Spencer is a man of character, as opposed to the Jew filth attacking his mother.
So what is wrong then with a few “hails” at the NPI conference?
Where’s the beef?
I watched the end of the Red Ice video of Spencer’s speech. Cutting through all of the anti-Spencer hysteria and all of the pro-Spencer spin, my own view can be summarized in three points:
1. I didn’t like it.
2. It was a mistake.
3. It really isn’t that big a deal.
Given all the breast-beating going on, point three needs to be stressed. Long term, I simply do not see this permanently damaging either Spencer or the Alt Right brand (such as it is). Spencer is young and potentially has decades of activism ahead of him. Who knows what may happen in that time? One must look at the long time horizon here, rather than obsessing over short-term damage.
Any significant political success for Spencer and the Alt Right presupposes a set of conditions that would ensure that many Whites simply would not care about a few silly seconds at the end of Spencer’s 2016 NPI talk.
Whites becoming more desperate as the racial conditions worsen – would those Whites care about a few “Hails” here and there?
Whites becoming more aggressively ethnocentric and willing to defend racial self-interest – would those Whites care about a bit of youthful indiscretion?
If and when the times become more propitious for a racialist far-Right in America (in contrast to today’s Trumpian cucked civic nationalism), then the real test will be if Spencer (or whoever) presents an attractive memetic product to the people. If so, then all the film clips of the 2016 NPI conference won’t make any difference whatsoever.
And even today: the type of Whites WNs would want to recruit, those hardcore Whites not satisfied with Trumpism, those Whites are not going to be “put off” by what happened at the conference, other than being dissatisfied, as I am, by the usual piss-poor “movement” judgement. But then, Spencer is really no worse than other “movement” leaders, so even that isn’t a major problem by “movement” standards. Unless the individuals criticizing Spencer are willing to speak out against the even more serious and fundamental problems of Der Movement, then the whole Hailgate episode is merely sound and fury signifying nothing.
Alinsky’s rules co-opted.
1. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” – I have read innumerable articles in recent months from the lying press about how the GOP is full of crypto-White nationalists. Sounds good. Big if true.
As long as Der Movement is not fooled by this unhinged hysteria as well.
2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” – We’re not going to get most people to do things they have no habit of doing. We need to play to the strengths of our existing human resources.
That’s very important. To quote Dirty Harry: “a man got to know his limitations.” But in order to effectively utilize everyone’s skills and aptitudes we must carefully match individuals with responsibilities. There are “leaders” who have no leadership skills or judgment whatsoever, as one example of a mismatch.
3. “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” – This and the above rule are standard Sun Tzu; know the enemy and know yourself or else you will be defeated. We must always stay abreast of the opposition, always be more informed, and always make them look stupid.
Making the Left look stupid really is not so difficult, IF the far-Right is clever.
4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” – There are two key forms of this: concern-trolling and malicious compliance. Doing so will stress them out by increasing their cognitive dissonance load, bleed them of resources, and generally waste their time and energy. You can also bait your opponents into producing specific outcomes if they are inflexible and dogmatic enough.
Yes, yes, yes. And this is what Salter’s democratic multiculturalism is all about. Use sociopolitical ju-jitsu to leverage all the Left’s talk about “inclusion” against them. A multiculturalism that is for everyone, including and particularly the majority, conflates into a multiculturalism for no one. The whole purpose of multiculturalism is to empower minorities while disempowering majorities; if the majority demands inclusion into multiculturalism – real inclusion that explicitly defends majority interests – then multiculturalism becomes diluted into nothingness and it falls apart. Further, majority-friendly multiculturalism will enrage the minorities who believe that they have an innate right to exclusive ethnic mobilization, and this rage will enhance chaotic balkanization and therefore underscore the demands of the majority for inclusion = a virtuous cycle. And all the idiots who say that democratic multiculturalism is “dishonoring our ancestors” – it is losing that dishonors our ancestors. Winning is honorable, let’s win, and we can win by forcing the enemy to live up to its own rulebook. Let’s do it.
5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” – Most of the Alt Right’s troll ops consist of making a mockery of things. Ditto for our memes and critiques, e.g. cuckservative. It will probably go down as one of the greatest political slurs of all time: implying that your opponent gets off to watching his country be destroyed while his wife’s son votes against him. Cuckservative captures perfectly, and ridiculously, how the target serves every interest but the national.
Agreed. And it applies to ridiculing Der Movement as well.
6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” – Trolling. Shitposting. Meme magick. It never gets old because there is always something new to provide a perspective on, or some new journalist to troll, or a comments section to raid, or a viral media campaign to be fought.
Well, we know some folks enjoy posting pictures of Pepe.
7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” – I think the only area the Alt Right sees diminishing returns on is putting out too blackpilled of a message, or being too gloom and doom. People don’t really want to hear that all the time, even when it has to be said. Things getting worse is after all part of the sales pitch as to why the Alt Right’s solutions are necessary. On the other hand, we have to have a positive and future-oriented message to put out, and that reaches a bigger audience than commiseration.
Sure, that should be the public face. In private though, we really need to follow the Sallis Strategy: despair, disillusionment, chaos, hatred, rage, balkanization, bitterness, etc.
8. “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” – I tend to think this won’t be much of a problem because there is nothing the regime can offer us that would be satisfying other than its resignation.
Murray is naïve here. We already have people saying “we won” after Trump’s electoral victory.
9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” – This certainly works in our favor given how (((neurotic))) the people we are engaged in holy memetic warfare with are. Even the implication of our presence somewhere or in something is enough to produce media hysteria and maelstroms of kvetching.
True, and this can be used to provoke the Left, see number seven.
10. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.” – At the moment this is our endless streams of daily content across multiple platforms, something we should continue to scale up and diversify.
See number eight. I agree completely; now is the time to push, push, push, not to declare victory and go home.
11. “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” – We want to get to a point where being labeled by the establishment as a racist, sexist, or anti-Semite is a sign of having done something correct, being that bad people are saying it about you.
This is reasonable.
12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” – In other words, to win you actually need an answer to the issue. It can’t just be about opposition. We must be more than reactionary.
We need a Futurist visionary objective. Criticism must be constructive criticism. When I criticize Der Movement, I also present an alternative at the Western Destiny blog.
13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” – This is my favorite and I think Alt Right troll ops have done this quite well. First you get ahold of a luegenpresse journalist’s attention. Then you apply the other above tactics to him or her. Finally you get some sort of overdone reaction from them AND their supporters against you, which helps reinforce your own battle lines by showing that the issue you are up against is supported by x and x-plus, all of whom are against you. Many journalists noted during the 2016 presidential campaign that if one were of a Semitic surname (or known to follow a cult of volcanic demonology) and said something critical of Donald Trump, that he or she would be targeted and harassed on their social media or in the comments section. They began to reach out to one another about this and write about the responses they were getting, many going as far as labeling themselves with the triple parentheses symbol in solidarity. So what had basically happened was that our argument all along that overseas Israelis were uniquely opposed to nationalism in the United States was proven—by getting them to band together and admit that they were, and that they were proud about it too. See, all those people who hate Trump have (((something in common)))!
This is somewhat similar to something Nietzsche wrote: that he would focus on particular people in order to criticize ideas that those people represented, not criticizing the people as an end to itself.
Similarly, I criticize individuals – or more often, types of individuals, without focusing so much on single individuals – to focus attention on their stupidities, including and especially in Der Movement. And why not? I’ve learned well. After all, for years, I’ve been the target of this personalized polarization, particularly by elements of Der Movement (e.g., those hostile to pan-Europeanism, those who oppose White ethnics in Der Movement). And what is fascinating is that some of the same people who are upset with me for being a “shit stirrer” today were completely silent back then when the thoughtful and analytical Rienzi/Holliday/Sallis was being polarized by other shit-stirrers – a fascinating contrast that confirms the validity of my criticisms of Der Movement.
And – other than tone – how is my criticism of Der Movement really any different than this? Why is my criticism wrong and those other criticisms legitimate? And some of the “esteemed movement leaders” quoted there, should we care what they think? Brimelow? Taylor? Spencer should wear their criticism as a badge of honor. On the other hand, Greg Johnson and Devlin are serious and intelligent activists and their critique of the NPI follies need to be considered. But the critique doesn’t go far enough. If a rather silly episode is worthy of an obituary, what about endless decades of “movement” failure? What about all the fossilized dogma, the silly “movement” narratives, the fact that Der Movement alienates a significant portion of America’s White population – the White ethnics who supported Trump? And how about all these “movement” feuds, which go on and on – the specific personalities change, but the atmosphere stays the same. In the past, it was Pierce vs. Covington or Pierce vs. Carto and today it is – what? – Johnson vs. Spencer? So now we have a series of articles and podcasts at Radix putting their “spin” on “Hailgate” and we have articles at VDARE and Counter-Currents taking the opposite tack. The more things change the more they stay the same. Aren’t there more important things to polarize over?
In any case, Alinsky’s “rules” are as good for the gander as for the goose.
Spencer and NPI give their side of the story:
A point to be stressed: if I criticize Spencer, it is meant to be constructive criticism from someone who is 95% or more in agreement with him, including (mostly, but not completely) about the “Big Europe” idea.
In the “friend/enemy” distinction I consider Spencer in the “friend” category (regardless of what he may think of me), and while I may get frustrated at “movement” stupidity, I clearly distinguish who is “on the side of the angels” and who is not.
I believe that some of what occurred at the meeting was a mistake, including and especially the lack of security and foresight (the Budapest fiasco is another example of poor planning). But if I have to choose between Spencer and “oh, how offended am I” Brimelow, I choose the former and reject the latter.
I do wish though that these Alt Right guys get over their Trump fetish, ironic or not. Der Touchback should be following us WNs, not the other way around.
If there is anyone most deserving of criticism the last few days it is the “God Emperor” himself – but, alas, “gods” are beyond criticism, eh?
The meeting security issue though really needs to be addressed. Who knows? When the “God Emperor” ascends to his throne, he may actually approve of, and encourage, leftist thug attacks. There will be no help from that quarter, that’s for sure.
Cucks and others.
Exactly the opposite of what we need. Donny Amnesty is getting more cuckified with each passing moment. His slavish supporters on the right will say this is all “squid ink” as is, of course, his public disavowal of his own supporters, his unwillingness to investigate Clinton, his constant backpedaling, his appointment of arrogant Desi (redundancy) Haley (you now, the brownsteress who attacked Don Fats during the campaign) and his hob-nobbing with Romney, who also attacked Trumpcuck during the campaign.
No wonder Der Movement loves Trump so much. Look at all they have in common – including a tendency to embrace and reward their enemies while kicking to the curb their friends, allies, and supporters. Note to Trump: in general, South Asian aliens and Mormon cucks did NOT support you this electoral season. You do understand that, don’t you?
Here’s an outrageous piece of filth who says that Trump needs to “go after” WNs, even though we’re all just a bunch of sad carnival clowns (albeit the dastardly Richard Spencer may be more dangerous!). As this cuck (hey, Matt, confused about the meaning of that term? Look in the mirror) laments that Trump isn’t doing enough to satisfy the complaints of those who didn’t vote for him, didn’t support him, and relentlessly attacked him in the most personal terms during the electoral season, we, at the same time, read that some in the Alt Right are “dismayed” that Der Touchback publicly disavowed his own supporters (and indeed wants to “look into” why they are “energized”).
The correct formula for promoting an unpopular or widely misunderstood cause is the old Roman adage suaviter in modo, fortiter in re, meaning roughly: “gently in style, firmly in substance.” The scholars and thinkers at the heart of the Alt Right generally try to offer well-grounded analysis in calm prose in order to convince those able to consider matters rationally (while largely ignoring those who cannot).
I agree wholeheartedly, and I have been saying for years that mainstreaming is wrong – it is not the content that needs to be made more radical, it is just the way it is expressed.
Now, my many critics will turn around and accuse me of hypocrisy, saying that my own tone is far from “gentle in style.” Indeed, they will assert, I engage in bitter invective, insults, radical pontificating and, yes, I suggest that some folks should be strung up with piano wire (after legally convened tribunals, of course).
These critics of course fail to point out:
1. That I’ve said repeatedly that some of the more radical material is tongue-in-cheek, openly mocking “movement” Nutzis and others, who for some reason don’t get criticized for the real thing that I get criticized for mimicking in a mocking manner.
2. When I have expressed myself “gently in style” I’ve been critiqued and attacked by (often the same) critics just as much or more than when I engage in over-the top radical rhetoric. Be honest critics – it’s the messenger you object to, and not the message.
3. If I was going to address a meeting attended by press (and normies) I would obviously use different language than I do at blogs intended for Der Movement as the main audience. And if my previous quotes were to be brought up, they can be re-interpreted, in gentle style, using Salterian rhetoric.
But no political movement can remain limited to such activity. Our very success makes it inevitable that we shall be joined by an increasing number of young hotheads with little patience for careful argument or measured statement. Movement veterans should bear in mind that these younger men have lived their entire lives under the watchful eye of petty tyrants determined to encase them forever a mental straitjacket, with the ultimate goal of demoralizing and destroying their race. Is it any wonder that when such young men are finally brought to a truer understanding of their situation, their first instinct is to turn on those whose malicious tutelage they have finally escaped?
The behavior recorded in The Atlantic’s video clip is a figurative middle finger raised in defiance of today’s ideological enforcers—and these are, in many cases, truly contemptible people. Yet I hope the “Sieg-Heilers” will get mere defiance out of their system and go on to more constructive work. No serious activist can remain satisfied with playing the role his enemies have assigned him, which is what “Nazi LARPing” amounts to. The Alt Right needs foot soldiers, but even foot soldiers must be disciplined.
Indeed. But can we do without bisexual Vietnamese women?
To be fair to Der Touchback, he really didn’t have a choice after the mess of the Alt Right NPI conference and the “Hail Trump” nonsense. Promoting chaos and balkanization occurs when pro-White paradigms become normalized, not when the President Elect is forced to publicly disavow WN. Better to have keep everything vague and have the Left whining about Bannon, then to have a clear-cut condemnation and forcing Trump to cuck to those who didn’t vote for him.
But the error was not all on the radical side. To have the likes of Brimelow there, a civic nationalist who associates with scum like Derbyshire, to pontificate on who is and is not in the Alt Right is an absurdity.
Look, everyone makes mistakes, and commentator at Radix have raised legitimate points about the stress Spencer was under, for days, before the “juvenile bravado” episode. If Spencer would acknowledge the error, understand the damage done, and take steps to rectify it and make sure it does not happen again, then one can accept error. I make errors, everyone does. But one must admit it to move forward.
I would like to see Spencer directly address this controversy.
On the other hand, this cuckiness cannot be blamed on the Alt Right.
Disappointment was inevitable, but this soon?
Those cuckservatives really learned a lot from this electoral season, huh? And is the pink-frilled, gayfaced Graham just about the worst featherless biped on Earth?
I can only imagine how good these guys are going to be with email security…assuming any of them which end of a computer is up.
We can be critical of Spencer, but let’s also consider that he is a very public face of pro-White activism and thus has to put up with this. And Brimelow has the nerve to be “annoyed?”
Here’s the thing, Pete, Spencer is “one of us” (by “us” I refer to a pro-White activist, not a “movement” activist since while Spencer is part of the “movement” I am not, although I am pro-White), and you are not. When push comes to shove, I know who I side with. It’s with Spencer and not with you. Here’s advice for the next NPI conference: Brimelow, don’t show up. Spencer, don’t invite civic nationalist cucks. Problem solved!
And then there’s this problem.
Yeah, I know that’ll make pro-White activism all the more appealing to the likes of Derbyshire, but a “movement” that loves East Asians and hates “Meds and Slavs” perhaps does have a bit of an identity crisis, as brownster Ravi suggests.
Der Movement, Der Movement, Der Movement marches on.
In isolation, nothing wrong with Spencer’s speech. It was just the wrong place at the wrong time. At a private meeting, at some other point in history, absolutely nothing wrong with it. But at a public, press-attended meeting, right after Trump’s election, with the media screaming for Bannon’s scalp, this was a bit of poor judgment. Better to have put something together in more political-Salterian terms: democratic multiculturalism, universal nationalism, the legitimacy of majority interests, etc. I thought the whole point – or at least one major point – of the Alt Right was to be a more moderate “gateway” to hardcore WN. I’m skeptical of the “gateway” hypothesis, but if those guys believe it, better they publicly espouse democratic multiculturalism than do cheap NSDAP imitations. Further, if you are going to “go radical” then why have the likes of Brimelow and Taylor around? Is there any strategy here, or just – as Der Movement would say – “LARPING?”
And about the leftist thug protestors – that happens at every rightist meeting, and at very meeting it seems like the attendees – and, worse, the organizers – are completely surprised and unprepared for it. No one ever seems to think: “hey, these things have happened every time before, let us be prepared this time.” If Der Movement doesn’t like my talk about affirmative action and quota queens then they have no one to blame but themselves.
Then we have this idiot “Ravi” (who Silver of all people effectively answered – fair is fair, I must give credit where credit is due):
Ravi • 2 hours ago
Children of the sun!! – what a load of tripe. So does this White Master race include Slavs as well? What about the Irish, Italians, Spaniards? What is a short, slit-eyed Vietnamese harlot doing in your ranks anyway? Is she white or yellow? So many questions – Do you even understand your own identity?
Children of the sun!! – what a load of tripe
So does this White Master race include Slavs as well?
Yes it does. No more and no less than any other European group. Der Movement may not believe that but I, and others, do.
What about the Irish, Italians, Spaniards?
Yes, them as well. No more and no less than any other European group. Der Movement may not believe that but I, and others, do.
What is a short, slit-eyed Vietnamese harlot doing in your ranks anyway?
A representative of the HBD faction? Where was Derbyshire?
Is she white or yellow?
Do you even understand your own identity?
Yes, more than you can ever imagine.
Note again (assuming “Ravi” is a South Asian brownster) how hate-filled Asians are to Whites, how desperate Asians are to divide Whites against each other.
In the long-term, it’s the Yellow and Brown Peril from the East that is the biggest racial danger.