White nationalism died because it dropped out

ancient_war

“Tune in, turn on, and drop out,” were the words of the 1960s hippies.

They advocated such behavior because they realized they were a minority attacking an established society. Thus they adopted a method — passive-aggression — that involved them becoming an obstacle to this society.

Since then, this mentality of protest has been common among political groups. But it only works when your ideology is one that the mainstream is already primed for.

To put this another way, what the hippies advocated was not different in substance from what the Revolutionists in France wanted in 1789. The hippies just turned up the intensity.

In the same way, Communism is no different from what socialists and other egalitarians want. It’s just a higher degree. All leftist ideas are the same, separated only by degree.

For that reason, when the hippies came about after a war the US won by appealing to fundamental liberal reasons, it was guaranteed they would succeed.

Those of us who are on the right, or endorsing ideas typically associated with the right, do not have that advantage. This applies to white nationalism, an ideology that this site has called upon us to destroy.

As Hewitt E. Moore notes (or dare we say, “observes”) at The Occidental Observer, white nationalism has self-destructed by marginalizing itself:

White Nationalism is nearing the age of needing heart meds (literally and metaphorically). Excluding a handful of leafleteers and diversity dodgers, the only movement is that of fingers on a keyboard. The keyboards allow for just enough recycled thought to prevent total ideological stagnation. Through the years, numerous would-be White Nationalists have searched the realms of Cyberia in hopes of finding White camaraderie in their geographical region; only to eventually permanently “log out” after discovering the movement is primarily an internet based phenomenon.

…We need a face-to-face community of noisy, intelligent, attractive, committed White people marching in the street with signs opposed to immigration, multiculturalism and the strident ethnic politics of other groups; there is a need for a steady drumbeat of political advertising where pro-White themes, whether explicitly white or not, are repeated over and over to the point that they become part of the furniture of life even if winning elections remains a distant goal.

He sets up two counterpoints here: white nationalism is a drop-out ideology, and what we need instead is a vivid pro-white crowd. I both agree and disagree.

White Nationalism failed because it is racial Marxism. Its goal, the classless white mob, is based on liberal ideals and upholds liberal notions of egalitarianism. Its method is based on dropping out of mainstream political discourse, rejecting conservatism, and instead adhering to a Marxist-style militarized ideological regime.

Further, white nationalism is designed in such a way as to alienate the average white person. It conflates all whites as being the same, which offends people who have strong cultural heritage. It embraces violent non-solutions to paranoiac diagnoses of non-existent problems, such as The Jewish Question and its negative treatment of Africans. Finally, by being such a strong ideological force, it demands that people engage in unproductive behaviors to demonstrate that they are of a true enough ideological bent. This reminds me of the darkest days of the French revolution, when the guillotine turned on its masters and Revolutionaries were facing the blade for not being pure enough in their hatred of the aristocracy.

In other words, white nationalism drives away the people it needs to succeed in order to conserve the people it has, which is a group that has grown only as more people drop out and become alienated thanks to the disastrous regime of Barack Obama. But it hasn’t grown and it hasn’t had any political successes because of its alienation.

What works instead? Pat Buchanan continues to influence people with his conservative politics, Ann Coulter openly speaks of the failure of diversity in her conservative columns, and in Europe, Marine Le Pen is succeeding with what’s ultimately a moderate right-wing party that eschews hatred and Holocaust denial and instead opts for a pro-nationalist outlook.

Dropping out is the problem with white nationalism. Without a broader context, it shifts leftward because white nationalism is not anchored in a bigger philosophy. Leftism will never support white nationalism because leftism is inherently egalitarian and thus will always tend toward being more inclusive, not less. Thus we look toward rightism, the movement that opposed the French Revolution and defends tradition, heritage and culture. With that as an anchor, nationalism becomes plausible again and its defense is an extension of existing conservative beliefs.

The left will win as long as they can portray pro-nationalist movements as fanatical, and people are hell-bent on helping them:

A man has been charged after pages were allegedly torn from the Koran and thrown during a football match.

Mark Stephenson, 25, from Napoleon Drive, Bicton Heath, Shrewsbury, has been charged with causing racial or religiously-aggravated harassment.

The better solution is this: instead of dropping out, reclaim your society.

Join your mainstream conservative party and start swaying it toward discussion of real issues, which are not only limited to The National Question but include other disasters like the debt bomb, decaying infrastructure, and anything leftists admire. If we don’t control these parties, parasites and profiteers will step up and take over.

Join your local society. Do not drop out and become another alienated basement-dweller with no power. Go to school, get degrees, succeed and/or start a business, do well, succeed. Become someone that is respected. Do not commit hate crimes. Do not use drugs, drink too much, stockpile anything illegal. Be visible in doing constructive things for society.

If someone tells you that you’re not true enough for refusing to Name The Jew(tm) or beat up Africans, realize you are dealing with an ideological zombie. This person is lost and is secretly a leftist, which is the enemy. Get away and ignore them. Do not engage them — they are insane.

Do positive things for culture. Learn to love classical music. Learn about your heritage. Uphold traditional behaviors, even the surface stuff like cuisine, folk sayings, and architecture. Support anything that reveres the past and carries it forward.

Instead of dropping out, drop in. Join society and do everything that everyone else does but keep your ideals intact. When people ask, present your ideas logically and clearly without emotion.

White nationalism died because instead of engaging in the means to solve the problem, it retreated to its trailer and became an inbred camp of fanatics. Let it go, or better yet, kill it. We need something better and no amount of cheering will make a dead horse win a race.

33 Comments

  1. Holmgang says:

    Look at the photograph posted with the article header above it. At least 10 Viking “living history” role players and many onlookers. No basement or computer in sight. Keep ancestral heritage alive and forming bonds of kinship all while having fun. No doom and gloom.

    1. 1349 says:

      The fad of historical reconstruction/reenactment (“role playing”) looks very much like a dying human’s quick recollection of all his life. In reenactment, the dying human is the whole society…
      That’s what it seems like in xUSSR, at least.

    2. No basement or computer in sight.

      It would be healthier if people all became re-enactors or some other active situation.

      The problem is not basements or computers, but that those are all that white nationalism is, as was the point in Hewitt’s article.

      But I think anything to encourage “historical consciousness” or even awareness outside of the individual is good.

      Crow often mentions meditation. I see this as a pathway through nihilism to understanding cognition in a realistic way, and thus to understanding reality.

      All of these methods are traditional and better than the modern groupthink of Ideology.

  2. Jack says:

    White nationalism failed because it’s white elites selling middle and lower class whites down the river. Anyone with half a brain realizes if the best whites are actively trying to kill the white race off while promoting destructive minority groups then the white race is a pretty fucked up and worthless race.

    They operated for years on that idea that if they could just convince the white elites of the truths they spoke they would join the cause. The elites well know what blacks and Mexicans do to white areas and they rejoice in their in it.

    1. White nationalism failed because it’s white elites selling middle and lower class whites down the river.

      Generally speaking, that would be just the liberal “elites”?

      The ones that were created by destroying the aristocracy and taking their place?

      We live in an age of pretend kings.

  3. Tyler says:

    After reading this article (and the link towards your ”jewish problem article”), I regret to say as a loyal fan and reader, I will leave Archeo Futurism, Guillaume Faye, Bret Stevens and this blog as of immediately. Nationalism is booming here in Europe and we are confronted by the jewish problem every single day. We all know it is a problem, what on earth are on about in denying this? Everyone is wakening up to it.

    No doubt you have read Gilad Atzmon. No doubt you see what goes on here in France with the quenelle. Have you read Alain Soral? Have you read Hervé Ryssen? France is strangled by jewish power and all its associated movements, organisations and pseudo philosophers such as Bernard Henri Levy. The latter are relentlessly writing , participating in debates argueing against tradition and strongly pro liberalism every single day. This is absolutely not some ”non existent problem”.

    Throughout history, countless great philosophers have pointed out the jewish problem. Were they wrong and do you know better?? We are suffocating under jewish lies and behaviour in France every single day. To deny this, at this crucial moment in time, is madness.

    Good luck.

    1. crow says:

      Does a People-Problem become a Jewish-Problem because the person manifesting the problem is Jewish?
      And why couldn’t Brett know better than ‘countless great philosophers’?
      Countless know-nothing modern halfwits are of the opinion they know better than all the sages of the past. So it seems quite reasonable that our very well-informed host might have some valid observations to make.
      If you feel your exit will punish this blog for not saying what you want it to say, then all I can say is good riddance.

      SQUAWK!

      1. Tyler says:

        ”Does a People-Problem become a Jewish-Problem because the person manifesting the problem is Jewish?”
        Does that jewish person ultimately want to belong to the People amongst which he lives? If that person openly identifies as being jew, and thus by its nature ultimately (and proudly) doesn’t want to belong to the People of the ”People-Problem”, yet plays key roles in shaping that People’s culture, laws, politics, media, etc, then he is a problem indeed. Jewish identity politics. Jewish group evolutionary strategy. Nationalism for jews alone but multiculturalism for the gentiles. This is all out in the open and not even ”conspiratorial”. Read Kevin MacDonald. Read Atzmon. Above all, read any prominent jewish philosopher, most if not all of them are rabid liberals, progressives, (cultural) marxists, internationalists. They are not only openly opposed to everything what we stand for, they are fanatically out to destroy it. Google and Read ” The Religious Origins of Globalism – Hervé Ryssen” as a good synopsis (french dissidents blog).

        ”And why couldn’t Brett know better than ‘countless great philosophers.. it seems quite reasonable that our very well-informed host might have some valid observations to make.?”

        Brett has been fantastic. Yet he is completely wrong in this jewish problem matter which he now addressed not once but twice. But it is a crucial matter for our broader movement of anti-liberals. If you don’t know your worst enemy, you are lost. Worse, if you ignore his fanaticism, you are totally lost. Besides, Brett is merely following Guillaume Faye’s position in this matter, and Faye has completely underestimated this problem, as so many did before him. His ideology is not taking off at all, because of this strange hyatus.

        Of course, I do agree however, that a lot of ”our problems” are of our own making. But who is on top of our ”food chain”?? We live in the ”jewish age”, not? (as per their own writings).

        Last but not least, I can recommend all to listen to the late Jonathan Bowden of the New Right, his speech about liberalism and historic revisionism, in order to understand properly who leads liberalism, and why not any true conservative opposition will ever be possible as long as we are not allowed to revise some elements of history, which protects only 1 single group, which you don’t even like to be named as such, since they are ”People”. Well, protecting 1 group of ”the People” via criminal laws is against your very own principles of this very blog too, is it not??

        ”If you feel your exit will punish this blog for not saying what you want it to say, then all I can say is good riddance”.

        It’s not about me, it is not about punishment. It’s about the success our broader movement. I speak for many many other true conservatives / traditionalists. Many of us link to your excellent blog.

        But many of us know and recognise the ”jewish problem” as our main enemy. Some of us think it is best not to address it head-on, or to leave it simply as it is for the time being, which is understandable. But to repetitively say that it is an ”invention” or ”non existent” is showing ignorance, bad faith, causing confusion and making further splits in our broader conservative movement.

        I am not as eloquent in English as I am native central european, so my apologies if not everything is 100% clear.

        1. But to repetitively say that it is an ”invention” or ”non existent” is showing ignorance, bad faith, causing confusion and making further splits in our broader conservative movement.

          If to disagree on one point is to cause further splits, then this movement is doomed.

          Nationalism succeeds where it focuses on the goal: nationalism and tradition. This is the essence of conservatism.

          It does not succeed where it attacks intermediaries or irrelevant targets. The goal is, as simply as we can state it, to replace a liberal world order (1789) with a conservative world-order?

          Then that is the goal.

          Anything else is too much cheerleading.

          Nationalism is booming, yes, relative to the past. But people support it most when it focuses on positive change not vindictiveness. That is what attracts normal, healthy, not already alienated people.

          1. Lord Mosher says:

            Ok Brett, but …

            Let´s imagine a “world getting better” in say, 40 or 50 years after people consciously focused on the goals you mentioned and without any vindictive behavior against any particular ethnic group.
            .
            People minding their own good business and shall we say, even innocently striving to create a better and ever more conservative society; will that alone and without fighting “the Jews” and their shibboleth, be enough to revert this social and cultural decay?
            .
            Maybe I am wrong but, intuitively, I fear that a traditional, conservative, pro-white (by cultural consensus) society would be a place where Jews might not be too happy to live in (or any other group but none are in power as they are); and since they are everywhere, they might do something to stop that change. And if they do, they might be doing that today, or yesterday.
            .
            If we follow your view and path, will that save us from an open and violent conflict against the Jews and its various Frankfurt School of thought ideologies?

            1. People minding their own good business and shall we say, even innocently striving to create a better and ever more conservative society; will that alone and without fighting “the Jews” and their shibboleth, be enough to revert this social and cultural decay?

              Yes.

              That’s the basic answer. The situation would not be quite as “off the shelf” as you characterize. A healthy society will be ruled by culture more than regulations, strongly nationalistic as a result, and thus will feature a lot more focus on “role” and “place” and a sense of collective purpose. This society would not consciously target outsiders, but outsiders would never feel that they belonged inside of it, and would be thus motivated to co-exist at a distance.

              Interestingly, this is how Jewish communities have survived in places as diverse as Iraq, Haiti, China and Brazil; they existed apart, which served their own national interests. It was only until the left enjoined citizens to become one solitary mass united by ideology that ethnic conflict accelerated. It’s worth contrasting the Jewish people with gypsies/Roma, because the former group existed apart and found a way to be useful and thus thrive, where the latter group essentially chose marginalization and crime as well as a nomadic lifestyle, and thus for the most part have never had anything.

              I don’t think it’s quite as simple as the “people minding their own business” part. Nation-building requires wise elders and a strong hand in certain matters. Cultural consensus takes care of most, but any elder that deserves the term wise is going to be a guardian against negative influences, as Plato reminded us.

              I fear that a traditional, conservative, pro-white (by cultural consensus) society would be a place where Jews might not be too happy to live in (or any other group but none are in power as they are); and since they are everywhere, they might do something to stop that change.

              If that’s a concern, I suggest not targeting the Jewish people. Much of the upset of the past is now resolved by the end of the diaspora with a Jewish state in Israel. There is always a place for Jews, Judaism and Jewish culture, and this is a vast improvement. I think Theodor Herzl had it right when he said the origin of anti-Semitism is that Jews are made an outlier by the fact that in a continent of national societies, they were without a homeland. It is in Jewish interests to have this homeland and a strong national culture in it, but they are also under assault by liberalism.

              If we follow your view and path, will that save us from an open and violent conflict against the Jews and its various Frankfurt School of thought ideologies?

              Yes. The Frankfurt School must be recognized as what it is, which is like Marxism (also authored by a Jew) an extension of French Revolutionary (1789) thought which is itself an extension of the Enlightenment which is itself an extension of some of the unhealthy thought from the democratization of Athens. But really, the impulse to be an individualist and thus to form an in-group with other individualists, which is the basis of Crowdism, is eternal to humanity. There are no shortage of bad guys adopting this philosophy into different forms and using it to brainwash the weak into forming an Ideological herd. It must be fought on its own terms, and defeating not by shooting everyone who believes in it, but by building the strong national identity you allude to in your first paragraph.

        2. Foam Penguin says:

          Your comments were making me reconsider some things until I realized you’re basically saying “Brett Stevens, for dissenting I must exile you for the success of The Movement.”

          With that one singular line of Stormfront logic I realized Brett Stevens is right and you are wrong.

          There is no “The Movement” just as there is no “Our People.”

          You are an angry basement dweller and I’d estimate there’s at least a 50% chance that you’re an American WN, as all American WN feel the need to name drop their European lineage unprovoked and with extreme lack of specificity – in your case, “central european.”

          I wouldn’t be surprised at all if “native central european” meant Heinz 57 American mostly-white.

          1. GoshDarnIt says:

            By the way, it is not a crime to (1) be angry; (2) live in a basement; or to (3) prefer to describe oneself as “native central european”. These things are irrelevant. Why not just take apart Tyler’s arguments instead of worrying about his lodgings, ethnic background or general mood?

            1. crow says:

              Deconstruction is a leftist invention. I tried to play ball for a long time until I realized how silly that was. When a raccoon craps on your doorstep you can spend all day trying to get it to understand that its behaviour is not a good survival strategy, but in the end, a swift kick delivers far more mileage.

              I have the best behaved raccoons anywhere.
              And consequently, the most well-fed, well-loved, and longest-lived.

            2. Foam Penguin says:

              People don’t listen to reason, so long ago I stopped attacking reasoning in favor of attacking the person giving the reasoning.

              It’s much more effective.

          2. Tyler says:

            ”You are an angry basement dweller and I’d estimate there’s at least a 50% chance that you’re an American WN, as all American WN feel the need to name drop their European lineage unprovoked and with extreme lack of specificity – in your case, “central european.” ”

            Goodness me. Can you perhaps attack the points I made, rather than vent your extremely childish speculations about my person. Allow me to lower myself to your level briefly in response:

            1. I apologised for not being as eloquent as most people are here, since english is not my mother tongue, that’s why I mentioned I am central european, idiot. I am born Dutch-French, living in central europe (Brett can easily verify my ip address to at least clear that up if it is THAT important to you, nitwit), I speak 5 european languages fluently, hold 2 master degrees and work for a major intl institution in a mgmt capacity both in London and ”central europe”. That’s my basement. Is that specific enough for you?? Unlike you who’s hiding behind the very specific pseudonym Foam Penguin, I have to be very careful what I say, as this is Europe, if you have any understanding what that means when addressing certain right wing, anti liberal, ”jewish problem” issues here. Specific enough for you now?

            2. I belong to the New Right. The school of Alain de Benoist (of which Faye has split off, the thinker to which this blog adheres to in many respects, if you have any clue, duh).

            I commented on why this article mentioned the jewish problem in a dismissive way yet again (like it did before), and this time doing so by associating it with the painted sadness of WN. Re-read what I said as to why the jewish problem is important for ANY conservative movement to address it. Nowhere did I even mention WN myself, let alone defend it, so your speculations are pure idiocy. Faye and archeo futurism are interesting and promising, but have been criticised by forefront New Right thinkers for avoiding the jewish problem, thus losing its vigour. It’s not just me saying this ”in anger”. You can read up on it yourself on the internet, if you are interested at all in learning a little bit, instead of playing the Brett-sycophant.

            3. Since we are now talking about it, WN is a minor ”school”, but they exist for very valid reasons, and they are largely anti-liberal, pro conservatism as well, so we should not dismiss them the way you guys do. They can be extremist, red neckish, lost and all that because snobbistic pseudo intellectuals like you have let them down for too long, look down on them and offer no solutions whatsoever. They need guidance, leadership, understandable language and ideas, not denigrating or frustrated intellectal masturbators like you have just shown to be. They are victims of liberalism, perhaps much more so than most of us here. If you only want intellectuals in your cause, well, good luck I say.

            1. crow says:

              In a nutshell, you get a hostile reception here because we don’t do Jew-bashing. It’s that simple. You see where that activity leads? You being made unwelcome, and you being very rude in return. That is reason enough that we don’t do Jew-bashing here, although there are many other reasons.

              1. Tyler says:

                Fair enough, only liberal bashing allowed by the crowd / in-group :-). No further, deeper, different or associated reflections welcome. Stick to the mantra. Indeed, that’s very simple.

                Worse, merely questioning the association of WN with the jewish problem as shown in this article, is heresy and a quest for ”jew bashing”, according to the in-group cheerleaders here.

                Nowhere did I do any jew bashing and nowhere did I ask for anything remotely of that nature. This is a severe lack of intellectual honesty. It’s outright dishonest and poor. But carry on exposing yourselves.

                1. crow says:

                  Whatever you say, Jack. Poor me. I am crushed.
                  Didn’t you say something about going somewhere else?

                2. Foam Penguin says:

                  There is no “exposure” taking place.

                  You don’t get it. There is no complete freedom from those who believe differently from you anywhere.

                  Not here, not somewhere else, not in any little internet movement, not in any real life movement.

                  The moment you realize that life’s many and varied ethnicities and factions are about as collected and united as a malignant tumor’s varied cells, you wake up to the reality of life: you are alone.

                  That’s why it seems like everywhere you go you can’t say what you believe to be true, or why everywhere you go everyone only has it “partly correct”: everyone hates each other and are doomed to eternal fragmentation and internal strife.

                  People within “The Movement” offer equal hatred, grudges, disagreement and passive/active resistance to members of “The Movement” and to non-members and even “ideological enemies” alike.

                  It is not unique in this aspect. Closer examination reveals politics at all levels is exactly the same, as are (almost) all other factions and creeds on earth.

                  Stop splitting hairs about political crap and look at human nature under a magnifying glass and you might learn something.

                  1. crow says:

                    Broadly true, but did you notice that here, within this particular little ‘movement’, there is a great deal of live-and-let-live, even mutual support?
                    The foolish friction you sometimes see is from newcomers who haven’t yet noticed what goes on, and behave like this is any other blog.

                    It isn’t.

                    1. Foam Penguin says:

                      True, but that’s because everyone here is generally mature enough to realize that dumb little factions are nothing but a means to an end, that dumb little ideologies are truncated mental models of reality and that none of those things are representative of reality itself.

                      We all get along pretty well because we’re chasing after eternally true principles and values, and that makes us good humans united in common healthy effort.

    2. LoreTek says:

      The “Jewish” problem is no more a problem than the redneck problem, or the human condition. If you look deeper you’ll see that its no really Judaism at all.

      By attaching labels like that you distract from the real issues and form a 2 sided coin that floats out to the side of whats really happening.

      “I know your afflictions and your poverty–yet you are rich! I know about the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.”

      You bite at the little worm they dangle in front of you.

      Which makes more sense? The people leading the charge to the end of the current age are Jews and you’ve figured it all out.

      OR

      They know you and others would think they are Jews and will soon focus all your attention on that whole group, leaving them to do their bidding and maybe even if you a good enough pawn will remove the Jews from finance and business, maybe even killing them, leaving only them to run the worlds economy?

      Deception is so easy it’s silly. Especially in todays world. Give someone two options and they will be blind to the third. Make the third option into a well known joke (conspiracy) and you will be absolutely free to do your will absolutely.

      You can be sure that these people want to bring about a new world order, you can be sure that they are fueled by a love of conquest, you can be sure that they are not actually called the Illuminati, you can also be sure that they are not real Jews, real constitutionalists (the only thing standing in the way of Mob take overs in most countries), you can also be sure that you will never know or be able to prove for sure what they are called, who members are or who their leader is.

      The point is you have to know that they are there they are not the two given options, and they are organized enough to set up any group they want to look like the enemy.

      “Love us, Kill them!”

      Will ALWAYS be the charge of the great deceivers. And you might find one day you have been singing their song like a good little parrot this whole time!

      1. 1349 says:

        The “Jewish” problem is no more a problem than the redneck problem, or the human condition. If you look deeper you’ll see that its no really Judaism at all.

        Rednecks have no doctrine.

        Judaism is an ideology more than a religion / ethnic identity. They admit to this themselves.
        And it’s a globalist ideology, aiming to a “global unity”. Again, they admit to this. A average jew might not fully recognize this but their wise men do. They have their own vision of a global future and try to implement it. (But they aren’t the only group with a global project.)
        And it’s a materialist ideology. Jewish economics outside Israel aren’t economics but chrematistics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrematistics
        So, in general, the Jewish problem is an ideological one. Neutralize / refute the detrimental parts of their ideology, and there’s no problem. Well, probably…

        Although a globalist idea, Judaism can make good use of local nationalism / conservatism. If everyone wants to live in a Mayberry, nobody will have advanced technology and cadres/thinkers to compete with a global project.

      2. Give someone two options and they will be blind to the third.

        Great point. Reminds me of the deceptions of murderers in the writing of Agatha Christie.

        I think the situation’s grim in a certain unique way: the enemy we face is something that lurks in every human being, a moral choice to commit hubris.

        When those people form groups, they invent a social justification in the form of ideology. That usually becomes liberalism.

        If it were as easy as taking out some small group of people, this problem would have been solved centuries ago.

        1. 1349 says:

          the enemy we face is something that lurks in every human being, a moral choice to commit hubris.

          We are not spherical humans in vacuum. Our choice is influenced by what we have been taught to choose. Hubris can be induced in humans. By means of propaganda of all sorts. This can be used as a weapon against an enemy nation/group. And it is, and has been.
          One can’t grow up a normal person if he’s constantly taught to be insane. IF your media and show business promote insanity but are controlled by those who are not insane themselves but are consciously using insanity propaganda as a weapon against the majority – your only option is to physically stop these controllers.

          1. Hubris can be induced in humans. By means of propaganda of all sorts.

            Very true. But those who induced it pre-date the Jewish people and appear eternally in every society. It’s like any other bad idea, based in wishful thinking instead of reality (note: nihilism cures this). But even the smartest among us fall prey to these bad ideas periodically, and buy the impractical convertible, eat too much chocolate, attempt to sing “Eye of the Tiger” at a karaoke bar after seven beers, and so on.

            IF your media and show business promote insanity but are controlled by those who are not insane themselves but are consciously using insanity propaganda as a weapon against the majority – your only option is to physically stop these controllers.

            Who controls the media?

            I have a surprising answer: the consumers. They indicate what they are willing to buy. And wherever crowds have gathered, at carnivals or amusement parks or even public hangings, there has always been an obsessive interest in the venal and the self-pitying. A crowd loves maudlin emotion and justifiable rage; it loves victimhood, in other words. It adores the crass, the excretory, and the violent. This is the nature of the enemy, and the enemy is within.

            1. 1349 says:

              But those who induced it pre-date the Jewish people and appear eternally in every society.

              Note that i’m not talking about jews exactly, so you don’t need to defend them.
              I’m talking about the possibility of using insanity/crowdism propaganda as a weapon, not as a means of making money.

              Who controls the media?
              I have a surprising answer: the consumers.

              This is almost the same as the principle of “demand creates supply”, which – excuse me – i consider a myth. A leftist one.
              From what i see, people buy/watch not what they want but what is offered and promoted, popularized. From what i see, demand is induced, artificially created. We live in an age of promotion, ads and hype. (The one who invented an object gets 1 buck, the one who produced it gets 10 bucks, the one who sold it gets 100 bucks!)
              Much of the information we get from the media works like a drug; it is pointless, often harmful, but most importantly, addictive. There has been research on this.
              The most efficient way to make money is to sell dope. The customer always comes for more. And this is done. Even your blog is addictive.
              But “the crass, the excretory, and the violent” are way more addictive and easier to mass-produce.

              Who needed porn before some scum invented it? Who needed convertibles before they were first supplied?
              Supply (& hype) induces demand.

              You want people to be invulnerable cultural Terminators who will, in a blink of an eye, notice (or feel by some instinct?) possible long-term harm from buying something or doing something. This requires strong skills of analyzing, synthesizing, generalisation etc. which 95% of humans don’t have, and hardly ever will. And no strong cultural code can fully defend them from this. Manipulation (including appeals to the lowest, dirtiest parts of a personality) is always stronger, i’m afraid.

  4. Wes says:

    The West not only has, and has had a Jewish problem…..it also has a Christian problem…….and it is rapidly acquiring a Muslim problem. It is a three headed dragon that is dragging us all down. Telling us all to be good little boys and girls, to ignore it all as an imaginary situation and just live a good life will not change that. It really sounds rather patronizing. However, that said, the WN movement, at least in America, is in the toilet, no doubt.

    1. Or simply a diversity problem, which is itself a byproduct of internal division and a liberal movement which wants to destroy the majority?

      1. Wes says:

        No, it goes much deeper than that. Of course, this is an individual viewpoint but I see a pathological cancer inherent in all these related religions. Of course they all spring from early Judaism, which is itself plagiarized from Egyptian religions and others. They are at once predatory on their neighbors and weakening among their adherents. It is a sickness. Actually a plague is a more accurate description. One that is at the root of almost all suffering in the world today, at least they are USED to cause suffering. The Jews are not really into proselytism but the other two actually do spread like disease. What motivates mankind? Food, sex, comfort, religion. It is a basic human need. Just as partaking of rotten food can make one sick, so can partaking of rotten religion. The world is sick. All colors and races are sick. Their religions are decadent and weak. Perhaps it is time for a new religion(s). Then we can separate the wheat from the chaff, huh?

        1. Wes says:

          How can we hope to separate from the other races when we all worship the same God? We can’t. We won’t. It is fundamentally against the teaching of Christianity and Islam…….and Judaism, (as the parent religion) is left pulling the strings. They are the chosen, don’t you know? It is a trap. We need our own religion………..or we are all gonna end up the same color, with the same kinky hair and the same black eyes.

  5. ben says:

    Jew here:

    Jews get a bad rep because we are shrouded in a sort of mystery and efforts to undermine our status/authority have usually played on that (not that they are necessarily misplaced). Thus we have served as a ‘bogeyman’ onto which fears of societies and communities have been imposed, going back to medieval times. I’m not exactly sure of the details of our tribe’s transition into European society during the start of the diaspora, but I don’t believe that (as many WNs probably do) that our singular aim is to bring down others. There may be plenty of ‘evidence’ to the contrary, but people with an agenda can easily twist information (especially in the internet age). It seems odd to me how after multiple massacres and expulsions, we seem to have been invited back to places relatively soon after, until ultimately meeting the same fate.

    I was brought up in a typical Jewish community in England, I went to a Jewish school and received a Jewish education. Not once did I hear of anything but being a ‘righteous’ man as the ideal – which did not include incurring harm to non Jews. We were taught, however, that other groups obey their own laws, and we obey ours. We have always seen ourselves as separate and because of this, we are. We have always yearned for self-determination. If whites were cast adrift in an often hostile foreign culture, wouldn’t they feel the same? Isn’t this the essence of ethnonationalism? And you do realise that the prominent liberal Jews are as against Jewish ethno-nationalism (read: Israel) as other forms, and do you truly believe that this is solely a Jewish issue? As a minority culture within a host, we are subject to a different form of scrutiny to others. White guy espouses liberal ideology? Ah… an exception… Prominent Jewish figure does the same? Aha! Typical Jew!

    Let me demystify most Jews for you – we are people without a vendetta against anybody (though of course there are exceptions; nutjob talmudic scholars do NOT represent mainstream Jewry anymore than the Nazis / Amish represent mainstream whites) but we do value our identity. We have had a tough time holding onto it, but it just goes to show how deep identity runs. And don’t worry, European Jews are flocking to Israel anyway. The demographics of Jewish communities here are changing dramatically, and pretty soon there either won’t be any left or the ones that do remain will have outmarried.

Leave a Reply

37 queries. 0.687 seconds