In bed with the System as well as with the Press.
Let us assume for the sake of argument that a particular incident took place. Thus, let us consider the following scenario, including several premises:
1. A prominent “movement leader” is a complete incompetent, wrecking the group of which he is head. However, he is acceptable to the rank-and-file for all the usual reasons.
2. This leader does something unpleasant that would make the rank-and-file lose respect and confidence in him and endanger his status as leader.
3. This “something” is known by the authorities and is eventually adjudicated – in criminal or civil court, it doesn’t matter – locally, so the “movement” in general does not know about it.
4. This is the crucially important point – the watchdog groups – with all their spies, infiltrators, resources, and connections to the authorities, undoubtedly know about the “something.” How could they not?
5. And most important of all – knowing about the “something,” the watchdog groups inexplicably stay silent about it, protecting the “leader” and his reputation among “movement activists.”
If we accept all of these premises, then the question arises WHY did the watchdog groups protect the “leader” about the incident in question? Two possibilities. The less likely is that the “leader” is actually working for the watchdog groups, and just like the FBI will protect a mob informant or an undercover agent from the local authorities, the watchdog groups wanted to protect their “man in place” in the “movement.” But, as I said, that is unlikely. By far the more likely explanation revolves around premise 1 – the person in question was an absolute incompetent and was driving the “movement” into the ground. Why do anything that would threaten that inept “leadership?” Why take the chance (admittedly unlikely in Der Movement, but still) of someone more competent replacing this individual? Better to leave him in place to wreck racial activism, and serve as an effective bogeyman for watchdog group fundraising, than to expose what is described in premise 2. So the “watchdogs” kept silent, and enjoyed the resultant chaos.
Moving on from that (Hypothetical? Real?) scenario of the WN 1.0 past, let us now consider the situation in the WN 2.0 “movement” over the past few years. The System, the Mass Media, focus on, and elevate in status, the most incompetent (relatively speaking) of “movement leaders.”
Let me put aside my ideological and personal disagreements with these people and just rank them in relative terms. I see the most competent and persuasive person being Taylor. But note that Spencer gets exponentially more attention than does Taylor. Johnson is perhaps equal to Spencer in competence but less so than Taylor, and Johnson gets more attention that Taylor but significantly less than Spencer. MacDonald is maybe one million times more effective and competent than Heimbach – but who has received more attention from the media? David Duke always got more attention than William Pierce, and the latter was a more effective and disciplined organizer and ideologue. Rockwell got more attention than Carto. You can talk about “personality” and a “flashy and aggressive style” as explanations, but that only goes so far.
Lest I get accused of “low information moralizing” – yes, I know that, for example, in the past Taylor was a guest on a variety of TV talk shows. I would like to point out three things about that. First, it was years ago, long before Trump, long before the System become overly paranoid about White restlessness and resistance. Giving Taylor that attention was a mistake on their part; will they do the same today? Two, they made that mistake because they didn’t understand how sane and articulate Taylor would appear on TV. They may have assumed that they could bait him into frothing at the mouth and giving spastic Dr. Strangelove salutes. Third, the attention given to Taylor then is a miniscule fraction of that given to the Alt Right heroes of today, what with the larger presence of the Internet and with social media. And, yes, Pierce was on 60 Minutes – an attempt to tie him and The Turner Diaries to the Oklahoma City bombing, an interview that took place two decades before the Trump candidacy, an interview that pales in comparison to today’s coverage of the Alt Right. So, my basic argument still holds.
One can productively speculate that the System intentionally focuses media attention on the more inept and/or bizarre elements of “movement leadership,” while starving the more effective elements of attention. That applies to ideas as well as people. The more stupid the idea – endorsing Tulsi Coconut or Andy Eggroll for example – the more attention it will receive from the Press. That’s not by accident.
I’ve talked to people who grew up under communism in Eastern Europe. After the changes, and the secret police files were opened, it was found that many dissident groups were “controlled opposition.” Infiltrators were in many cases running the show. In some cases, infiltrators actually founded the show – the secret police themselves organized a fake opposition to the regime so as to identify, manipulate, and compromise the authentic opposition, and to create a useless safety valve for discontent,
Whether or not that is occurring in the West today as regards the Far Right, at minimum we have a situation in which the System is taking what we can assume is an authentic dissident opposition and intentionally boosting the public profile and leadership credentials of the more incompetent, so as to fill the leadership niche space with the inept, and thus preventing the emergence of a competently effective dissident leadership.
The System is utilizing negative selection – counter-selection – to ensure that the “movement” is led by failures. The “movement’s” affirmative action policy fits very well here. After all, the System is well aware of “movement” fetishism – remember Hermansson gloating that HopeNotHate intentionally picked a Swede as an infiltrator so as to appeal to Nordicist instincts. In Siege, Mason talks about how the infiltrator sent to attempt to compromise him was of a racial type meant to appeal to WN archetypes. Similarly, the System will carefully boost the credentials of the “right” types, what is required is a combination of racial bonafides as well as gross incompetence. Thus, while Taylor has the racial bonafides, he is too competent to be a focus of too much media attention. Instead, the attention has to be focused more on Beavis-and Butthead sniggering, freaks, perverts, proven failures, etc.
So, yes, “The Press” – in conjunction with “movement” fetishism – will choose your leaders.
Enjoy the ensuing never-ending failure. After all, “The Press” couldn’t accomplish this without your very willing acquiescence. You have met the enemy and he is you. Enjoy.