Anyone else notice that Amren is really pushing the work of McCulloch recently? Once again Sallis is proven correct, as I predicted that the HBD-Nordicist alliance, with Jewish/Asian interests in the background, will always attempt to divide Europeans against each other. Der Movement is tiresomely predictable, and the HBDers most of all.
Comment from the threads:
Southern and Eastern Europeans are admixed with Asian and Arab blood due to wars and invasions during the Middle Ages onward. For example, Spain and Portugal were conquered by Muslims in the eight century. It took eight centuries to get rid of the Muslims, but they still left their legacy in its inhabitants which, in turn, slowed the country’s economic growth as well scientific and literary progress.
Evidence of Siberian/East Asian admixture in Northern Europe – which even the radically hardcore Nordicist Durocher now admits exists (although he claims it is “beneficial” to all humanity) – is of course excluded from such screeds.
Note to White ethnics – leave Der Movement ASAP.
Now, let’s look at input on this matter from everyone’s favorite dishonest commentator Silver:
For some people, the racial and cultural differences become too significant to paper over as one moves from northwest Europe to southeast Europe. Although pan-European ideals hold some degree of personal appeal for me, I think it’s terribly unrealistic to expect most people to ever share them. Pan-Slavism had more going for it than pan-Europeanism, but even that never really got off the ground.
Slav is technically not a racial term, but I am not opposed to its use in this way. There is less racial variation among the people encompassed by the linguistic term Slav than there is in the racial term ‘white’, after all.
I have the impression that people tend to run away from Slav as a racial identifier in a bid to avoid association with the sorts of things that WNs have historically regarded as backward or inferior in Slavic cultures. This is especially so if they are coming at WN from a national socialist angle.
Despite the numerous factors in its favor, pan-Slavism would, I agree, have served as little more than a vehicle for the promotion of Russian interests, simply given the sheer weight of numbers on the Russian side.
It’s easy enough to proclaim European unity, especially in internet comments, but achieving actual unity in real world activism is rather more difficult.
A racial movement is not like other movements, in which membership is determined by the views a person claims to hold. Membership is decided by visual identification. No amount of pleading will ever persuade some people to accept those they visually identify as too racially divergent, nor do constant reassurances do much to assuage the doubts of those whose inclusion is questioned.
The history of racial activism has amply demonstrated, I think, that any real world get-together will always be infected by such hardliners who will invariably express their views and question other people’s inclusion, leading to bickering and self-doubt – at which point any presumed ‘unity’ goes out the window.
The only way I can see for a racial movement to surmount this problem is market itself as a cultural movement – to promote a European cultural identity – and trust that, essentially, only whites will ever really be attracted to it. Misgivings about visual identifications would not then be the barrier to unity they are in a strictly racial movement. The very racial hardliners that make unity so difficult in a racial movement would also likely self-select out of a cultural movement, which would also ease the way to unity.
If you knew nothing about Silver’s past history, these comments would seem somewhat reasonable, even though we may disagree with the recommendations he makes. Unfortunately for him, some of us have long memories, and statements from him like “Although pan-European ideals hold some degree of personal appeal for me…” rank among the most dishonest in the history of the Internet. Silver has been a bitter enemy of pan-Europeanism for the past dozen years, and has been mocking, attacking, and deconstructing pan-Europeanism, often in the most mendacious and or infantile fashion, ever since he started infesting the Majority Rights comments threads in the mid-2000s.
Regarding his contention that “Membership is decided by visual identification…” that may hold for the McCulloch faction, but many – most? – people in Der Movement go by ancestry. For example, most people in Der Movement would reject a “Nordish” Jew, but accept a darker, swart cockney “Paleo-Atlantid” Englishman.
With respect to the main point that White unity in Der Movement will always be undermined by Nordicist hardliners who reject and exclude other Whites and by the reaction of those other Whites to that exclusion, I agree. My brief period of thinking that compromise was possible was wrong-headed delusion on my part; I can admit when I have been wrong, and I was wrong in that case. If that makes some question my judgment, so be it. Unlike Greg Johnson and the other Quota Queens, I’m not going to hide my errors in an attempt to safeguard others’ opinions of me.
Silver’s recommendations are flawed. Cultural nationalism does not solve the race problem to everyone’s satisfaction; even if it are mostly Whites who are attracted to it, it still leaves the door open for mass “cultural conversion” and assimilation, attacking the foundations of racial preservationism. One solution, and that which I have advocated, is adding (not replacing) cultural factors to racial ones, instead of replacing race with culture, or vice versa – thus merging the Salterian and Yockeyian viewpoints (note I use Salterian not McCullochian – ancestry not phenotype).
Pan-Slavism has been, as Silver admits, a failure and a vehicle for Russian domination. Further, it can exhibit the same problems as pan-Europeanism. One can imagine neo-Nordicist North Slav types, such as the Polako and Raciology specimens, attacking “racially admixed” South Slavs and making a distinction between “True Slavs” (Poles, Russians) and “False Slavs” (Serbians, Bulgarians). Same problem, smaller scale.
Personally, I’m a pessimist, and believe that Der Movement has already ruined a viable chance at victory. But, we can still try. What I advocate is that the small minority of activists who are pan-Europeanists (true ones, not Nordicists trying to expand their “D’Nations” base) cut loose from Der Movement and go their own way.
Pan-Europeanists should have their own groups, groupuscules, blogs, websites, organizations, meetings, etc. They should build a New Movement. They should be hardliners themselves – absolutely eschewing, excluding, and rejecting all Nordicists, fetishists, HBDers and other dividers. Now, there are possible problems here. There are so few true pan-Europeanists that there may not be a critical mass for success. From experience, I know that Nordicists and others of similar ilk will always try to weasel their way into pan-European groups, to subvert the mission and undermine activities. Conversely, there will be pan-Europeanists who will impatiently attempt to expand their influence by accepting these other types or at least by making “alliances” with them. These dangers will exist. But if Type II pan-Europeanists can perform better than the Type I Nutzis dancing through cemeteries with their swastika-soled boots, then they can provide an attractive, viable alternative to the failed “movement” and to the hardline dividers to whom Silver refers. A more successful and sane movement can attract high quality people, establishing a positive feedback loop of steady and sound growth, while leaving the failed “movement” to degenerate under the weight of its own failures and insanity.
Do I think this will occur? No. I think the swastika-soled boots crowd will dance off into the sunset, tripping over a tombstone, hurdling headlong into the grave. The majority of rank-and-file activists – including many who call themselves pan-European – are slavishly addicted to Der Movement and will not break ranks with it until it is too late to do any good.
We’re very likely doomed. You can’t say I haven’t warned you. You can’t say that I haven’t been (constantly) offering you an alternative. It’s been your choice to (constantly) reject that alternative.
I’d like to make one more important point. If pan-Europeanism is so crazy and unrealistic, then why is that that you have Nordicists – Pierce and Duke being two prominent examples – who always seem to find it necessary to pretend to be pan-European? I alluded to one possible reason above, the desire to maximize followers and followers’ donations. But I see three more fundamental reasons for this.
First, although authentic pan-Europeanists are relatively few, they have an influence out of proportion to their numbers. Consider Yockey – you have the hardcore ethnonationalists of Counter-Currents always promoting Yockey and his work, and the Nordicist National Alliance is now selling Yockey’s masterpiece Imperium. And all these types have not hesitated to make use of my own work in the past. Second, although there is a significant and very loud hardline Nordicist faction as well as Nordicist-oriented rank-and-file activists, there is also a significant, more “silent,” fraction of activists who are at least vaguely sympathetic to pan-Europeanism, and who would be a mobilizable force with better (and more genuine) leadership. Third, the White masses already think excluding even the Jews is nutty; thus, excluding Southern and Eastern Europeans would strike many of them as completely unhinged. Many of the things that are acceptable within Der Movement’s “amen corner” would not “fly” in the broader society. I understand the difference between descriptive and prescriptive, but if the prescriptive is derived from the counter-productive obsessions of a particular hardline faction, then perhaps the prescription needs to be re-thought.
Therefore, perhaps the problem is not with pan-Europeanism, but instead derived from the fact that the American “movement” had its genesis in Nordicism and Anglocentrism, amplified by the obsessions with Hitler and Nazi race doctrine, and so these paradigms are too deeply embedded within the Old Movement to be effectively opposed from within. The same holds for Old Movement dogma outside America, with Anglocentrism being of course prominent in the Anglosphere “movement,” and Hitlerian thought being prominent among activists in “Germanic” Europe. However, that all applies specifically to Der Movement – the Old Movement – not to society at large, and not to the nucleus of activists who could, under the right circumstances, initiate the development of a New Movement.
But, again, I’m pessimistic.