Category: white nationalism

Who’s a White Nationalist?

Not Brimelow.

An online dictionary definition of “nationalism” –

…identification with one’s own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.

It’s simply this question – what does one consider their “own nation” to be? If the highest form of “own nation” is “the White race” (however defined), and if the above definition applies, then one is a “White nationalist.”  Of course, it is a bit more complex than that, since the culture and ideology of White nationalism has evolved to the point where we can say that certain ideologies, memes, and paradigms are consistent, or not consistent, with being a White nationalist.  Read this.

For “white nationalist” to be a slur, the term itself would have to be generally accepted as immoral or derogatory. It would also have to be used in a way that incorrectly labels one a white nationalist. Calling Greg Johnson, a white nationalist, for example, is not a slur. He embraces the label.

The interpretation of the term white nationalist is just one interesting aspect of the lawsuit brought by Peter Brimelow, editor of VDare. He is suing the New York Times, according to Brimelow, for falsely labeling him a white nationalist. He not only denies being a white nationalist, he claims the company deliberately labeled him as such in an effort to damage his reputation, even after he made many good faith attempts to point out the error to them. He is seeking $5 million in damages.

Another interesting bit of this is the unspoken dispute over what exactly makes someone a white nationalist. Greg Johnson, for example, has written a book describing white nationalism. He calls himself a white nationalist. Peter Brimelow, in contrast, has never used to term to describe himself and has been generally negative toward the use of it as a label. No doubt both men share similar opinions on many matters, but they have many important differences as well.

Who is the best to decide if someone is a White nationalist? How the person in question self-identifies of course is important.  Perhaps even more telling and powerful is the opinions of others who consider themselves to be White nationalists. Do they consider the person in question to be a White nationalist or not? The opinions of numbers of actual self-identified White nationalists are no doubt more accurate than that of the hacks of The New York Times.

Readers of this blog know that I – a self-identified White nationalist – am no fan of Peter “Happy Penguins” Brimelow.  However, I 100% support his action against The New York Times.  Why?  Because Brimelow is 100% correct and 100% honest in denying being a White nationalist.

Brimelow is not a White nationalist.  A true White nationalist would not give a forum to the likes of Derbyshire, never mind being friends with that “man.”  I view Brimelow, if he actually has an ideology other than being pro-Happy Penguins, as a Paleoconservative immigration restrictionist and as someone who, if they are not a HBDer themselves, is certainly sympathetic to the “race realist” view.  I see no evidence that Brimelow subscribes to ORION – Our Race Is Our Nation – no evidence that he believes that the likes of Michelle Malkin and “Rosie” Derbyshire should not be part of his nation.

Likewise, I do not view Jared Taylor as a White nationalist, and, indeed, he has self-identified as a “White advocate” and a “Yellow supremacist”  as well as a “race realist.”  Ideologically, he’s similar to Brimelow, albeit being more strongly identified to both a “White identity” and to HBD.

Greg Johnson? Well, he not only self-identifies as a White nationalist, but also writes books attempting to tell us all what White nationalism means.  On the other hand, his extreme identification with petty nationalist ethnonationalism, and his blog’s promotion of what I term “ethnoimperialism” (the ideology of Northwest Europeans colonizing other people’s nations and turning those nations into their private brothel or “crash pad”) calls into question just what kind of White nationalist he really is.  That’s a debate for another time.

Pierce, Strom, and Duke can be considered White nationalists, but for them, the question always is/was what precisely do they mean by “White” – in fact an issue for most of Der Movement.

Spencer is floating in an ideological “no man’s land” currently.  Certainly, in the past he could be considered to be a White nationalist; what he is now I do not know.

MacDonald? I do not know how he self-identifies, and his current infatuation with HBD Nordicism raises the question as to his ingroup, but I suppose he may fall in the same category as Pierce, Strom, and Duke – it depends on what you mean by “White.”  A clarification on his part with respect to self-identification would be helpful.

As far as all of the Millennial activists out there, all I hear from them is basically Beavis-and-Butthead sniggering, so who knows?

Brimelow, however, is fully justified in his action and we can only wish him well in that endeavor.

“Movement” comments:

Laurence
Posted January 14, 2020 at 10:30 am | Permalink
Just to be balanced about men going bonkers for sexual favors, some established and purportedly sane men have gone ga-ga for bum-boys, Jeremy Thorpe and Lord Brown come to mind.

Yes, and not only them.

From TOO:

In these times of true degenerate modernity we really do need figures that are wholesome and are worthy of emulation. That’s why Hitler has so many admirers in our circles, nobody (apart from the usual suspects) has yet produced any evidence of degeneracy or weirdness in his personal life.

Two words: Geli Raubal.

Merry Christmas Heterosexuals

Der Movement for the holidays – and fisking about homosexuality.

Merry Christmas, suckers!  Keep on giving “D’Nations” – remember, those who give live in the Golden Age today!

But, but, but…Der Movement does good, it is fighting for the White race.

Keep on dreaming.

Remember…don’t objectify milady!  No, wait…(Putting aside that now, after pushing the idea that grossly obese landwhales are “curvy and sexy,” we now have sagging aging hags promoted as paragons of feminine beauty).  In any case, ”female” and “agency” in the same sentence is an automatic oxymoron, unless “agency” is preceded by “no” or “do not have.”

Get ready for the next Alt Right podcast  That’s right!

I would like to take a critical look at this essay, commenting on certain excerpts:

First, homosexuality is beside the point.

Then why does Counter-Currents focus on the subject so much?

Because of the distorting lens of the Jewish media, it is easy to think that all homosexuals are promoters of the Jewish agenda. 

Jew, Jew, Jew, Jewey, Jew, Jew.  Can we discuss the topic without knee-jerk Jew-baiting?

White Nationalism should be a one-issue political outlook. 

If so, then why must we discuss this topic?  Why does Counter-Currents “take a side” on this issue, not only with essays such as this, but with the essays (and books) by James O’Meara and Buttercup Dew?

White Nationalism is for the interests of whites and against the interests of our racial enemies. Period. Anything else is beside the point. 

The problem is that “the interests of whites” can be interpreted by different people in quite different ways. Moral, aesthetic, health-related, spiritual, etc. values can be viewed as important for such interests.

That means that White Nationalists must work to unite all whites into a self-conscious racial community, rallying around our common racial interests. 

All?

White Nationalism has only one message for homosexuals: white homosexuals have more important interests in common with other whites than they do with non-white homosexuals. We have to resist falling for any form of the divide and conquer strategy used by our enemies to destroy our solidarity as a prelude to destroying our race. Battles between gays and straights, men and women, pagans and Christians, Nordics and Mediterraneans, Celts and WASPs, Germans and Slavs, etc. have no place in the White Nationalist movement. These will always be used by our enemies to divide and subvert us.

What hypocrisy!  Let’s see: “We have to resist falling for any form of the divide and conquer strategy used by our enemies to destroy our solidarity as a prelude to destroying our race. Battles between…Nordics and Mediterraneans…have no place in the White Nationalist movement. These will always be used by our enemies to divide and subvert us.”

This coming from a site that has proudly featured the anti-“Mediterranean” ramblings of Andrew Hamilton and Ash Donaldson, that praises Humphrey Ireland, and promotes the HBD cult.  By the criterion of  “…have no place in the White Nationalist movement. These will always be used by our enemies to divide and subvert us” – then Counter-Currents has no place in the White nationalist movement, as it can be used by “our enemies to divide and subvert us.”

If Johnson has no problems with the aforementioned authors (as well as the likes of Colin Liddell [in the past] and John Morgan), then why not feature the writing of Andrew Joyce about homosexuality as well?

I have met a number of homosexuals in the contemporary White Nationalist movement, and I have my suspicions about a few others. 

Indeed. I have heard things about certain people as well.

All of these people, however, are intelligent and accomplished. 

Unlike those dumb, useless, and brutish heteros.

They are real assets to the movement. 

Really? The ones I know about or have heard about are, in my opinion, net negatives.

They are masculine, and appreciate masculine things like facts, logic, and forthright action.

Jack Donovan has described some of that “forthright action.”  Bite the pillow!

And even effeminate gay men can make a real contribution. Pim Fortuyn was ideologically a mixed-bag, but he had the potential to move the Netherlands significantly to the right, and his fruity persona only helped his cause. The media found it difficult to paint a flamboyant old fop who fussed over floral arrangements and doted over his lapdogs as the next Hitler.

What was tolerated in the socially liberal Netherlands would not be so well accepted elsewhere.  I believe most White Americans would be repulsed by a “flamboyant old fop.”

A unified White Nationalist movement does not require that all the different White Nationalist subgroups follow the same strategy. That would be counterproductive. The more different strategies pursued, the more chance that someone will hit on a winner. 

We’re still waiting for that winner to show up.

It does not require that all groups co-operate with one another either. It does not require that they like one another. It does not require that gays and straights share pup tents and take showers together. 

Brendan/Brandon is disappointed.

The minimum requirement for white unity is simply this: we all must focus our energies on pursuing our common goal by whatever path we choose, and we must resist wasting our time and energy on squabbles that divide us.

Again: Andrew Hamilton, Ash Donaldson, and Humphrey Ireland.  You hypocrite.

Second, intolerance of homosexuality is Jewish.

Insane. I suppose that’s why the Jews are constantly promoting homosexuality and why traditional Christianity, despised by the Jews, opposes homosexuality.

Westphal is apparently a Christian. If you ask Christians why they think homosexuality is a sin, they cannot point to any saying of Jesus. Jesus saw fit to condemn divorce but not sodomy. Christians have to turn to the Old Testament, to the record of the Jews and their wanderings, crimes, superstitions, and hatreds. There we find homosexuality condemned as a capital crime. Why? The whole aim of the Jewish law is to set Jews apart from the rest of humanity. The Jews condemned buggery because they and all their neighbors were engaging in it. Homosexual pederasty, which still remains a taboo in our culture, was widely practiced by the ancient Aryan peoples of the Mediterranean world. The Persians, Greeks, and Romans all practiced it, including some of the manliest men in history and legend, like Achilles and Alexander the Great.

So what?  First of all, I don’t care what Christians or Jews support or oppose.  I make up my own mind.  Second, what people did in the past is irrelevant. 

Technically, the Greeks and others were not pedophiles, who pursue children, for they focused their attention on young men who were well past puberty…

Like Pilleater?

But there is no question that homosexual behavior was not only tolerated by ancient Aryan peoples, it was considered normal, in some cases even ideal. It was ascribed to the gods (Zeus and Ganymede) and lauded by poets, philosophers, and historians. It is hard to maintain hateful Jewish attitudes toward homosexuality if one really understands and appreciates the greatness of classical pagan civilization.

Regardless of what is on the Old Testament, the Jews of today, who are relevant to us today, promote homosexuality.  And one does not have to “understand and appreciate the greatness of classical pagan civilization” by agreeing with, or appreciating, all facets of that civilization. Let’s see…they viewed Germans as barbarians, and celebrated the defeat, slaughter, and enslavement of those German barbarians. Does Der Movement appreciate that? I doubt that very much. Consider what Caesar did to the Gauls. Does Der Movement appreciate that? Should we tolerate treating today’s Celto-Germanic peoples in a similar fashion?

As poisonous as the Old Testament’s moral condemnation of homosexuality may be, it is based on a realistic conception of human nature. Judeo-Christianity condemns homosexuality as a sin. A sin is a matter of choice. And nobody is immune to sin. If a heterosexual is a person who is immune to homosexual attractions, then the Judeo-Christian viewpoint implies that there is no such thing as a heterosexual. If a homosexual is a person who cannot help but be attracted to people of the same sex and has no choice in the matter, then the Judeo-Christian viewpoint implies that there is no such thing as a homosexual either. There are just people, all of whom have the capacity to be tempted by homosexual attractions and to choose heterosexual attractions. Thus there is no room for moral self-righteousness.

Retarded sophistry. Who cares about the goddamned Old Testament?  We can condemn homosexuality on biological, aesthetic, and social grounds without invoking scripture.

Matters became worse in the late nineteenth century, when psychologists—some but not all of them Jews—created a new paradigm for understanding sexuality. There were no longer homosexual and heterosexual desires, which can be found in all people and can be controlled by our faculty of choice. There were now homosexual and heterosexual people, and what made a person one or the other was generally thought to lie outside of our choice and control. One’s sexual proclivities suddenly became a whole “lifestyle,” a whole “identity,” giving sex an inflated importance in the scheme of things. It was not long before Freud started speculating that the whole soul can be understood in terms of sexuality. This new and false conception of sexuality has caused immense suffering and damage to our race.

Jews!  Jews!  Excuse me…if it is all a matter of “our faculty of choice,” then why can we tell that someone is homosexual just by listening to their voice? Or in some cases by looking at their face?  Are we, in December 2019, denying a strong biological basis for sexual preferences?  And, if is “choice,” then can homosexuals please choose to be heterosexual, thus ending the problem?

First of all, it has created a great deal of anxiety for men and women who experience homosexual attractions at one time or another. In pagan societies, these desires could be acknowledged, understood, and even expressed if one chose to. In Judeo-Christian society, such desires were repressed, but their mere presence said nothing more about one’s identity than one is a sinner and subject to temptation—just like everybody else. Today, homosexual desires cause great anxiety and psychological anguish. People worry if they fall into a small and stigmatized sexual subspecies, totally different from the rest of humanity. A young man gets aroused wrestling with a friend and suddenly has a psychological crisis on his hands. He wonders if he is sick. He feels alienated from his family and peers. He wonders if he will have to move to the city and buy a feather boa.

Projection? Homosexuals seriously – very seriously – inflate instances of nominally heterosexual people experiencing “homosexual attractions.” Johnson should realize that many – I would say most, more likely the vast majority – of heterosexuals go through their lives without once experiencing such attractions. 

Second, this anxiety has chilled same-sex friendships and male bonding, and it is the bonded male group, the Männerbund, that is the foundation of all higher forms of civilization, particularly Aryan civilizations. It is amazing to read accounts of male friendships from earlier centuries, for example in Augustine’s Confessions or Montaigne’s Essays. It was possible for men to frankly express their love for one another without fearing the stigma of homosexuality, because that was an identity that simply did not exist before the late nineteenth century. (Today, these expressions of affection are read through the distorting lens of “queer theory,” and Augustine and Montaigne and countless other figures have been “outed.”)

I don’t know.  Maybe if young men can attend Alt Right meetings without being “flirted” with by homosexuals, then a “Mannerbund” could be possible.

Third, those who decide that they do not merely have homosexual desires, but are “homosexuals” are trapped by this self-concept into an exclusively homosexual lifestyle, which not only carries health risks…

This makes no sense.  Why would an “exclusively homosexual lifestyle” carry health risks while a “partially” homosexual lifestyle not?  The risks might be statistically higher in the former case, but still substantial in the latter. It’s not like there’s a threshold that needs to be reached before health risks occur. A single homosexual encounter can result in a life-changing infection or structural bodily damage.

…but also prevents them from affirming whatever heterosexual desires they might also have. It cuts them off from marriage and family life, which could be combined with homosexual relationships openly in pagan societies and on the sly in Judeo-Christian societies.

“On the sly.”  I’m sure the wives would be thrilled if they knew that their husbands are sleeping with men.  Get tested, milady!  Virus testing awaits!

Fourth, it has created the heterosexual, who thinks he is immune from same-sex attractions. 

Created?  CREATED!!!????  Excuse me, heterosexuals are not “created,” unless by “creation” you mean conception and birth. The idea of Johnson here apparently is that there aren’t any people who are innately purely heterosexual. They all have homosexual yearnings, don’t you know, perhaps satisfied by getting groped in a men’s room, or propositioned at an Alt Right meeting. Excuse me, but this is pure fantasy.  

This allows some heterosexuals to fuse Jewish intolerance with self-righteousness, turning them into queer-bashing bullies.

Is wishing to avoid interacting with homosexuals equate with being a “queer-bashing bully?”

All these destructive consequences could be alleviated if we freed our minds from the legacy of Jewish hatred and intolerance. 

Gaslighting nonsense.  Intolerance of homosexuality is not “Jewish.”  If anything, the opposite is true.

Queer-bashers are in the grip of Jewry without even knowing it. 

Oh, please.  This is just transparent pandering to Der Movement’s knee-jerk anti-Semitism. “If you dislike homosexuals, then you are secretly in thrall to the Jews.”  Nonsense.  The same “movement” tells us that “the Jews” control the media, have an outsized influence on popular culture, dictate social and political mores, and are over-represented in academia and the professions.  Yet, society moves steadily in the direction of the LGBTQ agenda.  What does that tell you?

What are the Chances?

Be honest.

Put aside all your hopes, what you want to happen, what you wish to happen. Imagine you have a powerful incentive to make the most accurate prediction possible.  Imagine that you must be absolutely, ruthlessly honest.

So, the issue here is – predict what the chances are for White racial nationalist victory.  What are the probabilities?  Choose from:

Zero – no chance of victory whatsoever; defeat and racial destruction is assured

Negligible – there is a theoretical chance of victory, it is greater than zero, but it is so small, it is like winning the lottery or being hit by lightning

Low – say up to 15%

Low to Moderate – 15-40%

Moderate – 40-60%

Moderate to High – 60-80%

High – 80-100%

Absolutely certain – 100% chance of victory, absolutely assured

For me, I’d say that if we stay on the current trajectory, and have Der Movement dominating racial activism, it is Negligible.  I will not say zero, because there is always a chance.

If a New Movement following my ideas arises that can effectively compete with Der Movement, perhaps we can move into the Low range. If this New Movement completely replaces Der Movement, and if things break our way, perhaps Low to Moderate. But, at this point, that’s it.  Even the most ludicrously optimistic evaluation, with EVERYTHING breaking our way, cannot pass Moderate.

And of all of the above, the scenario that is overwhelmingly most likely is the Negligible choice, the one in which Der Movement leads us to the grave.

Be honest.  Do this exercise yourself.

If you disagree with my pessimism, then, on your own blogs (if you have such), explain why – without falling into the Quota Queen dishonesty designed to maximize “D’Nations.”

The Basic Foundation of White Nationalism

Race as nation.

The Left (and the System in general) pretends to be confused about what White nationalism is – “there is no generalized White nation” they proclaim – or they stupidly and mendaciously conflate White nationalism with “White supremacy.” 

Putting aside all of the details and all of the various permutations of White nationalist thought, the concept is very simple and very basic – extending the concept of “nation” to incorporate the entire race (typically meaning Europeans as a whole), so that the concept of national identity and national allegiance, at its highest level, focuses on race, rather than on particular ethnic groups constituting that race.

Nationalism is an ideology and movement characterized by the promotion of the interests of a particular nation,[1] especially with the aim of gaining and maintaining the nation’s sovereignty (self-governance) over its homeland. Nationalism holds that each nation should govern itself, free from outside interference (self-determination), that a nation is a natural and ideal basis for a polity,[2] and that the nation is the only rightful source of political power (popular sovereignty).[1][3] It further aims to build and maintain a single national identity—based on shared social characteristics such as culture, language, religion, politics, and belief in a shared singular history[4][5][page needed]—and to promote national unity or solidarity.[1] Nationalism, therefore, seeks to preserve and foster a nation’s traditional culture, and cultural revivals have been associated with nationalist movements.[6] It also encourages pride in national achievements, and is closely linked to patriotism.[7][page needed] Nationalism is often combined with other ideologies, such as conservatism (national conservatism) or socialism (socialist nationalism) for example.[2]

Thus, again, White nationalism is simply putting the race as a whole as the nation instead of nations based on particular ethnic groups. The latter certainly can still play a role, and those nations can continue to exist (and should),  but the highest form of national allegiance is to the race – Our Race Is Our Nation, the “ORION” theme. The idea that nationalism has to refer to a pre-existing nation-state is ludicrous and ahistorical; indeed, many current nation states exist because of the pre-existing nationalism of those who envisioned the state and actualized it into existence.

Everything described in the Wikipedia quote above holds with respect to White nationalism – self-determination, political power, identity, etc.

It is not easy to formulate an argument that whites, uniquely among the world’s peoples, lack any moral right to organize in defense of their interests or to maintain homelands of their own. So our enemies do not, in fact, attempt to formulate such arguments; they simply lie. The lying takes the form of name-calling, and consists in the discrepancy between the dictionary definition and the definition-in-use of devil terms.

Yes, and that lying includes dishonesty about the meaning of White nationalism, as discussed above.  Lying about White nationalism is simply a malicious racial attack against Whites and White interests.

Another Grand Ethnonationalist Victory!

Sieg heil!

“…inevitably backfired…”

Inevitably?  Sure.  What with all of this Nordic Celto-Germanic Northern Italian competence and all, amplified by ethnonationalist superiority, what could possibly go wrong?  Hail Padania!  Hail Ethnonationalism!  Hail Victory!  Hail!

Zman:

Trump really is the quintessential Baby Boomer male. He made a lot of money, but will never have much to show for his time. Everything about Trump is wrapped up Trump the person, the selfish, boorish oaf living for the moment. When the wife got too old, he traded her in for a new one. When he hit middle-age, he bought a sports car and started dating young women. His story will be one of endless self-indulgence.

Zman’s buddy Greg Johnson argues that voters – including White evangelicals – voted for Trump purely based on his persona (as described here by Zman), and not his policies. The existential meaning of Greg Johnson is pure unadulterated dishonesty.

So much winning!  The future for White nationalism looks bright!  Following the brilliant guidance of our racially superior leadership, we’ve leveraged the 2016 election prudently to achieve a clear path to victory!  All that’s left for us is to dance through cemeteries wearing swastika-soled boots!  Hail!

It’s Not All One

Der Movement is not White Nationalism.

Imagine some deluded individual obsessed with promoting “conservativism.”  If you were to tell this conservative that “The Republican Party and conservatism are one and the same; they are the same thing,” what would be his response, assuming that he was of normal intelligence (albeit deluded)?  Something like the following, perhaps:

No, you are wrong.  Conservatism is an ideology, a worldview, what I and others like me are fighting for.  The Republican Party is just that – a political party, the current vehicle for achieving conservatism.  The Republican Party is simply a tool – a very imperfect tool – for actualizing conservative ideals.  True enough, today, it is the only practical vehicle for achieving conservatism, but if and when it ceases to be a suitable vehicle even in an imperfect sense, then conservatives must either retake the GOP or leave it and found a new party according to our principles.

No doubt a progressive liberal type would say the same thing about the Democrats.

Very well.  The principle is the same for Der Movement and White nationalism.  Der Movement is only a vehicle, and it is a failed vehicle that is doing more harm than good.

The last straw for me has been the Trump fiasco and its aftermath in Der Movement, the latest in an endless series of Man on White Horse humiliations for the Type I retards of racial activism.  I had correctly identified Trump as a fraud and a buffoon in the year leading up to the election, and had also identified the only reason to give him support – the public misperception of him as a “racist fascist” was – and is – an important driver for promoting chaos and balkanization and destabilizing the multicultural consensus.

But, no, Der Movement had other ideas.  Trump was The God Emperor, the Last Chance for White America, an American Caesar Who Shall Stabilize White Demographics, a sincere hero bestowing upon us some “safe space” to expand the ever-growing success of racial activism. Pepe!  Kek!

And upon the utter collapse of that narrative, none of these no-character defectives has the moral courage, the integrity, the internal strength and fiber, to admit being wrong and to take responsibility and be held accountable. Oh no, it’s just “Fuck Trump” following by endorsements of Chinaman King Andy Eggroll and semi-Samoan Princess Tulsi Coconut, it is snide cartoons of Trump as some sort of esoteric Lovecraft monster, it is endless feuding and airing of dirty laundry, etc.

And that’s added to the Unite the Right and IE/Discord fiascos, infiltrations, gossiping about perversions and drug use, the whole stupid litany of failure and embarrassment.

So, no, Der Movement and White nationalism are NOT one and the same.  Der Movement is not (and never was) any sort of even semi-effective vehicle for achieving racial nationalist objectives.  It’s a failure and needs to be replaced.

Advice for Young WNs: The Military

Advice.

Some time ago I gave some advice here to WNs, particularly young WNs. I need not recapitulate that post, but it centered on advice you’ll never hear from the Quota Queen Grifters – that activists should prioritize themselves, their health, their education, their careers, and their families, etc., before investing in the “movement.”

Speaking of education and careers, what about the military? From a WN perspective, there are pluses and minuses to that choice, but the purpose of this post is not to analyze that perspective. If we assume that a young White man is interested in signing up, perhaps for the minimum duty period, to learn skills, earn some money, get set up for future education or career choices, then how should they approach the situation if they are also interested in White racial activism?

This is an important topic nowadays, as one sees many news stories about how the military is cracking down against WNs in the ranks, dishonorably discharging those identified, and is being egged on by politicians and activists to do even more to identify, punish, humiliate, and discharge White soldiers with politically incorrect views.  Why can’t proud White men have the opportunity to serve their country in an honorable fashion and improve their lives?  Don’t they have the same rights as everyone else?

Advice needs to be given. What follows is going to be so simple, so obvious, so much centered on plain common sense, that I am almost embarrassed to write it.  But, alas, based on recent news stories, it is all too necessary, as simple and obvious common sense evades many young Whites who find themselves in untenable situations when their very public activism collides head on with their military service.  Common sense is eschewed, prudence is unheard of, and all the heroic “movement leaders” – obsessed as they are with maximizing their “D’Nations” – fail to provide even the most basic of advice to their followers.

Thus:

If you are a young White man with a growing interest in White nationalism, and if you are seriously considering joining the military, then you must absolutely eschew being any sort of overt activist before joining, and even more absolutely, avoid any participation in “movement” activity while performing your service. Do your time, learn your skills, earn your money and whatever other benefits, get your honorable discharge, and THEN if you so choose get involved in racial activism to the extent you wish, according to your particular circumstances (e.g., your post-military career may be one that necessitates continued secrecy and prudence).

FIRST you join up, serve your time, earn what you can, and get honorably discharged, and THEN, if you so wish, get involved in racial activism.  Do NOT be an overt activist before joining, and, please, do NOT ever engage in activism while in uniform.  

Note the last part. Obey the rules and regulations of the service. Do not proselytize, do not recruit, do what you are supposed to do.  Serve your country.  Do not cause problems. Put it all in suspended animation.

To put it another way – do NOT be a White nationalist while serving in the military. Completely forget about the ideology, adopt civic nationalism, reject Der Movement and all its works. Take a hiatus.  Rethink your views. Once you go back to civilian life, if you still have an interest in White activism, then, fine, do it.  But only then.  Don’t ruin things for yourself by being a retarded Nutzi.

Back in the 1990s, people may have been able to get away with a degree of overt pro-White racialism in the military, but not today.  Note that America lurches to the Left to a greater degree during the Presidencies of “extreme right-wing Republicans” (sic) like Reagan and Trump; what flew under the radar (to an extent, before it became too extreme and violent) under Clinton is not going to fly decades later under Trump. Again, if you choose to serve, you should respect the rules and regulations of your service and reject racialism while in uniform.

And what if you already have become an overt activist and you want to join the military?  I would seriously urge you to rethink that choice.  The chances of it ending well decrease with each passing day in the Far Left Dystopia that America has become, and is becoming to an ever increasing degree.

The same basic advice of this post applies to other early career choices that can be negatively affected by an overt connection to Der Movement – e.g., non-military government service, medical school, the corporate world, teaching, academia (e.g., Duchesne), etc.