Counter-Currents
Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 95
Greg Johnson Interviews Patrick LeBrun on Entryism
Patrick Le Brun
59:15 / 204 words
To listen in a player, click here.
To download the mp3, right-click here and choose “save target or link as.”
To subscribe to our podcasts, click here.
Patrick Le Brun is a writer and activist, who has written many articles for Counter-Currents. He has extensive experience with the French Identitarian movement. He is currently based in the United States, where he mentors racially-conscious college students who wish to engage in activism.
Greg Johnson interviews Patrick Le Brun about the concept of entryism and its applications for racially conscious whites, particularly college students. Topics include:
- The concept of entryism
- Different movements on the center Left and far Left that overlap with White Nationalist interests
- The role of deception in entryism (secret agents)
- Resources for mentoring racially-conscious college students who want to engage in entryist tactics
More reading:
Entryism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entryism
Learning from the Left:
https://counter-currents.com/2010/06/learning-from-the-left/
Third World Eugenics viewed by the Cognitive Elite and the Fair Trade Movement:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVimVzgtD6w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTznEIZRkLg
http://fairtradecampaigns.org/campaign-type/universities/
Jewish Demographics & the BDS Movement:
https://counter-currents.com/2012/08/demographics-and-jewish-destiny-part-1/
Cell-Based Organization:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clandestine_cell_system
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA505161
Fight for a Fair Minimum Wage:
Paris-Berlin-Moscow Axis:
CIA’s version of our path to victory: “Stalled Engines”:
http://www.dni.gov/index.php/about/organization/global-trends-2030
Further Reading for Entryists:
https://counter-currents.com/2010/11/secret-agents/
https://counter-currents.com/2012/12/metapolitics-and-occult-warfare-part-1/
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
16 comments
Dear Greg Johnson,
Why, why, why anti-fracking? It creates energy Independence and fights globalism. Maybe there are some pollution concerns but that does’t mean they are insurmountable. Please rethink this position . . . GMO’s sure proven bad results. But fracking has so many good results . . . supporting family farms for one thing. Or give us some information why fracking is bad for our cause!
Jim Kelly
If you Google “California drought and fracking” you will be surprised to learn that the byproducts are polluting the water supply in the underground aquifers which is exacerbating the affects of the drought. Which drives up food prices.
Anti-human trafficking as anti-immigration entryism.
I went to a charity event for group that was trying to end human trafficking (modern day slavery).
I observed that most of the attendees and volunteers were young white women.
Excellent idea. Volunteerism, entryism, and dating in one package.
Also, this is a struggle in which Jews (and historically Muslims) are prominently on the wrong side.
I have an opportunity to accept interview to work for a progressive value driven org, although they support wholy diversity, equality,sustainability , social justice and equality….No chance of doing much in that context except get a salary, and work for the enemy, what to do …
PS I enjoyed your Vico lecture
If you can’t find a better job, why not go for it? Better their money go into your pockets than a committed Leftist’s, and perhaps you will learn things that can be applied to our struggle, get a chance to cause inter-Left coalition conflict, and have some opportunities to gum up the works when you are preparing your exit.
Many thanks for the response. Much after my thoughts on the subject. I could alos donate to the cause..
Hans… ROSSLING!
@Greg Johnson: In the past, you have vehemently rejected this course of action because it is against our nature and counter-productive.
Matt Parrot against entryism: Shut Up and Blend in
You opposed support for conservatives: White Nationalists & the Political “Mainstream”
You decried the “Self-Co-option” and “Self-Censorship” of those who join these conservative groups and you rejected the idea that their goals at least marginally help our cause.
But now, you advocate joining leftist fringe groups? The justification to do so is orders of magnitude less plausible than the rationale behind supporting Pat Buchanan.
e.g.:
BDS: John Kerry is not a good political prognosticator and his attempt to scare the Israelis by pointing to BDS is a sign of his weakness. BDS is run by leftists, leftist Jews and Arabs. “They can take care of themselves”, as you put it. Instead, your plan is to expend time and effort on behalf of anti-zionist leftists in order to make their liberal zionist opponents spend more time of their own. Frankly, the attempt of european nationalist parties to directly link up with the Israeli right is more compelling. But even that is in my opinion a questionable investment.
Protectionism: Trade unions abandoned protectionism, so did the anti-globalization movement some time ago. The only interest groups in favor are remaining small manufacturers and specific sectors of industry who can’t compete and can’t join corporate globalism.
Whether or not protectionism increases our wealth is a matter of debate. I think it could have slowed our decline in some sectors. But do we even want more prosperity at this stage? Prosperous nations like Sweden waste all of their prosperity on even more immigration and on the third world. Those who suffer from economic hardship have clamped down. Greece built a border fence for example.
Feminism: Feminists don’t care about Rotherham. They didn’t even pretend to care after the scandal hit mainstream news. So it is not self-censorship that is holding them back.
Counterexample:
Soak the rich: One leftist cause that is also beneficial to our own is the “soak the rich” movement. The rich and powerful should pay for the political harm they are causing.
I think that our primary focus should be to build explicit White Nationalist institutions, and I am opposed to the message from various mainstreamers that we should stop doing that and instead co-opt and censor ourselves by working for the center-Right.
And that is precisely what happens with these enthusiasms for Ron Paul, the Tea Party, Rand Paul, Putin, and Dugin: money and energy that was going to build up our side was and is being siphoned out of our cause and toward theirs. The whole point of entryism is to get other people working for our ends, not the reverse.
There are people who agree with our ideas who are unable or unwilling to do anything toward building up a White Nationalist alternative beyond sending donations and buying books. People like that should consider entryism.
Why entryism on the Left, rather than the center-Right?
1. Because the Left actually drives policy, while the center-Right just follows passively behind the Left. If you wish to subvert the institutions of a society, you need to go toward the leadership, the power, the brains, the energy — and those are on the Left. Since the Right is nothing but the retarded shadow of the Left, subverting the Left will ipso facto subvert the center-Right anyway.
2. Because our people have a track record of deceiving themselves about the “real” motives of the center-Right, thus falling into self-censorship and self-co-option, whereas they are less likely to be deceived about the Left and are therefore more likely to maintain a focus on actually subverting the Left agenda and institutions toward our ends.
But of course if you can actually burrow into center-Right institutions and move resources and momentum in our direction, knock yourself out. The attempts that I have observed in that direction have not, however, been all that encouraging.
If you discover that you are doing more good for the enemy than our own cause, then you are doing it wrong.
Entryism is certainly not the sort of thing I recommend for all of our people. But for those who would otherwise remain passive, it is worth considering, which is why I did the interview.
The case for entryism presented by Patrick Le Brun and yourself is threefold:
1. Acquisition of organizational experience, power and influence
2. Support for specific leftist causes that happen to be indirectly beneficial to us
3. Subversion/Hijacking of leftist movements
1.) can be gained be joining any kind of organization, including mainstream conservatives, professional associations, local environmental action, or by having a career as an expert, judge or bureaucrat. Membership of a leftist fringe group can be a professional liability. Especially BDS, if BDS does not succeed.
2.) is usually based on convoluted justifications, several debatable assumptions and layers of indirection that rarely pan out in reality, as I pointed out. We can have endless discussions about whether a specific movement is good or bad for us. Complicated plans are likely ineffective. I’m in favor of KISS (keep it simple stupid). (e.g. NumbersUSA, CIS)
3.) requires the assumption that “the Left actually drives policy”, as you put it. Most leftists don’t have this impression, which should give us pause. There is the important factor of modernity itself. Containerization and cheap fuel made globalization possible. Cheap air travel and communication are a major factor behind multiculturalism. Division of labor and the decline of manual labor enabled the change in family structure, single motherhood, etc. Notice that women didn’t not follow many feminist prescriptions at all, which drives feminists mad.
To the extend leftist ideology and organization matters, we have to identify how this exactly works. Loudmouthed leftist campus activists mostly spout ideas they have heard from their professors, so do they even make a difference? If not, then a better course of action is to become an academic. But the role of universities as places of debate and the promulgation of ideas has been undermined by the internet. Why use 20th century strategies in the 21st century?
Some of our ideas (skepticism of mass immigration, multiculturalism, diversity) seem to become more popular. UKIP turned from open borders to anti-immigration because that is were the votes are. No subversion was necessary to do this.
Again, we can get into endless debates about the influence of modernity and the mechanics of cultural marxism and ideological change. So subversive left-Entryism relies on several debatable assumptions as well.
The KISS-approach to Entryism:
1. Become a judge, expert, bureaucrat, government official.
2. Read Counter Currents, etc. for ideological input.
3. Nudge things our way within the system.
or:
1. Make money
2. Support our cause
P.S.: There is another possible case for left-Entryism, namely sabotage. But that is not a KISS-approach either, for reasons along the lines I described above. Sabotage can be cheap however.
How about combining your approach with Le Brun’s?
1. In college, get some experience, pad your resume, and practice subversion by trying entryism with Left campus groups: opposing human trafficking, fair trade coffee, environmentalism, animal rights, etc.
2. Become an influential judge, lawyer, official, journalist, etc. and do what you can to nudge things in the right direction.
As for sabotage and Left entryism, I think one should be always on the lookout for opportunities, particularly if one is on one’s way out anyway. Never waste a chance to promote incompetence, conflict, and chaos on the Left. It is good practice for life in general.
Two books everyone needs to read, as soon as possible:
1. Edward Abbey, The Monkey Wrench Gang
2. Balthasar Gracian, The Art of Worldly Wisdom
Also, watch Yes, Prime Minister: The Complete Collection
“And that is precisely what happens with these enthusiasms for Ron Paul, the Tea Party, Rand Paul, Putin, and Dugin: money and energy that was going to build up our side was and is being siphoned out of our cause and toward theirs. The whole point of entryism is to get other people working for our ends, not the reverse.”
Good one! And this is the point bourgeois conservatives fail to wrap their senile minds around. They always support the enemy in exchange for nothing, and that is why they are eternal losers.
Broken link should be: White Nationalists & the Political “Mainstream”
(starts looking around for “end human trafficking” groups)
Also see (hear) GJ’s new interview with Lana L. from Radio3Fourteen:
http://www.redicecreations.com/radio3fourteen/2014/R314-141024.php
Grey’-Jo’ is a beast! Not unlike a rough (if magnificent) beast, his hour (one suspects) come round at last, seems to be slouching his way towards Bethlehem to be born.
Thanks . . . I guess.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber 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