I was recently reading in the news about a group of English soccer fans who, while chanting “we’re racist,” refused to allow a Negro to board a train in Paris. This was, as one can imagine, inflated into an international incident, plastered across newspapers and websites, certainly more important to the System than those mild shenanigans in Rotherham (completely forgotten about by now). Let us for a moment forget that a Negro has no business being in Paris to begin with, and consider the deeper meaning of this incident.
When such things occur, I wonder about the perpetrators. Of course, we do not know who they are, but I very much doubt that these are any sort of real racial nationalists or ethnonationalists. I wonder who they vote for back in England, who they support. Maybe the Conservatives. Maybe even Labour (do you doubt it?). Maybe — “at best” — some support the UKIP. If Nick Griffin was running for office how many of those “racist” soccer fans would vote for him, as opposed to the mainstream conservatives? Most likely, not a single one. The “bigotry” of these soccer fans is personal, not political. There may well have been alcohol involved. Typical of the juvenile and feckless creatures Whites have become, displeasure over race replacement does not manifest in practical political action, but in carefully hidden disquiet that will rarely erupt in a silly display of (drunken?) hooliganism.
There used to be a TV show popular in 1970s America, All in the Family, with one of the most famous characters in television history: the blue-collar White bigot Archie Bunker. This being a Jewish-created show, Bunker was of course shown as ignorant and buffoonish, no surprises there. But, that said, he did — and still does — represent something about Whites that remains a serious problem for nationalist progress.
Despite all of Bunker’s anger and frustrations toward minorities (and also White ethnic Catholics), he was — what? A neo-Nazi? No, not by a long shot. Bunker was a supporter of Richard Nixon, the Republican President who promoted affirmative action and busing. Bunker gave his ardent support to a politician who enacted policies that were complete anathema to Bunker’s fundamental racial beliefs. Thus, the problem: Bunker’s racialism never expressed itself in practical politics, it never manifested in a manner that could influence public policy or in any way modify the historical currents to which he objected. Like White “bigots” the world over, Bunker’s racialism was private, manifested in “venting,” and bluff displays of “politically incorrect” verbal bravado (and even that is forbidden today), not in any sort of useful activism, not even in making the right choice on election day.
White “bigotry” is childish, useless, sterile. It accomplishes nothing but to energize the anti-White Left, and give more ammunition to the forces of White dispossession. I’ve had Bunkers in my family; I’ve known their behavior well. You the reader may have had the same experiences in your family. Folks who sputter with venom about “the niggers and the spics,” and yet go on to vote for Nixon or Bob Dole or George “Open Borders” Bush or John McAmnesty or any of the others. These are folks who are deeply upset about illegal immigration and who will rail against “dem wetbacks crossin’ the border” but then they’ll flock to the polls and eagerly vote for a Jeb Bush or a Marco Rubio. Their bigotry is all “hot air,” it is “sound and fury signifying nothing.” And as their world crumbles around them, they begin to find that even this harmless venting, this juvenile name-calling, even that is no longer allowed. it is “hate speech,” and they had better learn to just “shut up” and vote for whatever White-hating, immigrant-loving, far-Left GOP candidate is being championed by FOX news.
There are some who would make excuses for the Bunkers. Why, they say, there’s no choice on the ballot! Better Nixon than McGovern! Putting aside the issue of why the Bunkers allowed their nation to be stolen from them, so they are constantly presented with such non-choices, the fact remains that, even when a small level of choice is in fact presented to them, they don’t take advantage of it. David Duke ran for President several times. He did very poorly. What fraction of “White bigotry” supported Duke? A small fraction indeed. Pat Buchanan is a moderate paleoconservative and no racialist, and it is true he was part of the Nixon administration. But compared to other Republicans, Buchanan at least represents a sliver of difference compared to the neoconservative juggernaut. How did Buchanan’s Presidential aspirations fair? Also poorly. Republican primary voters, far more “conservative” than the general White population, favored the likes of Bush Sr. and “civil rights Republican” Bob Dole over Pat Buchanan. If even someone like Sessions, a System Republican who takes a hard line against immigration, were to run for President, do you doubt that the Archie Bunkers would still vote for Jeb and Marco, all the time muttering under their breath about the “illegals stealing our country?”
Europeans are not much better. Significant fractions of Europeans express strong opposition to mass immigration in opinion polls, and then these same people cheerfully go to the ballot box to vote for a Merkel, a Sarkozy, a Cameron, or worse. I have no doubt that in, say, Greece, the fraction of the population vehemently against immigration is significantly larger than the fraction who vote for Golden Dawn. But these “bigots” will instead vote for pro-immigration conservatives or even for Syriza.
The problem is not just that we need to “wake more White people up,” it is that those who are at least partially awakened refuse to act upon their beliefs and upon their “awakened” status. Like Archie Bunker, they’ll mutter and complain, shout racial slurs at soccer games, prevent Negroes from boarding trains, leave comments on Internet blog threads, but they won’t even vote the right way in the complete privacy of the ballot.
This “Bunker Syndrome” represents a major impediment to progress: even when Whites know, they do not act. Even when they know, they will not vote for the far-Right. Even when they know, they remain complicit in their own dispossession. So, the “movement” had better be aware that it is not enough to educate and “awaken,” one must somehow instill political maturity and seriousness into a population that behaves like a bunch of semi-retarded children. That will not be an easy task.
Is Nicki Minaj Super Bass-ed?
Le Nationalisme Blanc est-il haineux ?
Qu’est-ce que le nationalisme américain ?
The Abortion Fight Returns
Le Nationalisme Blanc est-il non-américain ?
Fondations du XXIème siècle: Le Siècle de 1914 de Dominique Venner
Owning the Libs, Stanning the Empire
Redéfinir le courant majoritaire