Counter-Currents
1,823 words
White advocates have no political power. White advocates have all the political power.
Those who don’t favor the genocide of the white race have been completely marginalized. And yet, in another sense, White Nationalists dominate American life.
To paraphrase Marx, where is the party in opposition that has not been decried as “racist” by the party in power? Where is the opposition party that has not cleverly retorted that their enemies are the “real racists”?
Sometimes it seems that American political debate boils down to accusing the other side of being like those evil White Nationalists. This suggests that the world recognizes that White Nationalism is “itself a power,” a power that cannot be ignored. You can love us or hate us, but you can’t pretend we don’t exist. Underlying every issue that is debated—guns, health care, immigration, foreign policy—is the reality of race, the undercurrent that is never spoken about by the Right but that dominates American life.
Much of white advocates’ political activity, other than pure education, consists of trying to bring this undercurrent to the surface. Unfortunately, White Nationalist political influence within the mainstream is chiefly negative. Associating with certain groups or figures hurts their credibility with the larger public, which is conditioned by the controlled media to remain anti-white.
However, there is a positive side to this. We aren’t here to elect Republicans after all. If activists concentrate enough on a certain subculture or political issue, it becomes associated with the white advocacy movement. Those hostile to white survival avoid it, but it can still serve as a way to attract unattached people who might be interested. Subcultures like folkish heathenism or black metal are cultural examples, and Southern nationalism is moving this way as a political example.
One can imagine issues like immigration or guns evolving in a White Nationalist direction. As groups that focus on such issues become racialized, many people will bail out, but those who remain involved will become more dedicated, and a “safe space” will be carved out for white advocates to organize. Furthermore, these spaces will still exist even if they are no longer respectable. This is why Leftists fight so hard to prevent white advocates from participating in even non-political venues, especially music scenes.
“The power to destroy a thing is the power to control a thing,” said Paul Muad’Dib in Dune. Believe it or not, White Nationalists have this power. Take the conservative movement. All it takes to demolish a conservative gathering is for one person to show up with a “racist” sign. There are costs to such actions, obviously. In the short term, it makes it more difficult for any white advocates who are trying to work within the movement. It increases the internal defenses of the anti-white thought police within conservatism. It empowers a progressive media, which gleefully trumpets any proof of racism.
However, in the long term, it creates an association in the public mind between a major political force and the cause of white people generally. Isn’t that what we want?
James Mason writes in Siege that white advocates must think of all white people everywhere as our army. They may not volunteer, but circumstances and political action will cause them to be conscripted. For white advocates, the overall strategic objective of political activity is to make race the defining difference between various political, cultural, and social groups, as a precursor to the formation of an ethnostate, the great dream of the White Republic.
Arguably, race is already the defining difference on a host of issues, but only on a subconscious level. The explicit issues are things like “limited government,” capitalism vs. socialism, or religion vs. secularism. We have to cut through the distractions and bring out what is already implicit in the narratives we see every day.
How do we do this?
Do we just show up where we are not wanted, screwing up mainstream conservative plans?
It’s a start. But this can’t just be trolling.
A successful movement has to have waystations that we control all along the political spectrum. Part of this means overt vanguardist groups for the true believers. But another part of it means creating cultural spaces: publishers, websites, bands, or spiritual groups. Yet another part of it means trying to reclaim turf from the Left, like unions or the environment.
However, for now, the bulk of White Nationalists’ power consists in the power to destroy.
If our goal is to make all white people our “army,” we have to deal with the fact that the largest group of politically active whites is affiliated with the Republican Party.
One of the perennial debates in White Nationalism is between attacking conservatives, working with them (or infiltrating them), or just ignoring them. The correct answer is essentially “all of the above.”
Everyone knows that there are certain issues—immigration being the key example—that come as close as they can to being defined as purely “racial” without crossing the line. The media knows this, non-whites know this, and white advocates know this. The only people who don’t already know this are the professional anti-immigration groups and activists, and this ignorance (deliberate or otherwise) is the thin reed that allows them to continue to operate and have a voice at the system’s table.
There’s no point in showing up to an anti-immigration rally talking about a non-white America. Everyone involved in the issue already knows that this is what it is about, and the battle lines are already drawn. All overt White Nationalist participation in the issue can do is make their job harder, lessen the numbers of uncommitted people who want to engage in the issue, and reduce the value of the movement as a whole. It is better to show up quietly, make new contacts, and educate and move them along separately and below the surface to waypoints further along the spectrum.
In contrast, something broad, like the general opposition to President Barack Hussein Obama, should be racialized. The two-party system leads to political groupings that are so broad that ideology is less important than emotional identification. “Team Red” vs. “Team Blue” means more than ideology. So forget the idea that the Republican Party is “anti-white,” because there is no monolithic party the same way there is in Europe. Anyone can call himself a Republican. The broader, more inclusive, and more race-neutral a Republican group is, the riper it is for infiltration.
The media are looking for signs that the Republican Party is transforming into an all-white, rump opposition party that opposes the President purely on racial grounds. White advocates should give them what they want. The case that should be made is essentially the Mantra: the system is anti-white.
A single sign at a Tea Party rally that says “Obama is Anti-White” will make every blog. A post on the Campaign for Liberty website that “the government targets whites” will go viral. Showing up to an Americans for Prosperity meeting to ask a question about why non-white small business owners get special advantages, which “hurts whites,” will become the subject of every discussion afterward.
The key is to racialize every mainstream issue, to make implicit racial polarization explicit. Constantly emphasize that (1) the government is targeting whites on racial grounds and (2) the opposition is organized on racial lines. The media will do the rest of the work, since they will promote anything that fits their own narrative of angry white males standing in the way of progress. So much the better.
George Lincoln Rockwell often spoke about “political jujitsu,” using the very power of the controlled media to his advantage. Rockwell accomplished this with outrageous stunts and imagery that could not be ignored, especially that of the swastika. Today, the media’s hysteria over “racism” has advanced to the point where such tactics are no longer necessary to get attention. Something as harmless as a Confederate flag at a war memorial or a white student union can throw the whole country into an artificially produced uproar. This is an opportunity to exercise power, because the media can do white advocates’ job for them.
Media people think that tax protesters are racist. Good. Argue that whites are hit with a “disproportionate impact” in any tax increase and that this is deliberately discriminatory.
Media people think that gun owners are racist. Good. Argue that whites disproportionately own guns because non-whites disproportionately commit crimes.
Media people think states’ rights are racist. Good. The best way to further this is to argue that Barack Obama’s “drive for equality” is about using federal power to target whites.
In every case, make the point that the egalitarian principles of the system are violated when it comes to whites. Make race the central question even on issues that were once considered race-neutral.
The media will broadcast these reasonable positions in tones of shock and outrage, but they will broadcast them nonetheless, and the effect is bound to be educational.
- Some of our people will begin thinking racially.
- They will see that the system is stacked against us.
- They will also know that there are people out there who will represent their racial interests.
- And they will see mainstream Republicans rushing to denounce and silence them.
We want to increase media criticism of Obama’s opponents as racists. We want to increase the feeling that minority conservatives are Uncle Toms and race traitors for hire (which they largely are). We want to increase the reliance of the Republican Party on white voters, so it is harder and harder for them to ignore or betray white interests.
In our own consciousness, we need to consider ourselves already the true leaders and authentic spokesmen of our race, and we need to communicate that attitude to everyone else.
It’s important to clarify that this is simply a tactic. It’s a separate question if the Republican Party can be reforged into a pro-white party or used for anything practical. Nor should this strategy actually concede egalitarianism as a desirable goal. The point is to use the Left-wing media to sow discord in the controlled opposition and break some people away from it.
We should also do the same thing to the libertarians.
Simply criticizing Republicans from the outside is useful, but it is not enough, because it largely goes unheard. Race-based criticism from within, amplified by the media’s bias against the Establishment Right, can destroy the controlled opposition and open the way for a new alternative. A well-written article on Counter-Currents can be read by tens of thousands. A well-staged stunt at a Republican event can be seen by tens of millions.
We have power. We have the sexiest idea there is. We know this because they can’t shut up about us. Let’s use it. Whites will become our army when we force everything down to a simple choice: The System is anti-white. We are pro-white. Which side are you on?
25 comments
It is true that most major news stories and events have a racial sub-text to them. Or put another way, they are racial in nature but media usually frames them as something else, unless they can devise some angle to it demonizing white racism, or making THAT the issue of attention.
Republicans and conservatives and libertarians do triple backward flip-flops to stay far from any racial component in any story or event. Crime, immigration, entitlements out of control, national debt, etc., are all racial in nature but the moment someone mentions or hints at that, the left media immediately transforms the story into more evidence of white racism. All this means is that rs, cs, and ls fear media and bow to its perceived power, letting that media control and slant all news and information their way.
I agree that it would be great to manipulate that in the way that the author suggests, i.e. racializing every story and event and forcing others to explicitly acknowledge that racial component at long last. But know this, the moment that happens, the perception is that the outspoken one may immediately be tarred, feathered, marginalized and ostracized, ridiculed and demonized. If he is already a public person, he may be destroyed to the best ability of media AND by rs, cs, and ls, and thereafter utterly ignored. And if a private person, he may be targeted and find his job gone, which means his wife divorces him, thus he loses his home and family, and spends the rest of his life under an underpass. Or so he may think if he considers this route.
How to get past this? If enough whites speak up, it can do some good, but how does one even get to that starting point? Most whites are simply far too materialist and self-centred to make any sort of commitment at all.
Most whites are simply far too materialist and self-centred to make any sort of commitment at all.
So? Most Whites aren’t scientific geniuses, but that didn’t keep our race from leaving footprints on the Moon.
We went to the moon in 1969. The genius and technology employed were that of Wernher von Braun and his fellow German scientists – von Braun and some others being SS officers – whom the USA brought over from Germany in 1945. In 2013 it would be unthinkable to those that rule us to use men with these backgrounds.
Also the White America of 1969 was so vastly different from that of today, in spirit, attitude, courage, etc. Back then many issues WERE very specifically seen as racial in nature and people widely spoke up about it. White people angrily demonstrated in huge numbers against racial integration, against school busing, against black crime and welfare recipience… the list goes on and on. None of which is seen, or even could be seen, today, given the huge advances of radical egalitarianism and the massively pejorative use of the label ‘racist!’ which universally kills all dialogue now.
We are in steep decline as a people and a culture and a civilization. A mere less than half a century has profoundly altered things downwards. What was possible then is probably not possible now. That does not mean doing nothing or being defeatist or giving up, but it does mean recognizing these realities of change. We can and should encourage our fellow whites to think about racial issues intelligently and to speak out and act, but let us not be unrealistic in our expectation of results.
Kudzu Bob, one thing that keeps millions of whites away from risk,etc. is that they are employed as public employee’s, with all that implies in priviledges and pay. There is now, like never before, a huge segment of European-Americans employed by the govenrment either directly, or as employees of firms that have the government as their main source of income. This is one way the democrat party keeps power, being the party of big government.
Your point is a good one. Anyone who can solve the problem you raise gets a medal, because it’s a huge one – perhaps the biggest problem we face. Perhaps Hood can clarify how he thinks we can get around this obstacle.
It would be interesting to hear from pro-white advocates who have gone public under their own names to hear the stories of what they’ve faced. Do they think the rest of us are chickenshit? Or are they sympathetic? Was going public worth it for them? Do they wish they hadn’t? Perhaps in some case their stories have propaganda value.
When thinking about solutions to the problems before us, we need to clearly identify what kind of problems we face and what kind of solutions are required. As I see it, these problems are primarily not of an intellectual or technological character, but of a political and metapolitical character. I believe the answer is to create a White nationalist political culture that can inspire, sustain, and direct effective political and metapolitical activism.
Of course, this is easier said than done. Writers like Gregory Hood are sometimes criticized for giving answers that raise more questions than they answer, for giving intellectual solutions to political problems. Thus, when Hood states that the answer to White dispossession and genocide is state power, there are people who sniff that he doesn’t tell us how state power can be acquired, that he is issuing imperatives without instructions.
I intend to address the subjects of political culture and political solutions in more detail later. (I might take a few cues from Thomas Sowell’s A Conflict of Visions concerning the constrained or tragic vision.) It should be clear enough, however, that political solutions to our political problems will inevitably be incomplete, expensive, and vulnerable. They will be incomplete because our influence and power will be quite limited; they will be expensive because they will require considerable and constant effort to create and maintain; they will be vulnerable because of our environment, opposition, and inexperience. Furthermore, it will take some time before politically constructive courses of action demonstrate their worth, so that they are politically credible in a visible way and not simply a matter of fancy theory or bombastic rhetoric.
We need a political culture in which we can aggregate the entire range of problem-solving skills we require, so that we can solve the manifold problems before us.
We need a political culture characterized by discipline, energy, solidarity, continuity, creativity, courage, and prudence.
We need to recognize the true stakes of our struggle.
We need to become agents and not objects of the war in which we are in, whether we like it or not.
We need to recognize and accept that we have the task of a generation — or of generations — before us.
We need to overcome individualism and presentism.
We need to accept risks and injuries with stoicism.
We can’t expect heroism from everyone. However, we can at least give support to those who take risks on behalf of our cause. We should work in such a way that those who are prepared to take risks as activists do so with adequate guidance, cooperation, and support. Skirmishes and campaigns should be prudently selected, prepared for, executed, and followed up. Militancy and militants are too rare and too valuable to be squandered.
The thing that is so utterly incredible in Gregs’ statement, “the system is anti-white”, is that it should have to be made clear, at this late date, that it IS anti-white. Affirmative action, quotas of all kinds, advantages in business ownership depending on race, college admissions, etc. etc. And some European-Americans still don’t see it. That is incredible!!
Brilliant article! Sounds also good as a guide line for making YouTube video’s! Posing as a Republican or Libertarian, and then talking about issues from a racial angle.
I often wonder why no politician, member of the congress or ex president has ever came openly and publicly stated that system has become openly anti-white.Not even those who were or are at the end of their careers have moral courage to state something that they must know. May be that is the reason why so many whites keep silent.
Well, that’s inspirational. Linked and quoted and commented here:
http://ex-army.blogspot.com/2013/02/destroying-republican-party.html
The GOP is dead, when 2016 arrives even the most thick-skulled American will understand that its over.
White advocate or white nationalist? Which is it? How are people going to follow someone who can’t even be consistent on the name?
And these tantrums benefit WN how, exactly? The SPLC/ADL gains a new bogeyman, the media calls someone a white supremacist, and we’re in no better position than before.
…
My big criticism of this article is that it leaves one with the impression that “the public mind” can be meaningfully influenced by stunts. The “public” is mostly concerned with jobs, facebook, ipods. The masses are irrelevant to our goals at this point. Our only hope is to find those willing to sacrifice and draw them into the struggle. But we must first define that struggle, and here we are failing.
Some time ago Greg Johnson mentioned that he was working on a WN manifesto. I’d like to know if he has made any progress with it.
I am not ready to write that manifesto.
For a southern, white, gun-owning male I don’t see that the death of the GOP will be much of a detriment to my life. For a number of political cycles I have voted for a third party just to avoid scrubbing off with a Brillo pad after leaving the booth.
Even in The South, there are few that recognize the history of the Republican party. It is seen as the party of Reagan and Goldwater and I constantly have to remind my friends that the GOP was the party that gave us the 14th amendment to the constitution and reconstruction. They have never been a friend to The South and the sooner they are gone, the better.
As for bringing racial identity into politics, we really have nothing to lose at this point. We are maligned as “traitorous hillbillies” for our desire to keep our legal firearms and the party of peace, love, and do your own thing revels in the image of using the US military to immolate any southern region that dares to show the least resistance to the imperial rule. We won’t win any converts from the progressive left or get any kisses from the media so why even bother moderating our views?
You are one of the few individuals capable of the task. That is no exaggeration.
Wow. The BEST essay I’ve seen on this site, and that’s saying a lot!
Thanks.
“One of the perennial debates in White Nationalism is between attacking conservatives, working with them (or infiltrating them), or just ignoring them. The correct answer is essentially “all of the above.” ”
I very much like the angle. Think of the havoc Matthew Heimbach is wrecking with his WSU, which is all the better for his identifying as a conservative.
Some excellent comments and criticisms here. I will respond with a follow up this month that will put what I’m talking about into more specific terms.
I must chime in here again. Now that the state of the nation address by the Prez is over and the Republi/CON side has countered with issues that could not concern most European-Americans in the least, in fact, snub most European-Americans; the above subject, How to destroy the republican party, becomes more and more urgent.
Fourmyle of Ceres is trapped in the spam filter.
Help!
Well this one got through. So I am not sure what is the problem. You don’t appear to be in our spam list.
Email us directly, and we can try to figure this out.
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
Edit your comment