Counter-Currents
2,092 words
The SPLC, a powerful Southern Jewish hate group and anti-First Amendment organization with extensive ties to the media, police, secret police, and judiciary, has announced triumphantly that Derek Black, 24, the activist son of Stormfront founder Don Black, has renounced his views and joined the bloated ranks of the anti-white multitude. (“Activist Son of Key Racist Leader Renounces White Nationalism,” July 17, 2013)
Not too many years ago the media, goose-stepping like Soviet troops to the SPLC’s tune, muttered darkly about young Black’s AM radio program (paid for out-of-pocket, we now learn, by his father) and activist outreach to white youth. We were assured once again that Jews and “minorities” were under dire, imminent threat from white speech. Next . . . the ovens!
As ever, a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing. The same old racist defamation.
In what follows I assume for purposes of argument that the statement by Black to the SPLC is a) reported accurately and b) sincere on Black’s part. (He wrote, “I realize not all will instantly believe me, or may perceive this as a seemingly abrupt change when it has been instead a gradual awakening process.”)
I have no reason to doubt his confession, which is why I discuss it. Indeed, denunciation of whites and genuflection before Jews is the social norm.
Since I wrote the last two paragraphs, the SPLC has released a new Internet article clarifying the issue. Derek’s father Don Black is quoted as expressing his “shock” on Stormfront:
Derek was here all weekend, helping us build and replace old windows [at the family home in West Palm Beach, Florida]. He’s made it annoyingly obvious over the past few months he was no longer interested in WN [white nationalist] activism, but he always said he was still WN. I knew the Jews at the Poverty Palace were working hard, since he would be such a big prize for them.
But he didn’t give us a clue as to what he planned today.
I don’t want to talk to him, but his big sister called him, and he confirmed that he had written what the SPLC posted. He says he doesn’t understand why we’d feel betrayed just because he announced his “personal beliefs” to our worst enemies. Oh well. Just when I thought I couldn’t lose anything else.
Some threshold questions come to mind.
Why did the SPLC release Derek Black’s statements? (In part, obviously, to hurt and demoralize his family.) Why did it publicize his conversion the way it did in light of its usual target audiences—Jews, anti-white and anti-First Amendment international, federal, state, and local police and secret police agencies, sympathetic politicians, prosecutors and judges, high-level federal and state bureaucrats, academics and university administrators, mass media outlets and, finally, antifa domestic terrorists?
What is the SPLC’s motivation? What purposes does the information, presented the way it is, serve among these moderately diverse constituencies by enabling them to work effectively toward shared goals of white dispossession and oppression and development of increasingly racist, illiberal, anti-Constitutional, and anti-democratic social structures?
Secondly, why was the story not picked up by the mass media? At the very least, there should have been a handful of stories, and conceivably even widespread coverage, as in the recent arrest of anti-Breivik Norwegian musician Varg Vikernes in France. It is, I assume, within the SPLC’s power to determine to some extent the level of media coverage of its material.
In the same article the SPLC quotes reactions from various whites on the handful of Web forums that still exist. One post advocating exile to Africa was by a “Maxfield Parrish” on Occidental Dissent:
He is a traitor, one without hope and one without redemption. Should WN’s ever seize power his name should figure prominently on the “Hunt Down List” . . . softened up with brass knuckles to the face and groin, then water-boarded, reducing him to a quivering, gelatinous lump of obedient flesh.
It appears the values of the US government (which the SPLC diligently serves), Israelis, neocons, and Ivy League “civil libertarians” like Alan Dershowitz have now struck deep roots in American culture.
The Jews overthrew 500 years of painfully-won humanitarian moral and legal progress overnight in their contempt for human rights and greedy demands for torture and assassination. Congratulations!
The SPLC added that “there were those who acknowledged the most obvious conclusion—that it’s an error to indoctrinate young children” (i.e., teach your children to care about the fate of their own kind). Not until you fully grasp the true nature of the Jew will the arrogance, irony, and self-righteous hypocrisy of this genocidal sentiment hit home to you.
Black’s public confession has a ritualistic quality. Further, it contains elements of what in the Soviet Union was known as self-criticism, and in Red China jiǎntǎo (检讨).
The most striking feature of the statement is its triteness. It could have been lifted directly from any college professor, textbook, Hollywood celebrity, or TV commentator. Or, for that matter, from the SPLC’s or ADL’s own propaganda. There is nothing original in his beliefs whatsoever. Americans have heard the identical clichés thousands and thousands of times before.
In the confession, Black denounces an alleged “white power” configuration responsible for the “structural oppression” of Jews and non-whites.
Brain teaser: If Derek Black were to send a letter to the white power structure he decries, castigating its members for their sins, where would he mail it? To the White House? To Microsoft’s Jewish CEO? Wal-Mart? Wall Street? Hollywood? (Remember, for Black, as for most whites, Jews are not the problem—indeed, they are not part of any problem, and cannot be criticized.)
The Jewish answer, of course, is: Whites as a group are inherently racist from birth— “the cancer of human history” as one of their most eminent and revered spokesmen famously put it. The only way to eliminate “racism” is to eradicate the whites who carry it (ultimately, all of them).
What else do you do with “cancer”?
What are they doing?
Revealingly, Black made his confession directly to the SPLC, a Jewish organization in bed with the government. He thereby abased himself simultaneously before the “Party” and the US’s ruling race. His compulsion—unerringly correct from the perspective of a turncoat—was to propitiate the Jews. He did not confess to the Negroes: he ignored blacks and confessed to those who rule.
Black is not the first turncoat to ritually confess directly to the SPLC. It seems that whites inside and outside of the power elite hold the Jews of this organization in quasi-sacred awe. Racialists even grant friendly interviews to these deadly foes.
At 24, Black is not a child. He has not grown more radical. Rather, he has gravitated to the far Left—to the Establishment. It seems unlikely that he will ever hold pro-white views again.
I have the definite sense that Black’s distinctive hairstyle and vaguely Amish- or Orthodox-style garb in past photos says something meaningful about his personality and psychology, though I am not sure what.
Black must have been exposed while quite young to a thorough understanding of our situation, given that his father was imprisoned by the state. Presumably, he was educated about the facts in a non-superficial way.
In a totalitarian state, cultural values proscribed by the ruling class cannot generally be transmitted successfully to children by their families. Under most circumstances the values of the power elite and the state will prevail instead. Also, it has been a core policy objective to thoroughly undermine the family, and it has been quite successful.
Without knowing the details, it seems certain that the mass media played an important role in altering Black’s beliefs. They are all-pervasive, and speak day and night with a fanatical, unified voice about race. You cannot go one hour without being exposed to anti-white or philo-Semitic messages.
The “educational” system was also a factor. Mark Potok, a Jewish racist employed by the SPLC, indicates that Black recently finished his third year at the “elite” New College of Florida.
I’ve never heard of this “elite” college, although I am familiar with elite Jewish universities like Harvard, Yale, and Princeton.
Evidently an oppressive atmosphere of institutional and peer discrimination at the college caused Black last November to post a racial mea culpa to a private, students-only forum.
The Jews, natural communists, immediately recognized the psychological significance of the ambiguously-worded statement. Of course, they do lots of illegal spying besides, and thus had a rich context within which to interpret his words.
The abusive put-downs at New College probably involved a substantial face-to-face component, which Jews know is psychologically and emotionally extremely stressful to their prey. Not for nothing do they prattle endlessly about “hurtful” words and looks, epithets, and “bullying” for their favored constituencies while ruthlessly employing the same modus operandi against their white, conservative, heterosexual, and Christian victims.
Black mentioned in his private student post that “terrifying” accusations of hatred and racism “have been posted in [college] threads about me.” To refute the evidently hurtful and hateful messages he pleaded defensively (in part):
I am not a white supremacist, nor do I identify with white supremacy.
I have nothing against anyone because of their race, religion, or anything similar.
I am not a Nazi, nor do I identify with Nazism.
I’m also pro-choice (regulated by states), pro-gay marriage (with gov’t not defining marriage between people), and anti-death penalty (regulated by states).
The Jews call hurtful falsehoods of the kind propagated by New College “defamation” when done to them. No, that’s not right. They call truthful statements defamation.
But, it goes without saying that Jews are free to lie outright, spew hatred, and threaten violence against anyone. After all, they’re Jews.
The SPLC, which operates an elaborate spy network to monitor, harm, and bankrupt whites everywhere in America who speak out or organize, proceeded to expose Black’s private message in an article.
About the facts of anti-white racism and discrimination, ongoing genocide, Jewish power and privilege, and the tyranny under which we suffer, there can be no reasonable dispute. The facts are plain and irrefutable. The Jews know them, governments know them, the Left knows them, and we know them.
Imagine if the positions were reversed, with Jews treated like whites, with pervasive, systematic, institutionalized discrimination (“affirmative action” and “minority preferences”) the least of the actions taken against them. The terrorism and bloodshed they would have unleashed would have destabilized the government long ago.
Yet, while denying freedom of speech and association to whites, and any access to the mass media or role in the democratic process—i.e., all methods of peaceful change—they preach: “Don’t even think or speak of violence.”
And, of course, we obey. They ARE Jews.
Fascinatingly, Jews and governments are hoist by their own petard. Choose any buzzword, “principle,” or law you want—”racism,” “hate,” “genocide,” “crimes against humanity,” “discrimination,” “offensive,” “hurtful,” “equal rights,” “religious bigotry,” and on and on endlessly, and you will discover a perfect description of their own behavior.
If you desire to see the Jew, the Left, the tyrant, listen attentively to the epithets they hurl against those they hate. The formerly Invisible Jew will materialize from the shadows, revealed in the starkest light.
It is not possible to credibly maintain, as Black does, that “white power,” much less “supremacy” or “(white) racism,” is entrenched in contemporary society, that whites lord it over Jews and non-whites, or discriminate against them, violently oppress them, are legally privileged, or that replacement migration in every white homeland worldwide does not threaten whites’ existence.
Endlessly repeated claims like these are nonsense on a par with “biological race does not exist” mouthed by genocidal obsessives for whom biological race is everything.
It is possible, or course, to advocate oppression, dispossession, discrimination, and genocide of the white race—or not to care about such evils. Ultimately, that is the position of Jews, the government, Left-wing elites, and now Derek Black.
We know that if Black were a Jew he’d be called a self-hating Jew, if Negro an Oreo (black on the outside, white on the inside), if Amerindian an apple (red on the outside, white on the inside), if Mestizo a coconut, and so on. How instructive it is that no parallel epithet exists for whites—the race in greatest danger of extinction, and which suffers the brunt of ruling class enmity.
In many ways, “self-hating white” seems the appropriate label for Derek Black.
But run-of-the-mill whites like him are generally not self-hating. Rather, they are self-righteous. Internalization of prevailing dogmas invariably imparts a smug sense of moral superiority.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
40 comments
I am sorry but this not surprising to me at all. Jared Taylor had a post about genetics in which he said something to effect that the mind is not a tabula rasa and that parents cannot expect their values are transferable. We all find our own. Each generation gravitates to its peer group.
If someone is brought up in a bubble without outside influences then those influences will be attractive. It is like the proverbial you can’t keep them down on the farm, once they have see Paris. The prodigal son may return and he may not. Personally, I blame parents who cannot communicate and make real their beliefs with down to earth ‘teaching moments’. Parents are supposed to protect their children and not make them mouthpieces for their beliefs.
I want to repeat Rhonda’s point for emphasis:
“Parents are supposed to protect their children and not make them mouthpieces for their beliefs.”
The most stRiki-Eiking component of all of this is that this man is given special attention and credence in the first place because his dad is an activist. His dad, I don’t believe, should have been pushing him into any measure of political or social activism, anymore than a parent should be pushing their kid into playing football or attending a particular college. Many kids will end up rightfully feeling that their parents regard them more as pets or are losers living vicariously through them rather than as grown men with ambitions of their own.
Certainly, it’s possible that his parents didn’t force-feed him into activism and yet he still betrayed their beliefs and his race. But my strong, strong suspicion would be that he has been inundated with political activism for years, and just had a compulsion to run away from it. I have certainly seen this with many friends whose busybody parents tried to impose their own dreams on their children (not anything related to WN, though). It very often ends up with a resentful kid who feels used by his parents.
There is one other excuse I’ll make for him: many people seem to become very myopic about WN and sucked into reading negative, critical articles which can make one overly paranoid about individual blacks or Muslims or whomever. My guess is that many “keyboard warriors” and people who are very insulated are liable to feel some guilt and just feel foolish when they invariably meet good blacks, Muslims, Mexicans, etc. In some instances, this realization one was overly paranoid of Other individuals could ricochet so far to the opposite extreme that they could wind up like Mr. Black.
Thus, I believe that it is critical to always bear in mind that we have a positive, progressive need for our own communities and homeland – the human right to association and self-determination – and not only the negative needs related to black crime and Jewish usury and subversion, etc.
Ultimately, though, none of this is to excuse the younger Mr. Black. At 24, he is a grown man and prostrating himself before the SPLC and writing leftoid idiocy against his own family is morally repulsive and nearly unforgivable.
I wonder if they ga e him one of those cool watches that let you open up portals in the pavement?
Peer pressure is very powerful. Few decisions are more important for a parent than who your children will associate with. That’s one of the big ones here.
Another big item here, quite likely, is the archetypal son’s journey. It usually involves some (or a lot of) rebellion from the father. I mean, harrowing rebellion. Sometimes rebelling against the father is necessary to becoming a man. One of my life observations so far is this: “Show me a son and a father who have fought about values — and I’ll show you a son who is a lot like his father later on.” The father, indeed, transmits his values to his son through conflict, as if in his energetic fight with his son over values the son is able to register clearly what they are. The later religious songs of Johnny Cash, who in younger days rebelled mightily against his religious father, come easily to mind.
Whites should not be so hard on him at this point. Look at that face. It’s the face of a boy trying to become a man. The posts lifted by SPLC envisioning violent retribution are vile and stupid by the way, only playing into the enemy’s hands.
Yes, rebellion. But there are better ways. This is equivalent to Daniel Boone’s son going over to the Indians. The luxury of having an extended adolescence is coming to an end. Kids are going to have to grow up a lot faster now. By that new/old standard, he’s a man and made a man’s choice, just like Trayvon. But despite being inundated with White Nationalism, he grew up in relative luxury and is obviously soft, a boy despite his age. Very awkward and unfortunate. He’s fallen into the gap between the old culture and the new, the status quo and the New Order that is yet to be born.
Jaego makes a very cogent observation, one that deserves some elaboration.
We have had the luxury of extending adolescence into our forties, and beyond, in all too many cases. This allows for many to believe they are magical, that they live in a world where they simply wish for a thing hard enough, and it becomes so.
Derek’s letter does reek of self-confession. This is a standard manipulation technique of the Left, and works extremely well. It is almost formulaic, to the point that it almost seems pro forma – “Say a few words against your former comrades and their philosophy, and you can have extra rations, soldier; maybe even a bit of meat.”
I draw a few lessons from what Derek has done.
One. the educational system has taken adolescent rebellion, validated it, amplified it, and left it with nothing to support other than all that makes you who you are. This was deliberately done, and it had been done masterfully.
Two, White Nationalism has failed to remotely accept Rockwell’s charge to Pierce – we have done absolutely nothing to help our sons and daughters understand our philosophy, or why they are the incarnations of millennia of Racial development, and have a duty to their forebearers. The first could be done by restructuring, say the Scouts of America with church-0based summer and winter camps. The latter is the very effective practice of the Jews.
Three, Jaego is right – ‘ “worse is not better” – but things have to GET worse before we have a chance of making them better. That is where we must focus our efforts, on laying the foundation for what will be on the other side of what is becoming a new normal for the West, for our Race.
Four, we tend to make a tempest out of this very small teapot, save that Derek’s choices are the one’s our own Posterity are making, all too often. Covington has written about this, and it seems that one generation abandoned the raising and grooming of our Children to the tender mercies of television; two generations later, they are returning the favor, having been provided with nothing better by us.
Five, this demonstrates the importance of a metapolitical focus, which will be needed simply to avoid insanity in the all -too-powerful social control system that is developing. The Left and television offer our Children something to be against, and, all too often, that something is us, and the Civilization we and our forbearers created.
We must offer them something to be for, and they must take upon themselves the hard duty of defending it, and extending it.
That is why it is so damn critically important to send money to counter-currents, each and every month, without fail.
Without fail.
Some traits are partly genetic, but character as a whole is not. This is a Tragedy, but the most tragic part of it is his inability to see it that way. A person without the tragic sense is without profundity. So he’s been going along with White Nationalism all these years until a stronger force reprogrammed him – one that also promised an easier and more lucrative life if one wants to be cynical. And not to know that he had just betrayed his family marks him as an immature dweeb. As Shakespeare said, “Ripeness is all” – and he just doesn’t have it.
I’ve never followed SF that closely. I feel bad for Don Black.
Too much is being made of this. He’s very young. The views of such a young man can’t be called “arrived” or stable. Whatever merit we assign to his father’s views, it’s likely he’s never had any breathing room from them. This is 10 times the problem when one’s father is famous and impressive. When any young man has not been able to test what’s handed to him and explore with his own mind — he can’t be called truly confirmed in any views at all. If Whites will not over-react to this (which would please the tribe much), or react too negatively, it’s possible that he could see the full circuit of thought and in the end come back on behalf of his race — but with his own mind and his own conviction. It’s unreasonable for anybody — whether White Nationalists or Jews — to place so much on the back of a young man who’s never had the chance to explore, weigh, and test the world with his own mind. The Amish and their ‘wild times’ come to mind. Letting kids find out, in the end, the value of their parents’ ways.
Whenever somebody displeases or disappoints you, it’s a good practice to imagine the prospect of them coming back to your side later. Before you say something bitter or denigrating, ask yourself: “Will saying this make it it more likely, or less likely, that he/she might return to our side?”It’s a hard human reality that people will gravitate towards the people who feel the most enobling and offer the truest love. He’s young. He’s in flux. But some of us are old. Do we want to fail him at that?
Julian, your advice is quite wise, and as a general rule many would do well to heed it, but I don’t think it necessarily applies in this case. Derek could have left our cause quite easily, and with little fuss. He even had the fairly recent example of the Gaede twins to go by. He instead chose to go thermonuclear, including toadying to an organization that has ruined innumerable lives. Why would we want him back, and how could anyone trust him in a sensitive position? With “friends” like that…
I don’t have any ill will toward Derek, and it is entirely possible that one day he will fully appreciate the gravity of the dishonorable behavior that he has engaged in (assuming he doesn’t know already). Maybe, one day, this will help him become a better man. Or maybe not.
We’ve all made mistakes, but part of wisdom is understanding that mistakes have consequences. While Derek was not important to me personally, and I found his radio show unlistenable, there are those who placed their trust in him, not the least of which being his father. I mean, my god, how many early 20’s types have their own A.M. radio show?
Derek betrayed that trust in a gratuitous and hurtful manner. I hope that at some point Don and Derek will reconcile, but I hope this more for the father’s sake than the son’s. Don Black deserved better than this, but his son is still his son, dishonorable punk that he may currently be. Anyway, I hope they patch things up.
Yet as to the broader movement? I hope to god Derek is done, always and forever. He can only be of service to us now as a cautionary tale, a lesson in exactly how NOT to handle a sensitive situation. Lots of people leave political movements, but few are so willfully destructive on the way out.
In the bigger picture, our society has rapidly devolved from a high trust to a low trust culture, which mirrors our devolution from a white society to a multiracial cesspool. Our movement in particular, infiltrated and suppressed by the system, is particularly plagued by low trust. Derek, while unimportant in and of himself, has behaved in such a way as to damage that trust level even further. He sends a message about the movement: “If you can’t count on Don Black’s own son, who can you count on?”
Problem is, until we build trust, we aren’t going to be able to move forward as a movement. Derek, either intentionally or just as a result of his myopic selfishness and dishonorable behavior, struck a blow against the very thing that we need more of. Will this stop us? No, of course not. In time, it will become old news, and then more or less forgotten. At the end of the day it’s just a small bump on the road. But it was still a blow to a precious commodity that we already have too little of, and for that reason if no other it is worth taking seriously.
Nice column, Mr. Hamilton.
I certainly don’t envy Derek being, in effect, born under the klieg lights. To be a public and particularly visible white activist from a very early age must have been quite trying at times. Perhaps it was not so onerous when he was able to live in a more or less white nationalist cocoon, enjoying minor celebrity status, in fact it may have even been stimulating and rewarding during that period. But now that he is trying to make his way in what tragically passes as mainstream society, it is no doubt quite a difficult row to hoe.
In any event, the point is that he embarked upon this journey without being of an age sufficient to fully appreciate the consequences and implications of white activism. Given that most of us, myself included, write under pen names, my hat is certainly off to those that have to confront most directly the slings and arrows of anti-white hatred.
To that extent, he has my sympathies, and I’d have nothing more to say on the matter if he had simply dropped out of our cause, appropriately distanced himself from it, and gone on to pursue his private interests. But if that’s all he wanted, he certainly picked a very strange way to go about getting it.
Instead of taking reasonable steps to separate himself from the movement and transition into a truly private and obscure existence, he actively put the metaphorical dagger in his father’s back. He didn’t just distance himself from the cause, he went full retard, bursting forth with the most worthless leftist tripe and pablum, groveling shamelessly before his new masters. His letter really does read like something out of 1984, or perhaps a Stalinesque show trial. Very, very odd stuff. Is it even possible that he actually believes such utter bilge and boilerplate?
The whole thing is so over the top that it lends itself to all kinds of theorizing and speculation. Some have suggested that he has simply been indoctrinated by the university multicult. I suppose this is possible, but given his particular background in white nationalism, and the level of activism that he engaged in, I find it unlikely. His letter has the quality of a term paper designed to please a petty schoolmarm. Something about it seems off, it just doesn’t ring true.
Others have speculated that he simply wanted to distance himself from white activism so as to get on with life, and that’s all there is to it. As alluded to above, if this is all he wanted, he certainly made a dog’s dinner of it. He made his break in a gratuitous, shamelessly hurtful and duplicitous manner that was pretty much guaranteed to shock and inflame, deliberately embarrassing and hurting his father, and brazenly repudiating his life work, not to mention a healthy “F You” to those decent souls who, through their financial contributions, no doubt helped finance Derek’s life. Not exactly a great ticket to quiet obscurity with no hard feelings.
Uh, Derek, if by chance you are reading this, did it ever occur to you that simply exiting stage left was an option, and that going thermonuclear wasn’t necessary? You were never particularly important anyway, and I’m not saying that to denigrate, just as a point of fact. None of this was remotely necessary, so people must assume that you did this consciously and with malice aforethought.
Tis all quite strange. While we cannot know the precise motive behind this, we can say with some degree of confidence that Derek acted in a willful, deliberately hurtful manner. Contrast this with how the Gaede twins exited white activism. Perhaps they made mistakes, but essentially they managed to make it clear that they were no longer involved without going out of their way to throw their mother, or the many supporters who watched them grow up, under the bus in the process. It would have been nice if Derek had learned something from them, but apparently that didn’t happen. I suppose a little bit of class, or perhaps just common decency, goes a long way.
Yes, it’s almost as if he learned nothing or that everything he learned has to be utterly rejected for his confession to be pure. Some people are like that and will eagerly throw away years or decades of knowledge and contacts to embrace something new. Some psychologists have called it snapping in relation to joining a cult.
A more mundane explanation: he couldn’t quietly exit stage left because having grown up in the limelight, he can’t imagine any other way of being.
(Moderator: please delete the previous, something went wrong with the formatting.)
Of course it was necessary. From the November, 2012 forum post it is certainly obvious that he had privately renounced his WNist views a long time ago. But he was kept bullied on and on. I’m not even sure this public renouncement of his father will suffice.
BTW I’m not even sure his views have changed at all. In the USSR, renouncing one’s father was a sign of fear, and was usually without any substance. I’m sure he must have been afraid of his black and liberal classmates bullying him. How could he not have been?
Derek did actually take reasonable steps, first merely distancing himself, then attempting to resolve it in a private local forum. Even now, Derek’s denouncing White Nationalism and not White Nationalists. Derek’s still trying to make it about ideas rather than about people or about his relationship with his father, which he apparently continues to value.
The SPLC is still settling for a scripted wad of anti-white platitudes from a kid who wishes to be left alone rather than a fierce denunciation of his family and expose of their (alleged or real) shenanigans. That’s what they would have preferred. While Don’s evidently not succeeded at passing along his ideals, he has apparently succeeded at maintaining a good relationship with his son.
Derek may be burying a dagger in his dad’s back, but only haltingly and only as deeply as is necessary to win the approval of his peers. Derek didn’t have the option of merely dropping out, as he was clearly being badgered and harassed on campus about his past, and had been too active too recently to credibly get away with claiming to have changed his true feelings without some public statement and some sort of stamp of approval from the SPLC.
Reiner: “Of course it was necessary.”
Betraying trust is rarely necessary in a literal or meaningful sense, but may appear convenient. In any event people, including those far more prominent than Derek, leave political movements all of the time. Even for white nationalists, the idea that one must go to the SPLC in order to do this is ludicrous.
Parrott: “Derek did actually take reasonable steps, first merely distancing himself, then attempting to resolve it in a private local forum.”
If a person wants to leave the movement, then leave the movement. That doesn’t mean trying to negotiate a middle ground, so that one may have one’s cake and eat it too, it means really leaving the movement, including any and all perks and benefits. If one chooses to do so in a manner that shocks and inflames, one shouldn’t be surprised when the result is shocking and inflaming, bringing upon oneself extra scrutiny.
As a traditionalist, I’m surprised that you are showing what seems to be little regard for basic causality and responsibility. Because of his father, a person is able to get his own A.M. radio show, a nice little perk that few young men have access to. Derek enjoyed minor celebrity status within the white nationalist context. He’s 24, not 12, and has chosen to avail himself of these perks until very recently. He thereby makes himself somewhat prominent, if not terribly important, and also chooses to attend a supposedly extra-Leftist school. Apparently he is harassed (who would have thought it?) by his vibrant and tolerant classmates. So, of course, his only choice is to go thermonuclear.
Come on, Matt. There were many, many choices available to Derek, both recently and much further back. Derek tried to have it both ways, and when that proved impossible, he went thermonuclear.
Parrott: “Derek didn’t have the option of merely dropping out, as he was clearly being badgered and harassed on campus about his past, and had been too active too recently to credibly get away with claiming to have changed his true feelings without some public statement and some sort of stamp of approval from the SPLC.”
He had plenty of options, virtually all of which would be far less shocking and inflammatory than the one he took. Not only do people drop out of political movements all of the time, they also take time off from school, transfer to different schools, etc. This has almost become a norm.
At the bare minimum, Derek could have issued a clear statement that he was no longer a white nationalist, that his views as an adult don’t correspond to those of his childhood, and he wishes to be free to live a private life like a normal person. The write ups from various rags would of course follow, just as they did with the Gaede twins. Give a few interviews, make the renunciation clear, but don’t gratuitously throw people under the bus. Not pretty, but not thermonuclear. Now, if that didn’t work, and he was entirely comfortable with being dishonorable, then of course he could have gone thermonuclear. But it probably would have worked, at least as well and perhaps far better than the route he chose. Unless, of course, he’s planning on going full traitor, doing paid gigs for the SPLC, which is entirely possible.
What we see is a pattern of crummy behavior. For example, especially given that his father had doted upon him, and he had taken advantage of the perks that resulted from that, it would be a matter of basic respect to, however uncomfortable it might be, man up and have the conversation before the fireworks started. But based on Don Black’s printed statement, he was completely blindsided by the SPLC affair, despite being physically with Derek in recent days. Derek couldn’t even do the honorable thing at the micro level, much less the macro.
I’m not trying to demonize Derek, but there is a pattern of dishonorable behavior or, if one prefers a less dramatic take, just crummy behavior. I’m certainly not perfect, but whatever crummy behavior I’ve engaged in I’ve at least learned to be embarrassed by it. Time may tell, but at this point Derek appears to be shameless, and I think that’s probably the most disturbing thing about this. How do you build trust in a movement if it is acceptable to do thermonuclear 180’s?
Parrott: “Even now, Derek’s denouncing White Nationalism and not White Nationalists.”
Yes, and that’s far worse.
Parrott: “Derek’s still trying to make it about ideas rather than about people or about his relationship with his father, which he apparently continues to value.”
Make no mistake, refuting the life’s work of his father is very much about his father.
Parrott: “Derek may be burying a dagger in his dad’s back, but only haltingly and only as deeply as is necessary to win the approval of his peers.”
Well…that was mighty white of him! Or not.
Lew: “It’s a big deal. If anyone can think of a better propaganda victory for the other side than showing the world “even their own kids reject them,” please let’s hear the possibilities.”
Bingo. That’s it Lew, in a nutshell.
I met Derek multiple times and he always carried himself in a smug and detached manner of one who would rather be somewhere else. Indeed, he pointedly refused to discuss politics or ideology, content to say what he was there to say, do his corny guitar shtick, and retire back to his room.
I try to keep my private tricks private, but one trick I have is dividing somebody’s engagement by their intelligence. If somebody’s a fluent and well-educated man, but is only parroting mantra platitudes and kvetching about double-standards, then I’m wary of that person. Conversely, somebody who strikes me as less intelligent is held to a lower standard. I haven’t been in the game for all that long, but it’s proven a pretty reliable trick for sussing out whether people are sincere nationalists.
As for the root cause, I don’t think nationalism can thrive in a secular liberal frame. Loyalty to Tribe (or loyalty, period) doesn’t grow in that soil. The problem is that many nationalists who are atheist supremacists know that supremacism itself can’t actually be taught, so they try to graft nationalism onto the generic secular popular culture…a foreign body that the ideological and social immune system is swift in rejecting.
Supremacist nationalists who are hoping to pass it on should either resign themselves to teaching it to their children in a Traditionalist context or figure out some way to make supremacism a worldview that’s tolerable to thoughtful and sensitive people who are integrated into contemporary society.
I think the latter resolution is both undesirable and unlikely, but it would be an actual resolution. Nationalism can perhaps hang onto a secular modern mind as long as you’re nearby to hold it in place, but it won’t stick on its own accord.
A small percentage of people are even interested in politics, or at least “big picture” politics. Partially that’s because of the debased nature of “democratic” politics but it also has to do with human nature. An effective political movement surely has to have some capable chiefs, but it has to have a lot more capable Indians. A lot of people, especially men, aren’t that interested unless they can be the chief. So they make their way in life as the chief of their little family or business circle and are willing to risk nothing for politics on a larger scale. Derek Black probably concluded the academic life is pretty good, with better prospects for a comfortable existence than engaging in political activism deemed taboo by the system. At first I was appalled that he went to the SPLC for his coming out party, but maybe there is a certain hard-bitten logic to it. If the SPLC has the mark of Cain on you for your beliefs, then it must be they you have to go to have it removed. But I think Derek will have to do quite a bit more grovelling if he wants to remain in their embrace.
What white activism needs most are speakers who can move people with their words. Derek’s daddy-funded radio program gave evidence that Derek has a ways to go in that regard. In that sense he is less of a loss that George Burdi e.g., who had some ability as a speaker. In any case, the idealists and truth-seekers will soldier on…
I would like Derek to see how he can walk away from the issue of White Genocide with just a shrug. You can change your mind on things like “white nationalism” or similar topics, but no one an just shrug off genocide. So, either he doesn’t believe it or he doesn’t care.
If he doesn’t care, that would be sociopathic. Nothing else need be said. If he doesn’t agree that we are seeing genocide through social engineering, than he never actually understood the real fact supporting that claim.
In the USSR, it was common for family members of “enemies of the people” to renounce their fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, etc. It didn’t mean anything except that they were afraid. I dare propose in this case it also means nothing except that Derek is afraid. He is the one who was bullied for years, not you or me, and I think one needs not be a sociopath to try to stop harassment and bullying at any price.
Derek probably wants to finish collage and maybe get a job later. He can later either go back to support WNism overtly (having amassed some wealth etc.) or support it covertly (like yours truly does, sending small donations here and there, etc.), with the latter option being more attractive if he doesn’t think he has the talent or motivation to be a public personality and an outsider in society.
Please, people, stop believing the confessions at communist show trials!
My reaction is not anger, but disbelief. Like many of us, I have slowly woken up to the dangers to our race. I have studied so much, and the facts are so very clear. I could never go back believing the mainstream narrative, even if I wanted to. A defector, however famous, will not make any difference.
Maybe Derek has fallen in love? Loves makes us do crazy things. What if he is in love with a non-white girl? Or with a boy, which I find somehow more likely. Homosexuality is not looked upon kindly in Stormfront circles. Such a conflict has propelled many a son into the camp of his father’s enemies.
In short, I do not deem it likely that Derek really believes the mainstream narrative. The wording of his statement is an indication for that: it is very impersonal, it does not feel real. Probably, it is an “amour fou”. It will pass, and if the father behaves wisely, Derek is not lost.
It just sounds like he wants to live a normal life and to get everyone out of his hair. Establishing his leftist credentials directly to the SPLC would be the most logical way to do it.
I don’t really see the big deal about any of this.
The thing is that every generation has its own set of obstacles and challenges that it has to overcome. I do not know why this is so hard for people to comprehend. What my parents had to deal with is not what I had to deal with and because they never bothered to deal with their issues my generation had to deal with their shit plus the shit of my generation. They had no clue what I had to deal with. I decided the buck stops here, my kids are not going to deal with that, they have to deal with what is now. I apologized to them and said I am sorry, talk to me, I will support you. I never got an apology from the crap my parents laid on me, but I will be damned before I will lay that on my kids. They are white an they have the right to exist without turning the other cheek and without loving their enemies. It is not easy being a young person in this day and age. I thank the universe that I found the I Ching and the hexagram number 18 Work on what has been spoiled by the parents.
Terribly off-topic I’m afraid, so please excuse me, but I could not resist when you mentioned the I Ching. I studied the I Ching too ( and Taoism, and Zen), but I found it quite difficult to interpret. I have discovered the Runes however, and it seems clear to me that they are far more helpful to a person belonging to a European ‘Volksseele’. Maybe you should give the Runes a try? My whole journey from liberalism to white consciousness, something quite unthinkable for me only a few years ago, started with my exploration of the Runes. They may work wonders in many ways. And another personal discovery: “inner peace” is inseparable from outer harmony, i.e. your actions are in accordance with your circumstances. And this may mean a very un-peaceful, even war-like actions.
What makes you think I have not been investigating the runes? I mentioned the I Ching because I have studied it for over 30 years and that particular hexagram deals with the degeneracy of fathers and mothers which I think is particularly relevant when a father cannot even discern that his son is being seduced by an opposing group deliberately using that vulnerable relationship.
Sending him to a left wing school was a deliberate set up in my opinion. Look at the pictures of that kid. He has been wearing clothes that are left wing hippie type clothes. HELLO. What has he been trying to say? He most likely really NEEDED to investigate the other side for his own personal destiny. When will parents grow up. It is not about them. It is about the future of our race.
I looked up the college Derek goes to, it is apparently some very far left college that doesn’t even assign letter grades. Why would they send him to a school of that type? Don Black’s wife also works with minority kids.
Very astute.
That’s pretty interesting. The more I’m learning about this whole situation, it just seems like a very basic principle playing out — one that everyone should keep in mind: do not put all your eggs in one basket.
I don’t pity anyone in this situation at all.
It’s a big deal. If anyone can think of a better propaganda victory for the other side than showing the world “even their own kids reject them,” please let’s hear the possibilities.
Taylor Somers was a YWC turncoat who issued a statement in which he apologized for trying to bring Nick Griffin to his college. (http://www.toqonline.com/blog/weakling-rescinds-nick-griffin-speech-invitation/)
Derek Black was a Stormfront turncoat.
I don’t recall the guy’s name offhand, but American Renaissance had a turncoat who did an indepth interview with the SPLC.
What do all these people have in common? They were WNs who were public about their activism. The leftists attacked them–and ruined their ability to get jobs and make a living–, and so they gave up on the movement.
If the WN movement was strong and supported its activists, we wouldn’t need to worry about having turncoats. We need more public activists and fewer “keyboard commandoes” who use fake names.
Indeed which is why we must donate regularly and significantly. Fund raising must become better. Ultimately we must produce our own White Entertainment safe for our children to view and that won’t be cheap.
On two further notes: Let’s not forget that many liberals, ones who’ve travelled the world and befriended all races of people do become staunch White Nationalists. I’m certainly one. Lets not forget that being a White nationalist doesn’t preclude one from function with other races etc either.
I suspect that a movement that defines itself as “anti” something instead of pro white or something in a positive sense will struggle. Our movement needs room for peace, spirit, compassion and love, mainly for each other but with some space for others of goodwill.
My feeling is Derek Black like the girls from “Prussian Blue” just had the movement shoved in their face too much. Perhaps they’ll come back in someway or just disappear.
If it makes anybody feel any better, Larry Flynt’s daughter became an anti-porn activist of the Christian variety, or so I have heard. Hey, it happens to the best of us.
Just because he’s Don’s kid doesn’t make him an exception. If a kid grows up only hearing about the tricky Jew and the thieving Negro but never experiences it for himself, this is gonna happen. Especially once he gets to college and gets bombarded with keg parties and all the souless college girls ready to show him how liberated they are, if only he’ll play ball and stop worry about stupid stiff like the future of his race. Not everyone can handle being unplugged from the Matrix, for some its easier to just pretend to still be asleep.
Derek should not have treated with the rabid anti White SPLC. Other than that, he has the same rights and responsibilities as any other White man and shouldn’t be singled out for specific condemnation based on his not living up to his father’s greatness. How many million other White kids are just like him? Groveling to one of the primary organs of state terrorism was probably the fastest way for Derek to get the liberal hyaenas off his case at his college. All in all, the public hand-wringing by patriots is nothing but nectar to our enemies so the sooner we get on to other things the better.
I suspect Derek Black will come to deeply regret this decision. His decision to walk away from WNsm while damaging to the movement is ultimately trivial compared to his decision to backstab his own father. Highly dishonorable.
Lew: “I suspect Derek Black will come to deeply regret this decision. His decision to walk away from WNsm while damaging to the movement is ultimately trivial compared to his decision to backstab his own father. Highly dishonorable.”
The way he has treated his father is absolutely shameless, and if Derek has any conscience to speak of, he’ll regret it down the road. But Derek has also behaved shamelessly toward our cause in general, a cause from which, as alleged and to all appearances, he voluntarily accepted benefits and perks until quite recently. Those who are making excuses for him are making a mistake. Sympathy is a positive trait, and a sign of decency and character. But it can be misplaced, and condoning gratuitously crummy behavior is misplaced sympathy. We may sympathize with his having been born under the klieg lights, and we may understand why he wanted out of the movement. So far, so good. Leaving is fine, but you don’t get to lob hand grenades on the way out.
If nothing else, this discussion about Derek’s dishonorable behavior should serve as a coaching session on how not to leave a movement, and hopefully it will help people in the future make better decisions. If someone wants to leave, they are of course free to do so. Not a single negative peep should be said about those who drop out, provided they do so in a decent and reasonable fashion. I’ve always disliked even minor snarky comments to the effect of “no great loss” or “we didn’t need him anyway.” Poor taste at best. People have all sorts of legitimate reasons for dropping out, and their choice should be respected. That’s a case where “mom” was right: “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.”
Leaving for most means a simple fade out, and is no big deal. But in those rare cases where a positive disclaimer is required, and Derek’s may or may not be such an example, groveling before the SPLC and going full retard liberal is gratuitously incendiary. Doing this in a way calculated to blindside a doting father makes it even worse. For those that decide to lob grenades and hand our enemies propaganda victories on their way out, they need to understand that they are inviting extra scrutiny, and that’s what has happened to Derek. I wonder if he thinks it’s worth it.
As a result of his shocking and inflammatory exit, Derek’s racialist history is more known than ever. His picture is more known. Before all of this, how many people even knew that he had a radio show, apparently funded by none other than Don Black? How many people knew that he had a doting father? How many would have guessed that he spent the weekend prior to the fireworks with his father, who I believe has had some serious health problems, but kept him ignorant of the ticking time bomb? How good does it look for one to avail himself of benefits and perks, presumably financed in whole or in part from funds raised by Stormfront contributors, and then throw those same supporters under the bus in a thermonuclear 180? Yet now all of this is out in the open, alleged as fact.
This is not a pretty picture, and Derek could have avoided it all by dropping out of the movement with dignity instead of going thermonuclear. Any remotely decent person would have understood, and to hell with the rest. Of course, it’s possible that Derek actually wanted a maximum explosion, and perhaps even plans on going full traitor. But if he didn’t want all of these allegations to come to light, he seriously misjudged the situation. Perhaps his example will serve as a cautionary tale for others, encouraging them to behave with more honor, dignity, discretion, and just simple common decency. I sure hope so.
Derek Blacks renunciation of his white nationalist beliefs seems well choreographed and timed for maximum impact. Not to mention his laughable and easily dispelled claims of a “white power structure” that allegedly controls everything. He also made a major mistake in not consulting with his father first and must be too immature to realize the effect his actions have on him and others close to him. Like others already have stated, he simply could have laid low for a couple of years or just disappeared rather than make such a major production of things. There’s probably more to this story that we’ll ever know.
While this is disconcerting, it didn’t appear to me that the fortunes or future of white nationalism were tied to Derek Black. So in this respect his defection to the radical left has no impact except possibly to dissuade some younger impressionable whites from becoming WN’s.
IMO, any sane and racially aware white person will come to see white nationalism as the only force capable of forestalling white genocide. While libertarianism and conservatism and its derivative ideologies have their finer points, neither are capable of defeating those that seek our genocide.
I choose to view this as fortuitous, he could have betrayed us further down the road and from a greater position of responsibility and leadership. The sooner these malcontents are identified the better. As to the question of whether he should be allowed to return to the white nationalist cause, yes. At some future date he should allowed to contribute to the white nationalist cause as a “source of funds,” never from a position of responsibility or leadership. Remember, we always need money for our cause.
If he ever wants to come back to WN he should do so “in style” : by writing a letter to the SPLC in which he denounces his previous denunciation of WN. Now that would be a real propaganda coup!
BTW, why should WN not have a similar thing as the SPLC : a special column in their publications of letters by former liberals who converted to WN? That would be very inspiring.
Franklin Ryckaert in blockquotes:
A “real propaganda coup” would be enough people sending enough money to counter-currents to begin to develop an alternative support system, such as our own law firms, and our own above-ground political organization. This was Pierce’s remit, but…) We could call the latter the Northwest Front. The tricolor flag – OUR tri-color flag – would be nonverbal statement of where we stand.
Merely publicly identifying with us at this time is career suicide. I know this from painful personal experience. However, as more and more careers end due to circumstances beyond one’s control (Shanghai, Bangalore), people might well be willing to consider our Vision, if it is broad enough to include Something better, much damn better, for them.
A friend of mine is sending me a book he found in a Salvation Army bookstore, “America- Wake Up!” He thinks highly of it, in terms of helping to build the bridge from where we are, to where our Posterity damn well deserves to be.
This one point to be borne in mind, in these very externally demoralizing times: once we truly decide “X” can happen, and should happen, then “X” WILL happen.
Bezmenov knew it all too well: defeat begins with demoralization. Don’t let it happen to you. think bigger, and think better.
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