Print this post Print this post

On Steve Bannon’s 60 Minutes Interview

2,035 words

Eclipsing the exodus of Chief Strategist Steven Bannon from the White House is the troubling news that President Trump has reached an agreement with top Democrats to “protect thousands of younger immigrants from deportation and fund some border security enhancements,” according to AP. These are people who were brought illegally to the United States as children and who benefited from Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program. But I think how we link the two events can help illuminate what the Trump presidency means to white advocacy and nationalism.

At one point during Bannon’s 60 Minutes interview with Charlie Rose, Rose asked him whether he was on board with ethno-nationalism. Bannon quickly dismissed the idea as ridiculous. According to Bannon, ethno-nationalsm is not only “morally wrong,” it’s also “totally irrelevant.” Earlier, he had referred to white ethno-nationalists as “morons” who were “marginal people that have no impact in our movement.” He also claimed that they were hitching a free ride on the Trump train. That about says it all, doesn’t it? This is also exactly the response anyone who’s been paying attention to politics should expect from Steven Bannon or anyone from the Trump administration. How could it possibly be otherwise?

Stepping back, however, I find it instructive to ask why Rose posed such a silly question to begin with. We could just as easily ask why candidate Trump was hounded by the mainstream media to denounce white supremacy. And no matter how many times Trump did so, it was never enough. Neither Trump nor Bannon have ever promoted ethno-nationalism, not for whites anyway. They have also gone on the record numerous times to denounce people who support ethno-nationalism and similar identity politics. So why the repeated questioning?

It’s because the mainstream media, Marxist epigones that they are, do not trust Donald Trump and do not trust Steve Bannon. They trust Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and other liberals, and so will take them at their word. But like police detectives who think they have their perp, these same people will not relent in their questioning someone they don’t trust until the perp slips up somehow, contradicts himself, or (their hope of hopes) cops to it all.

“You’re goddamn right, I ordered the code red!”

Something like that.

It all boils down to Vox Day’s Third Law of SJWs: they always project. Liberals like Charlie Rose are aware of and approve of the anti-white ulterior motives of their Democratic leaders. They then project this animus whenever they harangue people who don’t share such ulterior motives, typically, their Republican opponents. In so doing, they always prompt their opponents to reveal their pro-white ulterior motives. Despite fervent denials, the Charlie Roses of the world just know such ulterior motives exist. How? Because they themselves have them. That’s why they call it projecting. And that’s why they never stop.

Insidiously, by taking such a tack, the questioner intends only galvanize the non-white and anti-white Democratic base at the expense of his interlocutor. As we all know, being explicitly pro-white is the naughtiest of the naughty in today’s political climate, and nothing will excite the Left more than getting that code red (or, really, code white) admission from a Republican.

This leads to three possible outcomes.

  1. Rose is right. Trump and Bannon are secretly promoting the racial interests of white people at the expense of non-whites.
  2. Rose is wrong. Trump and Bannon are secretly promoting the racial interests of non-white people at the expense of whites.
  3. Rose is simultaneously right and wrong. Trump and Bannon are promoting the interests of whites and non-whites equally, just not their racial Instead, they promote American economic and national interests which, according to Bannon, runs much deeper than something as superficial as race.

I would imagine that from the wording of this list you can guess where I stand on this issue. But let’s quickly dismiss the first two possibilities before delving into the third.

Trump’s recent action on DACA repudiates the first possibility, as if there were any doubt. Acting in the racial interests of white people would demand that the nation take in absolutely no more non-white immigrants, let alone the 800,000 which will in effect be amnestied by Trump’s actions. Whites are having difficulty reproducing at replacement level as it is, and many of their brighter lights are currently suffering from the suicidal delusions of cultural Marxism. Meanwhile many non-whites have no trouble drastically increasing their numbers every generation. Therefore, bringing in more non-whites or keeping the illegal ones—as in the case of Trump’s DACA compromise—will ultimately spell demographic disaster for whites.

As painful as it was to learn about Trump’s read-my-lips moment over DACA, the silver lining here is that we can finally put to rest the canard the Donald Trump is a closet white supremacist. As for Bannon, despite rumors about his appreciation for Camp of the Saints and his name-dropping of Julius Evola and other hints towards a Hard Right disposition, he claims in the interview that he opposed Trump’s DACA decision because it harms America, not specifically white people. This is a point Bannon makes a few times in the interview: America needs an immigration system which benefits America, which means a merit-based immigration system. Hardly words to satisfy white advocates, for sure. As such, I think we can also lay to rest any idea of Steve Bannon keeping swastikas and photos of Hitler in his bedroom.

Many of Trump’s other actions repudiate the second possibility as well. Repealing Obamacare and building the Wall are two obvious examples. Others include the so-called Muslim ban, the reduction of illegal immigration, and the crackdown on sanctuary cities. If Trump and Bannon secretly wished to promote the racial interests of non-whites, they wouldn’t have done any of these things. In fact, they would not have diverged from any of Barack Obama’s policies at all. Yes, this is a bit of a straw man argument, but it does serve to demonstrate that the Trump-as-anti-white argument is every bit as absurd as the Trump-as-Pro-White one.

And, to Bannon’s credit, he does oppose amnesty and the path to citizenship for many of these DACA people. Amnesty is “non-negotiable in the Republican Party,” he says. And when pressed about the fate of these people in America he stated flatly, “when work permits run out they self-deport.”

As for the final possibility, it makes the most sense if you listen carefully to Steve Bannon throughout the interview and take him at his word. It seems that all Bannon really wants is for people to place nationality before race. This jibes most with his constant repudiation of identity politics and his constant promotion of what he calls “economic nationalism.” Here is a particularly meaningful snippet:

The Left, all they try to do is identity politics. And I say this and I’ll say it every day. The more you play identity politics, and we focus on economic nationalism, we will win. We will roll you up. Because Hispanics and blacks understand that if there’s jobs there and careers there and they can take care of their families and their children and their grandchildren so their children and grandchildren can get into engineering schools, and get into computer science and go to Silicon valley and work then this country is going to be more prosperous. And by the way, that’s a winner. Identity politics is a loser.

Here’s another:

We have citizens in this country that have to be taken care of and that’s the promise of Donald Trump. I’m looking out for you as a citizen. You are an American citizen whether you are Hispanic, whether you’re black, whether you’re Jewish, whether you’re an evangelical Christian, whatever your sexual preference is, you’re an American citizen. And guess what. I will defend your right to the job first.

See? So Steve Bannon opposes illegal immigration from Mexico not because he feels superior to Mexicans but because illegal immigration harms the Mexicans who are already in America as citizens. He opposes H-1B Visas not to keep America free from Indians and Chinese but to protect the interests of the Indians and Chinese who are already here as citizens. Sure, opposing illegal immigration and H-1B Visas also helps the white majority, but that, at the very least, is not the stated purpose of his economic nationalism.

So what should a white advocate or nationalist make of all this? I would say three things. First, we have to assume that we really don’t know all the details surrounding Bannon’s departure. He claims he jumped rather than was pushed. He also says he’s going to become Trump’s wingman now that he’s back to running Breitbart and that he and his ex-boss are as chummy as ever. Who knows?

Second, it doesn’t really matter if Bannon and Trump are race realists at heart. Perhaps they are. From my perspective, both men seem too fearless and too pugnacious not to be. Yet they denounce white nationalism and subscribe to the politically correct America-as-melting-pot notion anyway. This could possibly spring from munificent good intentions. Conversely, this could also represent the kind of ideological compromises needed to shift the Overton Window rightward a realistic couple of clicks. It’s either that or abandoning political correctness wholesale and, with it, any hope of moving the Overton Window at all.

In either case, white advocates and nationalists should not expect too much from Trump and Bannon. These two will serve our economic interests well, as shown by record stock market gains, increases in manufacturing, common sense policy decisions (such as dismantling President Obama’s climate change initiatives), drops in unemployment, and other fortunate outcomes. They will also serve our national interests by beefing up the military and police, by making it harder for terrorists to enter the country, by renegotiating lopsided international deals, and taking effective action against rogue enemy states like North Korea. These are all good things. Yes, they benefit non-white Americans as much as white Americans. But it is still good, and far preferable to the overtly anti-white policies the Democrats wish to impose on us.

But this is far as it goes. To think that Trump and Bannon harbor some kind of ulterior pro-white motives to match the anti-white ones of the Democrats amounts to little more than wish-casting. We have no deep state champions in government. At least we have to assume that we don’t. That way, we can make the most of the little breather from history that Donald Trump and Steve Bannon have afforded us. In the big scheme of things, we have very little time to lose.

The last takeaway from the Bannon 60 Minutes interview is this: never has the absolute maliciousness of our enemies been so clear. We live in a world in which our mainstream institutions believe that placing whites on an equal footing with other races is tantamount to white supremacy. Think about that for a moment. Donald Trump’s and Steve Bannon’s greatest sins are to cater to the needs of whites as much as to the needs of non-whites, and to seek their votes as much as anyone else’s. And that counts as white supremacy. That’s the reason why Trump and Bannon are so hated. And that’s the reason why wearing a Make America Great Again hat can get you physically assaulted in certain parts of the country. When Left says, “black lives matter,” they’re really leaving out the rest of the sentence. “Black lives matter more than white ones,” is what they really want to say. And they will say it soon enough, if whites let them.

In the meantime, we have well-meaning men like Donald Trump and Steve Bannon who are holding the line, mostly by keeping us rich and safe. But they do this by pretending that an antiquated notion of America will be enough to keep the tapestried fabric of our nation from tearing apart along racial lines when the time comes. White advocates and nationalist however should not suffer such illusions, and when the fabric of this nation does finally tear apart, we should be ready to move quickly and act decisively to pursue our own interests at last.

This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , . Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  1. FrankC
    Posted September 20, 2017 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

    Question for Steve Bannon: If it’s really only about being a citizen, then why not bring a million Sudanese and a million Somalis into the U.S.A. and put them on the path to being citizens? Then, according to Bannon, they’ll be one of “us” and all will be fine and dandy. After all, they will be legal and they will be citizens.

    Yeah, right. It is about race or it is about nothing at all. If I go to China, follow the legal procedures and become a citizen, does that make me Chinese?

    I am a White Nationalist(not a civic nationalist) because I deal in realities. This means that I have more things in common with a native Swede, German, Frenchman, Italian or Greek than I do with a Sub-Saharan African who happens to live in the United States, speaks English, and happens to be a citizen.

    Civic Nationalists have to lie to themselves so they can lie to others(and parrot the PC line). White Nationalist are truthful to themselves and truthful to others. Which is it more honorable to be?

    • Rob Bottom
      Posted September 20, 2017 at 10:54 pm | Permalink

      What is more honorable: losing the war (whites going extinct) honorably, or winning the war (whites surviving) dishonorably? Regardless of the fact the victor writes the history, it’s clear which I’d prefer. Besides, our enemies don’t give a damn about honor (neither did the Huns, which is one of the reasons they were able to conquer so much of Europe).

      Realistically any politician with white nationalist leanings (including anyone from the alt-right who decides to try to break into politics) should do their best to play the left’s game in the current political climate. Play your cards close to your chest. If that means couching your agenda in civic / economic nationalism so that it doesn’t raise any red flags, so be it.

      • Greg
        Posted September 22, 2017 at 11:57 am | Permalink

        Losing the war and white civilization disappearing is not the worst outcome. Doing nothing, just watching TV, self-indulging in hedonism and letting non-whites out-breed us is infinitely worse.
        Dying while sacrificing yourself for a noble cause is an honorable legacy to leave for our children. We honor many such characters throughout the history.
        We are the last stand against the barbarians, it’s up to us how we’ll be seen by future generations.

    • SWPLNationalist
      Posted September 21, 2017 at 3:16 pm | Permalink

      The obvious answer to that question is because adding a million new citizens of any race, especially new low skilled citizens, would be harmful to people who are already citizens.

      I can understand being a White Nationalist, wanting to be pro-your people, and thinking civil nationalism isn’t enough.

      Don’t pretend as if civic nationalism is just the same as the current neo-liberal/globalist order though. It’s really not.

      Bringing in a million Somalis or a million Sudanese would be a dumb move for a number of obvious reasons. Being a White Nationalist or a race realist is not necessary to be able to realize that. You just have to not be a complete idiot.

  2. Peter
    Posted September 20, 2017 at 4:24 pm | Permalink

    1)Groups, group identity, acting coordinatedly: there is 1 group that if it acts coordinatedly, dominates any and all other groups: Whites.
    2)It´s all about power.
    3)The solution to the problem of power is the balance of power. Every player ultimately has an interest in the balance of power lest he be overpowered by an usurper.
    4)There is one group on earth that organizes the global balance of power, their name begins with “j”. Because everybody has an interest in the balance of power, this “j”-group gets affirmation from everybody (that´s the reason why they are not eradicated: they provide value).

    In the spirit of balance of power, opposition to White Identity is logical.

    So: we Whites have to understand the big picture in which all this unfolds. Then we have a chance to survive.

    Bizarrely, the group that organizes the global power balance, the “j”-group, are, by virtue of their effort, themselves the supreme power, able, and by necessity ready, to execute the dissolution of all other players. A strange game-theoretical paradoxon. It means that the global balance of power needs to be organized in a different way so as to avoid the rise of this kind of paradoxical result. The answer is decentralisation, and the internet, by its very nature the epitome of decentralisation, is the means to this end.

  3. Ardeshir Aryan
    Posted September 20, 2017 at 10:50 pm | Permalink

    There is that Ben Shapiro crowd that emphasizes on constitution and ‘ideas’ on which it stands. If you pass this ideological test, you become an ‘American’ which is an explicitly nonracial specification. What to do?

    • Peter
      Posted September 21, 2017 at 10:01 am | Permalink

      Ask: attraction or non-attraction. The argumentation for WN suffers from a fundamental shortcoming: there is no “proof” and no ironclad deduction. What nobody dares to admit is that eventually, it just comes down to subjective preference: do you want to live around non-Whites or not. Implicitely, everybody knows; proof: White Flight, and self-segregation. Explicitely… people are too intimidated to admit it, and pretend HBD, crime statistics etc., which is insufficient.

      Be subjective. We The People are the souvereign, we do not have to justify our decision: what we want, is law. Why we want it is nobody´s business. We do not want black people around and that´s it. That, and only that, is the reason, nothing else, and it is 100% valid.

  4. Antiochus
    Posted September 21, 2017 at 6:16 am | Permalink

    Agree with everything, except the “rogue state” insult…I stand with North Korea. And Iran.

Post a Comment

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.
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs


    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics


    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles


    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace