One of the scariest moments when playing chess is when you spot a weakness in your own position which you can only hope your opponent doesn’t see. All you can do is wait and pray that he doesn’t move his bishop there or his queen there because that would convert what is already a difficult circumstance for you into a desperate one.
No one knows your own weaknesses better than you yourself do.
Anyway, I arrived at this thought when reading a fairly critical comment on my last piece for Counter-Currents, entitled “On Necessary and Convergent Goals of White Nationalism.” The basic point of the article was that we should distinguish our necessary goals (forming an ethnostate) from goals that happen to converge with our necessary goals (for instance, resisting organized, liberal Jewry). I amplified this by pointing out how we should resist those Jews who fight against our necessary goals and respect the ones who don’t. I offered two examples of Jews who don’t: The Reactionary Jew and Jewamongyou.
I thought this might strike a nerve, and it did.
The commenter points out that Jewamongyou opposes Counter-Currents and implies that the presence of Jews in the so-called “Alt Lite” (such as the American Renaissance crowd) is an effort to “divide-and-conquer” the Alt Right. He concludes that my “attempt to find ‘white Jews’ is sad.”
I would like to respond to this comment because I believe it is both correct and incorrect, and disentangling these threads will hopefully prove to be illuminating for all of us.
Firstly, let’s tackle what’s incorrect about it. He claims that Jewamongyou opposes Counter-Currents. My response? So what if he does? Counter-Currents, as great as it is, is not in itself a necessary goal of White Nationalism. It is one of many means to that goal. If Greg Johnson were to quit Counter-Currents and retire to his mountaintop retreat to write his three-thousand-page magnum opus, the need for White Nationalism would still be there. So, it is not really about who approves of or does not approve of Counter-Currents.
Further, I’m sure Alt West/alt liters like Jared Taylor and Gavin McInnes would oppose certain aspects of Counter-Currents, too. Does that mean we shouldn’t respect those guys? Sure, I wish Taylor would handle the Jewish Question differently, and I wish McInnes were more of a racial identitarian. But these two and others like them still deserve respect. They do good work. They indirectly help our cause. And, White Nationalism aside, the world is a better place with race-realist writers like Taylor and McInnes than without them. (Of course, we reserve the right to tweak and razz them to our heart’s content, just as they can do to us.)
I am also sure that there are people to our right who (let’s be honest) find Counter-Currents to be weak tea. To such people, the writers here, myself included, are the cuckiest cucks of all the cucks in Cuckland. Does that mean we shouldn’t respect such people when the chips are down and a white ethnostate is finally undergoing its bloody birth throes? Quite the opposite, I should say.
As for the divide and conquer argument, I am pretty sure that Jared Taylor, Gavin McInnes, and other anti-anti-Semites came out of the box already not hating Jews. They’ve always been like that. It’s not like those dastardly Jews infiltrated American Renaissance and Taki’s Magazine and seduced these two fine, upstanding anti-Semites away from the Alt Right. Rather, divisions such as Alt White, Alt West, and Alt Lite are what we ourselves erect to rationalize and understand the natural differences of opinion among men who share many of the same political goals. There’s nothing wrong with that. Furthermore, I’m quite certain that one will have a hard time proving that American Renaissance and Taki’s Magazine are evidence that the Alt Right has been “conquered” by the Jews.
Anyway, here is what Jewamongyou has to say about White Nationalism:
Am I a “white nationalist”? Since I believe that whites have a right (and even a duty) to their own nation – just like every other race/ethnicity – I suppose this would make me a “white nationalist”. Even if some don’t consider me “white”, this does not change my opinions about white nationhood.
Basically, he’s accepting the need for white nationalism and won’t stand in the way if it ever becomes a viable thing. You know what? That’s good enough for me. If all Jews were like this guy, we’d be smooth sailing right now on HMS Ethnostate, would we not? So, yeah, respect. I didn’t say we have to like him and eat latkas with sour cream and applesauce at his brother’s bar mitzvah, or anything. Just respect. That should be enough.
Secondly, here is what is correct about the comment: Jewish neocons did infiltrate the American conservative movement in the 1980s and 1990s and basically took it over, changing its nationalist tone to a more internationalist one and making its not-so-terrific effects felt during the Iraq War. Casualties (of the takeover, not the war) included Joe Sobran, Pat Buchanan, Sam Francis, and others. Historically speaking, if Jews are allowed to be active players in an organization that isn’t a professional sports team, they are probably going to dominate that organization sooner or later. Whether this is on purpose or not is immaterial. What is material is that for an organization based on ethno-nationalism, clogging its upper ranks with Jews (or any outsider group) not only defeats the organization’s purpose, but is actually poison to that organization. Kevin MacDonald provides excellent examples of this in his Culture of Critique, but one we can all relate to is how it has become taboo in the West for white people to self-identify as white. This lack of identity (or negative identity, however one wishes to look at it) is one reason why the political class of Western Europe has become helpless to stop the waves of Muslim invaders who are bent on Europe’s subjugation. And the people who are most on-board with keeping white identity taboo are, frankly, liberal, diaspora Jews.
Would the Israelis ever allow Palestinians or any non-Jewish group into the upper echelons of power in their country? Could there ever be a non-Jewish Prime Minister of Israel? Does Israel allow non-Jewish refugees to immigrate to their nation, even for humanitarian reasons? I didn’t think so. So our commenter’s point is well taken. It is not only reasonable, but reason for concern. The Alt Right (or at least the American, European, or Anglospheric branches of it) should never be too friendly to Jews or any other outside group. If an Alt Right-like organization pops up in Israel or China or Mexico and wants to do great things in those nations, fine. Just not here.
Yet my suggestion is that we resist those Jews who fight us and respect the (albeit much smaller) number of them who don’t violate any Alt Right identity principles. This is a way to distinguish between enemy and non-enemy so that when the time comes to actually fight for our ethnostate, we will have fewer people standing against us (and perhaps more standing with us) than otherwise. And we will need as much of this as we can get. So it seems that despite making a valid point, our commenter may have missed mine.
Think of it as a tactical maneuver, which is where my chess analogy comes into play. If I were the SPLC or some other highly influential enemy of the Alt Right, where would I not want the Alt Right to move? What positional weakness would I not want the Alt Right to exploit? Remember, only the SPLC knows where the SPLC is weakest. So where is it most afraid to get hit?
The answer, in my opinion, has to do with anti-Semitism, which is one of our enemies’ more effective weapons against us. If people on the Alt Right breathe fire all the time about how much they hate Jews, then this weapon maintains its power. It helps people feel sympathy for Jews, and, by extension, non-whites (because apparently if you can hate a Jew, you can hate a black, a Muslim, etc.). Those of you who have read In Search of Anti-Semitism will know that Bill Buckley was profoundly moved by such sympathy, even to the point of breaking off with Joe Sobran over the Jewish Question.
This is the case even if the Jews deserve that hatred.
In other words, the commenter could very well be correct in much of what he says, but that doesn’t mean the tactic I am suggesting won’t help us, even just a little bit. If those on the Alt Right were to overcome their emotions (in public at least) and demonstrate unexpected sophistication in their relation with Jews without violating any of their core ethno-centric principles or the necessary goals of white nationalism, then suddenly the game gets a little more difficult for the SPLC and Co. They will have a harder time justifying their cutthroat bullying practices while, to the disinterested observer, the Alt Right will come out looking like classy underdogs. People will start feeling sympathy for us.
I know. Such a tactic won’t have any great immediate effect. Our enemies won’t simply resign and go home. But they will get annoyed, and our position will be strengthened, even if only by a little bit. Of course, we have to mean it, too. If there are Jews like The Reactionary Jew and Jewamongyou who are willing to, at the very least, stay out of our way, we lose nothing by saying thank you and remaining cordial with them. In fact, we might even gain something. Over the long run, such advantages are not insignificant. Enough of them will help to create a position for us in the future that will cause our enemies to worry about where we’re going to move next, and not the other way around.
No Taliban Ever Called Me Incel
“TERF Nazis Must Die!”: A British Feminist Opposes Translunacy & Unwittingly Supports Patriarchy
Contre le sectarisme de droite
Qu’est-ce que l’Alt Right ?
On Red State Secession
Pour faire l’éloge des extrémistes
Remembering Savitri Devi (September 30, 1905–October 22, 1982)
Pourquoi les boomers n’ont pas besoin de craindre le Nationalisme Blanc