Counter-Currents
Thomas Hart Benton, “The Kentuckian,” 1954
1,085 words
As I write, it looks like the Democratic party will retain control of the US Senate by a narrowed margin and the Republican party will gain control of the US House of Representatives by a narrow margin. The likely result: gridlock, centrism, pervasive dissatisfaction, and ever-increasing polarization. In short: This has been a good election viewed in terms of the long-term interests of white Americans.
(1) This election is a repudiation of the presidency of Barack Obama, specifically Obama as a “post-racial” and leftist president. Two years ago, I predicted the following:
Obama, like Clinton, will probably begin his administration with an orgy of high-minded oratory and high-priced social uplift programs, rapidly wear out his welcome, suffer a series of humiliating defeats, and end his administration as a centrist: exhausted, cynical, morally-compromised, an object of near-universal scorn.
I never dreamed, however, that Obama’s presidency would collapse so fast, a function of the man’s essential emptiness. He is the weakest president since Carter, the most despised since Nixon. Furthermore, unlike Carter and Nixon, Obama’s stature will not rise when he leaves office. In their own ways, Nixon and Carter were too big for the office, thus they blossomed when they were not being “handled” and “fed” things to say. But we all know what happens when Obama does not have a teleprompter or Rahm Emanuel around. I am betting that Obama will be a one term president. The real question is whether he runs again in 2012. The 2012 presidential election is the Republicans’ to lose.
(2) The best thing for white Americans is continued racial and political polarization until the system cracks. Two years ago, I wrote:
The recent presidential campaign has been racially divisive and polarizing, and that is a good thing. Countless whites have become newly conscious of their distinct racial identity and interests. Of course the Republican candidate, John McCain, did nothing to encourage this process. Nothing, that is, until he added Sarah Palin to the Republican ticket, which brought about a vicious and polarizing reaction from the left, particularly Jews. Millions of whites, most of them from the productive minority that carries the rest of the country, spontaneously identified with Palin. Thus the establishment’s hatred for her—and, by extension, them—was very instructive. Many became not just aware, but fighting mad.
Sarah Palin, of course, is still a polarizing figure. I hope she stays out there attracting liberal lightning bolts, but the Republicans would have to be The Stupid Party to run her for president in 2012. A much greater cause for hope is the phenomenal growth of the Tea Party movement. Like Palin, the Tea Partiers profess anti-racist, universalist Americanism of the classical liberal variety. But to the left they still just look like a bunch of rednecks and crackers, and as Matt Parrott has pointed out, if you call a white man a white man long enough he might just take your ugly insult to heart.
In short, the racial polarization of 2008 has continued and intensified.
Gridlock, however, will do far more to further racial polarization than a Republican sweep of both the House and the Senate. As I wrote in 2008:
. . . a McCain victory would only have dissipated this tendency to greater white racial consciousness. If McCain won, it would have been blamed on Republican racism, even though Obama would presumably have been defeated by racist Democrats who would have refused to vote for him. Republicans never would have considered voting for a Democrat in the first place, black or not. Nevertheless, a McCain administration would do everything in its power not to further white racial consciousness.
An Obama presidency, however, will only intensify racial polarization and stimulate greater white racial consciousness and self-assertiveness. More of the sleepers will waken.
(3) The only thing I hoped for from the present election is a strong showing for anti-immigration candidates. Immigration is really the only political issue that White Nationalists should bother with today, since we desperately need to close the borders, and we can make real progress in that direction.
An immigration cut off would not decrease racial tension and polarization, since differential birth rates would still doom whites to eventual demographic eclipse even if the borders were sealed today.
What an immigration freeze would give us is time, and given the sorry state of the White Nationalist movement today, we need all the time we can get. We need time to organize ourselves, so that changing circumstances will give us more than mere opportunities to congratulate ourselves on our prescience. When events break our way, we need to be able to convert them into real political power.
In terms of immigration, this election has been a mixed bag. Symbolically, the best victories would have been Tom Tancredo as governor of Colorado and Sharon Angle as senator from Nevada. Both were long-shots, but both were defeated. In terms of substance, however, the House and Senate both will be seating a solid group of immigration restrictionists.
(4) Gridlock in Washington means that nothing will be done to alleviate the current economic depression, and this provides another important opportunity for White Nationalists. Already, at the end of 2009, the US Census Bureau pushed back the date when whites become a minority from 2042 to 2050, citing the depression as the main reason for the slowed demographic changes.
If only 2 years of depression bought us 8 years of breathing space, I say let the bad times roll!
The Great Depression of the 1930s was also the Red Decade, because the Communists took it as an opportunity to organize, not as an excuse to close their purses and pull their punches. White Nationalists need to be just as smart. Let future historians call this the “White Century,” the first of many to come.
This election, in short, is good news for White Nationalists.
Even though our cause is just, truth is on our side, and eventually we will win, we can’t lose sight of the fact that, at present, we are a small, despised, poorly-organized, and powerless minority. The political system is stacked against us. The predominant moral climate holds racism to be the ultimate evil. Aside from the internet, we have no way to get our arguments to the masses.
Thus the best we can hope for from an election are events that argue in our favor and opportunities for action and growth. This election guarantees continued racial polarization and offers real opportunities for a respite on immigration. So let’s get to work.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
13 comments
Good stuff.
“We are a small, despised, poorly-organized, and powerless minority. The political system is stacked against us. The predominant moral climate holds racism to be the ultimate evil. Aside from the internet, we have no way to get our arguments to the masses.”
Kinda fun when you put it that way.
I consider myself a white nationalist and I can’t stand Sarah Palin or the Tea Party Movement. I do like your web site though.
Sarah Palin and the Tea Party movement are of no value in themselves. They are anti-racist and wedded to the system that is killing us. But they are useful because they drive liberals into frothing rages, which alienates whites from the system and creates greater polarization. That is what we want.
I guess they help from that standpoint. Myself, I kind of like being on the fringe. I’d be lying though if I said that I never sympathized with “conservative/libertarian” movement. Thanks for the response Greg.
Great analysis Greg. I wouldn’t mind seeing more articles like this on CC.
In two years, I will do another one.
My predictions:
The new Republicans will cave into the system and get co-opted by money and power. But they have a big problem- the debt will force misery upon White Humanity, so any politician will be blamed, especially those who openly betray us and join the multi cult. This assumes that we have no flash point over next two years. A good old fashion police shooting, riots, and burning cities would be just about what we need during the 2012 primaries.
Or, Obama will stay radical, and the Republicans can stay truly conservative because he is a worthy opponent who demands response.
I concur with your overall analysis, especially with regards to letting the ‘bad times roll’. The phrase ‘every little bit helps’ certainly comes to mind.
But I wonder, if the immediate goal is to achieve a critical mass of racial polarization, would or would it not be better if Obama gets a second term?
One the one hand, if he loses a re-election bid in 2012, the blacks will at least make a lot of noise and voice their displeasure, further alienating Whites. They could also do a redux of the 60s riots and burn down cities (and probably not just their own sections this time). Either way, their reaction will likely further our goals.
On the other hand, another four years of Obama could potentially wake up even more people to the racial reality they have ignored all this time. There was an obvious spike in racially-tinged thought and activity during and, especially, following his first year in office. Even if he tries to act Clintonian (I.E. act centrist), he’ll still alienate people.
Thoughts?
I agree. From the polarization point of view, the best thing to do would be for the Republicans to run a lily-white ticket with Palin at the top and get beaten by Obama.
It would certainly send a message.
But the thing is, in theory, whichever makes the non-Whites (in this case, blacks) act out more, will provide greater potential for new converts.
Following this theory, it would be better for Obama to lose in 2012 and watch as the blacks make fools of themselves and further solidify the fact that the races are different in more ways than just skin color. But then we run the risk of the new rep. president continuing the same multi-cult BS, and the White electorate going back to their bread and circus routine .
A second Obama term would, again in theory, be more toned down. Therefore, the risk would be the same as above: the continuation of business as usual.
But, we have seen that Obama is quite the radical fellow. He’s not only a politcal marxist, but he’s the typical minority with a chip on his shoulder. If he is rebuffed on his healthcare law, he’ll find some other way to ‘stick it to whitey’. Whatever he’ll do, he’ll piss off not just more White people, but will drive out the last remnenats of the White democrat vote (those who are not true-blue marxists and multi-cult nuts).
Obviously, we can’t know for sure what will happen, and we should prepare for whatever transpires regardless. Perhaps within the next year or so, we’ll have an idea of how to proceed.
Pity James Russell didn’t get in. Though, he was more than just a long-shot.
I like this article. Yes, division is good for us. Worse is better. We used to hear lamenting pundits on TV talk about how divided we are and how much we need unity. Haven’t heard that in a while, because even those propagandists know that with Obama, there will not be any universal American unity. He’s a divider, and they can’t call for unity while their Jesus Obama is busy keeping the minorities divided away from American Civilization.
I’m well read in the Southern Agrarians. They did a good job of explaining that we have enemies. Being divided away from those who fight against us is an explicit agreement that our enemies are indeed enemies.
What is the WN Christian response to the Sermon on the Mount? Easy: 1. Jesus can return anytime he wants to and prevent our enemies from trying to destroy us. As long as he’s not here, I’m not interpreting his absence as a Biblical demand that I commit suicide by surrendering to the femnazis, militant gays, Negroes, Jews, Mexicans, and Muslims. 2. “Love thy enemies” does not apply during wartime, and we are in a race war.
Greg Johnson is one of my regular reads, along with Kevin MacDonald, Pat Buchanan, etc. I wish we could know more about him. Where raised, where educated, when, influences, plans?
I fear immigration reform may be what the Republicans would give Obama in exchange for cutting the budget, lessening regulation and reducing taxes. The Republicans, especially the tea party Libertarians, are more pro business than they are anti-immigration.
From Obama’s view, getting pro-Business legislation in exchange for immigration reform would be worth it. It gives him a better chance at an economic recovery, plus he will go into 2012 with healthcare reform (which will get reformed itself) and immigration reform.
The “power” of the latino vote will be made a key issue in the media now with the GOP’s loss in Nevada, and Rubio’s win in Florida. This may force the GOP’s hand, if needs forcing. The Jews will probably be a little spooked at the results of this mid-term election, so they will be out in full force advocating immigration reform.
The good news is that immigration reform may actually be a hot topic. If that battle can be won rather than just avoided or lost, it would be a very strong and positive sign.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment