The Green Marchers

1,410 words

Recently, Hondurans from the 2018 illegal immigrant “caravan” attempted to cross the border from Tijuana into California. They seem to have been repulsed by the US Border Patrol, though many undoubtedly got through via the legal system. It was a close call. If the caravan actually crossed en masse, it would have been a crippling blow to the credibility of the Trump administration. Nonetheless this event is significant, for until 2018, no white Western military force has been able to beat “green marchers,” which is what the Honduran caravanners were.

What, you might ask, are green marchers? These are unarmed, semi-organized mobs of paupers that gain some objective by moving in massive, locust-style groups. The name was coined by the Moroccan government, although they were not the first people to use such a tactic. The wildly successful Moroccan Green March took place as the Spanish Fascist leader Francisco Franco was upon his death bed in November 1975.

At issue was the Spanish colony south of Morocco called the Spanish Sahara. In 1975, the Moroccans wanted to do a naked imperial land grab of the Spanish colony. Instead of mustering a large, well-trained army equipped with the latest weaponry and requiring a high-IQ, highly-trained bunch of soldiers to man such weapons, the Moroccan government transported thousands of peasants to the border with the Spanish Sahara, dubbed them “the Green March,” and sent them into the Spanish colony.

With their leader dying, the Spanish did not know what to do, so they lost their colony. It is not really a tragedy for a white country to lose what amounts to a Third World country – even a province in Northern Africa with an “off-white” population. But for the native Sahrawi of the Spanish Sahara who became ruled by Moors, the situation was a disaster. It is always a disaster for a people, any people to be ruled by Third Worlders.

Throughout the 20th century and beyond, green marchers have been quite effective.

Non-Violent Civil Disobedience

The green marchers’ tactics originate in the civil disobedience ideas[1] of New England Transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau, who famously spent a night in prison after symbolically refusing to pay a small tax levied for the Mexican War. The ideas of civil disobedience were first used practically on a large scale during the Indian Independence Movement which lasted from 1893 until 1948. The ideas of civil disobedience were also used by the Negro insurrection in the United States (often called the “civil rights” movement) which lasted from Brown vs. Board in 1954 until President Nixon’s election in 1969. (This insurrection is always simmering. It flared up again during Obama’s second term.)

Non-Violent civil disobedience as a tactic for pursuing political goals is misnamed. There is violence, but it is low-intensity violence the impact of which is magnified by biased reporting. “Non-violent” protesters trespass, push, go limp, and break minor laws. When the police respond, the protesters cry out in pain. The ultimate goal is to goad government forces to react with violence, at which point the media whips the public into a moral panic. It is important to note that the use of non-violent civil disobedience for a political goal doesn’t imply that the political goal is right and moral.

Ultimately green marchers turn their social and military weakness and inherent racial pathologies into advantages. Helplessness becomes a form of social dominance. Weeping becomes a means of gaining power. The slave becomes the master.

Other green marches include the march to Selma, Alabama on March 7, 1965. During that march, blacks trooped across the bridge – officially “peacefully” but actually were seeking a confrontation – and were repulsed by State Troopers. The result was a public relations debacle for Alabama’s whites. The Johnson Administration was thus able to move further on “civil rights.”

In 1980, the Mariel boatlift was a green march with a twist. In this case, the US Government and a great many anti-Communist thinkers thought that another batch of refugees fleeing Communism would help the Free World against the Communist World.[2] However, Cuba’s Communist Leader Fidel Castro was a step ahead of the listless and unfortunate President Carter. Castro used the exodus to rid himself of criminals, the mentally ill, and other problematic people. Castro ended up with fewer domestic political enemies and troublemakers.

The 2015 “Syrian” Refugee Crisis was also a green march. Large bands of military-aged men from the Islamic world, not necessarily Syria, moved from staging areas in Turkey to Greece and thence to Germany and Sweden via the same route the Ottoman Turks used to attack Vienna. Once in northern Europe, they quickly attached themselves to the welfare system and made nuisances of themselves.

A successful green march is a calamity for those in its path.

Today, Selma is a ruin. The United States is saddled with an anti-white, low-IQ Congressman John Lewis who coasts along in politics unchallenged because of his participation in the march as a young man. The green march to Selma was part of the transition the “civil rights” movement made from an elite-sponsored, everyone-play-fair social reform to the disaster people like George Lincoln Rockwell predicted that it would become. The natural culmination of “civil rights” was Haitian Revolution-style destruction.

In in Florida, the Mariel boatlift brought crime and social dysfunction. It was a factor in Carter’s loss in the 1980 election. (He won Florida in 1976 and lost it in 1980.)

In Germany 2015, the green marchers likewise left destruction in their wake. In addition to the mass rapes and sexual harassment in various cities, Angela Merkel’s political party was severely damaged, and the foundations of the European Union were shaken. Brexit happened in no small part because of the Refugee Crisis.

The Wider Political Ecosystem of Green Marches

One must wonder how unarmed mobs can be successful given the existence of weapons like the machine gun and obstacles like barbed wire. The answer is obvious. Guns don’t fire themselves. Using a machine gun is an act of will. Green marches cannot take place if there is political will to shoot. Green marches cannot succeed unless the target population has somehow lost its will to survive.

Green marchers also depend on the following additional factors:

• The target country must be headed by a naive, weak leader such as Franco’s trembling successors, Jimmy Carter, or Angela Merkel, or a treacherous, but powerful leader like Lyndon Baines Johnson. Green marches exist in an ecosystem of bad decisions created by these sorts of leaders.
• The media must be sympathetic to the green marchers. Palestinians cannot effectively green march.
• The green marchers must be able to cloak themselves in religious archetypes, such as the role of the sacred victim in the religion of Negro Worship grips so many minds in the United States and elsewhere. Essentially, they must appear helpless, needy, and non-threatening – and the target audience needs to care about such people.
• The target country’s government must be powerful enough that no native white extra-legal or paramilitary force can arise to resist the green marchers. (This factor is sometimes called anarcho-tyranny.)

A Counter to Green Marchers

During the Cold War, the United States embarked on a massive wave of technological innovation to counter Soviet gains in rocketry and other matters. However, there was no effort to counter green marchers in any circumstances.

The Cold War was waged and won along many fronts, from religion to pop music. So too must the resistance to green marchers. The following suggestions apply:

• Numbers are of the essence. Reduce Third World birthrates.
• Encourage Third World people to be guest workers in other Third World Countries. Central Americans should be employed in the Persian Gulf.
• Encourage full employment for people in their native lands.
• Barriers work. However, there are considerable legal issues. It is an act of war to shoot persons in Mexico, even non-Mexicans, from across the US border. We could, however, situate the barrier just inside the US so we could shoot trespassers with impunity.
• Effective non-lethal crowd dispersion technologies must be developed. A massacre of green marchers is not a positive end.
• Metapolitics is also important. The vast majority of Americans cannot admit to themselves that the presence of non-whites reduces their quality of life, although they carefully arrange their lives to not be around non-whites. If that changes, everything changes.

Notes

[1] https://sniggle.net/TPL/index5.php?entry=rtcg#p18

[2] This was not a baseless idea. Communism collapsed in Eastern Europe when East Germans started to move unhindered to West Germany in 1989. However, the racial factor is so obvious it doesn’t need to be spelled out.