What lessons can White nationalists learn from this book? One major lesson: the decline of mainstream conservatism creates important opportunities, BUT White nationalism, as a fringe dissident pariah movement, is currently characterized by inherent weaknesses. To navigate through the narrow window of opportunity thus presented will require leadership skills not displayed by the quota queens in charge of Der Movement, and it will also require avoiding those icebergs that can sink the ship faster than anything else.
Speaking of which, let’s look at two recent “movement” phenomenon as part of an indictment against Der Movement. Here, I will not discuss broad trends – the decades of failure, the affirmative action policy and related intra-White divisions, the rigid dogmas, the bizarre memes and fetishes – and instead concentrate on Der Movement’s reaction to two personalities: Donald Trump and John Derbyshire.
Trump: Der Movement never learns its lessons. One definition of insanity is doing the same (failed) thing over and over again and expecting a different result; by this definition, Der Movement is definitely stark raving mad. Over and over again, Der Movement gets seduced (a word specifically chosen) by “men on white horses” – right-centrist mainstream leaders who Der Movement fawns over, only to become betrayed and disillusioned when the (to the sane along us) obvious truth is revealed. Ronnie Raygun, Ron Paul, Putin, Orban-Le Pen, the list goes on. And now Trump – received by most in Der Movement with a combination of homoerotic ardor (Roissy) or apocalyptic expectations (Amren, TOO). Indeed, we are told that a Trump Presidency is “the last hope of White America.” To put that in perspective: Trump is a social liberal who supports affirmative action and who as recently as 2012 denounced the very mild concept of “self-deportation” as being “too harsh” for the poor persecuted illegal invaders. Even in the current campaign, Trump has advocated “touchback immigration” for the invaders, and members of his entourage have told us that he is “playing a part.” And now he is rapidly backpedaling from his Muslim immigration promise.
The correct approach to the Trump candidacy is to take the mindset of bemused skepticism about Trump the man, while focusing on the public perception of Trump as a “racist, fascist bigot” and how that perception feeds into patterns of White support for Trump, with an instrumental approach to use Trump to achieve certain short-term and long-term tactical and strategic goals.
Instead, Der Movement takes the public perception of Trump at face value, almost worshiping the man, while either ignoring or mendaciously spinning the truth that the Trump primary campaign proved the validity of the Lind hypothesis. No, no, Der Movement doesn’t want to hear of Lind – anything that contradicts “movement” dogmas is blasphemy. Instead, we’ll pour all of our interest and effort, all of our emotional intensity, into a vulgar buffoon with a part-Jewish family, rampant Negrophilia, and rapidly changing ideologies.
Not surprisingly then, Der Movement has managed to get the interpretation of the meaning of Trump exactly backwards.
Derbyshire: With a few notable exceptions (e.g., Greg Johnson), Der Movement has embraced Derbyshire despite his open opposite to White nationalism and his labeling of Amren conference attendees as “latrine flies,” his promotion of miscegenation and his labeling of racial preservationists (“purists”) as crazy, his mocking of MacDonald’s work on the Jews, his extreme Judeophilia and (of course) Asiaphilia, and his promotion of anti-White colored activists such as “Jayman” and “Razib.” Putting aside all of that, Derbyshire has recently come out questioning why possession of child pornography is a crime, essentially endorsing the legalization of child porn. He outrageously equates the demand for child porn – which results in the sexual exploitation (and sometimes torture and murder) of children – with dissident thought. Indeed, he implies that legal action against “chomos” is the same “anarcho-tyranny” as persecuting rightists for their political beliefs. This creature, this justifier and moral enabler of perverts, is embraced, rather than rejected. So far, only EGI Notes has called out Derbyshire over his comments on child porn.
When Weissberg stated that the public views White nationalists as morally akin to child molesters, some on the Right were outraged and offended. And yet, here is Derbyshire making a moral equivalence between consumers of child porn and political dissidents, both being persecuted “thought criminals” targeted by an anarcho-tyrannical establishment. Where are all those outraged Rightists now? Why don’t they speak up? And when is “Daddy Dragon” going to do the right thing and remove this creature from the VDARE stable?