Category: populism

The Nazi Next Time, II

Further analysis.

Let’s take another look at my The Nazi Next Time essay from 2015.  How does all of that look now from the perspective of Trump’s election and all the events from the year (and more) since that election?

Before we look back at the main points of that “Nazi” essay, let us consider that now, approximately two years later, certain elements of the System Left are beginning to reach similar conclusions.  Read this Frank Rich piece.

However common the ground of Democrats and Trumpists when it comes to economic populism, they will still be separated by the Trumpists’ adamant nativism, nationalism, and racism. The liberal elites who continue to argue that Democrats can win by meeting Trump voters halfway don’t seem to realize that those intransigent voters have long been hardwired to despise them.

The pot calling the kettle black?  Who despises who?  It was the Democratic Party’s abandonment of the White working class, in favor of Colored Identity Politics, which set the stage for right-wing populism to begin with.  Working class and middle class White Americans rightly perceive that the Democrats despise them, so why not return the favor?

Looking to the future in his 60 Minutes White House exit interview, Bannon said, “The only question before us” is whether it “is going to be a left-wing populism or a right-wing populism.” And that is the question, he added, “that will be answered in 2020.” Give the devil his due: He does have the question right. But there is every reason to fear that our unending civil war will not be resolved by any election anytime soon in the destabilized America that Trump will leave behind.

But the long-term threat is bigger than the potential arrival in the Capitol of radicals like Moore or the conspiracy theorist Kelli Ward, a possible inheritor of Flake’s Arizona seat. By illuminating a pathway to power that no one had thought possible, and demolishing the civic guardrails that we assumed protected us from autocrats, Trump has paved the way for far slicker opportunists to gain access to the national stage. Imagine a presidential candidate with Trump’s views and ambitions who does not arrive with Trump’s personal baggage, his undisciplined penchant for self-incrimination, and his unsurpassed vulgarity. 

Yes, I can imagine it: that’s why I wrote the “Nazi” essay; the vision was clear in my mind…and still is.

Finer-tooled instruments — smarter and shrewder demagogues than the movement’s current titular head — may already be suiting up in the wings.

Oh, we can only hope.  I do believe eventually, we’ll see that.

In any case: Sallis was prescient once again.

Now, back to the 2015 Sallis piece.

The hysterical angst of the Republican Establishment concerning the rise of Trump is glorious to observe.  Of course, the interesting thing is their complete lack of self-awareness, their lack of understanding that they themselves are responsible for the predicament they find themselves in.

I was I believe too kind to the GOP then.  Or, perhaps, I realize now that the Republicans don’t care about winning; they only care about being part of the System’s anti-White agenda.  Trumpism in the 2016 election gave the GOP sweeping victories at every level, leaving the Democratic Party in complete disarray.  2016 was a stunning confirmation that right-wing populism is the path for continued Republican electoral dominance even in the face of the changing demographics that the GOP itself has been complicit in promoting.  Trumpism can build a solid White voting bloc, with strengths among demographics (working class Whites, White ethnics) who were part of the Reagan coalition, but who have been straying from the GOP after decades of Neocon-corporate-cuckservatism, as exemplified by the Bush family, “plastic man” Romney, and execrable filth like John McCain (and the pink-frilled Lindsey Graham).  And how has the GOP reacted to this good fortune?  By doubling down on their anti-Trumpism, by obstructing what little the Grand Cuck Trump (this revealed after the election) wants to accomplish in a positive sense, by joining in with the absurd moral panic over “Russian interference,” by cucking to an extreme degree, by doing everything possible to throw away the fruits of the 2-16 electoral sweep an alienate and discourage Trump’s base.  So, now, I believe that they have awareness and understanding – it’s just that they are part of the same corruption, and always have been.  It’s always been a fraud, a scam, a con game run on the White American voter.  The GOP really isn’t in any predicament at all; they are simply playing the role assigned to them, playing it with relish.

Of course, all else being equal. The GOP would prefer to win elections, as they would like to enjoy the power and perks of elected office.  They also want to convince the rubes of the viability of the “two party system” and they want to keep the political donations and campaign contributions flowing in.  But winning is not an existential issue for them, but being anti-White is. If given a choice between winning with an explicitly pro-White agenda and losing as pandering cucks, they’d pick the latter every time. When the choice is put into those stark terms, the real Republican agenda comes into sharp focus.

Consider: after the startling electoral success of 2016, GOP cucks still pretend that association with right-wing populism will somehow damage the party – they will be ‘”toast.”

Still think they really want to win?

One reason is that the GOP has been complicit in the demographic changes that have put them “in between a rock and a hard place,” politically speaking. On the one hand, Republicans look at America’s growing colored population and see the need to appeal to that demographic. On the other hand, the GOP base of support is conservative White Americans, particularly right-of-center White men.  To pander to minorities runs the risk of alienating the base; to secure the base runs the risk of alienating the coloreds. Up to this point, the GOP strategy has been to pander to the colored minorities, while throwing “bones” to the base in the form of phony “implicit Whiteness” and “dog whistling” rhetoric with no real-life political consequences. Heretofore, the GOP has mastered feinting right during the primaries, running centrist in the general election, and, in the rare cases of GOP Presidential victories (since Ronnie Raygun, we have had only the two failed Bush men being elected), governing from the left. Base anger has been silenced by “they have nowhere else to go” “lesser of two evils” electoral considerations.

But now, the rise of Trump is an ill wind blowing in the direction of the GOP elites: the base is starting to awaken and will not be forever willing to “vote for lesser of two evils” and support anti-White leftist Republican candidates.

Whatever else Trump is or does, this alone justifies supporting his 2016 campaign, which I did.  Even if he is a completely self-interested phony, his reliance on right-wing populism “let the toothpaste out of the tube” and the System, however it may try, cannot get it all back in again, long-term.  They may win some battles here or there, tactical successes, but the tides of war will go against them.  By this, I mean the war to make multiculturalism work smoothly, and have White blithely accept their own dispossession.  The System may still win in the end, but their victory will be a Pyrrhic one, a bloody mess that will leave a nation essentially ungovernable long term as any major power on the world scene.  They may suppress right-wing populism short-term (and likely, not even that), but, like a bed penny, it’ll keep on popping up again.  Trump is a catalyst, a “John the Baptist” foreshadowing things to come.

But there is something else. The problem with Trump is seemingly not only his ideology of right-wing populism (real or fake), it is also because the Republican Establishment – with some justification – see Trump as an ill-informed, vulgar, obnoxious, childish buffoon, with no self-control and an embarrassing lack of gravitas.  Very well, but in response to those concerns I have two words: Pat Buchanan.

Like Trump, Buchanan ran for President as a right-wing populist Republican. In fact, there is considerable overlap in overt ideology between the two men’s campaigns. While lacking Trump’s “alpha jerk-boy” charisma, Buchanan has certain advantages that you would think would endear him to the GOP elites: Buchanan is a well-informed, articulate, religious man, with strong Establishment connections, and prior political experience in previous Republican administrations. Buchanan has always been an “inside-the-Beltway” man, and is not an obnoxious buffoon.

And how did the GOP elites deal with the more polished and political Buchanan?  With the same disdain and hysteria that they now reserve for “Der Trumpening.”  The Elite made it clear that they would never accept Buchanan as the nominee, they panicked over his early successes, they sabotaged his campaign (as I recall, they even prevented him from being on the ballot in some states), etc.  So, the case of Buchanan proves that the problem with Trump is not so much his repellent personal aspects, but his core of right-wing populism. Anything that appeals to Whites is anathema to the GOP, which is of course self-destructive given the nature of the GOP base (it is not for nothing that Sam Francis labeled the GOP “the Stupid Party”).

As stated above, the GOP would rather lose as anti-Whites than win as pro-White.  It’s a well-established trend dating back decades.

The point is that the GOP lost anyway with Bush and Dole in 1992 and 1996. While it is understandable that the incumbent would be favored in 1992, there was no excuse for favoring the “living mummy” “civil rights Republican” Dole over Buchanan in 1996. Favoring Buchanan would have solidified the GOP base and could have put the party in the direction of a right-wing populist track that could have genuinely benefited White Americans.

That is anathema to Establishment Republicans.

But, no. The elites sabotaged Buchanan and they suppressed right-wing populism for several electoral cycles. Now it has erupted in a more “virulent” form with Donald Trump. Instead of learning their lesson and understanding that the base cannot be taken for granted, instead of understanding that they need candidates that appeal to the base, the GOP elites are hell-bent on sabotaging Trump and suppressing right-wing populism for another couple of electoral cycles.

They may succeed but they are playing with fire.

They couldn’t stop Trump from winning, but they are fairly successful in teaming up with Democrats to block Trump’s ostensible agenda. Here, they are getting help from Trump himself, who betrays his base at every opportunity.  xxThere are some who say that there is evidence that Trump is sincere in his right-wing populism: he gave up his easy billionaire lifestyle to run for President. But that in and of itself means nothing.  It ignores issues of ego and the lust for (political) power. By analogy, we can ask why billionaires all don’t just ease up and enjoy the “good life,” why do most of them continue to strive, “wheel and deal,” obsess over money, and engage in rent-seeking behavior, including political lobbying, designed to further increase their wealth and power?  That’s the nature of the rich and powerful: they are never satisfied; they always want more (and that is one reason that they become rich and powerful to begin with).  If such people are given the opportunity to go into the history books as US President, would they eschew that opportunity?  Trump’s Presidential ambitions tell us nothing about his sincerity.  The fact that Trump ran as a right-wing populist may reflect his real views, or it may simply reflect his realization that the only way he could stand out from the established field of GOP cucks was to give the base the “red meat” that they were craving.  If Trump is really the shrewd businessman his admirers says he is, then he must have noticed the open political niche space to the political right of the GOP candidate field.  Trump’s sincerity would be better displayed by an honest and consistent effort on his part to fulfill his campaign promises.  That he is not doing; instead we get jackass tweeting, half-heated measures, backpedaling, a disgraceful waste of political capital, and waffling on issues like DACA.  If there is sincerity there, it is awfully hard to see.

Who will come after Trump?  Who will be the next right-wing populist?  As even worthless and weak Whites become more aggressive out of sheer desperation, who will they turn to next?  Someone more extreme and firebrand-populist compared to Trump to the same degree Trump is compared to Buchanan? 

It won’t be “the fire next time,” but it may well be “the Nazi next time.”  The GOP elites had better hope that their country clubs are well fortified indeed.

Will Trump’s constant betrayals and failures discourage his base?  Or, as Rich suggests, whatever the outcome of Trump, the base will only become more energized?  The latter, we hope.  But we must realize that the trauma of Trump has immunized the System against the “virus” of right-wing populism; they’ll be on their guard against it, and will try and nip any further manifestations in the bud.  Where they will fail, I believe, is that the System is, at its heart, anti-White; they cannot muster up any real “red meat” to satisfy a growing sense of White Identity Politics that will become ever more resistant to Democratic attempts to divert race with economics or GOP attempts at implicitly White “culture war” dog whistling.  The toothpaste is out of the tune, so to speak.

But, the System may not be able to win over the Trump base, but they’ll use their power to sabotage future political manifestations of right-wing populism.

In the movie The Day of the Jackal, the Jackal tells the OAS leaders: “Not only have your own efforts failed, but you’ve rather queered the pitch for everyone else.”  One can say that about Trump perhaps (and about the “movement” more generally, certainly).

Now, right-wing populism, essentially civic nationalism, is not the answer.  It is best a precursor or at least a stop gap, and at worst a diversion, a cul-de-sac, a competitor to what is needed – which is explicitly prop-White racial nationalism – White nationalism.  At this point in time, we can work to ensure that right-wing populism serves positive functions, as a precursor to White nationalism (the membrane separating the two is thin; it is one step from civic nationalism to racial nationalism, but an big step many do not make), or at least as a stop gap as racial nationalism begins to develop (Trump is in a sense a stop gap; one other benefit of his election, besides all “breaking the ice” for more extreme politics and increasing balkanization an chaos, is that he prevented a Clinton election that could have led to more repressive conditions for the development of racial nationalism – worse is not always better).

I would suggest that at this point, right-wing populism is best suited for Presidential campaigns and also for Senate and Governor races, and for lower level races in areas in which the White population is not sufficiently “prepared” for more radical approaches.  However, in selected areas and selected times, we should begin to consider explicitly White candidates – even racial nationalist WNs – ranging from school board elections all the way up to the US House of Representatives. Some successes there can lead to consideration of WNs for the higher level races.  The value of political WN campaigns exists regardless of the electoral outcome: promoting balkanization, recruiting, propaganda, organization, normalization of racial nationalist discourse and “pushing the envelope,” forcing the civic nationalists to get off the fence in one direction or another, a whole host of advantages.

Political campaigns would benefit from effective local organizing and vice versa.  It’s been said, and I believe it to be true, than in some locales, WNs love near each other but do not know of each other’s existence. Even if some fraction of these are kooks, freaks, defectives, Nutzis, fetishists, etc. there may still be a critical mass of useful like-minded people in certain areas.  The trick is to get them together, to work together, and to organize, safely, without the threat of infiltrators exposing them all.  How to do it is uncertain.  Existing meetings with their “extreme vetting” are ludicrous jokes; real extreme vetting would help, but I’m not sure that Der Movement has the competence or discipline to pull it off.  Anyone who is able to put together an effective plan for local organizing is going to be at an enormous advantage.  In the competition for racial nationalist leadership, those who can perform effectively will rise, and those who are laughably inept will fall.  

WNs cannot depend on a “man on white horse” civic cuck “hero” to save them.  The Nazi Next Time is not going to descend from Valhalla, complete with blessings of Saint Adolf; instead, the “demagogues” of the future will come to the fore as a result of hard work, discipline, and commitment.

This will, I believe, likely require a New Movement that replaces the clown show that currently exists.  I’m not sanguine about that, but this blog will continue to play the role of “loyal opposition.”  Racial nationalism is the future, but that future will only become actualized if we make it so.  

Future installments of this topic will be forthcoming when events and new ideas warrant; note as well there is overlap with the concept of Political EGI, as any pro-White leader who is worthwhile must incorporate (even if indirectly) the concept of genetic interests into their memetic toolkit.

Advertisements

Ignorant Buffoon Jr

Touchback Jr. 

I essentially agree with Spencer’s analysis.  Did Jr do anything illegal?  I don’t see it. Treason?  Absurd (*).  On the other hand, let’s not let him off the hook that easily.

The bottom line is that Trump Jr is as stupid and politically clumsy as his father. Do you go personally to this meeting?  Ever hear of plausible deniability?  How about using cut-outs? Or…whatever – if you are the son of a Presidential candidate who is vehemently opposed by the media and the entire Establishment, you had better at least superficially keep up appearances. Let others, several layers removed, do the “dirty work.”  It doesn’t matter that he did nothing wrong; in politics, appearance means as much (or more) than reality. Come on, Donnie Jr was on Celebrity Apprentice with dear old dad, doesn’t he know the power of appearance?

One thing Spencer could have mentioned – of all of Trump’s children, Don Jr seems the most right-wing and the most in tune with an at least Alt Lite right-wing populism, another reason to be targeted by the Deep State.

A side note: I’m certainly no phenotypist, but on the other hand, unlike what some of my detractors believe, I certainly do acknowledge the importance of racial phenotype (it just has to take a back seat to the genotype). This “Russian lawyer” – is she actually an ethnic Russian?  She looks like she could be ¼ or even ½ Chinese.  Raciology alert!  Maybe – hopefully – she is a non-Russian “Russian citizen.”

When all is said and done, Trump is an embarrassment.  Relevance to EGI? Thanks to the Alt Right, Trump’s civic nationalist phony right-wing populism has been connected in the public mind with Der Movement, so, like it or not, the outcome of the Trump Presidency will, in some manner, influence the direction of American activism.  Hopefully, we can all survive the damage being done by this lumbering buffoon.

In all honesty, the “crazy and bitter” Ted Sallis could do a better job as President.  Sallis in 2020!  Who should be my VP choice – Durocher or Silver?

*In the early 19th century, the US government was unable to convict Aaron Burr of treason, despite Burr’s plans (and activities) in attempting to establish an empire out of the USA’s western territories and Mexico (both to be seized by force).  Now, in the early 21st century, we are told that Don Jr’s meeting with Suzie Chopsticks to get “dirt” on Hillary Clinton (certainly low-hanging fruit if there ever was) is “treason.”  Yeah…who was levying war against the United States?  Who are the two witnesses to Don Jr levying war or assisting in such levying?  As Spencer points out, the USA and Russia are not at war.

Fisking Costello

Analyzing Costello.

I cannot disagree with Costello on some of this…but he makes some errors, dependent on his meaning.

They will see that some of the most visible members of our movement, our self-described “leaders” are, in some cases, entitled, college-educated children of affluence. Vain, grandiose, egomaniacal, and attention-hungry.

Meet the Alt Right!

They will see that some in the Alt Right have not yet emerged, or only recently emerged, from living in their parent’s basement.

Some?

They will see that many exist as members of our movement only in a virtual sense, as internet trolls who hit and run. Vying with each other to prove who is the most “edgy” and “hardcore,” while usually backing up this posturing with absolutely nothing tangible and real.

True, but who does different?

They will encounter “purity spirallers” who seem less concerned with the real plight of their race than with ferreting out who in the movement might be “gay” — or with speculating that everyone in the movement is gay, except them.

I’ve already written about how “gay baiting” in Der Movement is clearly politically motivated, since there are some long-time “movement activists” rumored to be gay but no one ever mentions those people. The “gay baiters” usually fall into particular factions of Der Movement and they will turn a blind eye to the gays in their own faction.  On the other hand, there are some who push normalization of homosexuality too far.

They will see many childless, unmarried men who have turned necessity into virtue by “going their own way.” 

What happens when married fathers get so disgusted with women that they MGTOW?

Or worse, cultivating the cynical, misogynistic game of the pickup artist.

I agree with criticism of the gamesters. However. Not because of “misogyny” – in many cases richly deserved.  No, it is because the gamesters are hypocritical, illogical, juvenile, amoral hedonistic nihilists who typically ape the worst aspects of Der Movement (the Alt Wrong, for example); Roissy’s ardor for Trump borders on homoerotic mania and is frankly embarrassing,

They will see that others have the luxury of responding to the plight of the white working class, and the perils that face our civilization, by casting runes, or brewing mead.

Mead and runes?  Isn’t that all part of Der Dogma?  No blasphemy, please!

And within that group they will encounter large numbers of folks defending dead, despised dictators that, rightly or wrongly, hundreds of thousands of mostly working class Americans sacrificed their lives in order to depose. Those Americans being their grandfathers and great grandfathers.

Yes, we shouldn’t obsess over Hitler, etc.  We shouldn’t lie about WWII either to satisfy “boomers.” And doesn’t Counter-Currents run pro-Hitler essays and celebrates Saint Adolf’s birthday with posts?

They will see high flown intellectual discussions, usually presupposing the equivalent of a doctoral degree, of authors they have never heard of, and have no time or energy to read after getting home at night from eight solid hours of labor.

That could be construed as a refutation of some of my work, but of course I’ve never asserted that the details of, say, EGI should be used as propaganda to the masses; instead core concepts can be converted into “us vs. them” language of kin and tribe, and used in that manner for political purposes (as my Political EGI posts make clear).

Of course, Costello’s argument here can be used against most of the content of Counter-Currents: isn’t it too intellectual for the proles?  Is your local plumber going to care about Evola and “Savitri Devi?”  But it isn’t meant for the proles, you say.  Very well…my own work is mostly aimed at “movement” activists anyway (or may be dumber than the proles, but that’s another story).

Perhaps worst of all they are going to see chaos and disunity: character assassination, betrayal, rumor-mongering, doxing, trolling, back-biting, gaslighting, etc. 

Can Counter-Currents stop running articles on Friberg already?

They will see, in short, that the movement we offer them is, arguably, no movement at all. In a real sense, it does not exist.

When I say that, I’m “crazy” and “bitter.”  When Costello says it, it’s A-OK. Remind me why my criticisms of Der Movement’s ethnic affirmative action program is wrong.

In sum, the proles will see us as a lot of disaffected, spoiled, bratty, out-of-touch sacks of venom, who have created a little ghetto for ourselves replete with forums in which we may vent and posture without tangible results, and any real consequences. They will see that most of us have nothing in common with them, cannot understand their daily woes, and are entirely irrelevant to their lives.

Does that include posts in which the writer fantasizes about cooking breakfast for an aging mudshark?

And they are also perceptive enough to pick up on the dirty little secret of the Alt Right: namely, that many of us do not really love our race. That in fact we walk around most of the time consumed by hate for other white people, and that many of us have about as much contempt for the working class as your average liberal.

Many Whites – although not necessarily many working-class Whites – deserve to be hated.

The Alt Right has become nothing more than yet another “lifestyle choice” in the vast cornucopia of modern American lifestyles that coexist within the Great Beast, posing no fundamental threat to it. Despite our pretensions to the contrary, our dysfunction, disunity, and surfeit of bad character make us about as big a threat to the system as Wiccans. Who is the “leader” of the Wiccans? Or, who are the leaders? I don’t know, and I don’t care, and I don’t know anyone who knows because Wiccans don’t matter. I’m sure the Wiccan movement has been replete with struggles for power and internecine wars over doctrine and purity, but only Wiccans care about this. To the rest of the world they are simply irrelevant oddballs.

Again, how does any of that really differ from my own criticisms of Der Movement?  Obviously, it’s the messenger, not the message, folks.

So, forget any thoughts about riding the wave of the prole awakening and leading or guiding these folks. We are simply not worthy. Not now, anyway.

Can we become worthy? Here we can certainly be open to the possibility of becoming worthy to lead or guide, but let’s try to avoid falling into the trap of feeling superior to the proles. As a good corrective for our already swollen egos, let’s start by thinking in terms of becoming worthy of joining with them, in common cause. Now how do we do that?

Stop obsessing over a cartoon frog and screaming “Hail Kek?”

The other day a friend said something to me that was quite insightful. He said that a true movement might emerge if the internet were to be wiped away tomorrow. Now, this is not only unlikely but, most will say, undesirable since the internet can be (can be) such a useful tool. But consider it: if the internet ceased to exist the real movement would emerge from the great ocean of trolls and virtual friends. Why?

Because the real movement would consist in the people enterprising enough and committed enough to find some other ways to meet and keep in touch. The trolls and virtual friends would disappear overnight, because they were never really committed in the first place, or were “committed” for all the wrong reasons.

There would be fewer but better White Nationalists.

True enough.

Now, there are two important implications to be drawn out of this thought experiment: (1) The only really committed White Nationalists are those willing and able to form actual communities, as opposed to virtual communities; and (2) it follows from this that ultimately the movement is nothing without actual community, because actual communities are formed by, and attract, the most committed people, and a real movement is a movement of truly committed people. QED.

Fine, as far as it goes.

I submit that the most effective way to form ties with our awakening proles, and to facilitate their greater awakening is to come together with them in real communities.

In order to do this, we in what we already optimistically call “the movement” must overcome our own class snobbery and our tendency to only want to engage with others like ourselves. 

“…only want to engage with others like ourselves.”  In more ways than one, eh?

On more occasions than I can possibly remember my movement friends (virtual and otherwise) have asked, despairingly, “When are people going to wake up?” Well, now they are. But it’s not the sort of people who were always asking this question. Almost everyone I know in the movement has led a life of relative privilege and is college-educated, some with advanced degrees.

“…has led a life of relative privilege”  Speak for yourself.  You did say “almost” so I’ll give you credit for that.

But in the country as a whole, the vast majority of affluent, college educated people are sound asleep — indeed, many of them are monsters of entitlement, selfishness, and hedonism. It is the proles who are waking up — the people I’ve never even really learned to talk to. Honestly, I am just about as alienated from the proles as a limousine liberal. I too have never set foot in a factory (just like Karl Marx!).

Given that almost the entire American manufacturing sector has been outsourced to China, I doubt that many proles have set foot in a factory, either.  Is being a prole merely employment or is it to some degree culture, a lifestyle choice?  There are well-read blue collar folk, as well as the college-educated who “keep up with the Kardashians.”  It’s not so cut and dried.

The only manual labor I have ever done was whiting out errors on my college term papers, back in the old days when we were still using typewriters. My only prole friend — a high school dropout who actually has done manual labor — is really more of a prole wannabe: both his parents have master’s degrees, he’s a successful businessman, and in truth he is an intellectual with a long list of publications.

Serving breakfast to Ann Coulter – does that count as manual labor?

Many on the Alt Right profess to admire aspects of National Socialism, but very few really “get” what was arguably the central feature of that movement, and why it was so powerful at unifying the German people: true, deeply felt love of one’s own. A love that transcended class divisions, whether based on birth or wealth or education. Let us, in fact, borrow some pages from our enemies: love really is the answer; it’s just love of one’s own.

Dead dictators as role models?

And let us also celebrate diversity. The rich diversity of white people: the doctors and plumbers and stock brokers and waiters and professors and farmers and nurses and bricklayers and soldiers and programmers and Walmart greeters and actors and dentists and, yes, even lawyers.

OK, fine.  That should include people rightfully critical of Der Movement as well.  More to the point, does Costello also “celebrate” ethnic diversity among Whites?

And, to a great extent, we must also be tolerant of our people’s peculiarities, so long as they are committed to our cause. For example, it is priggish and dumb to want to run off someone genuinely committed to our cause because now and then in the evening they want to smoke a joint. Or because, through some cruel caprice of Mother Nature, they do something in private with other consenting adults that you wouldn’t do.

Er…what about the need for “good character” as explained below?  How does tolerance for character flaws square with Costello’s call for better men and women?  Inconsistency.

The only true movement is going to consist in loosely-connected, real communities that provide a safe space for white men and women and their families. For white people of all classes. These communities will provide opportunities for socializing and for protection. They will provide positive environments in which to raise children, safe spaces in which forbidden ideas can be expressed, and, at times, they will engage in advocacy and agitation.

This is necessary, but not sufficient.  That’s only one leg of the three. “Loosely-connected communities” are the gardens from which the real flowers of revolutionary activism will grow. The communities are not ends to themselves, as Costello seems to imply. “Loosely connected” of anything will not get the job done in the end.

Doing the hard work of building communities requires good character: dedication, dependability, honesty, genuineness, honor, and selflessness. Ultimately people will only follow and trust and respect those who exemplify these qualities.

Therefore the current “leadership” of the “movement” are out of the running here. Can Costello name any current (or past!) “movement” “leader” who has ever exhibited the full gamut of required character traits?

Aristotle teaches us in his Rhetoric that a necessary precondition of a man giving an effective speech — in other words, of persuading people — is that others must be convinced that he is of good character. Such men, and women, will draw others into a community. And so, the very first thing we must do to create a real movement, is to strive to become better men and women.

I’ve been promoting Codreanu’s Legion and the idea of the New Man since the early 2000s. Interest: none. Understanding: none.  Success: none.

We must disavow vanity, malice, gossip, trolling, and, above all, the suffocating pretensions of the ego. This real movement, if it is to emerge, is not a means to anyone’s ego-gratification. It demands that each of us place the good of the race above his own ego.

Please tell me – where in Der Movement such self-sacrificing idealists exist? Where is the niches where such people can develop and thrive?  Answer to both questions: nowhere. Thus, a New Movement is required.  QED.

There was a saying in Hitler’s Germany: “Du bist nichts, dein Volk ist alles” (you are nothing, your people is everything).

Quoting dem dere dead dictators?

How many do you know in our movement today who are truly living that saying? We must live it — we must live up to it — if we are to truly serve the cause we claim to be championing.

Living up to it: serving breakfast to Ann Coulter?

The goodwill and harmoniousness of communities built by and for individuals with such commitment will draw in others — persuading them that what that community stands for is positive and good. This point is absolutely crucial. The vast majority of people judge ideas not based on the arguments that are presented for them, but on the basis of the character of the people who espouse those ideas. In other words, they look at the “effect” those ideas have in a person’s life. This is especially true of those who have little formal education, and little time to peruse the intricacies of philosophical argument.

Good character, something which, like good judgement, the “movement” is in very short supply of.

In short, the key to building ties with the great number of awakening proles and the key to further radicalizing them is becoming something better than we are now — and coming together with them in real communities. Communities that, needless to say, are high-functioning, welcoming, and convivial, and that have mechanisms for weeding out individuals who are bad news. 

Bad news = 99.99999% of De Movement.

This is not just the key, of course, to building ties with proles, but with others as well. And my larger point, again, is that the only real movement is going to be based in such communities. As for the trolls, let them go their own way. And if men want to vie over who gets to crown himself King of the Trolls, that is fine. It keeps them busy and keeps them out of our way.

Ultimately, the only real “leaders” in this movement are the people who have the dedication, seriousness, and selflessness to build real communities. Such communities are the future of our movement, and the future of our race.

You know I’ve been advocating for community building ever since the early 2000s.  No one listened then and no one listens – to me – now.  Will they listen to the more acceptable messenger Costello? Who knows? But advocating to the masses is only one – the lowest – level or point or leg of The Movement Tripod.  Without building the other two legs will fail – you simply cannot build viable communities with the low quality human material of the “movement.”  Concomitant with community building must be building a New Movement, and to have the New Movement you need to have a sane and rational Elite, with fresh ideas and independent of “movement” dogma, to lead the way.  No one is interested in that because it is at cross purposes with individual agendas, factional interests, empire building – and of course the money-grubbing of “donations.”  One can expect Costello’s arguments to be met with “he’s right, you know” before all those folks go back to brewing mead and scribbling runes on Pepe cartoons.

In any case, at least Costello recognizes the deficiencies of Der Movement.

6/14/17: Another “Movement” Fail

Another “movement” fail.

The successful populist, and that increasingly will be the only successful politician, will have to start here: simple “moderate” message of good-will hammered hard and mechanically repeated (the populist finds tests effective sound bites and repeats them in the form of mantras to mesmerize and inspire: Trump’s “make America great again”…Idealistic appeals will fall on deaf ears unless those ideals are linked to self-interest and hope. Donald Trump instinctively grasped this and acted upon it, using the vocabulary and statements at the level of an eight-year old to propel his campaign. The populist casts scorn on the expert. Without modern media, Trump’s campaign would have been ignored and allowed to wither by being deprived of the oxygen of publicity, but modern media provide new ventilation systems for the oxygen of populist rebellion.

Sigh.  Yeah, Trump sure got elected; he “succeeded;” fat lot of good it’s doing all of us now. Wait, this essay says, use Trump’s methods.  Yes, but the methods are linked to the outcome – superficiality, jackassery, a complete lack of any ideological foundation is lined to major cucking in power.  Alliances, alliances!  And when the “alliances” are successful, it’s a pyrrhic victory – look at the UK under Brexit, groaning under mass non-White immigration and beset by constant NEC terrorist attacks.

And apparently Le Pen lost because she didn’t mainstream enough!  

The defeat of Marine Le Pen, ironically, had much to do with her attachment to and association with old and discredited political structures. She also refused to make an alliance or compromise…

Amazing!  Leave it up to Der Movement to learn nothing from its constant debacles.  Let’s all go on Twitter, rant about “crime” (why not import lots of “high IQ law abiding Asians” then?) and make alliances that will prevent any meaningful change in the event of an electoral victory.

Yegads…Der Movement’s stupidity is terminal.

Those who believe in a return to some form of ethnic separatism need to abandon, at least for the time being, uncompromising and isolating positions and become more fluid and fluent, more outgoing, more social, and less ideological, more passionate but less embittered; in a word, more popular…

More compromises, more mainstreaming, more implicitness…in other words, doubling down on decades of failure, betrayal, and defeat.

Of course, we need to use whatever sociopolitical and technological “technics” for victory, but not at the expense of the core message.  Means are not ends; means are to achieve ends. Once we focus on means at the expense of ends, the meaning of any “victory” is lost. We’ve seen, time and time again, that mainstreaming usually fails, and any “victories” based on lowbrow appeals to strictly proximate interests end up achieving nothing. This is the same “implicit Whiteness” argument wrapped in a slightly different package – implicit Whiteness and Republican “dog whistling” led to decades of GOP fraud.  Don’t we ever learn?

The other negative aspect of the new media is the encouragement to retreat from social life. Much time spent with a computer would be better spent by many in a real social environment.

I agree.  Of course, that statement was made on an online post, and I’m answering it in one. So, we’re both hypocrites.  On the other hand, if you want people to get involved more in analog activism, rather than digital navel-gazing, the “movement” needs to be cleaned up. Read some “movement” comments threads online and then imagine meeting some of those folks offline.  Would you really want to?

Right-Wing Populist Politics

The next step.

With the victory of Trump (*) the potential scope of right-wing populism in American politics has expanded.  Yes, we need metapolitics, including the creation of a community infrastructures and the production of cultural artifacts, but we need to get involved in politics as well.  It’s not that we are going to exert change by working within the system, but we can advance the cause by infiltrating the System, and turning the System against itself, and continuously push the envelope by actualizing increasingly explicit pro-White politics.  Pro-White political campaigns, even if unsuccessful, can be used for propaganda purposes, to promote our memes, to recruit, to build infrastructures, and to infiltrate the GOP and/or to create new parties.  Such campaigns would increase chaos and balkanization, creating divisions that can create even more demand for right-wing populism and even more explicitly White politics.  Perhaps, indeed, overtly pro-White candidates may be possible, eventually, given enough balkanization, starting at the lower, more local levels, and eventually working up nationally.  And if any candidates are successful?  That opens the door for yet even more pro-White candidates, pushing the envelope farther to the right, it creates more hate and balkanization, and, also importantly, it puts pro-White individuals in positions in which they can exert influence in favor of the “movement” in general, at least providing protection to allow “movement” infrastructures to flourish.  It’s analogous in a sense to the distinction between “legals” and “illegals” in The Turner Diaries, although in the scenario I’m talking about all involved are legal – it is the distinction between those working within the System and those working without, and the former can provide “cover” and assistance to the latter.

This is the time to get started.  If he have achieved nothing else, Trump has broken the “glass ceiling” for hard rightist politics.  I would advise first getting involved at the level spanning the spectrum from, at the most local level, school boards and city/town politics up to and including at the national level at the House of Representatives (we should think big and I believe that the House should be an excellent target to aim at).  If that’s successful, over time, then the Senate and seeing what can be done at the Presidential level (explicit pro-White candidates, not Trumpian implicit civic nationalism), at least at the third party level

* Trump is President with the Alt Lite Bannon high in his councils.  Sessions is Attorney General.  With respect to a crackdown on illegal immigration and a reduction of legal immigration – if not now, then when?  With respect to a crackdown on leftist thuggery, up to and including using the RICO laws against the organized leftists and labelling them, rightfully, as a terrorist group – if not now, then when?  If not by those individuals, then by who? The time for excuses are over, the civic nationalists worshiped by precincts of the “movement” are in power.  They had better get it done, and quickly, before Der Touchback is impeached for (real or imagined) Russian connections or some other scandal or invented scandal.  Let’s see what happens.

What If Trump Was Not a Moronic Jackass?

Saying it in a different manner.

Could Trump have run an implicitly White, right-wing populist, civic nationalist campaign and still be in the lead in the polls now, with a strong chance of winning?

Certainly yes, if the man was a serious thinker, rather than a crude Beavis-and-Butthead type jackass.

Having already outlined how he should have answered the Brown Star family, and how he should answer Ms. Girdle Fats’ attack on the Alt-Right (his Manchester speech being interestingly similar to the advice), I now move on to broader perspectives.

Immigration.  Here is where Trump has had his greatest problems, re: policy.

He should have outlined his policies as follows:

1. A zero-tolerance policy for any further illegal immigration.  But, instead of bloviating about a “big, beautiful wall” that “Mexico will pay for” he should have stated, calmly but firmly, that a border wall is a necessity, that we must do it regardless of the cost, that Israel has managed quite well with their wall, that since the wall is a national security priority it will come from the defense budget, and since Mexico bears much responsibility for the problem, we will recoup part of the cost through a tax on remittances, a tax on Mexican commerce, and – tying immigration to outsourcing – a punitive tax on American companies that move overseas (or to Mexico).

2. The illegals already here have to go.  But rather than blustering about a “deportation force” he should have endorsed the reasonable policy of “self-deportation.”  By enforcing immigration law internally in the strictest degree possible, by raising it to the level of a national emergency and investing the necessary resources, we will take away from the illegals everything that makes life in America worthwhile.  They will be forced to go back where they came from, since all opportunities and benefits and necessities of living will gradually be withdrawn from them.  Gradually over time, their numbers here will decrease as they return home.  Absolutely no benefits for “dreamers” and no “in state tuition” and no looking the other way as companies hire illegals and no drivers licenses and no anything.  

3. Birthright citizenship should be abolished. Legal immigration should be cut sharply, if not ended completely.  No H-1B visas.  No “high skilled” immigrants needed.

4. Muslim immigration: what he should have said here was: “as part of my plan to cut legal immigration, there will be no immigrants or refuges from any area that constitutes a terrorist threat.”  Same effect, less “threatening” language.

Other issues:  You know, when asked about the “nuclear triad” you should not say “the devastation is important to me” but rather: “given the security threats to America, including a nuclear-armed China and Russia, who are modernizing their nuclear forces, as well as North Korea and the long-term uncertainty about Iran, it is prudent for America to maintain all three parts of its nuclear triad.  Indeed, we should be modernizing and expanding our arsenal, including bringing back high-yield multi-megaton thermonuclear weapons and MIRVed warheads for our ICBMs, and we should look into making at least part of our ICBM force mobile.  Even in the absence of any immediate external threat, America should maintain the triad, as a hedge against any future, heretofore unknown, threats to our national security.”

And, also: no Twitter feuds, or comments about gushing blood, Mexican judges, or hand size.

But what do I know?  After all, Trump is an alpha male of vastly superior racial stock, so let’s all follow the God Emperor – as he merrily cucks away right off the proverbial cliff.

Who Will Pay Off Trump’s Losing Gamble?

Raising the stakes.

Is Trump correct about the “Mexican Judge?”  Of course he is. Unfortunately, instead of explaining his position intelligently, and pointing out the judge’s connections and ethnically-based organizational affiliations, Trump, like the clownish buffoon he is, keeps on blustering: “He’s Mexican and I’m going to build a wall.”  The Jake Tapper interview was painful; Trump talks like a petulant elementary school student.
The bigger question: how does this all affect White interests?
Trump is gambling that going along this path will gain enough working class/populist White votes to compensate for those cucks and “soccer moms” turned off by his rhetoric. Trump is like a gambler who keeps on raising the stakes, but it is we, and not him, who will ultimately pay off if he loses.  Just like Hitler gambled the future of “far-right fascistic racialism” on his gamble of military-based German hegemony (and lost, to our detriment today), so is Trump gambling all on the idea of being an ignorant blowhard is the best way to ride a wave of right-wing populism.
Now, Trump’s antics are great for chaos and balkanization.  For this, for all the trouble he has caused, and all the raciosocial resentments he has brought to the surface, he needs to be commended.  But he has raised the stakes so high, he really needs to win.  If he wins, with all his antics, that would raise balkanizing chaos in America to new heights.  However, if he loses – and as of today, it looks like he will lose – this can and will be used by the System to discredit right-wing populism and race-based appeals.  If Trump loses, he not only wastes the current opportunity, but he spoils things for future right-wing populists to come, candidates with similar (or better) agendas, but who are not, like Trump, ignorant buffoons.
The only other possible positive outcome is if the GOP is so stupid as to pull something off at the convention, deny Trump the candidacy, and put a nice cuckservative in his place, who will then go down in flames among the justified outrage of Trump’s supporters.  That scenario though looks even less likely than a Trump victory in November.
The real “right” had better come up with talking points now, in preparation for a Trump defeat, including but not limited to:
1. How Trump was betrayed by GOP elites and various cuckservatives who didn’t provide their support and constantly sniped at him.
2. The hostility of the mass media and other elites.
3. The demographic changes in America – supported by the cuckservative GOP elites – has ensured a Democratic majority and has made patriotic candidates difficult to elect.  The answer to this is to hold the cuckservative GOP elites responsible, not Trump and his supporters.
4. For all his good points, Trump didn’t have the best temperament for a presidential candidate.
But, no, the right – the “alt-right” – is too busy onanistically pleasuring themselves over Trump, and too busy pontificating about “high trust hunter-gatherers” or “Savitri Devi’s Kali Yuga” to do anything strategically useful as per practical politics and meta-politics.