The double edged sword of the Internet.
Thinking about this – we must remember that the Internet is a double edged sword. A net gain – but still, it comes with costs, as I have written about and as others (Covington for example) have commented on in the past. We have all become too addicted to, and dependent on, the Web, and we have lost much of the social interaction, and the ability to navigate the real world, that we had in the past. The nature of the Internet, which removes people from face-to-face interaction, breeds freakishness and removes much of the selective pressure against severe defectives. Indeed, activism in the Internet age seems to be breeding a new form of racialist, a deformed human type.
Thinking back to the sort of racialists I knew – personally, IRL – back in my time as an analog “meat space” activist, it is obvious that those WN 1.0 types were very different from the WN 2.0 (or 3.0) “heroes” of today. They were so different, it is almost as if they were a different species.
Those activists of the 90s were hard men. None were effeminate; none were metrosexual. No soyboys. None were potential bronies or furries or Asian Aryanists or cosplay wannabes. None were potential juvenile lulzers. Maybe some liked to drink, but none were cokeheads. For all their faults – and most of those people were hardcore Type Is so faults there were aplenty – they were serious. Maybe some were too harsh and offended their fellows, certainly many had all the freakishness, fetishism, and incompetence of today’s Type Is. Similar to today, they made sure to exclude Type IIs from any positions of authority, and of course the “movement’s” ethnic affirmative action policy was already very well entrenched back then. But even with all of that, there was solidity of character, some of those people inspired confidence because of their character, if not by their competence (or lack thereof). Character is a trait sorely lacking in the activists of today. Yes, I may sound like a grumpy “get off my lawn” older man, but that’s the way I see it.
Of course, we cannot ascribe all of these differences in activist character solely to the influence of the Internet. There are generational differences (although that itself may be in part affected by the pervasive influence of the Internet in the 21st century). The activists of the past were mostly Boomers and the first half of Generation X, with some fraction from earlier generations. Today, we have a core made up of Millennials and the second half of Generation X, with some Generation Z filtering in. Contra Millennial rants about Boomers, this change has not been for the better.
Further, “movement” organizations of the past explicitly and officially rejected homosexuals, people with non-White spouses, and drug addicts – an exclusiveness which by itself would eliminate a significant fraction of today’s Alt Right and Alt Wrong.
But the Internet has indeed had an effect. As stated above, we have all become too dependent on the digital world. Just like a muscle, or a mind, becomes weaker through disuse, the “movement’s” abandonment of “meat space” has led to a proliferation of the unfit, the botched, the hyper-freaks (instead of the more typical WN 1.0 Type I lesser freaks) – and has led to a situation that when the muscle is finally used, it fails. When WN 2.0 organizes meetings or rallies, that usually turns into disaster. Yes, the hard men of the past were hopeless with the more intellectual aspects (that are the most important) of operational security (they were Type Is after all), but at least they had the physical aspects of operational security well in hand. Today, there is neither.
Perhaps, just like the Internet has been a double edged sword for our side, censorship and deplatforming of our side from the Internet will be a double edged sword for our opponents. Perhaps the selective pressures of a more hostile environment, and the need for more effective IRL activism, will bring back some of the hard men, but this time with more effective Type II leadership cadres, so as to not repeat the errors of the past.
I would like to cite another problem, this one fully within the context of Internet use itself. The rise of social media as a communication platform has resulted in the degeneration of the ability of activists – particularly the younger ones – from expressing themselves in longer and thought-out opinion pieces. Everything is tweets and brief “memes” – forget about reasoned argument and debate. But, hey, it’s WN 2.0 (or 3.0) – so it’s all good! No worries, eh?
Seriously though, the “movement” needs to get ahead of the curve, and develop a more balanced portfolio of analog and digital activism. We need to stress more on the analog; however, the problem is that I do not believe that Der Movement and its failed “leadership,” as well as the “face-buried-in-the –smart-phone” rank-and-file are ready and able to do this.
But I most strongly advise that we start thinking about becoming less dependent on an Internet controlled by our enemies. Of course, we should develop our own independent digital capabilities if possible, but we need to look analog as well. After all, in the end, racial survival and progress will be actualized in “meat space.”