more honest about what he thinks. No amount of him calling Bill Clinton an 'American national socialist' will ever convince me the guy isn't opposed to the Brazilification of America; you can just tell. He seems to lack the courage to say things that will get him more thoroughly expelled from the political mainstream than he already is....
2004-01-20 06:13 | User Profile
Forgive my irrational hatred.
http://forums.originaldissent.com/archive/index.php/t-8431 Okiereddust
Skunk is just a lighting rod for everything going on at LF. Some criticism he undoubtedly brings on himself by his provocative style, but more of it is his success vis a vis the less talented anti-semites. He was the center of the ratings controversy, and now this.
2004-01-20 06:43 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe]"Paleo's may not talk about race as much as WN like, but anyone is either crazy dishonest saying that our country wouldn't be a vast improvement, if paleoBuchananites controlled our government instead of neocon Bushies."
Indeed! Coming at this from about as national socialist a perspective as is possible, I think its extremely foolish to perceive the good as the enemy of the perfect. I would be extremely willing, for example, to participate in a revolution (assuming electoral politics are irrelevant now, which may or may not be true) where national socialists came to be part of a broader coalition government that included paleos and even libertarians. Anything is better than the not-so-slow slide to White extinction the current regime is taking us on.[/QUOTE]
I think really this is at the heart of matter, the nature of national socialism,and whether it is really capable of not "perceiving the good as the enemy of the perfect" willing to "be part of a broader coalition government that included paleos and even libertarians". It is my firm opinion based on long-time study of national socialism, which has been rebuttressed over and over by my personal experiences on this forum, that it is not. :wallbash: It is something deeply ingrained in the nature of national socialism, that they view their way as the only way, and anyone who does not agree with them absolutely and unconditionally as the enemy. It is expressed in things like their "Fuehrerprinzip", statements of people like Franco that "someone who names the Jew 100% of the time is our friend, one who names the jew 95% of the time is our enemy" and the unwillingness of even moderate national socialists like Triskelion to discuss the issue fairly and reasonable without getting mad, or to say even one decent thing about Buchanan.:hitler: :thumbd:
It is something intrinsic in national socialism, this "my way is the only way" and the attitude of Hitler that "the future of germany is inseparable from mine". For you history buffs it was expressed concretely as early as in things like Hitler's refusal to participate in the german patriotic resistance to the ruhr occupation in 1924.:hitler: :thumbd:
It is something basically intractable and irrational about national socialism to me something that personally seems at times almost daemonic in nature. Whatever my feelings about its nature, one can look at anything about national socialism, and see it is something that they themselves are 100% responsible for. :thumbd:
2004-01-20 06:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE]A couple days later, three Campbell police officers visited my home; two detectives and a uniformed officer. I recognized the two detectives from my time working at a nearby motel; they were often involed in murder investigations, as well as rape and bank robbery cases, which gives one some idea how seriously the state takes the distribution of patriotic flyers. [/QUOTE]
[I][B]A political regime whose survival depends on White passivity must discredit White self-assertion.[/B][/I] Irmin Vinson
"The remarkable ease with which organized Jewry successfully pilloried Charles Lindbergh, over his mild criticism of Jewish agitation for American entry into the European Civil War, is a telling case in point: in a contest between the power of the label "anti-Semite" and the prestige of America's most admired national hero, the national hero came out the loser."
[url]http://library.flawlesslogic.com/holocaust.htm[/url]
2004-01-20 07:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Marcus Porcius Cato]It is truly evident that eight PaleoConservatives do not make even one neoKahnservative.
Obviously in results, but certainly not in Truth. And without the familial/tribal connections and deep pockets the neo-cons have access to, I would add. But thanks, we will keep trying. You're posting here so there must be something worthy of your attention at the very least. I consider that as an accomplishment.
I aver that one Texas Dissident walking arm in arm with one OkierSomethingOrOther in the good company of one Sertorius, almost, but not quite, make one Jim Robinson.[/QUOTE]
It really does all boil down to the integrity and character of individual men. Based on what I know of the character of both Okie and Sert, I wouldn't hesitate going to the mat for either one and consider it a blessing to have had their particiation here over the years. We might be many things both positive and negative, but I can say for dang sure that we haven't sold our soul to the RNC or AIPAC. Nor will we ever.
2004-01-20 07:19 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]I know you don't mean to say that religion is non-essential per se, but that it's non-essential for unity among those who (largely) agree on the rest. But then it looks like a circular logic statement.[/QUOTE]
It depends upon the context, mr.
2004-01-20 07:46 | User Profile
[QUOTE=MadScienceType]We've been over this and over this. There's far more to unite than divide the various factions of actual conservatism (as opposed to the hijacked pod-thing that passes for such nowadays) whether WN or paleo, but both sides would rather savage each other over minutiae.
No, it is one side that continues to savage the other over minutiae. And yes, over time it begins to sink in that maybe it's not simply minutiae at all. But let's be perfectly clear in this particular matter. Do you mean to imply that Linder is the authoritative voice for white nationalism? I don't believe that, hence my repeated pleas for serious minded WNs to step up and cast off the elements that are hindering a broader WN movement. It's quite simple really and I believe necessary before any advancement can be realized. To be consistent, I would state the same thing to any in the paleo camp and have done so, albeit in mostly private communications. Indeed, I've lost numerous prior confidants because of it. They've told me that trying to build such a bridge is a fool's errand, but I guess I'm too headstrong because I continue to maintain that it is not only possible, but necessary when considering the forces allied against us all.
Me, I'm simply at a loss as to what exactly to do...
That continues to be the question of the day, but one thing you don't do is come out of the gate alienating a sizable portion of your potential audience and fellow sympathizers with overblown rhetoric rooted in a flawed, unrealizable philosophy. That's just flat-out stupid and surely men of good will can start out with that basic agreement.
2004-01-20 08:29 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]No, it is one side that continues to savage the other over minutiae. And yes, over time it begins to sink in that maybe it's not simply minutiae at all. But let's be perfectly clear in this particular matter. Do you mean to imply that Linder is the authoritative voice for white nationalism? I don't believe that, hence my repeated pleas for serious minded WNs to step up and cast off the elements that are hindering a broader WN movement. It's quite simple really and I believe necessary before any advancement can be realized. To be consistent, I would state the same thing to any in the paleo camp and have done so, albeit in mostly private communications. Indeed, I've lost numerous prior confidants because of it. They've told me that trying to build such a bridge is a fool's errand, but I guess I'm too headstrong because I continue to maintain that it is not only possible, but necessary when considering the forces allied against us all.
Actually I would say Linder certainly is the authoritative voice for national socialism, and to those who say national socialism is the authoritative voice for all nationalism of any interest or value to whites, he is the obvious leader now, although others may emerge, jumping around it seemspresently on the Storm, White, Linder triangle.
I've made it clear ([url]http://forums.originaldissent.com/showpost.php?p=70956&postcount=40[/url]) that national socialism by nature seems to be an irrational force which can do nothing else but work to destroy any competing political movement, and foremost among these competing movements it wishes to destroy are competing nationalist movements. Since national socialism is not a viable movement today, national socialists really as movement are as a function of their size probably more responsible for the deplorable state of our nation today and the dominance of people like George W. Bush than any group probably than the neocons themselves.
That continues to be the question of the day, but one thing you don't do is come out of the gate alienating a sizable portion of your potential audience and fellow sympathizers with overblown rhetoric rooted in a flawed, unrealizable philosophy. That's just flat-out stupid and surely men of good will can start out with that basic agreement.[/QUOTE]
Counterproductive for the nationalist movement yes. "Stupid", i.e. damaging to the personal agenda's of those involved, who can say, as one does not really know exactly what these agenda's are? Linder seems like a smart enough man to me, although he likes to rant and rave.
I suspect he's got an agenda alright - the agenda of Alex Linder.
2004-01-20 13:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe] ...A few weeks ago, I was in the process of distributing 150 National Alliance flyers on the subject of how heterosexual, non-IV drug using Blacks, according to the U.S. Institute of Health, are 14 times more likely than heterosexual, non-IV drug using Whites to be HIV positive. ...[/QUOTE]
One of the first strategic problems of WN tactics to slap me in the face was the mass distribution of pertinent, shocking, undeniably important and indisputably accurate FACTS stamped with some org name that, for most people and all media, IMMEDIATELY discredits the information and enables the enemies of truth to shift from the import of the info to the reputation of the group advertising itself. Consider any mainstream news report you've ever seen, heard or read about an NA distribution. You get one vague sentence of the flyer's content. . . "Flyers in stone weighted plastic bags that advised whites not to date blacks because blacks are far more likely to have AIDS" ... and four paragraphs detailing all the reasons respectable Americans should distance themselves as far as possible from the NA. . . "Neo-nazis...West Virginia compound...Turner Diaries...Tim McVeigh...domestic terrorists...etc." The truth or falsity of the media spin is irrelevant. Attention is effectively diverted from the substance to the source. The same news team covering a distro of the same info WITHOUT the plug for the group scavenging for dues has to struggle to put the mandatory spin on it. They can't so easily shift from the issue of its content to ADL soundbites on the reputation of the White Supremacist group. Without the "give us money" brand name getting in the way, who knows who is spreading uncomfortable FACTS or why? The propaganda value -- in service to THE CAUSE -- is increased tenfold. Splattering NA on it DIMISHES the its effectiveness.
This isn't just the fault of the media either. Branding an informational flyer with NA is no different than branding a newspaper ad with Levis or the Gap. It transforms the message into a financial solicitation. It doesn't take much for anyone but the mind-numb impulse buyer to shift from interest in the ad's message to seeing it as a hyperbolic ploy for cash, checks and money orders. The media's demonization of the group simply nudges this shift into place -- for most of the minority not overtly scared off by the "terrorism" talk.
What is the real goal of these distributions? To wake people up? Or to publicize the NA?
If the goal is waking people up, distribute the same flyer WITHOUT the NA label. Instead of providing the NA url for more info, provide links to neutral sources, like fedgov surgeon general stats. Give ordinary folks the facts without the "join our terrorist organization now!" sales pitch. If they look up the info, think about it, and put the pieces together THEY'LL SEEK AND FIND A GROUP WHEN THEY ARE READY. And when they show a friend or neighbor the troubling pamphlet they found on their doorstep, there is NOTHING ON IT BUT FACTS. Are they correct or not? There is no self-contained strawman lending itself to easy dismissal of the info on the grounds/motives of its source.
Any group that urges members to distribute BRANDED flyers is interested in advertising itself at the expense of the goal they supposedly exist to achieve.
Call me crazy or a weakling conformist, but I'd have no problem presenting all my family and friends with FACTS about AIDS or interracial crime, but there is no way in hell I'd sabotage my efforts and shatter my reputation by addressing these problems in the context of a pitch for NA. If and when the FACTS sink in and they are looking to get involved, THEN is the time to direct them to groups for consideration.
But alas, groups like NA are only happy if they sabotage member efforts from the get go. They measure the "success" of their distributions by how many local papers go out of their way to scare any curious recipients out of taking the info seriously.
2004-01-20 15:34 | User Profile
Do you mean to imply that Linder is the authoritative voice for white nationalism?
No. Linder is just a guy with a cyber spintro-sheet whose over-the-top style touched on a lot of the frustration Whites have felt. I'm sure that some folks see him as a leader, whether he wants the title or not, but that's mainly due to a lack of literally anyone else as an alternative. You could say that it's an example of the old saying, "in the kingdom of the blind..." and all that. But it seems that a lot of the old-guard paleo types have gouged own their own eyes as well. As I said, I myself was willing to give Linder the benefit of the doubt because of the Doles affair (actions speak louder than words, after all, even nasty words) but that momentum's long gone.
but one thing you don't do is come out of the gate alienating a sizable portion of your potential audience and fellow sympathizers with overblown rhetoric rooted in a flawed, unrealizable philosophy. That's just flat-out stupid and surely men of good will can start out with that basic agreement.
Are you referring to the anti-Christian rhetoric, the "kill all the Jews" stuff or both? I agree that the frustration Linder feels with what the modern-day Church has become is expressed with a rather broad brush, but I happen to share most of those frustrations (with the institutions, at least). I know you've posted examples of some scathing attacks on the faith itself, and I think he's wrong, but naive as it may be, I can agree to disagree with that. At least I can admire the honesty, if nothing else, his disdain represents. I would rather deal with that issue in the open and at the beginning than have him pretend to be a man of faith while hiding his contempt in an effort to gain an audience. Such duality is one of the Jews' trademarks and one of the reasons we're in such an awful mess. I do agree with concerns about a rigidly-enforced orthodoxy, but too much compromise isn't a good thing, either.
I don't believe that, hence my repeated pleas for serious minded WNs to step up and cast off the elements that are hindering a broader WN movement.
One of the reasons there are so few serious-minded WNs is that to be pro-White is to be antisocial, since the society itself is organized around an anti-White position. However, the question is, were a perfect WN society to dawn tomorrow, would these same people be antisocial? The answer I believe in most cases is yes, as opposed to those who are simply against society in its current form. Linder-style rhetoric, as il ragno more succinctly put it, tends "to dowse more nuts out of the ground." In other words, the signal-to-noise ratio in the WN "movement" is very small, and probably accounts for most of the nihilism that Tex (and I) find fault with, not to mention the Nazi-fetish crowd. However, as we've seen, the minute an even semi-respectable WN type appears, he's taken down through smear, bogus legal shenanigans or other unsavory methods. To add insult to injury, the desperately-clinging-to-respectability paleo leaders are right there distancing themselves and throwing tomatoes at the poor SOB in the stocks with the howling mob of Jews and their hangers-on! I suspect that this is also a reason for the WN/paleo friction.
They've told me that trying to build such a bridge is a fool's errand, but I guess I'm too headstrong because I continue to maintain that it is not only possible, but necessary when considering the forces allied against us all.
You and I are on the same page, my friend. Franklin's words were never so true as they are these days. Perhaps a mutual nonagression pact (though historically, those ain't worked out so well!) is the way to go temporarlily, to allow passions to cool before a bridge can be constructed. Good fences make good neighbors.
To me, ego has no place in this fight, and a whole lotta folks on both sides take stuff waaaay too personally.
2004-01-20 15:58 | User Profile
One of the first strategic problems of WN tactics to slap me in the face was the mass distribution of pertinent, shocking, undeniably important and indisputably accurate FACTS stamped with some org name that, for most people and all media, IMMEDIATELY discredits the information and enables the enemies of truth to shift from the import of the info to the reputation of the group advertising itself. Consider any mainstream news report you've ever seen, heard or read about an NA distribution.
I think Chest nailed it here. Let's face it, the NA's in it for the money, and they're of the school of thought that there's no such thing as bad publicity. They're going for a niche market, and they're very good at it. The way they present their stuff is pretty much guaranteed to elicit the media coverage outlined, and that's only going to attract the antisocial types I mentioned above. Hey, a nutcase's money spends just as well as anyone else's.
If they put fundraising aside for a bit, they could get the facts out without all the baggage Chest points out.
[url]http://freedom.orlingrabbe.com/lfetimes/attitude.htm[/url]
This is an interesting article I've posted before, and I'll do it until you kids do your homework and read it ;)
An excerpt that pretty much makes the case for what Chest says above.
While propaganda from a less credible source is immediately less effective, its effects increase over time without further administration.
There is a theory which explains this phenomena. The untrustworthiness of the source is at first closely associated with the message and suppresses its effectiveness. After a while, the source and the message become less closely associated, and the effectiveness of the message is no longer suppressed. Therefore, communications from untrustworthy sources, while not immediately effective, are effective over a longer term--unfortunately for the world, but to the delight of wild-eyed radicals. As Bill Clinton understands, lying, and having a reputation for being an absolute liar, doesn't change your job performance ratings or credibility after a three week latency.
The NA is immediately made out as "not credible" and you'd think their propaganda would see the same latent effect, but really, the propaganda never gets out, since the Jews are well aware of this effect (heck, maybe they did these initial studies) they make the story not about the message, but the messenger. Removing the NA stamp could short-circuit that. At worst, the story would simply be unreported if they couldn't spin the NA into it, but at least the people the flyers reached could come to their own conclusion without the ever-helpful -berg pointing them to the right door. But that approach could cost as much as $100 in potential dues, and the NA muckety mucks have a car payment, dontcha know!
2004-01-20 18:28 | User Profile
[QUOTE=MadScienceType]No. Linder is just a guy with a cyber spintro-sheet whose over-the-top style touched on a lot of the frustration Whites have felt.
That reinforces my greater point. Nothing wrong with viewing him as an entertainer. Not my cup of tea, but different strokes for different folks and all that. The problem is those who view any pronouncements made from him or his corner as coming down from Mt. Sinai and subsequent proliferation of said views throughout various corners of the 'net hampering real efforts at movement building. That is when it becomes a destructive force.
I'm sure that some folks see him as a leader, whether he wants the title or not,
He does and has said "follow me" on numerous occasions, even here on this board.
but that's mainly due to a lack of literally anyone else as an alternative.
Off the top of my head I can think of several men worthy of support, both in the paleo and WN camps.
But it seems that a lot of the old-guard paleo types have gouged own their own eyes as well.
Who?
I agree that the frustration Linder feels with what the modern-day Church has become is expressed with a rather broad brush
It's well beyond a simple 'broad-brush'.
I know you've posted examples of some scathing attacks on the faith itself, and I think he's wrong, but naive as it may be, I can agree to disagree with that.
Can those whose faith is the very core of their being agree to disagree with those whose main goal is to exterminate that same faith and the institutions that represent it? I don't think so.
At least I can admire the honesty, if nothing else, his disdain represents.
Radical zionist jews are honest in their wishes to exterminate Christianity and the White race. Are we to admire their honesty?
I would rather deal with that issue in the open
Me too, hence mine and Okie's harping on this subject.
I do agree with concerns about a rigidly-enforced orthodoxy, but too much compromise isn't a good thing, either.
Very true and I would add that all compromising cannot flow in one direction only.
To add insult to injury, the desperately-clinging-to-respectability paleo leaders are right there distancing themselves and throwing tomatoes at the poor SOB in the stocks with the howling mob of Jews and their hangers-on!
This is one of the things I would like to see changed. It is my hope that we are helping develop a new paleo leadership that sees the bigger picture.
You and I are on the same page, my friend.
I know, MST. You're a good man with honorable intentions. Hopefully this kind of dialogue will help heal some of the basic problems and misunderstandings among us.
To me, ego has no place in this fight, and a whole lotta folks on both sides take stuff waaaay too personally.[/QUOTE]
It's hard not to when one truly considers the stakes involved. At the other end of the spectrum, some folks need to take things a whole lot more personally.
2004-01-20 18:32 | User Profile
One more question I have is this: has it been decided that white nationalism = national socialism?
2004-01-20 18:51 | User Profile
Texas Dissident,
No, not in my opinion. That is the view that the Jews and their strap hangers wish for the general public to believe. It is possible to support this without believeing in N.S., despite the views of Cato and company.
2004-01-20 19:40 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]One more question I have is this: has it been decided that white nationalism = national socialism?[/QUOTE]
Only on FAEM which is defunct. :)
White nationalists I've known personally do not care for any association with Hitler of any kind whatever because they know what poison he is in America. National socialism is a link to Adolf and he'll never fly in the USA. Hobbyists and neopytes and the hard-core fringe is the only place NS lives in this country.
2004-01-20 19:50 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ragnar]Only on FAEM which is defunct. :)
White nationalists I've known personally do not care for any association with Hitler of any kind whatever because they know what poison he is in America. National socialism is a link to Adolf and he'll never fly in the USA. Hobbyists and neopytes and the hard-core fringe is the only place NS lives in this country.[/QUOTE]
Well, we've been extremely in the minority while you've been in the overwhelming majority for the past sixty years. When is your program supposed to kick in?
2004-01-20 21:45 | User Profile
[quote=Texas Dissident]The problem is those who view any pronouncements made from him or his corner as coming down from Mt. Sinai and subsequent proliferation of said views throughout various corners of the 'net hampering real efforts at movement building. That is when it becomes a destructive force.
Agreed. But you're always gonna have those kind of nuts, whether they follow Alex Linder or Pat Robertson or are a loyal Bush-bot Freeper.
He does and has said "follow me" on numerous occasions, even here on this board
Are you sure? I know he's made several "join us" type statements, which might be viewed as a "my way or the highway" proclamation, but I thought it was more of a general contribute-however-you-can kind of thing. Maybe my rose-colored specs are a bit thick, I dunno.
Off the top of my head I can think of several men worthy of support, both in the paleo and WN camps.
Sure, and when any of them pops up, out come the tomatoes, as I said.
Who?
Well, I hate to even bring him up for fear of starting a whole brouhaha, but Buchanan comes to mind. Yes, yes, I know all the good he's done, but for every step he pushes forward, he retreats a couple. Speaking of "alienating a sizable portion of your potential audience and fellow sympathizers" Buchanan's repudiation of even the mildest of racialists wasn't the greatest thing in the world. Not saying he should've had them write his speeches or anything, but he could've at least tolerated them rather than going out of his way to banish them, I guess in order to shore up his P.C. bonafides, defenses against charges of racism or what have you, which turned out to do no good anyway.
Can those whose faith is the very core of their being agree to disagree with those whose main goal is to exterminate that same faith and the institutions that represent it? I don't think so.
Do you think that's actually what Linder et al. have in mind? Maybe I'm naive, but I don't get that. There's some definite contempt and loathing, yes, but I don't get outright extermination. I've read that during the Revolution, Patriots, most no doubt Christians themselves, would actually burn down churches and tar-and-feather clergy that expounded the Loyalist position from the pulpit. They didn't exterminate Christianity here in doing so, but certainly did damage to its institutions. I'm not making a direct comparison between Linder and those fellas, just pointing out that it's possible to separate the faith from its earthly trappings.
Radical zionist jews are honest in their wishes to exterminate Christianity and the White race. Are we to admire their honesty?
I disagree. It's only been relatively recently, now that they feel Whites are too powerless to do anything about it, that Jews have been really out in the open about their desire to do in both of the above, and even then, the rhetoric is all couched in terms of fairness and inclusivity, diversity, etc. for fear of stirring the White mass out of its stupor.
Me too, hence mine and Okie's harping on this subject.
Fair enough.
Very true and I would add that all compromising cannot flow in one direction only.
Certainly. Whites have compromised and compromised (actually more like retreated fully while they were told it was a "compromise") and I see no sign that the flow will ever be reversed.
This is one of the things I would like to see changed. It is my hope that we are helping develop a new paleo leadership that sees the bigger picture.
Same here.
It's hard not to when one truly considers the stakes involved.
Understood, but if insults and slights keep our backs up constantly, I think we'll have no time for anything else. Not saying to let it slide, necessarily, but...
At the other end of the spectrum, some folks need to take things a whole lot more personally.
Well, yeah. Mostly the types among our folk who have the "Apres moi, les deluge" attitude, but I was referring more to the personal insults and such, kind of like what goes on at the VNN forum. Actually, it's too bad dueling's gone out of style. I'll bet it would make more people think before opening their traps if they knew they might be facing business end of a .56cal pistol the next morning!
2004-01-20 22:52 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]One more question I have is this: has it been decided that white nationalism = national socialism?[/QUOTE]
I'd say National Socialism is a subset of White Nationalism.
2004-01-21 00:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=MadScienceType]Agreed. But you're always gonna have those kind of nuts, whether they follow Alex Linder or Pat Robertson or are a loyal Bush-bot Freeper.
True enough. Unfortunately they seem to monopolize the discussions with their distractions. We need a larger, much more active centrist core.
Are you sure? I know he's made several "join us" type statements, which might be viewed as a "my way or the highway" proclamation, but I thought it was more of a general contribute-however-you-can kind of thing. Maybe my rose-colored specs are a bit thick, I dunno.
Just check his last reply to wintermute here last July. If anything's changed I don't know about it.
Well, I hate to even bring him up for fear of starting a whole brouhaha, but Buchanan comes to mind. Yes, yes, I know all the good he's done, but for every step he pushes forward, he retreats a couple.
But please keep in mind that he has reached an audience unsurpassed by anyone else I have seen. Yes, let's not rehash Buchanan. All Okie or myself have tried to do is get the hard-core NS/WN types to admit that he's ever done one thing right. That's it. Triskelion couldn't do it.
Do you think that's actually what Linder et al. have in mind?
Yes, I do. In fact I'll go further by stating that at times with such strident rhetoric I believe his true intention is not White self-determination but rather the stamping out of the true faith. Perhaps at bottom that remains the core contention. Others may differ like yourself, but I can't tolerate that in any way, shape or form. Several of my betters agree with me, too.
I've read that during the Revolution, Patriots, most no doubt Christians themselves, would actually burn down churches and tar-and-feather clergy that expounded the Loyalist position from the pulpit.
It may seem like splitting hairs, but to me there is a world of difference between having my church burned down by, say, radical Methodists than Muslim Turks. But ultimately I'm not worried about the extermination of the Church Triumphant (nod to Walter). Scripture tells us that the gates of Hell itself will not triumph against it and I draw strength and reassurance in that. Bottom line, I just think that in our current struggle anti-Christianity is politically un-wise and I will oppose it with every means I have available to me.
So maybe that's enough. I've spoken my piece. Perhaps the next thing we need to focus on is that barbeque meet and greet somewhere around Central Texas. We've got a few OD regulars in and around those parts. :cowboy:
2004-01-21 02:50 | User Profile
Well, leave it to AY to distill the essence of all this verbiage down to the main point!
Our Leftist counterparts understand this - hardcore Marxists will put their larger-scale vision and "extremism" aside when they recognize that supporting a mainstream liberal Democrat (or an "anti-racist" neocon) can get them one incremental step closer to what they want.
That would be an excellent approach, but there's no politician of any significance left who would even countenance incremental steps towards the goals you outline in A through E. Buchanan was the closest thing, but he self-destructed, ejecting the WNs, racialists, far-right paleos and the like along the way. I think the reason the Kahanites and their ilk are content with the Weekly Standard is they see at least some of their ideas and agenda reflected in its pages, but the only place we see anything close to our worldview is little cyber-spots like this, and yes, VNN.
The only problem I see with the other potential allies you mention (and I'm all for allies wherever we can find 'em) is that they're just as powerless as we are. Maybe there's strength in numbers, though.
Bottom line, I just think that in our current struggle anti-Christianity is politically un-wise and I will oppose it with every means I have available to me.
Agreed. While I respect Linder's right to his opinion on the matter, that still doesn't mean I think it's a real good idea, politically or otherwise.
The BBQ idea sounds great.
2004-01-21 04:13 | User Profile
I have just read part of This Time the World which the Rockwell quote was taken from. Rockwell made it clear he intended to take power by legal means -- if a follower threatened violence, he would report him to the police himself. But he knew his enemies were not so scrupulous, so his followers had to be ready to face smears, loss of their jobs, beatings, arrest and death.
Could he have succeeded? I doubt it. He was clever at getting his message out, but the media remained in the hands of his enemies. He overestimated the rate of social and economic decay. But our rulers considered him a threat, even if they did not have a hand in his assassination.
2004-01-21 04:14 | User Profile
I have a few comments:
Ever notice how the Jews hardly ever mention the Klan but obsess with Nazi-types? The Jews fear Nazi-type ideology. It becomes the state. It is a near-religion that covers all areas of life and the Jews lay awake at night worrying about that.
2004-01-21 05:12 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]Similarly, White Nationalists may ultimately want an America free of Jews and coloreds (just as the Left wants a world free of Whites), but they will find few allies in achieving this goal, for the very same reason that Kristol has succeeded where Kahane has failed. On the other hand, there are plenty of Rightwingers who would:
A) Favor ending all aid to Israel B ) Favor pulling US troops out of Iraq and the Balkans C) Favor lifting sanctions against Iran, Syrian, and other nations on the Zionist hit list D) Favor an end to affirmative action and other anti-white legislation E) Favor an end to colored immigration from the Third World
Now, these are all issues that National Socialists, other white nationalists, paleoconservatives, and paleolibertarians can all agree on.....
Personally, I am at the stage where I regard neoconservatism as our ultimate enemy, and welcome an alliance with anybody (however temporarily) who is committed to opposing their sinister agenda. This include not only those on the Right who I disagree with on many issues (such as Libertarians), but also some Old-School Leftists, Arabs, and numerous others who are fighting the Wolfowitz-Perle-Frum axis of evil.[/QUOTE]Well before you go out on a limb chasing the Nadarites etc., you might try to get back the basic core part of the group that supports this agenda. I'd call it the old Spotlight group.
Basically the problem for this forum is with the demise of the Spotlight, (which of course the neo's at FR raved about constantly) there isn't any core attraction for that group to rally around anymore.
I'd call the Spotlight group soft racialists, in opposition to the hard racialists at VNN.
It does of course have a successor - the American Free Press.
It certainly is a big problem for nationalism that we don't have someone like Carto and his various innovations, Spotlight, the Populist Party etc. to rally around to. Between Linder and Fleming there is just a huge gap. We've tried to step into it, but sometimes it just seems to be swallowing us up.
I suspect a successful reinvigorated Spotlight type operation would have a good effect on both sides actually - moderating VNN etc. and emboldening Chronicles type paleos. Then the gaps that rack us wouldn't seem daunting.
2004-01-21 07:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]Well, we've been extremely in the minority while you've been in the overwhelming majority for the past sixty years. When is your program supposed to kick in?[/QUOTE]
Nein, I only mean Hitler gets us nowhere.
Like 2 examples I know of: My pappy and all my uncles fought in WWII. They and millions like them in turn influenced US culture. Big time. They're influence and the years that have gone by almost ensures that NS will remain a fringe. (Of course Hollywood helped a lot.)
The other example is David Duke. I cannot imagine how a guy the same age as me could have dressed himself in an SS uniform in the 60s and held a sign saying "Gas the Chicago 7." Evidently he has the same sort of family I had, because he has said in public that he apologized to them for that youthful publicity stunt.
I know this sort of thing is personal and subjective. But it's where people live. Americans in meaningful numbers are not going to start yearning for the losing side of that war. If invoked it'll just turn them off.
2004-01-21 09:15 | User Profile
"Let's face it, the NA's in it for the money"
That is just ludicrous. The NA is trying build a media in competition with that of the Jews, which obviously requires some funding, but you might as well claim that Jared Taylor is "in it for the money" due to the fact he doesn't give American Renaissance away for free. I've been with the NA for 8 years and I've seen our effectiveness grow several hundred percent during that time. When I joined, it seemed a quixotic waste of time that I just couldn't resist doing for reasons of my own passion. Now, we're actually on the move. True, we're now a teacup full instead of a thimbull full, compared to the ocean of the dominant media, but that's more than anyone else can say they've accomplished during the same period. When I distribute leaflets, I'm not thinking of it as a way of raising funds for the NA. Rather, I'm thinking that perhaps people will check out our website and so some reading of the enormous volume of text there (or listen to the audiocasts). I don't expect anyone to join on the spot, but rather to perhaps read some more stuff that will get their minds percolating. Whether they join the NA (as I happen to think would be the wisest course) or whether they join, um, someone else (no other group on the WN scene who is particularly relevant springs to mind just now) isn't the point. Most probably won't join any group, even if they agree with everything we say. But at some point, we're going to need such passive supporters as voters or soldiers (once their own county is coming under mortar fire or whatnot, then they will presumably be less interested in passivity). Furthermore, the flyers serve the purpose of telling people things they already know are true, thus demonstrating who tells them the truth (WNs) and who lies to them (media, government, churches). It should further be noted that when I deliver flyers, I'm not doing it for the media reaction - I'm doing it to have an effect on the people I am delivering them to. And that effect will either happen or not happen a good 24 hours or more before the media has a chance to comment on it.
2004-01-21 09:38 | User Profile
"Yes, let's not rehash Buchanan. All Okie or myself have tried to do is get the hard-core NS/WN types to admit that he's ever done one thing right. That's it. Triskelion couldn't do it."
I'd just like to interject and say as a full-blown nazi, I positively adore Pat Buchanan! He's the greatest American politician of my lifetime (born in 1970). The idea that anyone would reject him because he somewhat foolishly tries to placate the Jews strikes me as laughably stupid. One has to learn to take what one can get, after all. This is a man who wrote that the Holocaust was exaggerated and that Hitler was a heroic figure (albeit in only some respects) in one of his nationally syndicated columns. The idea that WNs should be hostile to the closest thing we've ever seen to one of our own as a viable candidate for the Presidency is moronic. Hell, if the decision had been left to Republican primary voters, Buchanan woud have been the '96 nominee. I'm not sure he'd have been able to beat Klinton, but stranger things have happened and who knows what an actually charismatic nominee might have done (doofus Dole only lost by 8 points, you know). Had Buchanan made it to the White House, we'd have likely achieved all five of the previously mentioned A-E goals, and more besides that. 9/11 would never have occurred, I strongly suspect, both due to immigration restrictions and the fact that Al-Qaeda would have a lot less motive to want to wage war on us. National Socialist hostility to Buchananism strikes me as bordering on the suicidally insane.
2004-01-21 09:48 | User Profile
"I suspect a successful reinvigorated Spotlight type operation would have a good effect on both sides actually - moderating VNN etc. and emboldening Chronicles type paleos. Then the gaps that rack us wouldn't seem daunting."
The Nationalist Times ([url]http://www.anu.org[/url]) strikes me as a pretty solid publication (of course, I'm biased; they're the only print publication to ever put me on their masthead). I've let my subscription lapse due to my present state of chronic unemployment and more-or-less abject poverty, but I doubt things have changed. Perhaps if more people subscribed to it and it were better known, it could serve a purpose similar to the one you have outlined (it was a Carto-affiliated publication at one time, but the fellow who publishes it and who heads up the American Nationalist Union, who's name escapes me, had the seemingly inevitable falling out with that apparently quite pugilistic Carto character - in any event, this publication does strike me as having an ideological orientation simialar to the one you outlined, or at least it did).
2004-01-21 17:28 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe]"Yes, let's not rehash Buchanan. All Okie or myself have tried to do is get the hard-core NS/WN types to admit that he's ever done one thing right. That's it. Triskelion couldn't do it."
I'd just like to interject and say as a full-blown nazi, I positively adore Pat Buchanan! He's the greatest American politician of my lifetime (born in 1970). The idea that anyone would reject him because he somewhat foolishly tries to placate the Jews strikes me as laughably stupid. One has to learn to take what one can get, after all. This is a man who wrote that the Holocaust was exaggerated and that Hitler was a heroic figure (albeit in only some respects) in one of his nationally syndicated columns. The idea that WNs should be hostile to the closest thing we've ever seen to one of our own as a viable candidate for the Presidency is moronic...... National Socialist hostility to Buchananism strikes me as bordering on the suicidally insane.[/QUOTE] Tell it to Triskelion and the other National Socialists at VNN (Trisk BTW always whined when I conflated him wth VNN - if you're here Trisk this ones for you).
In all seriousness, I wonder how you could claim to be a good NS and disagree with this apparently basic defining doctrine of NS, which every person in any sort of good graces of VNN/NA apparently has to agree to. Did you ever here of the fuehrerprinzip?
To me, its a little bit like hearing American Catholics say they are good Catholics, they just disagree with the Pope. Everyone knows of course wat the historical meaning of a Christian "who disagrees with the Pope is" - Protestant.
I've never been able to figure out the basis for this Buchanan phobia. Privately though it makes me suspicious. Ever notice how all these VNN leaders, singular among WN's, seem to be awash in money?
I don't know. Maybe its a class difference.
The Nationalist Times ([url]http://www.anu.org[/url]) strikes me as a pretty solid publication (of course, I'm biased; they're the only print publication to ever put me on their masthead). I've let my subscription lapse due to my present state of chronic unemployment and more-or-less abject poverty, but I doubt things have changed. Perhaps if more people subscribed to it and it were better known, it could serve a purpose similar to the one you have outlined (it was a Carto-affiliated publication at one time, but the fellow who publishes it and who heads up the American Nationalist Union, who's name escapes me, had the seemingly inevitable falling out with that apparently quite pugilistic Carto character - in any event, this publication does strike me as having an ideological orientation simialar to the one you outlined, or at least it did).
Another intrigue with one of the high money elite. Stories of intrigues with Carto are legion. Unlike Linder, this man seemed to have some real political ability and aspire to create something other than an internet huffing and puffing operation. But stories of personal conflict and disagreement with him, from the IHR debacle to the 1988 Populist Party (which he created) campaign of David Duke seem widespread.
The fact that so little of consequence now is related to him is emblamatic of the failures of both the organizations that now exist (VNN/NA etc.) and also of Carto.
2004-01-21 17:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]But stories of personal conflict and disagreement with him, from the IHR debacle to the 1988 Populist Party (which he created) campaign of David Duke seem widespread.[/QUOTE]
I wonder if anyone knows the background on this. If I'm not mistaken, Don Black originally created Stormfront with those who were crafting Duke's early political campaigns. What was the relationship, if any, between Duke, Carto, the Populist Party and Black/Stormfront?
2004-01-21 18:02 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe]"Politics is always changing, that's for sure. But there are always the breakthroughs. Duke and Buchanan in the early 90's remember scored great breakthroughs, but these breakthroughs petered out, probably because there was no organization built to follow up on their victories, and sustain ther momentum."
If I may interject, Duke and Buchanan both made huge mistakes that greatly reduced their effectiveness. Duke, following up on his 39.5% showing in the 1991 Louisiana gubenatorial race, instead of seeking the 1992 Republican Presidential nomination (which did nothing but split the anti-Bush right between him and Buchanan - particularly in Mississippi, the only state where both Buchanan and Duke broke into double digits), should have instead run for a seat in the U.S. House. He probably could have become the first WN congressman in decades.
I've always wondered if residual dislike of Buchanan for undercutting Duke contributes to the WN anathema's on him. Buchanan did after all at one time brag about neutralizing the Duke vote.
To me there was no question though - on a national level Duke was not a viable candidate. Being a U.S. Congressman potentially could have given him a great soapbox and platform.
He wasn't the smartest person though. In the LA house his most defining moment was introducing a bill to segregate black and white blood supplies - exactly the sort of nuttiness that ensures WN will never get anywhere.
Buchanan should never have backed Dole, once the GOP establishment stole the nomination from Pat and handed it over to that clown. He should have gone across town to the U.S. Taxpayers Party convention and accepted their presidential nomination. He was upset that Perot lied to him and thus wasn't going to be the Reform Party nominee in '96, but he should have made a run anyway. I suspect Pat would have regulated Perot to 4th place (seeing as how he'd steal many of Perot's voters and add to that pile a bunch of his own). By Election Day, it was clear Dole wasn't going to beat Klinton (I admit I would have voted for Dole had he any chance of disloding the Arkansas cretin). Instead, I was left to pull the lever for Howard Phillips, who got 0.2% of the vote, for 6th place....[/QUOTE]
We could talk about the miscues of Buchanan, but since no one here supports him anyway its probably pointless.
He definitely broke with the GOP too late, but obviously, as we can see today, its adversaries have never succeeded in creating an practical alternative vehicle for white Americans who aspire to more than internet keyboard smoke-blowing to support.
2004-01-21 18:21 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]I wonder if anyone knows the background on this. If I'm not mistaken, Don Black originally created Stormfront with those who were crafting Duke's early political campaigns. What was the relationship, if any, between Duke, Carto, the Populist Party and Black/Stormfront?[/QUOTE]I'm not sure exactly. Carto of course created the Populist Party, which Duke was the first Presidential candidate for in 1988. Oddly enough though apparently he backed away from Duke in 1988. Apparently for instance he gave Duke very little backing in The Spotlight. Also Bo Gritz, who was initially the 1988 Populist Party VP candidate, withdrew (he ran as its Presidential candidate in 1992 of course). He said at the time that he wasn't fully aware of Duke's background, but I suspect Carto's handiwork in this.
I'm not a Spotlight expert, but there definitely seems to be a rift, not only between the Buchananites and Stormfronters, but between the Cartoites (and its related organizations, like IHR, Nationalist Times, etc. ) and the Stromfronters,(in a broad sense - VNN, NA, etc) which the VNNers don't like to talk about.
Trisk for instance said he knew very little about Carto, which, for a man always asserting great if not supreme insight into the needs of an effective American WN program, I found hard to believe.
I doubt its over anything fundamental, but rather tactics. Everyone knows the Stormfronters always whine when Cartoite types aren't strident enough (let alone Buchanites). Carto obviously had the limited success with The Spotlight and IHR which he had by firmly excluding such hyenadom.
2004-01-21 18:33 | User Profile
Texas Dissident:
Do you mean to imply that Linder is the authoritative voice for white nationalism? I don't believe that, hence my repeated pleas for serious minded WNs to step up and cast off the elements that are hindering a broader WN movement. It's quite simple really and I believe necessary before any advancement can be realized.
Alex Linder is not the voice for anyone, not even all hard racialists -- half the commentary on his forum consists of tirades against Don Black and Stormfront.
To be consistent, I would state the same thing to any in the paleo camp and have done so, albeit in mostly private communications. Indeed, I've lost numerous prior confidants because of it. They've told me that trying to build such a bridge is a fool's errand, but I guess I'm too headstrong because I continue to maintain that it is not only possible, but necessary when considering the forces allied against us all.
You were very wise to reject this counsel. There are many serious minded WNs that are willing to work with the paleocons. In fact, I bet that for every WN/NSer you can name who sees no value in working with palecons, I could find a paleocon who feels the same way (think Thomas Fleming & Pat Buchanan or, if we're only talking about Internet writers, Walter Yannis and Okiereddust).
2004-01-22 00:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]I'm not a Spotlight expert...[/QUOTE]
Neither am I, but a bit of googling and it appears a fascinating subject. From The Public Eye (leftists apparently, but nonetheless basically informative):
In his history of the Liberty Lobby, Mintz argues the group reflects three facets of nativism: racism, conspiracism, and monoculturalism.
The John Birch Society trumpets jingoistic patriotism laced with conspiracist allegations that trace back to Robison's book alleging a Illuminati/Freemason conspiracy. Liberty Lobby relies on historic antisemitic sources echoing the Protocols. While still controlled by Liberty Lobby's Carto, Noontide Press reprinted classics by conspiracist antisemites such as Nesta Webster and John Beaty.
According to Mintz, Liberty Lobby clearly voices "racist and anti-Semitic beliefs in addition to conspiracism." As Mintz explains:
===Structurally, the Lobby was a most unusual umbrella organization catering to constituencies spanning the fringes of Neo-Nazism to the John Birch Society and the radical right. It was not truly paramilitary, in the manner of the Ku Klux Klan and Nazis, but was more accurately an intermediary between racist paramilitary factions and the recent right.
The idea that so-called rootless and cosmopolitan Jews had questionable national loyalties was a highlight of the Dreyfus affair and was amplified horribly by the Nazi genocide of Jews. Picking up this historic theme, Liberty Lobby's newspaper, The Spotlight, frequently rails against "dual-loyalists" in our government when their target is really Jews or supporters of Israel which Spotlight conflates into an antisemitic stew of conspiracism salted with Holocaust Revisionism, Aryanist yearnings, and racial nationalism. Spotlight has a readership that fluctuates between 100,000 and 200,000.
The Washington Post has described Spotlight as a "newspaper containing orthodox conservative political articles interspersed with anti-Zionist tracts and classified advertisements for Ku Klux Klan T-shirts, swastika-marked German coins and cassette tapes of Nazi marching songs." That description is actually mild. The Liberty Lobby and Spotlight are not only fascist, but also quasi-nazi, promoting many of the themes of Nazi racial nationalism, and certainly networking and being used by persons and groups who are neonazi. Although the Liberty Lobby is careful to sanitize its views, there are moments of clarity. One Spotlight article referred to the Waffen SS, Hitler's elite corps of ideological Nazis, as a "multinational anti-communist mass movement, which was, in fact, the largest all-volunteer army in history." The Spotlight also has celebrated neonazi skinheads and the apartheid government of South Africa. The Liberty Lobby denies it is even antisemitic, much less fascist or quasi-nazi. It considers itself a patriotic populist organization.
Liberty Lobby, Spotlight, the International Revisionist Conference, the Institute for Historical Review (IHR), Noontide Press, and IHR's Journal of Historical Review were originally all projects of Willis Carto, one of America's most influential racial theorists. Carto is described by the London-based anti-fascist magazine Searchlight as the "leading U.S. publisher of anti-semitic, racist and pro-Nazi material." The pseudo-scholarly Institute for Historical Review is a "revisionist" research center and publishing house that popularizes the calumny that the historical account of the Nazi genocide of Jews is basically a hoax. Noontide Press (in essence the book and pamphlet distribution arm of the Institute for Historical Review) distributes titles such as Auschwitz: Truth or Lie-An Eyewitness Report, Hitler At My Side, and For Fear of the Jews. Carto lost control over IHR and Noontide Press in a power struggle over money.
Russ Bellant describes how Willis Carto, early in his career, produced the magazine Western Destiny, which grew out of both the Nordicist Northern World and a vociferously antisemitic magazine called Right. Right recommended support for the American Nazi Party and was edited by E. L. Anderson who was associate editor of Western Destiny. Critics and co-workers of Carto claim E. L. Anderson was a pseudonym for Willis Carto.
Carto and Liberty Lobby were influential in creating the racist Populist Party and assisted in elevating David Duke to national attention as an electoral candidate. In the spring of 1985 the Populist Party held a major meeting in Chicago where the armed and confrontational activities of racist and antisemitic groups in rural America were saluted as "heroic," according to persons who attended the meeting. Antisemitism at this meeting was fairly obvious. One group of rural farm activists from the Midwest left the meeting after complaining that too many of the attendees were obsessed with Jews.
A series of political and financial schisms ended the direct relationship between Liberty Lobby and the Populist Party, although both groups still shared many of the same fundamental antisemitic and White racist theories. Many participants in the Populist Party believed a conspiracy of rich and powerful Jews and their allies control banking, foreign policy, the CIA and the media in the United States. Like David Duke, they also believed in an America controlled by White Christians of northern European heritage.
Former staffers at both the Liberty Lobby and the Lyndon LaRouche group claim both outfits have cooperated closely on several projects. In the March 2, 1981 issue of its newspaper Spotlight, Liberty Lobby cynically defended the relationship with LaRouche's original electoral arm, the U.S. Labor Party (USLP):
===It is mystifying why so many anti-communists and 'conservatives' oppose the USLP. No group has done so much to confuse, disorient, and disunify the Left as they have....the USLP should be encouraged, as should all similar breakaway groups from the Left, for this is the only way that the Left can be weakened and broken.
Spotlight later distanced itself and Liberty Lobby from the LaRouchites over the issue of their questionable and illegal fundraising activities but the groups share many similarities. They both see the world as controlled by secret elites involving a disproportionate array of banking families with Jewish-sounding names. Both claim Israeli intelligence and British intelligence polluted the CIA and U.S. foreign policy. Both depend heavily on the intellectual ideas of Spengler as outlined in Decline of the West. Both promote producerism and divide capitalist control into industrialists (productive) and financiers (parasitic).
Sounds like OD, really. Please forgive my ignorance, but is Carto still alive?
I'm going to have to go take another look at the American Free Press.
2004-01-22 03:27 | User Profile
"I wonder how you could claim to be a good NS and disagree with this apparently basic defining doctrine of NS, which every person in any sort of good graces of VNN/NA apparently has to agree to. Did you ever here of the fuehrerprinzip?"
Well, first off, my Fuhrer (Dr. William L. Pierce) is dead. Erich Gliebe is keeping the seat warm for the next Fuhrer, and I respect him for it and will obey his orders, but its not precisely the same thing, as I'm sure Mr. Gliebe would readily admit (a historical parallel might be Hitler to Pierce & Gliebe to Admiral Dunnitz; Dunnitz was certainly a great man who deserved our loyalty, but the Fuhrer is more than just a political office; its also a spiritual one and there won't always be someone handy who entirely fits that particular bill). Secondly, Dr. Pierce never suggested (nor has Mr. Gliebe) I shouldn't support Buchanan. Dr. Pierce said both good and bad things about Buchanan; I choose to place my empasis on the good ones.
2004-01-22 03:32 | User Profile
"Carto of course created the Populist Party, which Duke was the first Presidential candidate for in 1988."
That isn't exactly right. The Populist Party first ran a candidate for President in 1984; a little-known WN who was an Olympic Gold Medalist.
2004-01-22 05:18 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Neither am I, but a bit of googling and it appears a fascinating subject. From The Public Eye (leftists apparently, but nonetheless basically informative):
Sounds like OD, really. Please forgive my ignorance, but is Carto still alive?
I'm going to have to go take another look at the American Free Press.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the fascinating reference Tex. Yes Carto from everything I know is still alive. I haven't heard much about him lately though since the IHR affair and the decline of Liberty Lobby. That I suspect was hard on both the resources of an older man, both physical and financial. He never seems to really have been a fully public figure anyway - surprisingly little is known of him though.
America Free Press is an interesting magazine, though its reach seems a far cry from that The Spotlight once had. It does perhaps at least indirectly,have good linking sections.
2004-01-22 05:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]While there was much in Spotlight that is difficult to take seriously, I suppose that ideologically I have more in common with what you call their "soft racialist" approach than with the "hard racialist" crowd, and I suspect that the former is a much larger constituency given the relatively large circulation of Spotlight. I would add most David Duke supporters and the more explicitly racialist people at the Council of Conservative Citizens to this category. From a strategic point of view I believe this is the best place to be, because on the one hand paleoconservatives will covertly court you, while at the same time you aren't written off as an immediate enemy by the Stormfront or VNN people.
Well strategically it would certainly seem to have some advantages. Since Thomas Fleming style paleoism still gets written off from the mainstream, its hard to really see what his moderation really achieves other than give a forum to conservative academics like Gottfried and Jenkins that just must have a passably respectable forum. As for the disadvantages - we all know about that personally ;)
I don't believe that the disappearance of Spotlight has done anything to reduce the numbers of this faction, they just don't have a visible mouthpiece. What I would like to see in its stead is a journal that quotes The Culture of Critique instead of the Protocals and concentrates on immediate problems such as neocon control of our foreign policy rather than wild speculation about Bilderbergs, Freemasons, and the like (that goes for Rense with its UFO fixation as well). There's definitely an audience to be tapped and an organization to be created, it just needs to be done right.[/QUOTE]
Well I view the stuff about the Bilderbergs, etc. (very close to the Birchies although they emphasize the trilateral commision/CFR more) as serving a certain function in its day, as Tex's quote shows
They both see the world as controlled by secret elites involving a disproportionate array of banking families with Jewish-sounding names. Both claim Israeli intelligence and British intelligence polluted the CIA and U.S. foreign policy... Both promote producerism and divide capitalist control into industrialists (productive) and financiers (parasitic).
It certainly identified the fundamental problems in the world as deriving from conspiritorial, groups of collectivistic, rigid in-group/out-group mindsets, very similar to the mindset of neoconservatism, without falling into the trap of what german conservatives Burkhardt and Nietszche both called "the great simplifiers".
It certainly identified the problem very closely, which without the benefit of Kevin MacDonald's work was probably the best they could do at the time. Certainly though now the papers need to start squarely focusing in on neoconservatism, incorporating the other conspiritorial elements in simply as part of that, IMO.
Carto saw Yockey's Imperium as the defining work of his time, and established its worldview as the underlying theme of The Spotlight. Probably someone of similar resources and organizational ability will be required to do the same for MacDonald's trilogy and see that it reaches its potential.
Potentially of course a new such Liberty Lobby would be a great improvement in reach over the old Liberty Lobby, since MacDonald's theories and abilities IMO are much greater than those of Yockey's (whose works seem to have all of Spengler's vagueness with none of its rhetorical byte, being written in a very turgid fashion.). Unfortunately though ther don't seem to be any Will Carto's waiting in the wings. All we've been blessed with is the likes of Linder et. al. on one hand, and Fleming on the other. (with Taki in the middle giving a finger to the whole thing). :sad:
2004-01-22 08:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Thanks for the fascinating reference Tex. Yes Carto from everything I know is still alive. I haven't heard much about him lately though since the IHR affair and the decline of Liberty Lobby. [/QUOTE]
Thanks, Okie. After doing a good bit of research it appears this stone is best left unturned. Quite simply, everything surrounding Carto, Spotlight et al. appears to be a myriad of dilemnas wrapped-up tight in an enigma. One's sanity is probably better served moving forward, although there may be some practical lessons to be learned. I don't know if it's worth the effort though. Certainly doesn't appear to be.
2004-01-23 03:12 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Thanks, Okie. After doing a good bit of research it appears this stone is best left unturned. Quite simply, everything surrounding Carto, Spotlight et al. appears to be a myriad of dilemnas wrapped-up tight in an enigma. One's sanity is probably better served moving forward, although there may be some practical lessons to be learned. I don't know if it's worth the effort though. Certainly doesn't appear to be.[/QUOTE]Yes, I'm afraid I'd have to agree with you. Like the fight between Bill White and Alex Linder and the NA, (I can't figure out who's who) the fight between Mark Weber and Carto over the IHR (and in an earlier age, the fight between Hitler and the Strassers and the Stormtroopers) seems to be one of those defining moments of the far-right that leaves nothing in its wake but lessons of the limitations of the key actors involved, and warnings to all but the most fanatical to stay out of this imbroglio.
In any sense, since Carto lost, it appears the work and capabilities of Liberty Lobby pretty much came to an end.
2004-01-23 17:51 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]In any sense, since Carto lost, it appears the work and capabilities of Liberty Lobby pretty much came to an end.[/QUOTE]
True enough, Carto by all accounts was a rather unstable character who no one really seemed to get along with for any length of time. For our purposes though, it is interesting to consider the coalition of various groups that once moved in and about that circle. It's very similar to the coalition I would envision supporting now on good days. Though at least here, the militia types aren't overtly represented, which is unfortunate I think.
2004-01-23 18:13 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]There are many serious minded WNs that are willing to work with the paleocons. In fact, I bet that for every WN/NSer you can name who sees no value in working with palecons, I could find a paleocon who feels the same way (think Thomas Fleming & Pat Buchanan or, if we're only talking about Internet writers, Walter Yannis and Okiereddust).[/QUOTE]
That's great to read, VF. Thank you.
Coming from the paleo side of things, I certainly draw upon prominent paleos like Fleming and Buchanan, moreso Francis even, but while drawing from that well I also see the greater need to expand the philisophical boundaries and hopefully broaden the spectrum in order to build a coalition.
Like yourself, I have sensed a change in Walter, but I don't think Okie is as opposed to working with WN of good-will as it may sometimes appear here on our pages. Maybe there is some hope.
2004-01-23 18:38 | User Profile
Tex,
United We Stand :cheers:
And speaking of the elitist charge so popular among the named individuals, it can be bounced back at them for thumbing their noses at their "less enlightened" kin.
2004-01-23 19:45 | User Profile
Ay-men to dat! :lol:
2004-01-23 22:33 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Like yourself, I have sensed a change in Walter, but I don't think Okie is as opposed to working with WN of good-will as it may sometimes appear here on our pages. Maybe there is some hope.[/QUOTE] Interesting that one could have got such an impression. My only requirement is that they be willing to accept the premises of paleoconservatism are things they can countenance in people they seriously plan to work with.
Even if they don't accept such or seriously plan to work with us, (Franco comes to mind) I don't grow throwing stones. As far as I'm concerned people can agree to disagree if they like and stay around here. What I don't like is when people assume by virtue of that tolerance that I am necessarily coming to agree with them across the board, and get huffy and leave when they find out such isn't the case. Discussions regarding Buchanan come to mind.
2004-01-24 05:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]Tex,
United We Stand :cheers:
And speaking of the elitist charge so popular among the named individuals, it can be bounced back at them for thumbing their noses at their "less enlightened" kin.[/QUOTE]I bet you must have just loved Triskelion. :D Maybe I need to bring him back, so he can thumb his nose at you instead. :box:
2004-01-24 05:57 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]True enough, Carto by all accounts was a rather unstable character who no one really seemed to get along with for any length of time.
I don't know. He sounds like he'd have been perfectly at home at OD.
For our purposes though, it is interesting to consider the coalition of various groups that once moved in and about that circle. It's very similar to the coalition I would envision supporting now on good days.
Well it certainly isn't an easy task, putting together a coaltion of these groups, as we've found. At least today.
For the future, we can imagine the glorious vision.
For the past, we can remininse over the great memory.
Today, we groan at the intractable bitchiness. :lol:
Though at least here, the militia types aren't overtly represented, which is unfortunate I think.[/QUOTE]
I think you're a little optmistic about the militia's as well. Trisk said people have been trying to work with them for years. Most of them :cowboy:just want to play Rambo soldier. :gunsmilie And you can imagine how many government agents and agent provoceteurs all those guns and macho talk attracts.:tank:
No sirree. :ninja:At least if we get a government agent, he's probably a computer nerd who picks his nose. :nerd: