Category: strategy and tactics

A Failed Brand

Against the Alt Right.

My view is that we should abandon the Alt Right “brand” entirely. It only functioned when it was sufficiently vague to allow there to be a conversation between White Nationalists and people who were closer to the mainstream, which allowed White Nationalists to make converts and build connections. But Andrew Anglin and Richard Spencer have pursued a strategy of polarization between the Alt Right and what is now called the Alt Lite that has deprived the term of its original utility. So they can keep it.

Readers of this blog are aware that I have never been a supporter of the “big tent” approach.  Nevertheless, it must be said that the only way that approach would have worked for the “Alt Right brand” was if it was always made explicitly clear that the Alt Right was nothing more or less than an umbrella group of various disparate rightist factions: hardcore White nationalists, ethnonationalists, Identitarians, Alt Lite civic nationalists, Alt Wrong HBD “race realists,” more extreme Paleocons, Game-Manosphere types, Southern nationalists, etc. Unfortunately, that approach was incoherent from the very beginning.

At the same time the “big tent” approach was promoted, we were also being told that “the Alt Right is the movement” and “the Alt Right is White nationalism” and “the Alt Right is White nationalism or it is nothing at all.” Then came Hailgate, the continued identification of the Alt Right with its more “extreme” elements, and the fallout ensued.

Thus, hardcore White nationalists resented being lumped together with civic nationalist cucks, execrable HBD specimens like Derbyshire, homoerotic Trump fanboys and other hedonistic “game” “pussy nerd” nihilists, and all the rest.  Likewise, various non-WN Alt Right factions resisted association with “racist Nazi haters,” or anyone who dared to offend Jews or Orientals, or any “blackpiller” who dared to criticize “God Emperor” Trump.  And of course, besides these serious ideological splits, there were those who objected to having the “movement” conflated with the Alt Right’s juvenile jackassery (politely called by the euphemism “youth culture”), and so there was a generational split as well.

Predictably – and some of us, predictably, did predict it – the “shotgun marriage” of the Alt Right fell apart.  The Alt Lite tried to take the brand for themselves; failing that, they dissociated themselves from the Alt Right proper (which returned the favor), less “extreme” Alt Wrong elements “threw Spencer under the bus” after Hailgate, there were personal feuds between various racial nationalist/Identitarian/ethnonationalist factions of the Alt Right, and so there has been significant degeneration of the “brand” from its heyday of 2016.

What is the Alt Right now?  White nationalism Lite?  Racial nationalism for Millennials? Beavis-and-Butthead White nationalism?  The vanguard of the Iranian Renaissance?

While my reasons differ from those of Greg, I mirror his call for the rest of you folks to abandon the Alt Right brand.  Indeed, with analogy to the “only Nixon could go to China” meme, it would be optimal if Spencer himself would abandon the Alt Right brand, allowing for a “re-set” that hopefully would include lessons learned from errors made by the Alt Right.


The Adaptive Value of Truth

Truth is required for memes promoting long-term effective adaptive behavior.

I have been very critical of the “movement” – an activity itself criticized by certain racialists – which I believe is necessary; only through legitimate criticism can real improvement be achieved.

Now some of my critics would deny my negative comments are legitimate, but for this post, for the sake of argument, let us assume another riposte against my comments is made: “your criticisms of the “movement may be correct, but they are irrelevant; what ultimately matters is not ‘truth’ but whether a given set of memes is adaptive or not adaptive – ‘movement’ dogma is (in our opinion) adaptive, promoting adaptive behavior, so that is all that matters.”

A similar argument can be made – and has been made – in favor of religion; that is, it doesn’t matter if faith is based on objective fact; it only matters if religious faith promotes adaptive behavior.  Subjectivity, not objectivity, of reality is paramount if such subjectivity promotes the objective fact of genetic continuity.

Very well.  My counter-argument is this: even if “movement” dogma (or any other sort of dogma) seems to be adaptive at the current time, it is highly dangerous to base adaptive behavior on untruthful, non-factual, objectively unproven or disproved, and/or illogical memes. In the long run, the truth will out, particularly if you have determined enemies ready to utilize objective truth to undermine your subjective adaptive behavior.  If you tie your adaptive behavior on the weak foundation of fantasy, bizarre dogma, and refuted ideas then your adaptive behavior can collapse along with the failed memes.

It may sometimes be inconvenient, time-consuming, uncomfortable, etc. to get to the truth, and discard failed memes, to jettison refuted ideas; it may seem more efficient to take a “hey, it’s still working, even if it is wrong,” approach.  But in the long run, you’ll suffer like the grasshopper compared to the ant in that fable about the value of planning and sacrifice. Long-term stability of adaptive interests is best ensured by basing adaptive behavior on the best, the strongest, the most truthful memes possible; it is optimal to utilize those ideas that have been proofed, as best as currently possible, against critical analysis.  Better your own analysis than that of your enemies, better to voluntarily discard failed ideas than be forced to do so after memetic attack by your foes, attacks which, if successful, will leave your followers disillusioned, and weaken their resolve to defend their interests.

Getting back to religion, one can argue that Western Man tied adaptive behavior to Christianity; thus, after the “Death of God” (as explained by Nietzsche), due to illumination by the light of science, and rationalism Christianity as it existed collapsed, taking Western Man’s adaptive behavior down with it. Today, with a globalized society and the instantaneous dissemination of information by the Internet, the collapse of failed ideas can occur very quickly.  One could argue that the System’s memes are based on lies and refuted ideas – that is true, but note that the System is much more powerful than we dissidents and more able to slow the dissemination of the truth and note more fundamentally that the System’s edifice is beginning to collapse, there are cracks in the facade, and some “movement” activists talk of the inevitable collapse of the System due to it being based on a foundation of lies.

Should we not then wish to build our own adaptive system on a foundation of truth?  Isn’t that the best insurance against memetic shocks?  Isn’t that the safest long-term bet?

We Need Real Data

This is important.

This is a topic that I’ve brought up in comments at Counter-Currents, particularly in response to some Le Brun podcasts, but is worth discussing again (and again and again).

We need data, strong empirically-determined data, to assist in understanding racial-social trends in society as a whole, as well as within the “movement.” Many assumptions are made, and strategic approaches are designed based on those assumptions, without any real founding on real evidence. This is crucial in determining the answers to crucial questions about how to get Whites in general motivated to pursue their own racial group interests, and how to get Whites actively involved in racial activism.

We need opinion polling and other types of survey data, looking at the White population (in different countries if possible, but at least in the USA), broken down, if possible, by age, sex, education, income/class, and other variables. We need to ascertain how many Whites are concerned about the racial-cultural trends, and if so why, and if not why. We need to understand why those who are concerned do nothing about it, why they eschew racial activism, and what they think of the “movement.” Looking at the “movement” we need to identify the types of Whites who get involved, what their motivations are, how they got involved, and whether the “gateway hypothesis” (that people enter through more mild, Alt-Wrong style activism and the progress to the more hardcore) is correct or not. We need to understand whether ”mainstreaming” really works (I think not), whether “vanguardists” are more attractive or not to recruits, and whether the Alt Right’s “youth culture” is really a net positive to the “movement” and whether it is really responsible for bringing in young recruits. And there are, I’m sure, dozens of other essential questions that need be answered – and answered by real data.

Why don’t the more well-funded and “connected” precincts of the Right (e.g., the Alt Wrong) at least get the ball rolling on this? Or, if not them, can the more hardcore among us pool resources and get the job done?

Real data providing real answers leading to real solutions to pressing problems.

The Message as Well as the Messenger

Being right is not enough.

This essay (the current one in TOO, not the original 1989 version) by McCulloch is fine as far as it goes.  The logic is good and the moral reasoning is sound.  One cannot easily criticize the fundamental argument from a theoretical standpoint.  The only real objection at the current time is empirical: moral arguments, on their own, have not worked to convince White people to pursue their racial interests.

It is not merely, as the essay asserts, that Whites do not care because they do not know, or that they do not know because they do not care.  One can find Whites who will reasonably agree to the premise that genocide against any group is wrong and, as a matter of course, that every group has – or should have – an inherent right of self-preservation.  Very well. But if you then – using facts, logic, and the language of moral persuasion – attempt to convince them of the reality of White genocide, and the moral imperative of resistance, you will typically encounter immediate and unalterable hostility. They will deny the reality of White genocide regardless of facts and logic; Whites have been conditioned to automatically reject and deny any appeal to racial self-interest.

And I use the word “automatically” advisedly.  No matter how much the person had previously asserted their agreement with anti-genocide and pro-preservationist premises, as soon as those premises are explicitly linked to specifically White interests, their minds close down and self-righteous hysteria and moral posturing – usually using the language of cant – ensues. One can make arguments such as those suggested by McCulloch in this essay, and yet all these people will hear is “blah-blah-blah-racist hate–blah-KKK-blah-Nazi-blah-blah-blah.”

I have no easy answers for overcoming this conditioning.  I would suggest that Hitler did state what is likely a fundamental truth with his assertion that the masses are decidedly feminine in behavior.  Thus, the messenger is as important – or perhaps more so – than the message.  Now, I do not like stating that.  As a rationalist and an empiricist, who judges arguments by their memetic content, the idea that the messenger should rise to an equal or greater level of importance as the message strikes me as one step along the road to idiocracy.  It is irrational.  But as Yockey tells us, life is irrational. In this sense, the existentialists (using the broadest sense of that word) are correct: when viewing reality from the human perspective, there are limits to the rational, limits to empiricism, limits to positivism; man is inherently irrational.

Therefore, what would be helpful is coupling a sound message with appealing messengers: attractive, confident, successful men, speaking from a position of strength, well-liked and respected, and resistant to the inevitable backlash, thuggery, and social pricing resulting from their pro-White position. One could imagine some popular celebrity – actor, athlete, or respected political figure or businessman – being better received than the typical pro-White activist.  Of course, such people, even if they were pro-White, would likely be resistant to expressing these opinions – they would fear an end to their careers, an end to their social standing and reputation (even, thus retired celebrities would be hesitant), and so only marginal dissident figures publicly express pro-White views, a situation that the masses perceive as a lack of legitimacy.

Context is important as well: the feminine masses want to see strength, virility, defiance, success – a “winner.”  The same message with the same messenger will be differently perceived and received dependent upon the context surrounding the message’s delivery. Thus, a messenger who stands his ground and is able to deliver the message without disruption, and who of course never backs down under pressure, will more effectively deliver the message than the exact same messenger, with the exact same message, who is shouted down, chased off-stage, punched in the face, is surrounded by a motley crew of cosplay-wanna-bes, has a urine-filed bottle bouncing off his head, has his rally cancelled, and, especially, backs down under stress. On a purely rational basis, the content of the message, its inherent truth, should be independent of these external factors; however, the irrational reality is that these external factors are as important, or more so, in convincing the masses, than the message itself. I wish it weren’t so, but it is what it is.

If this is true, then great care must be taken in choosing the right messengers and also choosing the optimal environment within which to deliver the message, to invoke perceptions of strength and success.  It also follows that recruiting celebrities and other public figures, and convincing them to speak out, successfully and without a damaging backlash, without backing down, would yield more benefit than the typical preaching-to-the choir that goes on online – the powerless and marginal engaged in memetic group onanism.

Again, how to actualize these suggestions is beyond the scope of this essay. I honestly do not have the answer to this puzzle.

The Purge Continues

The meaning of the purge.

The suppression of dissident opinion and The Purge of the Right continues.

How to interpret all of this?

It would be tempting for the Anti-Alt Right Far Right to adopt the attitude of “the Alt Right and associated groups caused all of this trouble and this whole mess is their responsibility.” However, that would be the wrong view. We cannot confuse means (online activism) with ends (promoting White interests).  If the only way to safeguard our Internet presence is to be completely ineffectual, to accomplish nothing, to stay in our little playpen, then the online presence is useless.  The whole point of online activism is to eventually transition to the real world.  The Unite the Right rally had every right to occur, the violence was the responsibility of the Left and the authorities, and the Purge is System repression and nothing else.  Thus, the Purge is ultimately the responsibility of the System, not the Alt Right.

Of course, there are grounds to criticize the Alt Right and the other rally organizers.  We can ask whether the benefits of the rally was worth the costs. We can point out the lack of online security allowing the planning to be infiltrated, the relative lack of organization, the participation of Nutzi types, the silly costumes, and the point that if the Alt Right pushes its hegemony over racial nationalism, then they should include major racial nationalist stakeholders in the planning, and in the overall strategic direction, of big events and other activities.

That said, as much as I dislike the Alt Right, they cannot be blamed as the fundamental cause of the Purge (which would have happened eventually, sooner or later).

If we want to point fingers on the Right, we can look toward the “movement” as a whole, the Old Movement that never created the infrastructures required to survive System persecution and to move forward.  The Old Movement for the last half-century has been invested in the Piercian Der Tag mentality that the System is about to collapse any minute and “the revolution” is just around the corner.  After all, why organize in depth, for the long haul, with a decades-long strategic vision, if you are always thinking that “the System is definitely going to collapse in five years?”  If you believe, and proselytize, the view that a Turner Diaries scenario is going to occur within the next half decade, why bother with long term planning?

And so, when we find ourselves in the current situation, we find we have no community presence, no community support, no integration into the community, we have no cadre of lawyers ready to come to our defense, we have no print journals or other analog media ready to pick up the slack of online censorship, we have no elected officials sympathetic to our cause (the retarded buffoon in the White House, who denounced “hate,” definitely does not count), we have no professionalized security or intelligence operations, we have no businesses outside of direct “movement” activity to employ activists and to generate income, we have no (insofar as I know) “reptile fund” to support required covert operational activities – we have none of it. We are woefully unprepared for the contingencies that come from dissident activism and we are paying the price for that unpreparedness.  Instead of taking rhetoric about how “the System is anti-White and doesn’t care about our people” at face value, we have ignored opportunities to reach out to the declining White middle class, we have neglected practical community-based activities to help those Red State White Americans with increasing mortality rates and existential despair, we have turned our back on the real world and have rolled around in our isolated playpens.  And now when we need White support, they are not there for us like we were not there for them.

The “movement” made three significant errors:

1. Not organizing in depth in the real world.  See the two preceding paragraphs. This has been the largest error.  Decades of time, enormous efforts, and a lot of money, all have been completely wasted.  An absolute disgrace.

2. An over-reliance on digital activism.  This ties in to point #1 above.  We have become addicted to the Internet, at the expense of real world tangible activity.  We have reached a point where the “movement” is a foundation of digital bytes (easily erased by the System) coupled to a more recent superstructure of rallies full of mostly well-meaning people many of whom nonetheless look like they’ve just left a cosplay convention.  That’s not going to work out.  We need to take stock, and while we rebuild our online presence, we should consider this a “wake-up call” to invest more in analog activism – deep and meaningful community outreach, practical politics, System infiltration, and building of new alternative communities – and perhaps invest less in talking among ourselves online about “Pepe” and “Kek” and the older “movement” memes as well.

3. A too-narrow leadership cadre.  It has been the same people – the same types of people – and the same ideas, over and over again. There is no accountability, years and decades of failure have no consequences.  Other people with different ideas are ignored and scorned, because they are of the “wrong” ethnicity and/or do not kowtow to “movement” leaders and dare to criticize the “rock stars” and/or refuse to drink the “movement” Kool-Aid of outdated fossilized dogma.  It is high time to consider other perspectives. You are not obligated to agree with those perspectives, much less actualize them, but at least give them a fair hearing.  

Having said all of this, a case can be made that the Purge may in the long run be for the best.  It would have had to happen sooner or later – and worse may yet be to come if racial nationalism becomes more successful – so the faster the “movement” adapts to the way things are, the stronger it will become having weathered the crisis.  The System will adapt as well – a Red Queen scenario is likely – but this process is necessary for any real dissident movement.  The status quo had to be broken.  Perhaps it could have been broken in a more productive manner, but what has happened has happened, and reality needs to be dealt with as it exists.

A Tale of Two Failures

A tale of two failures: Klassen and Pierce.

We’ll now take a look at this analysis of Klassen’s basic errors and compare some of those to that of Pierce, and observant readers can discern patterns inherent in generalized “movement” failure. This is by no means any comprehensive analysis; nevertheless, it points toward real problems.

Problem A: Less than Stellar Employees
The problems Ben Klassen ran into are probably more related to the natural conditions of pioneering any sort of new religious and ideological territory than failings on his part. After all, Klassen’s career was extraordinary. He was so financially successful he was able to retire as a young man. From that situation he went on to successfully invent and market a product, be elected to public office, and make more money in real estate in Florida. His racial ideas, while radical, cannot be ignored.
His first problem related to the limitations of his pioneering work was having more problem employees than top talent during his active career as the church’s leader. Klassen writes in 1992, “I had damn few volunteers to choose from that were foot-loose and fancy free, could type and were dedicated to the cause, all of which is a dismal reflection on the disoriented state of mind in which the White Race was then, and still is.”
White advocate Jared Taylor spoke of this phenomenon in a 2017 interview. After describing his “redpilling” and white advocacy work going back to 1990, Taylor says, “In the earlier days you met most unusual people because it took a very unusual frame of mind to look into those dusty corners of university libraries [where frank discussions of racial matters existed in print] and to be aware of the obscure PO Boxes [where one could get racially frank literature]. So they were always very unusual people. Now, you meet more and more perfectly ordinary (sic), they’re not particularly unusual, they don’t have sort of the odd kinks of the mind that the older race realists tend to have. They’re smart, hard-working, nice looking, attractive people who have just seen through the rubbish.”[3]
In the above statement, Jared Taylor is pulling his punches and being generous. 

Dissident movements tend to attract marginal personalities.  It’s the nature of the beat.  One could attempt – one MUST attempt – to counter this tendency by weeding out the more obvious dysfunctional individuals at the very least. Failure to do so make dysfunction a self-reinforcing quality, as higher quality people become repelled by the freaks, while, of course, even more freaks are attracted.  Der Movement has always had the weakness of being so desperate for followers, for validation that they’ve accepted virtually anyone and everyone, leaving themselves open to both sincere freaks as well as malicious infiltrators.

Of course, in reading some of the quotes above, one wonders about the “pot-kettle” thing, but we can leave that aside for now.

Problem B: Location, Location, Location
Klassen sunk a great deal of capital into his church’s campus in the mountains of western North Carolina. In Trials… Klassen remarked that most of his neighbors were curious about his ideas and mostly friendly to his face. However, this friendliness masked the serious problems that developed due to the church’s location.
On the surface, the homogeneously white and rural location in the “conservative” Highland South would be a great pick for a new, explicitly pro-white church, however this was not the case…Framed in the metapolitical structure of the time and place, Klassen was, to put it simply, a living embodiment of “evil.” He was a big target smack dab in the center of the pre-sighted range of the Southern Protestant “Guns of Singapore.” The workers building Klassen’s church were shot at and had to bring their firearms to the site to be able to finish the job. After the church was built, it was vandalized, and the sign was hit by a shotgun blast. Klassen received hate mail, bomb threats, hostile trespassers, and prank phone calls…Klassen did recognize that his Christian neighbors would be hostile in theory. However, he didn’t realize the counterintuitive nature of ethnic struggles. This is the second problem with his pick of location. Those in homogeneous areas like Minnesota, western North Carolina, and Vermont are often so insulated from non-white dysfunction that there is no understanding in such communities of why someone like Ben Klassen would come into their midst with an idea that the institution of Christianity damaged white racial interests. They didn’t even realize white racial interests were under threat. As a result, every local politician in the area could be hostile to Klassen and not lose a single vote.
Had Klassen organized his church in South Florida, Anglo preachers would, possibly, have sermonized against him, but the whites in the pews would have all had personal experience dealing with non-whites and their problems. With this in mind, in South Florida, The World Church of the Creator might have easily gotten a quiet, solid-as-bedrock, base of support. 

True. But these types make the same mistake over and over again.  What is it?  Quota queen deficiencies?  Personal preferences (see about Pierce below)?  Ethnic affinities?

Had Klassen purchased property in the Poconos, he’d probably had done one better. Those with summer homes in that area would have had deep connections to New York City, quite possibly the city with the most red-pilled white population on this planet. It is also possible that had Klassen put his headquarters in eastern Pennsylvania and northwestern New Jersey, he’d have had an all-around better class of “walk-ins” supporting him.

But, but, but…those Whites (you know, the same sorts who supported Trump precisely because Trump was painted as a “fascist bigot” by the media) are the wrong (wrong! wrong!) kind of Whites – or perhaps not even White at all! Southern European Negroes, Eastern European Asiatics, all sorts of non-core European, outside-the-Hajnal-line, low life trash!  No, no, a thousand times no!  

The National Alliance – well, Pierce – made a similar error with respect to location– moving to the mountains of West Virginia, completely isolated from the main currents of American (and world) events and power, was a horrendously bad case of poor judgment.  And this was particularly so given that Pierce exerted tight centralized control over the activities of the Alliance’s local units (see more on this below) – a person so isolated being in no condition to exert control over people dealing with the real world of modern America.  And to the argument – “they had to move there to avoid leftist attacks” – let’s consider what Pierce told Griffin when the latter was writing his biography of the former.  Essentially, Pierce left DC because he wanted to, he wasn’t comfortable in “the big city,” he preferred the “mountain man” life, and he was getting disgusted and triggered by DC and was “doing things” (*) and was afraid those “things” would escalate and get him in real trouble.  The move from DC to Hillsboro was not really informed by a grand strategy, but by Pierce’s personal lifestyle preferences and his self-stated inability to control his behavior.  Now, if the “National Office” was the headquarters of an underground guerilla movement then, yes, living out in the middle of nowhere, the grand sage on the mountaintop, would have made sense.  But as the leadership of an aboveground, legal, metapolitical activist group, the location of the National Office was simply terrible.  If DC or some other “diverse” city was unacceptable, then there were plenty of predominantly White smaller cities, not too far from the centers of power, in which a real National Office could have been located.  With the income being generated, and with some good sense, and quality staff, security arrangements could have made that would have been tolerable. But that’s not what Pierce wanted for his lifestyle, with the predictable outcome.

Also, and no offense meant to those who worked with Pierce in the wilds of West Virginia, but that location, that environment selected for people who were not representative of Whites in general, or of White nationalists more specifically.  That may be one reason why the Alliance’s propaganda (apart from the ADV broadcasts, which were usually quite good), membership handbook, and book catalog were all “off-putting” and did not resonate well with the target audience.  Essentially, the location predisposed the National Alliance to (relative) irrelevance and failure.

Problem C: Too Many Targets
Ben Klassen did himself no favors by picking too many targets. In his tribal struggle against Jews and non-whites, he also became a tax protestor, an anti-Mason, and an anti-Federal Reserve activist. His anti-Mason attitudes were probably correct in a European, French Revolution sense, but in the English Speaking World, Freemasonry is little more than a social club providing a place for retirees to get away from the wife and bicker with each other over trifles. 

Conspiracy theorizing and pet peeves have always been a problem for Der Movement. That goes against one of my most important pieces of advice: do not expand “movement” freakishness beyond what is absolutely necessary. That’s Sallis’ Razor: do not multiply memetic entities beyond necessity. Racial nationalism is already a “bridge too far” for most people, adding these other things is just plain stupid.

However, his biggest “too many targets” problem was his tax protest. Because he didn’t file his taxes, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) was on to him, and that gave a desperate edge to his activities. 

That was just plain stupidity (once again) on Klassen’s part.  Why add to your troubles and give the System ammunition against you?

Don Johnson died of a heart attack shortly after the Chilton Bank fiasco, and Klassen came to believe that his employee may have been a plant to disrupt his activities all along. 

Maybe.  Or maybe Klassen was simply foolish.  Or both.

Problem D: Competent Enemies
While Klassen was stuck with a large number of bumbling employees and unable to find a “great promoter” or “white financial angel,” his enemies moved on him with a ruthless efficiency. Klassen’s true ideological enemies consisted of the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center, both of whom used the local Macon County, North Carolina authorities to further their aims.
His enemies used the tactics of the strong against the weak. If one has more firepower but is faced with an elusive enemy, the trick is to bait the enemy into exposing itself to the firepower. This happened on the night of June 13-14, 1986. Klassen’s chief typesetter and employee Carl Messick, titled by Klassen Hasta Primus (meaning spearhead) awoke to voices in the middle of the night. Fearing an arson attack, he called both Klassen and the sheriff’s department and then took a firearm and fired into the intruders’ car as the trespassers attempted to escape. It turned out the intruders were a Georgia couple, William and Patricia Trusty. They claimed to be looking to visit a local couple. Remember, in 1986, there were not any pro-white activists on the internet that could crowd-sleuth the Trusty’s background like today.
The SPLC’s report on the affair states that the “…[S]ecurity chief Carl Messick fires 19 shots at the car of a Georgia couple who strayed onto the COTC grounds.”[11] The SPLC intelligence report doesn’t mention that the Trusty’s “strayed” onto COTC grounds in the middle of the night. The Sherriff’s Department arrested Messick. The trial was another unforced error. Messick didn’t use a lawyer in his defense, but the alleged paralegal expert in the COTC, the aforementioned Don Johnson. Messick was sentenced to seven years. By Klassen’s account, Messick was one of the few competent employees, and his incarceration really put him behind.
Klassen’s movement was bankrupted by the SPLC legal trick of suing a pro-white organization after someone with “links” to it did an illegal act. In this case, a follower of Klassen shot a black sailor and Gulf War veteran in a road rage incident in 1991. A jury ruled in favor of the SPLC and The World Church of the Creator was destroyed.
This tactic, where a follower of an extreme, pro-white group gets involved in a violent confrontation with someone else, and the SPLC swoops in with slick lawyers that seek a bankrupting judgement is effective. However, like the famous Highland Charge was effective against soldiers armed with matchlock harquebuses, but not more advanced flintlocks that were quicker to load and had a longer range, the SPLC’s tactic might not work in the future.

Again, quality followers/employees are important here.  And anyone who takes someone with an online handle like “supernazi1488ssmanadolflives” and gives them “the keys to the kingdom” is just asking for trouble.  Don’t be all surprised when your files end up in the hands of “watchdog groups.”

The SPLC’s bankrupt on behalf of tactic only works in a situation where the overwhelming preponderance of the public see the SPLC as a moral force. Additionally, a jury must be persuaded to give a big payout targeting an organization only thinly “linked” to the actual criminal, therefore the entire jury must be totally alienated from any pro-white idea. If pro-white metapolitical ideas seep into the culture, jury decisions will change. Additionally, this tactic can be used against the SPLC. For example, in 2012 a gunman named Floyd Lee Corkins II, who had links to the SPLC, shot up the Family Research Council after the SPLC labeled them a “hate group.”

Let’s consider the tight and hyper-centralized control of National Alliance activities by Pierce and his “National Office,” relevant to the abovementioned stories.

I have heard some people defend Pierce’s rigid centralized control with reference to the SPLC tactics mentioned above.  The idea was this – if Pierce let local units have more autonomy, they might do something illegal, which would be used to legally bankrupt the Alliance.  Or even if they just did something stupid and not illegal, and/or produced shoddy propaganda, that would have been an embarrassment to the “National Office.”

There is some truth to that.  One could counter-argue that by establishing such tight control, Perce created a legal situation that he could not plausibly deny pre-knowledge and approval if a NA member did do something illegal (even if Pierce had nothing at all to do with it and had no pre-knowledge). One could counter-counter-argue that this wouldn’t have made a difference one way or another, Pierce would have been blamed in any event, so better he exerted as tight control as possible.

A better argument against Pierce’s centralized control was that if he had picked better local unit coordinators, and had been more selective in NA membership, he would have had higher quality people in the local units who could have been trusted with a bit more autonomy.  You could have had local unit coordinators enforcing discipline in some cases rather than having the constant micro-management from the local office.

And the most convincing argument against the Pierce approach was that the centralized control was not really of the nature of “hey, you can do some local initiatives targeted to your local context, but you need approval first” but rather of the nature of “you guys can do nothing except distribute propaganda produced by the National Office (purchased by members thus forcing them to subsidize Pierce’s lifestyle if they wanted to do some local activity) or maybe if you are Gliebe you can be allowed to put together some sort of small cultural festivals.”  In other words, the centralized control essentially stifled all local initiative and all local activities except putting up the NA’s stickers and distributing leaflets (except again for a small amount of leeway allotted to one local unit – Gliebe’s).  Pierce’s centralized control was excessive, it was not a request for approval but rather a denial of all local initiative.  It led local units to be nothing more than money-generating vehicles for the National Office: membership dues, purchasing the centralized propaganda for distribution, and recruiting more members to do the same.  It was more like a Ponzi scheme or cult than an activist organization.  It could have been possible for Pierce to retain control but still let local initiatives go forward, if these initiative were actualized by high quality members, led by high quality local unit coordinators, and with timely approval by the National Office.  That’s not how it was done, however.

*I remember visiting the DC area during the last years of Pierce being located there (and long before I became associated with Der Movement), and seeing a building in Arlington with the following words, in big letters, carved into its wall: White Revolution is the Only Solution – accompanied by a swastika. One wonders if that was an example of Pierce “doing things.”

Answering a “Wolf”

More permutations of “movement” stupidity.

Read this.

…but count us out…

My reply:

We will.  Something that took me many years to learn, but which is now obvious, is that it is not possible to convince all people, or most people, or even perhaps very many people, of your views. What is more important: to convince the right people.  It is quite obvious that “radical individualists” are not the right people for racial nationalism.

Also: that “radical individualists” need and want a collective tribal wolfpack doesn’t quite make sense.

As regards the main article: citing the Mafia as an example of a System-resistant group is ludicrous. With RICO, informers, targeted prosecutions, and sociopolitical issues, the Mafia today is a weak shadow of what it was in the past.  

The idea that the “Wolves” are going to resist the government like a Red Dawn scenario is equally ludicrous.