1,612 words
French version here
Is White Nationalism “utopian”?
Utopianism is one of the most common objections leveled against White Nationalism, even from people who largely agree with us.
The word “utopia” literally means “nowhere” and refers to an ideal form of government that is not actually found anywhere in the world and may be impossible to realize. For the vast majority of persuadable whites, utopianism flatly disqualifies any political ideology, and the tiny minority that finds grandiose and impossible-sounding utopian visions appealing are overwhelmingly Leftists, the vast majority of them implacable enemies of white self-determination. Thus to own the label “utopian” is self-defeating in the extreme.
Fortunately, there is no need to paint ourselves into the utopian corner, because the ethnostate is no mere abstraction. De facto ethnostates exist on the planet today: Poland and Japan, for instance, are overwhelmingly racially and ethnically homogeneous, and although neither makes ethnicity the explicit legal foundation of citizenship, they consistently reject proposals to open their borders to mass immigration. Tiny Estonia, although afflicted with a large foreign population descended from Russian colonists, is a de jure ethnostate, for its constitution explicitly claims that the primary aim of the Estonian state is the preservation of the Estonian people for all time.
Within the United States, we know exactly what a homogeneously white society would look and feel like, because there are countless zip codes in which there are no non-whites at all, or such tiny numbers that they do not alter the norms and functioning of white society. These communities include many of the suburbs and resorts favored by our anti-white elites. These “whitopias” are quite real, and they are routinely ranked among America’s best places to live. The goal of White Nationalism is Aspen, or Chappaqua, or Martha’s Vineyard for everyone.
Moreover, within the lifetimes of many present-day Americans, the kinds of laws and policies proposed by White Nationalists actually existed, from immigration laws designed to preserve the white majority, anti-miscegenation laws to maintain racial purity, eugenics laws to improve future generations, and even mass deportations of Mexican invaders from border states. These are not utopian pipe dreams. They have already happened.
Thus the first step to creating a White Nationalist America is to dust off these laws and policies and implement them once again. America could become a normatively white society again tomorrow. That is simply a matter of will. And once that decision is in place, we can adopt and improve upon tried and true policies to move from multiculturalism toward the white ethnostate. This process might take fifty years. But we could take our time to get it right, because whites would begin to reap enormous psychological benefits today, simply by knowing that our people have a future again. The purpose of White Nationalism is to give our race a future again, in North America and around the globe.
The ethnostate is no utopia. We know that ethnostates are possible, because they are actual. The real utopia is the multicultural, multiracial paradise where diversity is a source of strength, not alienation, inefficiency, hatred, and violence. Pursuing the multicultural utopia is making vast parts of the white world into dystopias. Compared to multiculturalism, White Nationalism is sober, plodding political realism.
So if the ethnostate is a real possibility, aren’t White Nationalists obligated to spell out exactly what kind of society it will be? Will it be capitalist or socialist? Will it be democratic or authoritarian? Will the legislature have one house or two? What will the flag look like?
Many White Nationalists are dismissive of such questions, and for good reasons.
First, such questions seem premature. It may be generations before we have white ethnostates in North America, and the task of designing institutions and flags will fall to future generations. It seems hubristic to try to make decisions for them.
Second, it is naive to think that there is one right answer to this question. A glance at history reveals an astonishing variety of different political regimes in white societies. Different white peoples find different forms of government attractive. A Scandinavian ethnostate might be much more socialistic than an American one, but they could be equally committed to the survival and flourishing of their citizens.
Third, it is imperative for the White Nationalist movement to unify as many whites as possible around the idea of the ethnostate. However, demanding agreement on the details of the ethnostate is the quickest way to get White Nationalists fighting one another. Thus the more specific our proposals for the ethnostate, the less likely we are to get any kind of ethnostate at all.
Fourth, such questions put too much faith in institutions and laws, and not enough faith in our people. Whites have a way of making decent societies, no matter what political and economic systems they adopt. Conversely, as the history of post-colonial Africa proves in spades, even the wisest constitutions cannot produce good government if the people are not capable of it. Thus the most important thing is for white nations to regain control of their demographics and their destinies. At that point, we can simply trust the white genius for self-government to come up with a whole range of workable political models.
As convincing as these arguments are, though, White Nationalists still have to offer some specifics. White Nationalism will never happen unless we can rally as many whites a possible to our cause. But if we offer no concrete proposals, we are in effect asking our people to give us a blank check, and most of them will quite understandably balk at that prospect.
White Nationalists need to adopt the following policies to turn the United States into an ethnostate.
First, we need to close our borders to non-white immigrants.
Second, we must repatriate all post-1965 immigrants and their descendants to their ancestral homelands.
Third, we must deal with pre-1965 non-white populations by offering them, for instance, autonomous reservations, independent ethnostates, or resettlement in their ancestral homelands.
Fourth, we must institute anti-miscegenation laws to protect the purity of our race. The best anti-miscegenation policy, of course, is simply creating a white homeland. But since it is impossible to prevent all inter-racial contact — due to tourism and trade, for instance — actual laws need to be put in place to discourage miscegenation.
Fifth, an ethnostate must institute pro-family policies. We must restore biologically-based and tradition-hallowed sex roles: men as protectors and providers, women as mothers and community builders. We must also make it affordable for men of all social classes and income levels to own homes and support housewives and children.
Sixth, we will have to adopt protectionism and pro-labor policies to promote the return of high-wage manufacturing jobs to America.
Seventh, we will have to reform our educational system, culture, and media to purge them of anti-white propaganda and communicate the knowledge, skills, and virtues necessary both to flourish as individuals and perpetuate our civilization.
Beyond these specific policies, we can also predict certain features of future White Nationalist societies because they are already part of the White Nationalist movement today. For instance, the White Nationalist movement is religiously pluralistic, so any White Nationalist society we create will be religiously pluralistic and tolerant. The White Nationalist movement allows civic participation by women, so that will also be part of the society we create in the future. Finally, the White Nationalist movement rejects the bourgeois idea that the highest values are material comfort, security, and a long life, because these values make people slaves of the anti-white system that rules us. Thus when we create a White Nationalist society, it will never allow bourgeois values to trump racial idealism.
All White Nationalist policies require government action. They are not going to happen simply by leaving people alone. The trends we are trying to reverse were created by bad government policies, and they can only be reversed by better government policies. White Nationalism by its very nature is statist rather than libertarian, collectivist rather than individualist, illiberal rather than liberal. We believe that there is a common good — the survival and flourishing of our people — which can only be promoted by government policy, and we believe that whenever private interests conflict with the common good, the common good must win out.
This much is obvious. What people want to know is just how far this collectivism and anti-liberalism will go.
The political mainstream, particularly in the United States, is divided between the Left, which has no trouble using government to promote anti-white policies, and the Right, which tends toward a naive distrust of government as such and a naive faith that social order can spontaneously emerge from the bottom up.
Our enemies on the Left will not attack our statism, they will attack our aims. Our enemies on the Right might even share some of our aims, but they will attack our statism, and they will do so by likening White Nationalism to the worst forms of totalitarianism: Stalin, Hitler, Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, etc.
The best response to this sort of straw man argument is to point out that all of the policies we advocate actually existed, to one extent or another, in the United States within the last century, when the country was far freer and happier than under the present, politically-correct multicultural system.
Again, White Nationalism is no mere abstract possibility. Everything we advocate has already been tried. We know what we want is possible because it has already been actual. The burden of proof is on the advocates of multiculturalism, which has never improved any society anywhere, to prove that their vision will lead to anything but hell on earth for white people.
31 Comments
Great piece Greg, but I see one big hurdle towards a peacefull transition to white etno-states, and I’m curious about your opinion on this. What about massive civil disobedience from low IQ-non-whites? This is a problem that lies at the heart of universal etnonationalism; that not all etno-states will be equal.
If our leadership is able to strike a deal with theirs (to carve up lands and borders), my fear is that most of the low-IQ-non-whites will instantly recognise that they drew the shortest straw. They will understand that there is a high probability that the quality of their lives will decline in brown and black etno-states.
That leaves us with either the acceptance of defeat or the move towards the use of massive force, or in other words: war. This is the scenario that all our enemies will bring up in a debate, that the route towards the etno-state goes via massive bloodshed.
I believe in etno-nationalism because it is the only way to save our race, so we must try (hard), but this scenario keeps coming back to me.
I know there is evidence for the existence of etno-states, but what does the evidence tell us about how they came into being?
I hope you can help me with this.
Greetings from Europe!
“What about massive civil disobedience from low IQ-non-whites?”
The issue is with many (not all) high IQ whites who revel in their ability to get along with an international crowd and who only see the best of other races.
This is why we have police and the National Guard. Riots should be swiftly and forcibly quelled, with the arrest of all participants. This actually would help us, because if non-whites resist with violence and mayhem, this will harden white resolve to remove them and speed up the time table. Moreover, people who are arrested for crimes no longer have freedom of movement and association. Thus they can simply be deported.
Another measure that I would adopt would be to send non-white criminals to jails in the non-white countries we want them to settle in, which would save money on their incarceration, with the understanding that once released, they would stay there as citizens. There are plenty of shithole countries that would accept deals like that to enrich their local kleptocrats.
Good point Greg.
Actually quelling non-white violence, civil disobedience is not so difficult. Most MUDS are concentarted in dense urban areas which can easliy be surrounded and sealed off. In 1992 Rodney King Riots in LA, MUDS shot up trucks and fire engines and sealed off their communities because truck drivers would not drive into them. Result: no re-provisioning of grocery stores, gas stations etc. The riot was broken becuase, in part, people were running out of food in non-white areas where grocery store shelves were quickely emptied. Moreover, just cut off outside contact, cut off gas, elecriciy, etc. They will surrender and willingly stop their own destruction. Starving people are easily managed.
Part of our challenge will be to change ‘the narrative’ so that we change people’s minds, undermining the likelihood of massive civil disobedience.
Right now, lower IQ individuals absorb their worldview from TV to a large extent. A cursory look at typical programming shows why they regard multicultural societies as both positive and inevitable. And a globalised world without borders as their only hope for a good future.
Websites like Counter Currents do great work in starting to challenge ‘the narrative’. For nationalists to gain power and not face massive popular opposition, we need to increase the counter narrative through alternative media. This need not be all about explicitly political media either. Community radio in Australia is a small but woefully undersubscribed media. The people running it are desperate for new participants. Of course, if you went along and offered to put on a ‘White Australia hour’ they’d show you the door. But you could offer to do a classic/country/whatever hour and just use the music as a device to introduce a narrative that’s consistent with nationalist ideas.
The old-left Australian labour movement bought a Sydney radio station, 2KY, and rebranded it as KY Country. I remember my parents listening to it and it’s eclectic mix of Slim Dusty tunes and announcements from the Waterside Workers Union about pending strike action.
Nationalists speak about the meta political battle we face – I think access to new media and an infiltration of old media could be a part of changing the narrative.
.
Agreed… except I think “changing the narrative” also implies going back to topics we used to be able to talk about openly — white self-interest — and disabusing ourselves of off-putting leftish phraseology… like “changing the narrative.” Talk down to people thus, and you get what you get.
But can we also say that effective media ought to also include the sidewalk, the laundromat, the church basement, the mall parking lot, the school, the library, the tailgate party, your front porch?
By being fundamentally ad hoc, a grass roots approach is scalable, above all else. And personal, physical, face-to-face networking is inherently healthy and socially restorative, especially in relation to the alienating effects of mass media — an instrument which helped get us into this mess.
I don’t mean a Mormon-like mission, a canvassing effort for “Save The Whites” … but normalization of relations of white Americans with and among each other.
Dear Sir, You write from Europe and ask how we can achieve a peaceful transition to white etno-states.
From a European standpoint, the answer is quite simple: the millions of non-Europeans whom traitorous governments have encouraged to move into Europe (Britain included) need to understand that their place and their duty and their responsibilities are back in their lands of origin. At the same time the Western military alliance, NATO, supported by Britain, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands etc., needs to stop destroying the Arab-Moslem countries of the Middle East. And that is the deal: we don’t poke our nose into the Third World and the Third World does not poke its nose into our western world. There is no likelihood that the leaders of the Third World (potential Sadaam Husein’s and Colonel Ghaddafi’s, etc,. etc.) will refuse this deal, on the contrary. And then we will have ethno-states for everybody. The West certainly has the military power to implement this scheme of repatriation; and the morality of this proposed operation, as Greg Johnson has often pointed out, is also on our side.
Greetings from Europe, Richard Edmonds.
Absolutely! Mr.Edmonds
I like what you wrote. It would be wonderful if it could be implemented but it will NEVER HAPPEN. EVER.
The one big item that was not mentioned is how you are going to deal with that one group that controls the media, academia, the financial system and are deeply entrenched in the govmt at ALL levels. Do you honestly think they are they going to voluntarily give up their power?
I dont, they are going to stay here till it collapses. Their current strategy is very basic:
1. Continue pouring non-whites into the country. They will fight tooth and nail to keep this going.
2. Once the country becomes majority non-white they will say “Wee we are non-white too! We have always been a minority!
That way they will continue to dominate everything. The one big problem is the non-white people just view them as another over privileged group of whites.
So the question becomes how do we make that wish list happen? I dont see our politicians doing it. They are for sale to the highest bidder, usually to the group that shall remain nameless. Frankly before this happens peacefully there will be violent civil war. Thats just my opinion.
Why is it impossible to remove the parasites, T. Bone? GJ is by no means ignorant of the JP. Of course they won’t give up their power, that’s why the fundamental objective of WN will be to remove them from power in total, and by force if necessary. There is something essential to the Aryan spirit that is repulsed by the parasites, who have been expelled from Aryan lands many times for their bad behavior. No amount of social control or brainwashing can overcome this instinctive repulsion. I assure you they will be expelled again, we just must make sure that the terms of the next expulsion must be that they never return. They must be locked in their homeland and be a pariah people forever. A tsunami of popular rage is building against them and the White elites who serve them will soon find they have a choice, continue to serve the Jews, or face being Ceausescued.
You write, “I like what you wrote. It would be wonderful if it could be implemented but it will NEVER HAPPEN. EVER.
“The one big item that was not mentioned is how you are going to deal with that one group that controls the media, academia, the financial system and are deeply entrenched in the government at ALL levels.
Never happen? In the year of our Lord, 1290, our King Edward the First issued his edict of the expulsion of the Jews from England. A few years back, the British National Socialist, the late Colin Jordan, contacted the British Home Office (the U.K. Ministry of the Interior), and asked whether Edwards’s Edict of Expulsion was still valid, still the letter of the law ? He received the reply from an official at the British Home Office that Edward’s Edict of Expulsion has never been repealed or abrogated, so Yes it is still valid, still the letter of the law,but the official did add, that ” a lot of water has passed under the bridge since then.”
So never say Never.
Agree with all points but one: Anti-miscegenation laws.
I’m no libertarian, but the notion of the state policing people’s sexual & romantic behavior strikes me as going too far. I suspect that many of those who might possibly be convinced that white societies are desirable may find that a sticking point as well.
I would prefer to see positive incentives used instead. These incentives would be nonintrusive & completely based on the citizen’s choices. In the white ethnostate, rights & privileges & benefits would be extended for white people creating white families.
People have the freedom to make other choices, but doing so would mean that they give up those rights & privileges & benefits for themselves & their nonwhite children.
Anti-miscegenation laws are not stopping anyone choosing to be with a non-White person (e.g. I doubt secret police are going to travel to Thailand to bring back a guy marrying an Asian woman), its about forcing that White person to make a choice; White homeland or racial exile.
Could not disagree more. Miscegenation destroys the White race. Race traitors should be expelled and/or denied entry.
Anti-misegination laws are essential. If libertarians balk a this, let them go with the MUDS they value so much. The good of the race is more important than individual romantic, sexusal whims, etc. Weak half measures will not achieve anything.
Only unlimited race specific biological warfare can save us now.
All was going well with this analysis until: …likening White Nationalism to the worst forms of totalitarianism: Stalin, Hitler…
Everything mentioned in the six points related in this article are imperative points laid out in National Socialism – and put into practice in NS Germany. National Socialism is only a ‘worst form of totalitarianism’ for those who really don’t want those aforementioned points put into practice. The continuous defamation of National Socialist Germany – as well as its determined leader, Adolf Hitler – by people who claim to want an ‘ethnostate’ is precisely why there never will be another for a long time to come. This kind of slander aimed at the last true bastion of Aryan independence just demonstrates the ridiculously naive and weak-kneed will of the soldiers-of-the-pen.
These sorts of theoretical discussions about what needs to be done to save the White Race always end with a sort of ‘this is what needs to be done, but we have to do it carefully’ – read ‘let’s not rock the boat’. National Socialism rocked the boat and the people praised the men who did so. Theories and discussion are for lesser men – action to duty and indomitable will are for the conquerors who still possess that noble and great European spirit which is the only thing that will save our people. Turning your backs on the brave and noble people of National Socialist Germany because you don’t want to offend lesser men is indicative of a spineless will that will never achieve the goal.
You people are a disgrace. I’m just so sick and tired of this panty-wasted ‘nationalism’ theorizing. There is already a blueprint left to us. There is already a tried and true form of an ‘ethnostate’ which was very real and present in modern history. All the questions are already answered. What is needed is the spine and the will to go forward. But I’m afraid that this necessity is all but gone for western man. Simply pathetic.
Are you denying that our opponents link our ideas to Hitler, Stalin, etc. and characterize them as the worst totalitarians?
It is people like you who have led me to conclude that we can EITHER rehabilitate the historical reputation of National Socialist Germany, OR we can create a future for white people. I choose the latter. The movement has gone nowhere for decades, because it contains too many people who think the way you do.
The people who slandered Hitler and National Socialism continue to do so. John F Kennedy said that He would be recognized as a great leader once the hysteria died down – they never intend to let the hysteria die down. And when the slander wasn’t enough, they made war on them, both the Capitalists and the Communists united against Germany. Why do you think they will just let waltz into the Whitopia? If the slander doesn’t work, they will make war on us as well. Do you think that by disavowing Hitler we will be spared this? If so, you are confusing the incidental with the essential.
Hitler is a turn off for the overwhelming majority of White Americans, most of whom have relatives who fought in WWII. Those with supportive views of him are a tiny fraction of Whites, and are typically involved in Star Chamber conspiracy theories. I can’t think of a more effective repellent to creating a White ethno state in America.
And the overwhelming majority of White Americans are deluded about just about everything. They’re going to have to awaken and change. Certainly, we don’t have to put Hitler front and center. We’re interested in American National Socialism after all. But disavow him and his struggle? That would be to doom ourselves from the beginning.
WWII is a huge distraction.
The justness of our cause is not dependent on Hitler being a good guy or a bad guy. We would be as right if 6 Million died in the Holocaust as if it was only a few hundred thousands. We don’t NEED to redpill people on WWII to win.
The WWII pill is a huge rabbit hole and most people are simply not ready for it. It requires a certain knowledge of history that a lot of people don’t have. They just ain’t ready.
There are about 6 other things that the average person needs to be redpilled on before anything related to WWII. It’s just beat to dodge the subject when possible.
Mr. X, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Jaego, my heart aches as I was watching your strong-worded and a bit fiery-tempered exchanges on the issue of Hitler and National Socialism and its (ir)relevance with the cause of White Nationalism and White survival today. My first impression upon reading your opinions was that you all had your good points while the languages you used, especially those of Mr. X and Mr. Johnson, were a little provocative and absolute vis-à-vis comrades who we rightly are. After all, we all want to have a shared, mutually-agreed, balanced and rational understanding of the German National Socialism and its profound and consequential legacies, and what’s more, we all undoubtedly share the ultimate common goal of preserving the White race with its physical existence and cultural identity. Thus the least thing we want to see is such infighting on historical issues, however important and unavoidable they are, which only alienate, embitter and divide us and hamper our aim and effort of becoming a united and cohesive force that we must become in order to defeat our enemies and save the White race and its civilization.
As a proud non-white advocate and supporter for White Nationalism and also a long time avowed National Socialist and admirer of Adolf Hitler, I would like to share some of my thoughts and perceptions on this very thorny issue and hope my humble views could provide some modest reference to you. Yes, indeed, however we want to skip or bypass the historical status and legacy of Adolf Hitler in discussing our current imperative and mission of advancing White Nationalism and securing and building White states for White people in Europe and its diasporas in North America, Australia and elsewhere, Hitler and National Socialist Germany can hardly be completely avoided in reality due to its historical preponderance both in our own collective psychological depth as well as in the mind of our enemies. So how to view and treat Hitler and National Socialism, both in historical-political theory and in our real-world activism of spreading and promoting White Nationalism and recruiting more Whites into our camp, which as Mr. Johnson aptly observed, was essential to the ultimate success of our cause.
In my humble opinion from my limited intellectual capacity, I would like to say that White Nationalism today and Hitler/National Socialism (warts and all) are two things that are not entirely and mutually exclusive, incompatible or irreconcilable. Hitler was an unparalleled White giant and great leader in the last 100 years if not longer, and National Socialism is a great and indelible achievement and treasure of White people, they both have their unique historical presence and some realistic significance even in this day, in spite of their flaws and limitations and their smeared and discredited image in the majority of White normies thanks to our ruthless enemies and their relentless propaganda and indoctrinations. This should be and I believe already is a tacit shared understanding among a big majority of White Nationalists today. The crux, then, is that how and to what extent do we need to bring up and promote, or for that matter, suppress and avoid Hitler and National Socialism in our daily activism of advancing and spreading White Nationalism to normies in our current social-political-cultural context which is helplessly poisoned and antagonized toward Hitler and National Socialism.
Thus the whole matter, in my opinion, requires and deserves a smart and balanced approach, a clear understanding and differentiated/alternate use of strategy and tactics. Hitler and National Socialism forever have a place in our own heart and mind, and should become a reserved tool in our intellectual and metaphysical arsenal, but the application of it must be carefully measured and weighed, never blindly or uniformly, but tactfully and selectively toward different audiences. What we should wisely and effectively carry out is that on the one hand, we should try our utmost to educate and enlighten people on Adolf Hitler and National Socialism with the historical truths in all ways possible and viable, so as to debunk our enemies’ bloody lie that Hitler was the absolute evil and National Socialism the unmitigated disaster and gradually and effectually disinfect them and eliminate the pernicious influence of our enemies propaganda; on the other hand, we must wisely note not to bring up Hitler and National Socialist Germany at every turn and demand it as a prerequisite for comradeship between ourselves, let alone in our proselytizing effort on the normies. The advancement of our White Nationalist cause, both intellectual-theoretically and in real societal activism, must be and can be made synchronized and harmonized with the historical status and legacy of Hitler and National Socialism as long as we achieve this common understanding and handle them carefully; and our efforts of education and recruit of normies, based on their different levels and depending on their different degrees of progress in understanding historical truths on Hitler and National Socialism, should be coordinated with the discussions with them on Hitler and National Socialism correspondingly and adjusted accordingly in amount and degree.
With our balanced, patient, flexible and well-coordinated efforts of spreading White Nationalism vigorously and telling the truths about Hitler and National Socialism to the masses in a committed, measured and prudent way at the same time which will definitely help educate and produce a better historically informed and intellectually courageous White majority in a long run, there must be a day in the future that a perfectly well-rounded, truthful, rational and harmonious understanding and an honest and objective assessment of the legacies and dynamism of Hitler and National Socialism be established among most of White people in our societies.
After our cause of White Nationalism and building new White nations succeed, it is my belief that Hitler and his National Socialist legacy, for all its flaws and shortcomings, will get a monument in many if not all of our White nation’s capitals from the free will of our people, and Hitler will be commemorated forever as one of the greatest White heroes and most faithful, dedicated and sacrificial White leaders in history, together with other White titans such as William Pierce and George Lincoln Rockwell, among others. Despite the fact that all of them were not perfect (no mortal is) and each had their own intellectual and/or practical limitations born of their particular historical backgrounds, their heroic statuses will not be diminished and will live in our hearts forever and ever.
Mr. X, Greg, Mr. Jaego, my heart aches as I was watching your strong-worded and a bit saber-crossing exchanges on the issue of Hitler and National Socialism and its (ir)relevance with the cause of White Nationalism and White survival today. My first impression upon reading your opinions was that you all had your good points while Mr. X’s language was a bit harsh and caustic and Greg’s “Either Or” theory, in my humble view, was a bit absolute. After all, we all want to have a shared, mutually-agreed, balanced and rational understanding of the German National Socialism and its profound and consequential legacies, and what’s more, we all undoubtedly share the ultimate common goal of preserving the White race with its physical existence and cultural identity. Thus the least thing we want to see is such infighting on historical issues, however important and unavoidable they are, which only alienate, embitter and divide us and hamper our aim and effort of becoming a united and cohesive force that we must become in order to defeat our enemies and save the White race and its civilization.
As a proud non-white advocate and supporter for White Nationalism and also a long time avowed National Socialist and admirer of Adolf Hitler, I would like to share some of my thoughts and perceptions on this very thorny issue and hope my humble views could provide some modest reference to you. Yes, indeed, however we want to skip or bypass the historical status and legacy of Adolf Hitler in discussing our current imperative and mission of advancing White Nationalism and securing and building White states for White people in Europe and its diasporas in North America, Australia and elsewhere, Hitler and National Socialist Germany can hardly be completely avoided in reality due to its historical preponderance both in our own collective psychological depth as well as in the mind of our enemies. So how to view and treat Hitler and National Socialism, both in historical-political theory and in our real-world activism of spreading and promoting White Nationalism and recruiting more Whites into our camp, which as Mr. Johnson rightly observed is essential to the ultimate success of our cause, is a significant and inescapable question we need to address and act upon wisely.
In my humble opinion from my limited intellectual capacity, I would like to say that White Nationalism today and Hitler/National Socialism (warts and all) are two things that are not entirely and mutually exclusive, incompatible or irreconcilable. Hitler was an unparalleled White giant and great leader in the last 100 years if not longer, and National Socialism is a great and indelible achievement and treasure of White people, they both have their unique historical presence and some realistic significance even in this day, in spite of their flaws and limitations and their smeared and discredited image in the majority of White normies thanks to our ruthless enemies and their relentless propaganda and indoctrinations. This should be and I believe already is a tacit shared understanding among a big majority of White Nationalists today. The crux, then, is that how and to what extent do we need to bring up and promote, or for that matter, suppress and avoid Hitler and National Socialism in our daily activism of advancing and spreading White Nationalism to normies in our current social-political-cultural context which has become helplessly poisoned and antagonized toward Hitler and National Socialism.
Thus the whole matter, in my opinion, requires and deserves a smart and balanced approach, a clear understanding and differentiated/alternate use of strategy and tactics. Hitler and National Socialism forever have a place in our own heart and mind, and should become a reserved tool in our intellectual and metaphysical arsenal, but the application of it must be carefully measured and weighed, never blindly or uniformly, but tactfully and selectively toward different audiences. What we should wisely and effectively carry out is that on the one hand, we should try our utmost to educate and enlighten people on Adolf Hitler and National Socialism with the historical truths in all ways possible and viable, so as to debunk our enemies’ bloody lie that Hitler was the absolute evil and National Socialism the unmitigated disaster and gradually and effectually disinfect them and eliminate the pernicious influence of our enemies propaganda; on the other hand, we must wisely note not to bring up Hitler and National Socialist Germany at every turn and demand it as a prerequisite for comradeship between ourselves, let alone in our proselytizing effort on the normies. The advancement of our White Nationalist cause, both intellectual-theoretically and in real societal activism, must be and can be made synchronized and harmonized with the historical status and legacy of Hitler and National Socialism as long as we achieve this common understanding and handle them carefully; and our efforts of education and recruit of normies, based on their different levels and depending on their different degrees of progress in understanding historical truths on Hitler and National Socialism, should be coordinated with the discussions with them on Hitler and National Socialism correspondingly and adjusted accordingly in amount and degree.
With our balanced, patient, flexible and well-coordinated efforts of spreading White Nationalism vigorously and telling the truths about Hitler and National Socialism to the masses in a committed, measured and prudent way at the same time which will definitely help educate and produce a better historically informed and intellectually courageous White majority in a long run, there must be a day in the future that a perfectly well-rounded, truthful, rational and harmonious understanding and an honest and objective assessment of the legacies and dynamism of Hitler and National Socialism be established among most of White people in our societies.
After our White Nationalist cause of building new White ethnostates succeeds, it is my belief that Hitler and his National Socialist legacy, for all its flaws and shortcomings, will get a monument in many if not all of our White nation’s capitals from the free will of our people, and Hitler will be commemorated forever as one of the greatest White heroes and most faithful, dedicated and sacrificial White leaders in history, together with other White titans such as William Pierce and George Lincoln Rockwell, among others. Despite the fact that all of them were not perfect (no mortal is) and each had their own intellectual and/or practical limitations born of their particular historical backgrounds, their heroic statuses will not be diminished and will live in our hearts forever and ever.
I wish to insert:
Zero: Let’s begin normalizing relations with and among American whites.
I use the (now trendy) word normalizing in the familiar context of diplomacy, like opening an embassy in a foreign land. This aptly denotes the land we live in now, yet it is also the ground from which our movement is emerging.
In addition to being a node of a sovereign nation’s diplomatic apparatus, an embassy or consulate is equally a haven for nationals who may be visiting or stranded in an alien land.
Whatever the white ethno-state of the future will look like, or will be named, let’s just go ahead and consider that it exists now — because it does: within and among us. We are it because we share this cause.
In relation to our fellow citizens — our wayward brothers and sisters “abroad” — a white nationalist would do well to consider and conduct him or herself as an ambassador of our ethno-state.
The stated mission of an embassy service and its members does not encompass the development of policy or theory, nor does it need to proselytize. It carries out stated policies, to be sure, but the first policy, our first concern is simply to look after the well-being of fellow citizens, those who are for one reason or another trapped, traveling or living within foreign borders. In relation to that country’s laws and conditions, the embassy is the first and maybe the only court of appeal, a refuge, the place where one would naturally “check-in” for news from home, etc.
Service, organization, professional courtesy, graciousness and kindness, as well as clear, unambiguous communication would seem to be proper keynotes for those who work in the diplomatic corps.
It’s partly an analogy, possibly corny, but for a movement which — I am convinced — is about to explode in this very land, it seems practical to develop diplomatic strategy for and toward whites of a certain minimum receptivity, whatever their politics. This is matter of emphasis, not a denial of the importance of theory, for which there is plenty of time, as Greg states above. However…
I have to respectfully take tiny issue with Greg on his allotment of time, and not (only) because in fifty years I’ll be 104 — which I’ll just go ahead and take to mean 100% deceased.
Let’s not over-estimate the immovability of current obstacles, but rather keep pushing. This unbelievable tide of nonsense, naked corruption and instability (the flailing of a desperate, dying regime, I like to think) presents a continuing host of situations, conditions of heightened receptivity, opportunities and reasons to mobilize ourselves in an ever-widening body.
Did someone say esprit de corps?
The greatest weapon in the world is control of the media. Add Hollywood, education system and the federal reserve and you control a country. I see little hope unless control of the media happens first.
What a title for a book! The insides write themselves.
OT. Nice to see Paul Craig Roberts saying “fuck it” and doing what we all knew he could do!
“The ideology is not truth-based. Identity Politics is based in Jewish cultural Marxism, which was designed to break up goy society, and it has done a good job.”
The Abandonment of the Working Class
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/01/24/abandonment-working-class/
“Second, we must repatriate all post-1965 immigrants and their descendants to their ancestral homelands.”
I suppose you mean “non-white post 1965 immigrants”, more than a few Europeans have moved here since 1965.
Also, that still leaves 35 million blacks, mostly in the South and the AmerIndians. I suppose you can imagine sending the blacks back to Africa, the Indians?
The population of the USA in 1965 was about 194 million. Today it’s about 330 million. By most accounts we native born Americans reached ZPG around 1970, so most of that growth is post 1965 immigrants and so pretty much in round numbers you are talking at least 100 million people to remove from the USA.
The idea that a future American government is going to forcibly relocate 100 million people to other continents is absurd. Trump can’t even build the damn wall.
My previous comment on this topic a couple months ago (which was much more detailed in terms of the numbers of minorities needed to be repatriated from various areas of the USA) was met only with a sarcastic insult: “boomer cuck”.
OK, fine, insult me all you want. By my point remains if we spend all our mental energy on imagining fantasy solutions that are practically and logistically impossible (or, to complete will require World War Three, which is essentially what you are advocating), it’s not a lot more useful than what the Nazi LAPRers have offered up for the last 30 years.
I don’t think you should assume that all 100 million people will need to be forcibly relocated. Migration occurs because of push and pull factors, un other words, incentives to leave one place and go to another. The United State currently has a number of pull factors the make it a top destination country but policies could change these from pull factors to push factors. In addition to negative incentives to make people want to leave (withholding public assistance and various opportunities), if we are capable of changing the highest ideal of society from egalitarian to identitarian this will not just affect whites. Many immigrants still have ties their home countries and we can help create in them the psychological desire to return to them. There will probably be some cases of forcible relocation but not nearly as many as you are predicting.
Hi Greg,
Thank you for this interesting article.
Some questions.
“What people want to know is just how far this collectivism and anti-liberalism will go.”
How far would it go if you would have the power to do what you want to do in the Ethnostate? Where would you draw the line? Where does state rights end, and where does individual rights begin?
Best regards,
Per Nordin