Print this post Print this post

The Case Against Ron Paul

2,635 words

German translation here

In all of the pro and con debates that I read about Paul in the white nationalist blogosphere, one rather simple reality is mostly left out of the analysis: the fact that Ron Paul can’t win. But that simple fact changes the analysis entirely.

Because he can’t win, it is meaningless to point out what he “would do,” because he will never have the opportunity to do it. So yes, it would be great to have a president actively attacking the Federal Reserve. But Paul is never going to be a president. It would be great to have a president actively opposed to wars for Israel. But that president will never be named Ron Paul.

White nationalists need to grasp what we garden variety libertarians understood back in 1988: at best, the campaign is a message candidacy. It is intended to educate and spread an idea. It is intended to strengthen and build a movement. It’s also designed to rake in a lot of money, but I’ll put that aside for now.

Point is, Ron Paul knows that he can’t win. That’s not what the campaign is about. It’s ultimately about promoting HIS ideas, not ours. Perhaps it could serve as a springboard for a future Rand Paul run, but again, that would be about promoting his worldview, not ours.

That worldview is race-free libertarianism. It’s an idea of pure, deracinated Economic Man, eternally free to make a buck as his children pump out black and brown grandchildren.

It’s an idea that, fundamentally, has nothing to do with us, however it may overlap in certain policy areas.

Ron Paul is promoting his ideas, his movement, and the values that he undeniably cares about. He is doing this at the expense of our ideas and the values that we care about. He has spent a lifetime on the fringes of the Right, and during much of that time political correctness was not nearly as developed as it is today. If he had wanted to pick up the racial mantle, he could have done so. He was superbly positioned for decades to do so. He did not. At the end of the day, he was simply more interested in Austrian economics and the gold standard. Greg Johnson summed it up simply but brilliantly, “Sound money for the brown people.”

Some white nationalists say that we would be better off under libertarianism than the system we have today. This may be true, and certainly our path to extinction would be a little less unpleasant. But again, that’s pretending that we have a choice that we don’t have. Ron Paul can’t win. Libertarianism can’t win, at least not in the purist sense of true freedom of association, virtually no taxes, etc.

Sure, I’d take a pure libertarian society over what we have today. But that option is no longer on the table, to the extent that it ever was. Pure libertarianism will never appeal to more than a minority of whites, and a vanishingly small minority of non-whites. For example, southern California used to be a hotbed of libertarianism (and even there it couldn’t come close to a pure form). No more. The brown tide snuffed that out right and proper. Not that libertarian idiots ever acknowledge this, and not that their fatally flawed worldview is capable of addressing the problem. They are slaves to an ideology that doesn’t even allow them to process reality, much less act upon it. The idea that they are “Objectivists” is laughable.

In any event, the reality is that the sort of purist libertarianism that we would need to get any benefit at all out of it has a very low ceiling of support. Without the purism, you’d just end up with a corporate dominated, open borders society that didn’t engage in too many foreign wars. Libertarian Lite would, if anything, speed up the destruction of our people, and certainly would not halt it.

Ron Paul can’t win, and the United States as it is currently constituted will never be purist libertarian. So why make your decisions on the basis that two plus two equals five? To base one’s support upon impossible outcomes is pure folly.

Having said all of that, the current Paul campaign has been somewhat exciting for me. Not overly, but somewhat. Even though our white nationalist solution does not and cannot ultimately be found at the ballot box (in this we share a fate with libertarianism), an insurgent political campaign does have a certain value.

For example, Paul’s campaign has demonstrated that the internet has matured enough (sometimes we forget just how young it really is) to play a vital role in money raising and organizing. Most significantly, we see in Paul’s prominent campaign the result of several decades of libertarians slowly but surely spreading their ideas. This was done mostly through writing, as other venues have been largely closed to them. Not nearly so closed as they are to us white nationalists, but still.

They have labored long in the vineyards, and now have a movement that can actually bear fruit. The current success (relatively speaking, of course) of Paul required the foundational building that we libertarians of twenty years ago were actively, consciously engaged in. We knew what we were doing and why.

When I started as a young libertarian activist, libertarianism was a virtual unknown. Many still thought that it had something to do with Lyndon LaRouche; we were pretty much aliens from Mars. However, as the ideas spread, so did the reaction from John Public. Back in 1990 you would almost never run into someone who claimed to be a libertarian. By 2000, on the other hand, you started running into people who would come right out and say, “I’m pretty much a libertarian, but I vote Republican…” This without me having broached the subject at all; they just volunteered it. Middle aged moms would say this. The same people that would have stared at us blankly ten years earlier would say this.

Most of these people had never heard of Rothbard, and many had never even read Rand. Mentioning Austrian economics would have only drawn a confused look. The ideas had spread from the inner circle to ever broadening outer ones, just as the people who ultimately provide the warm bodies to create a White Republic will have probably never heard of William Pierce, much less have heard anything of archeofuturism or what not. Ideas spread outward, if they are spread at all.

And so it goes. Observing this transformation was fascinating to me. Today, libertarianism has transformed from a tiny grouping of misguided idealists into a much more significant grouping of misguided idealists. It’s certainly true that we as white nationalists face a level of suppression and sanction that libertarians did not, but it is also true that we are capable of doing many of the same things that worked for them. There are lessons to be learned here.

Again, libertarianism has a built in ceiling, and I can’t see it ever appealing to a majority of the population. But it is still a vibrant movement for now, though I hope and suspect that many will ultimately see that it is the road to nowhere, and will undergo an evolution similar to my own. We may be experiencing, or at least getting close to, Peak Libertarianism. A run by Rand Paul in the future could change that a bit, but not in the long run.

Point is, if we had a white nationalist movement half as vibrant as libertarianism has become – but open to working outside of the system – we’d be well on our way to achieving the White Republic, very possibly within our lifetime. We often talk of some sort of collapse scenario, or the “balloon going up.” But that’s all relative. If we had millions of people clamoring for or at least highly receptive to a White Republic, it wouldn’t take much of a balloon at all. Just a little something could be all the nudge that we need.

This is all entirely possible. It’s not fantasy, it’s not hopeless daydreaming. We know how ideas spread, we know how to do it. It’s not a great mystery, though some of our “own” (read liars and kooks) will say anything to misdirect people from this truth.

Chechar alludes above to the 2010 debate between vanguardists and mainstreamers. The “big debate.” While I agree with Chechar as to its significance, I think we dignify it a bit by framing it as we have. Really, it was a debate between liars/idiots on the one hand and those who have a grasp as to how revolutionary ideas actually spread. You want an idea to spread . . . you’ve got to actually promote that idea. Who’d a thunk it? Amazing how “controversial” that was.

Bottom line: this is a battle for minds, for hearts and for souls. It’s the total package. You don’t get that by hiding your views, but by spreading them. You don’t get that by watering down, but by passion. And you don’t get it all at once, but by constant repetition. I’ve amazingly heard, and this from a writer I respect, that he has pretty much written all that he has to say, and his past work is there for anyone who is interested. What the fuck? Did the Jews just make their case with the Frankfurt School, say they’ve pretty much said what needed to be said, that people could either agree or disagree, and now it was time to hit the links? Hell, they had written the subject pretty well to death by the early fifties. Did they stop there? The answer is obvious.

It’s about laboring long in the vineyards. It’s about spreading our ideas, not Ron Paul’s ideas. It’s about raising money for our own activists, not providing jobs for open border libertarians. I’m sure guys like Jesse Benton are having a high old time right now. I’m not interested in paying for their high old time. I’m interested in some white nationalist activists getting paid for their productive work. Let them have a high old time, if they’ve earned it. Jesse has earned it, but not for US, and it shouldn’t be funded by us.

It’s about building a white nationalist infrastructure, not a libertarian infrastructure.

The libertarians are big enough to take care of their own. Our money needs to be spent on, well, us.

Anybody who donates money to Ron Paul in 2012 just doesn’t get it. I donated back in 2008, and now wish I had given to a white nationalist cause instead. Still, I don’t regret it too much, as it was given during the initial money bomb that was really a breakthrough moment. It was a powerful demonstration of what the internet could do, and that alone was worth something. But never again, and particularly never again when the libertarian movement is clearly big enough to take care of its own. To donate now would be money purely wasted in promoting libertarian ideas as opposed to our ideas. If we aren’t passionate enough about our own cause to support it above the other guy’s cause, how the hell can we possibly achieve our goals?

As for voting, I’ll vote A3P. I’ll write in A3P if the candidate is not on the ballot in my state. Just as I used to vote Libertarian when I was still interested in seeing those ideas spread, if for no other reason than to offer a token of appreciation and some encouragement.

But you know what? IF Ron Paul was the Republican nominee (which he won’t be), I might, and emphasize might, make an exception. Maybe I’d vote Ron Paul in the general. Because at that point, it wouldn’t just be a battle of ideas. It would be a real, physical opportunity for a major political shakeup in this country. It WOULD be great to have a president opposed to wars for Israel, and attacking the Federal Reserve. It would be great to physically throw a monkey wrench into the political system.

But that’s not going to happen, though there may be one last shot at that with Rand in the future. But unless we are truly on the verge of throwing a physical monkey wrench into the works, what is really going on here is a battle of ideas. Why in the world support the other guy’s over our own? As small and pitiful as our resources back in 1988 were, we libertarians never would have done that. Support Ross Perot in 92, because at least he was not a major party candidate? Nope. Not gonna happen. If you weren’t libertarian, we weren’t interested. The willingness I just expressed above to possibly making an exception under extreme conditions . . . I wouldn’t have even considered it back then. So my “might consider” is rapidly turning into . . . I’d still vote A3P. See how easy it is to get off track?

As libertarians, we were absolutely committed to the rightness and justness of our cause, and if you didn’t promote our core values, you were dead to us. No way were we giving you any money. No way did you get our vote. It wasn’t enough to just wink and bat your eyes at us. You had to be one of us.

White nationalists need that mindset. We’re right, everybody else is wrong. We have the way forward to a great future, everybody else is an utter fool. I realize that’s a bit oversimplistic, and that even guys like Duke had to tone it down a bit for their political runs, just as libertarians do when they speak to a more general audience. That’s standard sail trimming, but whether one likes it or not, it shouldn’t be confused with the absolute stupidity of actively supporting the other guy’s values, the other guy’s movement, and the other guy’s bank account. White nationalists need to learn this distinction. Sail trimming is one thing if done by one of our own (like Duke), supporting a whole other movement is something entirely different.

One last point about Paul’s “integrity.” The guy charged serious subscription fees for a newsletter that purported to offer HIS perspective on financial and investment issues, as well as politics and current events. People paid good money because they thought they were getting Ron Paul’s take on things, a take that had considerable value given his role as a congressman and long time advocate of hard money. He now claims that he had no idea what was in the newsletters, that he didn’t even read them. He just sat back, let the checks roll in, and laughed his way to the bank.

That’s integrity?

Now, as it happens, I don’t believe the above to be the case. I doubt Paul actually wrote the lines in question, but he surely knew of them. Now, he shamelessly lies about the fact. Like Sergeant Schulz, he knows nothing.

So either he was a scumbag grifter then, or a shameless liar now. There is no third option.

That’s integrity?

And even if he had a monopoly on integrity in a decaying world, he’s not one of us. We’re either white nationalists or we’re not, and it is pathetic how a few seductive glances from across the dance floor can send more than a few of us into tittering like a teenage girl. We need to have some pride and some loyalty. Though one must cut through all of the kooks, liars and fools, there are some damn fine white nationalists out there. Counter-Currents is a great example of what is best in our cause, and it’s a worthy recipient of any extra change that’s burning a hole in your pocket.

Dance with the one that brung ya.


This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , . Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  1. Jeff
    Posted February 8, 2012 at 7:17 am | Permalink

    Good points all. Along that same vein, WNs should be exploiting this opportunity to point out to extremely frustrated Ron Paul supporters WHY their candidate faces so much opposition. Paul is plowing the field for us to sow the seed.

    The media blackout of Paul, Obama’s coming second term and wars without end all work in our favor, if we play it right.

    • phil
      Posted February 9, 2012 at 8:13 am | Permalink

      Jeff: “point out to extremely frustrated Ron Paul supporters WHY their candidate faces so much opposition. ”

      Glad you mentioned that. Most media opposition is going to be Jewish because Paul opposes wars for Israel. Even neo-con Jew border control type oppose Paul just because of the wars for Israel.
      It’s difficult to show the sheeple the connection between mass immigration and Jewish group self interest. It’s much more easy to show the connection between wars for Israel and Jewish interest.
      Once we’ve discredited the Jews with sheeple (thanks again for bringing up libertarians in this) over the WFIs, then the sheeple will realize what a self interested group Jews are.
      Then it’s a lot easier to show them immigration is largely just a Jewish self interest scheme.

      • phil
        Posted February 9, 2012 at 8:23 am | Permalink

        If you get to telling a libertarian the Jews oppose Paul over wars for Israel don’t go right into saying the same goes for the immigration issue, if he is a frequent contact anyway. You should let the seed of forbidden knowledge sprout first.
        Even then you should say Jewish interest in immigration is so as a minority themselves they will have the “back ground noise” of multiple numerous minorities to disappear into.
        Don’t bring up the “They want to genocide whites by blending them out of existence” until way later. That just sound too horrific of the Jews.
        Even I didn’t believe the genocide charge until less than a year ago. Then I read “The Mantra” over at Wow!
        And for heavens sake don’t point out that Ayn Rand was Jewish!!!

  2. Mimir's Well
    Posted February 8, 2012 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    Interesting…Definitely making me rethink some things…One reason not to discount libertarianism though is that WN ideas will find more fertile ground in a society that is more libertarian minded than we currently have. Too soon to tell whether or not the enemy of our enemy is our friend…

  3. Franklin Ryckaert
    Posted February 8, 2012 at 8:13 am | Permalink

    Ron Paul is the typical example of the one-dimensionality of the HOMO ECONOMICUS.
    No morals, no culture, no ethnicity, only ECONOMY is what counts. From this limited perspective everything is judged. He is against wars, foreign military bases and aid to Israel not for moral but for ECONOMICAL reasons : it costs too much tax money.
    And of course he is “not a racist” and he admires Martin Luther King!
    And this is the “best” America has to offer?

    • Stronza
      Posted February 8, 2012 at 8:34 am | Permalink

      How about maybe he is practicing taqiyya – you know, the deliberate lying that Kievsky is always talking about?

      • Greg Johnson
        Posted February 8, 2012 at 3:44 pm | Permalink

        Maybe. But isn’t it sad that the best we can hope from a politician is that he is insincere?

    • phil white
      Posted February 8, 2012 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

      Paul would probably say he’s against the war because it violates the constitution, secondly because it’s uneconomical.

      PS, if you want to vote AP3, but are worried about “throwing your vote away” and don’t want to elect Obama by default just keep track of the polling data in your state that last week before the election.
      With our electoral system, in most states the election will out come will be pretty well known. So you can probably vote AP3 or Constitution party or what ever and send your message without helping the Evil Party, as Sam Francis called them.

  4. phil
    Posted February 8, 2012 at 9:21 am | Permalink

    Tremendously good article. Way to many things in it to comment on.
    First of all Trainspotter started himself was a libertarian. That proves they are convertable to WN, probably much more so than the average white. Go meet some, ditto T-party.
    Second libertarian votes and membership sky rocketed in 1993. Do you need to ask why? Because in ’92 Perot proved the post civil war political system could concievably be defeated.
    As both Hitler and Crane Brenton wrote, one of the three greatest strengths of a political system is it’s longevity and consesquent reputation of invincibility. That’s one reason the Bolsheviks helped the Menshevik stage the intial April 1917 revolution. The Bolsheviks knew throwing out the infant Menshivk regime later thar year would be infinitely earier than taking on the 300 year old Romanov dynasty.
    Third where should we contribut to WN? I sent $100 “early” money to R P in ’08. More importantly I sent Buchanan $250 in December 1991. Buchanan got me plugged into the “movement” and probably thousands of others.
    Right now what do we have to financially support? AP3? I sent them a thousand a couple of years back. AP3 needs to do take some security measures before I send them more.
    The Council of Conservative Citizens was a good WN organization but they refuse to even ask prospective board members the most rudimentary questions about their back grounds.
    As a result they appear to be heavily infiltrated, both by FBI and Jewish groups. Their membership appears to have grown no more than 15% in the last 15 years, judging by attendance at national meetings. Wonder how that was stymied?
    Fourth as an American political modle I like the JBS. JBS at least pay their leadership enough, but just enough, so that the usual Jewish tactic (“We must be in the vanguard of all movements”) of taking over by doing all the volunteer work doesn’t work there.
    JBS does have some Jewish leadership though, which is something WN can’t afford.
    I’d like to see a WN version of JBS, with a prohibition of Jews and other Market Dominant Minorities and a little added security measures. It wouldn’t be running people for political office but organizing white resistance on a cultural and comminity basis. That I would contribute thousands to.
    Things in America aren’t going to be the near term disaster many think. Already American security forces are deserting the system. See the Oath Keepers oganization, Sheriff Macks constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers organization, Veteran Intelligence Professionals For Sanity from 2003. And there’s the mention by US Army War College Prof. Nathan Freier in his paper “Known Unknows” from Nov. 08, of the impossibility of the military putting down a U.S. insurrection.
    Lastly, Bob Whitaker pointed out that Libertarian activists are easily shown to not believe in their own supposed philosophy of individualism. If they were individualist they wouldn’t be out there spending their time for the “common good ” of spreading libertarianism. They’d be growing their own businesses instead. Maybe you could tell them families and nations are really just informal corporations, with siblings and citizens being stock holders.
    Bob’s got some tremendous activism going. Check out

    • Posted February 9, 2012 at 2:51 am | Permalink

      Tremendously good comment. I really liked what you had to say, though I’m still very warm to the A3P and CofCC.

      • phil
        Posted February 9, 2012 at 8:40 am | Permalink

        The C of CC allows much autonomy to local chapters, so you can do a lot of good locally.
        AP3 is worth supporting, especially locally. Jewish infiltration can only do so much so fast without totally exposing themselves.
        But most of all we need to form conscious white communities. Look up the PLE (pioneer little Europe) concept on storm front.
        A good PLE start would be to concentrate on issues that will attract women with families. And part of that should be prayer/spiritual guidance group meetings.
        We need communities with their own independent religious organization that will support the right of whites to exist as a group. It need not be an actual church, maybe just a bible reading and group participation weekly meeting. Women with kids eat this stuff up.

      • Fourmyle of Ceres
        Posted February 12, 2012 at 11:51 am | Permalink


        Some quick thoughts:

        One, security of the A3P computer can be easily done at a foundational level. Simply encrypt it with TrueCrypt. TrueCrypt has the power to encrypt the entire hard drive, OS and all. Yes, it can be broken, but that requires computers only one agency has. We are a long way from being worth the trouble. After all, we are all about “strict legality,” implemented in a “strictly legal, apple-pie, sort of way,” aren’t we? (HT: Jim Giles)

        Yes, we are.

        Two, money. It is the mother’s milk of effectiveness. Sending money to counter-curents is very easy, and veru wonderful. Right behind it is the Northwest Front. People will promise you anything, as long as it costs them nothing. I don’t know what you get for your money, but I know what you get with no money – nothing. Even ten dollars sent to counter-currents REGULARLY is very effective, and a true morale builder. Nothing says “Thank You!” like cash.

        Three, organization.

        (1) Join one of the local political parties, and they will send you to lectures here you will learn how to organize politically. This is a skill hat will serve you well.

        (2) Join a local Bible study, preferably a home-based Bible study. Learn hbow to turn that practice into the foundation of a church. As Brigham Young has demonstrated, you can do amazing things with a church.

        (3) Church organization is corporate organization. ALL of the churches are organized as 508 corps, not 501(c)(3) corps. They have the 501(c)(3)’s as subsidiaries. The government controls the content spoken from the pulpit of the 501(c)(3). It does NOT control the 508’s.

        (3)(a) Never speak in words you would not want read to the jury at trial. The race issue takes care of itself in such settings. Remember, the most segregated place in America is church on Sunday morning, and during the weeknight services. YOUR focus should be on a Church of Community, which seeks to mutually support the members.

        Along those lines, consider looking at the website for useful ideas for economic organizations. Look to the National Grange for how to organize interregionally, and cooperatives for how to organize locally. The IRS requires certain documents, particularly minutes of the meeting of the Board of Directors for the corporation. Make sure these are in order. Write your corporate charter with an eye towards forming one of these larger organizations. A look at their corporate charters will give you useful ideas, but by all means, keep yours as simple as possible. The stuff from LegalZoom will get you started, but keep an eye on the larger picture, and act in accordance with it.

        (3)(b) The Masonics set up a parallel structure alongside and within, but not of, the mainstream churches. The Masonic Rule in this case applies – send your business to your brother Lodge members, who are honor and duty bound to offer you the best price. Same applies to members of your church, particularly the Elders, who will softly shape Church policy, and, hopefully, influence member’s practices.

        The Collapse will turn our economy back to something like 1937. The ideas should be discussed at Elder’s Quorum Meetings (or Church meetings during the week) of preparing families to have family members move back in. Grandpa’s and Grandma’s social security checks will cover the property taxes, and provide cheap, reliable baby sitters.

        By the way, be relentless in pruning the Leadership. I suspect infiltration will become, one way or another, or you just might attract some people with deep psychological issues. Again, remember, basic background checks for the Leadership, and immediately I repeat IMMEDIATELY look at the first person who mentions the use of force against another, particularly another group or institution, and repudiate him, tell him to leave, and if he doesn’t leave, immediately, then you TELL him you are going to call the police. Better, call the police and have him removed.

        Begin all of your services with hearty “Welcome, and thank YOU for coming to the Bible Study!” Follow this with a Statement of Purpose and Practices, in which you state – paraphrase from the Mormon’s Articles of Faith – that you support the government, and all actions of the Church are strictly legal, and are to be DONE in a “strictly legal, apple-pie, sort of way.” (HT: Jim Giles) (Well, use your own words, if you want!)

        This is a start.

        Remember, Jesus started with two. Joseph Smith started with one. Mohammad started with one. You see the pattern. Fewer people, better people.

        NEVER FORGET that Jesus succeeded here the Roman Empire failed. You can accomplish miracles without the self-selected impotence of the use of force/use of deadly force against the greatest military and intelligence system the world has ever sen. YOU can DO what David Eden Lane said he would DO if he had it to do over. You can do what Robert Mathews tried to DO, and would do again, if he had it to do over. If I sound like a broken record, it’s because I’ve seen broken spirits who could have done so much more, if they did what WORKS, instead of what some fantasy writer examples for the substance of their lives.

        As Harold Covington said, it is the first step forward that counts. “Action, this day.”

        What’s In YOUR Future? Focus Northwest!

    • icr
      Posted February 9, 2012 at 7:11 am | Permalink

      ” It wouldn’t be running people for political office but organizing white resistance on a cultural and comminity basis.”

      Anyone have any idea what that would look like?

      • phil
        Posted February 10, 2012 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

        This is Haman’s take on a PLE (Pioneer Little Europe).

        He speaks of forming neighborhoods of pro-whites on a low key basis to start.
        The only thing I’d add wold be weekly spiritual guidence/mutual spiritual support group get togethers.
        At root churches provied our moral/philosophical beliefes. All the churches have been co-opted into supporting or at least not morally challenging the White Genocide. We need to form our own religious structures.
        We would politically support consersvative county level politicians, espcially a constitutional sheriff. A consitutional sheriff wouldn’t act against us just because we were pro-white home schoolers with a white co-op, church etc.

      • icr
        Posted February 11, 2012 at 7:01 pm | Permalink

        De Facto, won’t you need to belong to an already recognized church denomination to get the kind of special legal immunity that the Hassidic Jews and Amish get? FR. James Thornton might be of some help with this. He belongs to what I believe is a reactionary, anti-modernist schismatic group called the American Exarchate of the Orthodox Church of Greece, Holy Synod in Resistance. Not , of course, “explicitly white”, but you obviously need moral and spiritual elements beyond a devotion to biological race. And it would less intellectually taxing than constructing a new neo-pagan religion using teachings of Evola, Benoist and others. Have Asatru or any of the existing neo-pagan white religions set up intentional communities?

    • White Republican
      Posted February 12, 2012 at 11:45 pm | Permalink

      Phil remarks that the Council of Conservative Citizens appears “to be heavily infiltrated, both by FBI and Jewish groups.” I’m not familiar with this organization, but I wouldn’t be surprised if this is indeed the case.

      On the subject of agents provocateurs and informants, I strongly recommend the reading of Gary T. Marx’s article, “Thoughts on a Neglected Category of Social Movement Participant: The Agent Provocateur and the Informant” (American Journal of Sociology, vol. 80, no. 2, September 1974, pp. 402-442). This article can be found online at:

      It’s a bit slow to download, but it’s well worth the wait, for it is full of fascinating facts and insights. The state can be very thorough in penetrating and subverting organizations it dislikes in breadth as well as depth. For example, Marx notes: “According to a former FBI agent (Levine 1962), in the early 1960s about 1,500 of the 8,500 American Communist party members were FBI informants.” Marx also notes that “Malcolm X’s personal bodyguard, the man who delivered mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to him, was a New York detective who had been undercover for seven years.”

      • Andrew Hamilton
        Posted February 13, 2012 at 6:58 am | Permalink

        Thanks for this.

        Most white nationalists aren’t inclined to think in terms of practical, real-life power politics. This will have to change before any progress can be made.

      • White Republican
        Posted February 15, 2012 at 2:27 am | Permalink

        Andrew Hamilton,

        I had expected that you would appreciate Gary T. Marx’s article. I should get Marx’s Undercover: Police Surveillance in America (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1989) later this year. I should also look at the literature on COINTELPRO.

        You’re definitely right that most White nationalists don’t “think in terms of practical, real-life power politics.” We need to exercise greater vigilance and prudence in dealing with infiltration and subversion, and to have an idea of what can happen informed by historical knowledge. The fact that we only rarely see concrete evidence of infiltration and subversion — such as with Hal Turner — doesn’t mean that such things are uncommon. The fact that we aren’t criminals doesn’t mean that we’re safe, for we’re ruled by a lawless state, and the state can instigate or fabricate crimes and conspiracies to commit crime. We live under a regime of “anarcho-tyranny” but few of us recognize this.

        I would very much like to see White nationalists pay more attention to matters of security. Bruce Schneier’s works might be worth reading at in this regard — particularly those addressing the human aspects of security, such as Beyond Fear (2003) and Liars and Outliers (2011) — even though he’s a Jew. What I’ve read so far of Beyond Fear is quite good.

  5. Donar Van Holland
    Posted February 8, 2012 at 11:45 am | Permalink

    Very convincing article! Indeed, why give attention and money to someone who will not be of any effective use to us? Better to stick to the people whom you really agree with, to push your message together as strongly as possible!

    I find the “broken record” -idea of constantly repeating your message, even if you get bored and sick of it yourself, also very sound! That is indeed how things work! That is how companies and the MSM have brainwashed us, so the counterattack must do the same.

    We do not have much money, but we have dedication, and the “broken record” strategy fits quit well with that.

    However, where should we do the repetition? Not on our own sites, but on MSM sites, YouTube etc. The libertarian and anti-Islam sites, news items and movies are especially promising. That is where our potential members mostly are. I think many people have, like me, made the journey to white Nationalism starting from libertarianism and anti-Islamism.

    On our own sites we should try to present our view points in new, original settings as much as possible. New stories, new art work, new novels etc. In order to keep the flame burning for ourselves and our comrades, and also to find even more effective elevator pitches to drown MSM sites with.

    Finally, I wonder if this would be a good idea: an employment section on one of the White forums. White nationalists should only hire other white nationalists, whether for full-time employment, an incidental job, a service from a “normal” company, or even your shopping. So we can strengthen our network, our comradeship, and reduce our vulnerability to economic reprisals by a the Jews and their collaborators.

    In fact, I hate to say this, we have to be as racially conscious as the Jews.

    • phil
      Posted February 9, 2012 at 9:08 am | Permalink

      “I find the “broken record” -idea of constantly repeating your message, even if you get bored and sick of it yourself, also very sound! That is indeed how things work! That is how companies and the MSM have brainwashed us, so the counterattack must do the same.”

      You sound like the guys over at
      They rendezvous over there to form up “Wolf Packs” and work together on news sites where an immigration issues has come up.
      They do use the repetition strategy.

  6. Henry
    Posted February 8, 2012 at 12:35 pm | Permalink

    Whether by design or accident it matters not, but in keeping with dialectical theory, Ron Paul is currently providing the necessary antithesis to the tired old thesis and soon, so the theory goes, all will resolve itself into a new golden synthesis where the need to abuse and exploit will become a mitzvah for the Shabbos goy. A new Alexandria fit for the ancient money-changers of Wall St and the City of London. Only this past week or so did Ron Paul call for deposit accounts to pay investors (Paul calls them ‘’savers’’) an annual rate of 10%, which if compounded, would double their investment in seven years!

    Ron Paul couldn’t give a libertarian shit that the bank lending rate would need to be way higher than 10% to meet those returns. He doesn’t care what it means to those already struggling to pay a mortgage or struggling to even get one. Where does Ron Paul think the interest that doubles the principle in seven years will come from? – Oh yeah, there’s the ‘’Austrian’’ way to prosperity where the sum of money is fixed to a measure of gold! And so if borrowers haven’t succeeded in drawing the interest (gold) from their fellow man, they could always give up their property or rollover their loan and start over once again – just as it is now; but under Paul’s system the descent into perpetual debt would be greatly accelerated.

    Ron Paul on interest rates @ 4.15

    When Paul Warburg created the Federal Reserve System he had to contend with and work around restrictive laws on usury and must have dreamt of a day when a populist like Paul would come along and win support for Shylock’s release into the market place.

    Ron Paul is the champion of unregulated finance: in fact, he’s for unregulated everything. If Dr Paul didn’t exist the bankers and finance capitalists would invent him.

    The only attention that Ron Paul and his ideas should receive from WNs is the kind he’s getting here at Counter-Currents.

    Pre-mortem examination of corpus libertardius is required as many who call themselves WNs have ingested Dr Paul’s quack medicine and urgently need a purgative. Counter-Currents is providing that service and I’m looking forward to more of it.

  7. PC
    Posted February 8, 2012 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

    I was an active supporter 4 years ago. This time I haven’t been very active. One thing I do note is he has gained lot more votes this time around, and he has gained more respect from the so-called conservative Republicans. I’d say he’d easily win this election if it weren’t for the brainwashed Israel-firster Christian Zionist rapture bunnies as they seem to prefer any Israel-firster candidate but Ron Paul.

  8. Posted February 8, 2012 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    I contacted A3P shortly before the cyber attack. I expressed a desire to get involved with the party in my local county. I received a reply that a “local” rep would contact me. (The “local” rep is located two states and about 500 miles away!)

    I guess my ip address and email are on a list somewhere. Any advice from the forum on what, if anything, I should do?

    • Donar Van Holland
      Posted February 8, 2012 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

      I sympathize with you. I hope you used a fake email address? Your IP personal information is not so easily divulged, so a normal action group would not pose a problem. Assassination by the Mossad is not very likely either, as you are not important enough. Even a bigger fish like David Duke is not killed. You have to be a president like JFK for that honour…

    • PC
      Posted February 9, 2012 at 2:55 am | Permalink

      Well, they didn’t publish my name/address, so I’m safe for now. They published just the most active members. They’ve published names and addresses of members of National Alliance and other pro-white groups in the past and nothing bad happened to the members afterward.

      • Posted February 9, 2012 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

        Where can I find this published material?

      • Lew
        Posted February 11, 2012 at 11:24 am | Permalink

        They supposedly dumped the information into a searchable database on Be forewarned: is a Web site that attracts malicious trolls and criminals. Personally, I would never go much less download anything from that site without taking hardcore security measures first. If you have to ask what kind of security measures you should take, I would recommend you not go there. Others may have different opinion of course.

    • phil
      Posted February 9, 2012 at 8:57 am | Permalink

      I had a little more luck with the JBS. Their rep spoke with me at length on the phone and he is only 170 miles away.
      I’m an extreme introvert, (didn’t get married till I was 45.) and getting out and meeting people, making friends and organizing a pro-white dissident community is difficult for me, but this is War, ala “A Time To Love a Time To Die” and I’m beginning.
      Go to a meeting that’s 90% white. They can be reached. If they are at a meeting they are activist. That’s a tremendous advantage over just meetng people randomly on the street. , T-party, the local veterans clubs will have gathered your ducks for you.
      Are you within 200 miles of central Florida or West Missouri? Let’s meet.

      • Posted February 9, 2012 at 4:19 pm | Permalink

        “Are you within 200 miles of central Florida or West Missouri?”

        No, I’m not. No offense, but the JBS gives me the creeps.

  9. Fourmyle of Ceres
    Posted February 8, 2012 at 3:22 pm | Permalink


    Franklin Ryckaert in blockquote:

    And this is the “best” America has to offer?

    No, “the best America has to offer” is not running, because it would be a waste of his or her time. Paul actually scares the Republican leaderships, because he could go Third Party, and guarantee Obama the election.

    “The best America has to offer” is an Ideal that can not be publicly articulated in conventional politics, or, at the moment, unconventional politics.

    “The best America has to offer” is US, in Racially Conscious Communities, forming a White Homeland in a Northwest Republic.

    THAT having been said, Trainspotter makes the best point going; the libertarians are the nationally respected political organization from which we are most likely to find those who support our beliefs. You see, the Unspoken Assumption of the Libertarians is that their politics is based on their politics, and BOTH are at their foundation only possible in Western Civilization, which only one Race can Create, and Transform.

    This, incidentally, is why the Church-based alternative social and (soon!) economic systems are much closer to us than many might think. After all, THE most segregated place in America is church on Sunday.

    In short, we have the Unifiying Theme that all of them require, yet take for granted. Like the air they breathe, and take for granted, in its absence, it becomes obvious, and THAT is our moment of opportunity.

    Family – Faith – Culture.

    THAT is the best America has to offer, and THAT is our winning platform.

    What’s In YOUR Future? Focus Northwest!

    • Jaego Scorzne
      Posted February 8, 2012 at 4:50 pm | Permalink

      The Obama Administration is betting that Catholics aren’t serious about their religion; that most of them are “Kennedy Catholics” who put Liberalism and “women’s rights to their own bodies” first. But what about the Hispanics? Probably the same – they’ll vote for Obama for their own reasons no matter what the Bishops say.

      Good arugument against voting for Ron Paul. I’m doing a re-think.

  10. Endlosung
    Posted February 9, 2012 at 10:35 am | Permalink

    The question is not whether or not Ron Paul is a radical. He is definitely a radical. The question we should all ask is if it’s a bad thing or not. I don’t think it is bad at all. To fix our nation’s problems, we need someone who is radical.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted February 9, 2012 at 11:02 am | Permalink

      Yes, but we also need a radical with the right ideas, not just another person with the radically wrong paradigm of race-blindness that is killing us.

  11. Greg Paulson
    Posted February 9, 2012 at 9:41 pm | Permalink

    I don’t have time to read the other comments at the moment, so I might be repeating what others have said, but I thought this was a very good piece. I was a little surprised at how it was written, as this is not normally the style of Counter-Currents, but I don’t mind it at all. It was actually kind of refreshing (for C-C). Now, I think most of the pieces should retain the standard style as it sets a bar of respectability, professionalism, and gives credit to our movement. That being said, these kind of pieces have their place and are able to reach or speak to a lot of people; both those who find the standard style boring and those who prefer it. Pieces in this style make many people feel more comfortable, as though they are having a conversation.

    As for the content, I pretty much agreed with everything and identified a lot with the author despite our age difference. I too am a former libertarian who donated to Ron Paul in his original “Money Bomb” during his 2008 campaign. Maybe it’s because I used to be a libertardian/Paulberg that I find it so repulsive and am so outspoken against it. You know what they say about ex-smokers, no one’s more intolerant of smokers than ex-smokers. I think the same applies here, though I think the problem of “Ron Paulitus” is so widespread among WNs that my arguments against libertarianism and Ron Paul are perfectly reasonable, as well as rational.

  12. Trainspotter
    Posted February 11, 2012 at 2:38 am | Permalink

    Thank you to those who have enjoyed the piece.

    Greg Paulson: “That being said, these kind of pieces have their place and are able to reach or speak to a lot of people; both those who find the standard style boring and those who prefer it. Pieces in this style make many people feel more comfortable, as though they are having a conversation.”

    Yes, it was actually written as a comment for one of the Matt Parrott threads as opposed to a stand alone, hence its conversational tone and some other stylistic and structural issues. But it did make some important points that are worthy of consideration, if I do say so myself, and I’m glad that Greg Johnson deemed it worthy of a wider viewership. Not to mention the fact that it was ridiculously long for a mere comment, a vice that I often exhibit. Most of my writing is in bursts, and often I know that I won’t get a chance to write anything else for awhile, so I end up covering a lot of ground, perhaps more than I should. Maybe I ought to create a signature with the famous”If I had more time, I’d have written a shorter letter.”

    Greg Paulson: “Maybe it’s because I used to be a libertardian/Paulberg that I find it so repulsive and am so outspoken against it. You know what they say about ex-smokers, no one’s more intolerant of smokers than ex-smokers.”

    Yes, I think there is a lot of truth in this, though I must confess that I somewhat enjoy seeing Paul do well. Just as when I was a libertarian, I enjoyed seeing Ross Perot do well, though I would have never voted or campaigned for him.

    So it’s not that I’m vehemently anti-Paul, I’m just vehemently anti white nationalist funding for Paul. I recognize that he is not one of us, and that any overlap is incidental as opposed to fundamental. He is ultimately trying to build up libertarian ideas and a libertarian infrastructure. The libertarian movement will enjoy the benefits of the Paul campaign, not the white nationalist movement. Libertarians will get jobs in the libertarian infrastructure, not white nationalists – unless they are secretive, which is rather beside the point. The Paul campaign is lending mainstream credibility and legitimacy to libertarian ideas, not white nationalist ideas.

    As libertarians are the major beneficiaries, they should be footing the bill, not us. That’s not to say that we get no benefits out of Paul’s relative success. We do. We just can’t forget that he is building a movement that isn’t our movement.

    If white nationalism is to develop and grow, we must promote it with our time and money. Libertarians are happy to take our money in order to promote their goals, just as we would be happy to take their money to promote our goals. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out which side of that equation we want to be on, and it’s not the side that we’re currently on.

    We can’t divert what little we have toward promoting some other guy’s movement, however much we may enjoy its growth at the expense of the status quo, and despite the fact that we get from it the occasional batting of eyelashes – followed of course by the inevitable denunciation of our just cause as being immoral.

    I’m not the first to point out that it amounts to being treated like the high school slut. You don’t get your own nation that way.

    And we shouldn’t be overly depressed about our meager resources. Generally speaking, the libertarians were tiny and largely broke twenty years ago. There were exceptions, like the reasonably well funded Cato Institute. But in general, we libertarians were pretty much howling in the wilderness. That was before the internet came into widespread use, and I remember how hungry I was for libertarian commentary and thought. There was precious little to be found (probably why the Ron Paul report was able to rake in serious bucks.) It’s not like we were getting a lot of validation either. But, and not to be too melodramatic about it, we soldiered on, with no end in sight. That’s what WN have to do, and given the internet, our ongoing commentary is far more developed than what was available to libertarians just a couple of decades ago.

    Then Ross Perot came along and, by “virtue” of his filthy lucre, managed to gain a level of publicity that allowed him to mount the first serious independent presidential challenge in generations. Did our tiny band of libertarians give in to temptation, fold up shop, and get behind Perot because he had a chance of winning? Nope. We kept on, laboring long and in obscurity.

    But who had the greater effect on the cultural climate and ideological context of the United States? Perot, or the libertarians?

    The answer is obvious: libertarians. Geeky, socially awkward libertarians. Perot was loaded and libertarians were broke, Perot got tons of press while libertarians got basically none. Yet it was libertarian ideology that spread, while Perot is now just a footnote or trivia question.

    Perot has had effectively zero effect in the world of ideas and political culture. Sure, he pretty much got Clinton elected in 92, so technically he had a significant electoral impact. But here we are twenty years later, and I can’t remember a single thing about Perot other than that he was against NAFTA (wisely). On the other hand, it’s clear that libertarianism has matured into an important and increasingly accepted political philosophy. The fact that it ultimately can’t win, this is not the fault of libertarian activists. They’ve done their job, and they did it by sticking to their guns even when they were broke and without external reward. They did it by not getting sidetracked and supporting the other guy’s movement, but by holding fast to their own. Those are lessons for us.

Post a Comment

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.
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    Here’s the Thing

    Trevor Lynch: Part Four of the Trilogy

    Graduate School with Heidegger

    It’s Okay to Be White


    The Enemy of Europe

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs


    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics


    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles


    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace