And the same has happened, or will happen, to others on the Far Right. What to do? Short-term options include small scale informal meetings that piggyback on the meetings of others (e.g., using a mainstream conservative conference or even some non-political event to have activists meet up; this assumes that if “movement” leaders use their real names in registering there will no problem, and also assumes that something productive can be achieved via this awkward arrangement), suing the Feds to force them to fulfill their hosting obligations, or somehow finding a private venue that won’t reject Far Rightists. It’s also interesting how private businesses can be forced to bake cakes for gay couples, but businesses and even the Federal government (with its obligations in this arena) have the right to stifle free assembly by denying use of facilities for political reasons.
The only long-term solution I can see is for the Far Right to purchase (or build) their own meeting hall facility (or facilities).
The characteristics required:
1. Large enough and well equipped enough to handle Amren-sized meetings or even larger.
2. Should NOT be out in the middle of nowhere. It should be within relatively easy access of a major airport and nearby various hotel facilities.
3. Obviously it would need 24/7 security, trained personnel, cameras and other electronic security, and, of course, there needs to be solid property insurance. The security aspect is going to be perhaps the major practical hurdle, but what other options are there? You either hold no meetings, hold meetings hosted by others and these others have the obligation for security (I doubt hotels or government facilities would accept Far Rightists providing the security in the hotel property or Federal facility), or do it yourself on your own property. If you want meetings, then it comes down to outsourcing or insourcing. If no one wants to accept your patronage, then the choices conflate down to one: do it yourself.
4. The property would need to be protected legally as well as physically, to protect against lawsuits designed to strip the property from you as “payment for damages.” The Far Right needs a cadre of legal help, including people versed in property law and the protection of assets from liability.
5. The facilities should be made available to anyone in “this thing of ours” who wants to use it, regardless of “movement” feuding (e.g., if Spencer’s people own the property, they should let, e.g., Johnson rent it out if desired), for a reasonable fee. This could be both national as well as international users. Fees charged could help defray the cost of the facilities. The facilities could also serve other purposes, such as being a headquarters, storage facility, and temporary living space for activists in need, etc.
And, no, I do NOT want to hear “there’s no money for this.” There is. Stop wasting money on happy penguins living the good life in blue state suburbs, stop funding “Radio Derb,” stop funding the rest of the Alt Wrong and their pro-Jewish and pro-Asian HBD, and stop funding other tin cup panhandling nonsense.
Even if it requires different factions of the Far Right to overcome their differences and pool resources, it would be worth it. Eventually, more than one facility could be actualized (maybe one East Coast and one West Coast, for example), but there needs to be at least one.
If this is considered another “crazy” and “low information moralizing” Sallis idea, then please come up with something better. At least I’m making suggestions that have a degree of plausibility (assuming even the smallest amount of “movement” competence, selflessness, and discipline).
If any “movement” leaders read this blog, they should consider the suggestion. I assume they’ve already thought about it, perhaps dismissing it because of the financial and security issues. My answer is that the money is there if properly directed and utilized, a properly run facility can bring in a cash flow, and security is a necessary part of holding meetings: either you do it or trust others to do it for you. What’s your alternatives?
The Alt Righters believe they can still use public buildings in DC. I hope that is the case, but I wouldn’t put all my eggs in that basket. Then I heard that Spencer wants to own his own meeting place. Having written this essay several days ago, after I first read about the meeting problem, I was gratified to hear that he’s thinking along similar lines. It’s basic common sense, after all. And as I’ve suggested the money is there, it just needs to be redirected away from parasites and grifters and into productive pursuits and projects. Lack of financing? Face facts: you are in competition with the parasites and grifters. There’s limited niche space and if you can’t face those facts, you’ll be outcompeted financially.
And, no, this post is not incompatible with my previous (and continued) calls to “defund the movement.” I’ve made clear that while Der Movement, Inc., and all its associated stupidities, should be defunded (to clear the way for a New Movement), and, certainly, particularly stupid and useless precincts of the “movement” should be defunded, I’ve also supported targeted funding of important projects that would benefit racial nationalism as a whole, such as a “legal defense fund” to help build a cadre of pro-White lawyers. Here, in this post, I suggest a solution to the “meeting problem,” a solution that can be of broad benefit for activists worldwide (as one criterion is that the meeting hall needs to be broadly accessible to activists who wish to use it). This solution – or some other alternative that is equally capable of solving the problem – is worthy of financial support. Activists should use the “power of the purse” to steer the “movement” in the proper direction: defund incompetence; fund competence.