Category: white nationalism

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

Silk Road News: WN and Other News

Several items.

Another bizarre Asiatic behavior explained.  An annoying habit for an annoying people.

Colored is as Colored Does; Asians = more intelligent Negroes. 

Washington Post reporter Jeff Guo wrote an epic-length Tweet storm with every Angry Asian cliche imaginable: the Model Minority Myth is racist, Asians are discriminated against in the U.S., they weren’t even allowed in for awhile, the food tastes awful, and the portions are so small.

The only thing worse for nonwhites than having to live in a country built by whites is not being allowed to immigrate to a country built by whites.

Second, the claim that America was always a multiracial society — with whites, American Indians, and blacks present from the start of English colonization — is fundamentally false. From the beginning of the colonial period well into the history of the United States, there was a consensus that blacks and American Indians — and later mestizos and Orientals — might be “in” white society, but they were not “of” it. They were foreigners, not fellow citizens. They had no say about the character and destiny of white society…Chinese immigrants began arriving in the 1840s, and their presence almost immediately created a backlash. White Americans objected to Chinese economic competition, drug use, criminality, and all-round alienness.

Soon an Asian exclusion movement arose to cut off Chinese immigration and freeze the Chinese out of American society. The vanguard of Chinese exclusion came from the labor movement, which saw that big business interests were importing coolies to depress white wages and living standards. California was the front line of the Chinese invasion and the white reaction, which was often violent. The Chinese exclusion movement was led by the California Workingmen’s Party, founded by Irish immigrant Denis Kearney, who obviously didn’t fall for the idea that all immigrants are equal. (See Theodore J. O’Keefe’s “Denis Kearney and Struggle for a White America” and Raymond T. Wolters, “Race War on the Pacific Coast.”)

Because of exclusionist agitation, Chinese immigration was reduced, then completely barred for ten years by the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which was renewed in 1892 and again in 1902 and extended to people from Hawaii and the Philippines. Chinese exclusion was again reaffirmed by the Immigration Act of 1924. Chinese born in America were not considered citizens until 1898, and it was only in 1940 that naturalization was opened to people of Chinese, Philippine, and Indian descent, as well as descendants of the aboriginal peoples from other parts of the Western Hemisphere, meaning Indians and Mestizos from outside the United States. Chinese exclusion was only overturned by Congress in 1943, as a wartime gesture toward China.

The Raving Madness of Silk Road White Nationalism

Answering the Silk Roaders.

This was followed by a moronic attack against me on Majority Rights myself.

The reality of Silk Road White nationalism exposed here.

Daniel S, ally of Kumiko, saying that Asians should have colonies in the West and at its borders because a racial nationalist Europe will need Chinese girls with guns to defend us (emphasis added):

“Sacrosanct European territories in the Americas, Australia and New Zealand will likely need to become smaller at any rate in order to be maintained and defended. But with the increased manageability of defense will come an opportunity to offer cooperation to Asians to have some sacrosanct territories of their own in these places. 

We already have Chinatowns. Now there could be some intermittently disbursed along the borders of the Mediterranean and among European cities with border and migrant control an explicit part of their mandate.”

My reply to that race treason:

That is not simply saying, “Better Asians than Blacks.” That is saying to have Asian colonies in: Americas, Australia, New Zealand, European cities, and Mediterranean borders.   It’s there in black and white. 

And this is precisely my objection.  I absolutely reject any scenario that includes Asians having “sacrosanct territories” in White lands and/or maintenance of “Chinatowns” or any other invasive colonies in White “borders” or in “European cities.

And although the Silk Roaders will deny that Daniel S advocated Chinese girls with guns guarding the borders of the West, it is right here, with pictures.

In case the Silkers block the link from here, it is:

One can only speculate about the mentality underlying that.  

To summarize: In exchange for handing over the Russian Far East to Asians, Whites will in return get the “benefits” of Asian colonization of White lands, including Chinese girls with guns enforcing law and order.  What a deal!  It sounds more like an Alt Wrong masochistic sex fantasy than any sort of reasonable racial alliance, but what do I know?  Putting aside the obvious point that the problem that the West has currently with immigration (including of Asians, by the way) is one of will, not one of ability.  If Whites wanted to stop the influx tomorrow, they could very well do so on their own; they do not need Suzie Wong and her Kalashnikov to do the job for us.

And oh yes, the Silk Roaders will praise Britain’s “geostrategic thinking” in order to foment intra-European conflict, but note that this is the same Kumiko who wrote about the UK:

Yes, the UK’s leadership deliberately and consciously siding with international motherfucking Jews…

Which is it?  Britain’s wise geostrategic statesmanship, or a leadership “siding with international motherfucking Jews…” Whichever hands over the Russian Far East to Asians, and creates Asian colonies in White nations so that White males can be bossed around by Asiatrices with rifles – that’s the ticket! That’s to my mind an order of magnitude more repulsive than anything Hoffmeister ever said, and if I had to choose between Hoffmeister and Majority Rights, I pick the former.

And get this (emphasis added)

For British Asians in the Brexit environment, our lives and our property are bound up with the fortunes and the flag of Great Britain, so it is only natural that we would stand with Britain against any and all opponents.

Hmmm…”our?”  This creature, this diseased Oriental, lives in the UK?  Well, why not? Majority Rights supports Asian colonization of White lands, so it makes sense.  Some “White nationalism” MR is, with a female Japanese, living in a White nation, attacking WN by talking about “non-existent European solidarity.”  MR is not a pro-White site.  It is an anti-White, pro-Asian site.  Actually, even if Counter-Currents supports ethnonationalism it still does, insofar as I know, support the European solidarity this Asiatic claims to be non-existent.  So, the incompatibility between the two blogs is very clear.

To summarize: a non-White invader living in a White nation – the very thing Majority Rights was created to oppose! – uses that forum (what used to be a pro-White site) to attack the very foundation of White racial nationalism, the European solidarity that used to be a guiding principle of that site. In any case, MR is now openly hostile to the ethnic genetic interests of Europeans.

PLEASE TAKE MY EGI POST OFF YOUR GODDAMN SITE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH!

But I would urge readers of Counter-Currents to take a look at Majority Rights, both posts and comments threads, where the Alt Right and Trump are attacked as lackeys of Russians/Jews/Israel and where Alt Right personalities like Greg Johnson, Richard Spencer, and Michael Enoch are subjected to juvenile, and sometimes vulgar, personal attack.  After all, if you are not slavishly pro-Asian and anti-Russian, you are no damn good. In particular, Captain Chaos subjected Greg Johnson to a particularly repulsive attack (which I have saved in case the dishonest Silk Roaders delete it). Instead of moderating it away, they let it stand.  What to expect from a bunch of vile trash that harassed Michael Enoch (who was supported by the same Counter-Currents the vile Japotrix wants to curry favor with now – probably the reason Greg was attacked, his support of Enoch), engages in gay baiting of Richard Spencer as a lisping effeminate (while he actually has more physical courage than most, going out in public), and the way Bowery has been treated there over the years, allowing him to be abused by Graham Lister, while in the midst of serious personal difficulties, was disgusting and atrocious.

And lest we forget, I was labeled as a “Jew” or someone who “sucks Jewish cock” by Daniel after I had the temerity to object to colonies of Asian women with guns in Western nations. If that’s the supporters of ethnonationalism, again, I’ll take Hoffmeister over them any time.

By the way, the Majority Rights hostility to Trump and the Alt Right is encapsulated by this Kumiko comment:

I can’t wait to see the kind of vacuous nonsensical stream-of-conscious word-salad which will be deployed across the lectern in search of a meaning, once Trump actually starts ad-libbing in the middle of his own speech as he so often tends to do.

In terms of the substance of his speech, I’m expecting that it will be in the combined tradition of Madison Grant, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Dwight D. Eisenhower – which is to say, a crybully session in which people will be entreated to ‘discover’ that all of the problems of White and Jewish Americans and Israeli Jews, all the problems that they have, are somehow to be blamed on Asians and Mexicans.

We can’t pick on those poor Asians and Mexicans!  And how about putting Madison Grant in the same category as FDR, who pushed the Democrat party into anti-Whitism and Ike, who began the process of integrating the American educational system   How can you compare a racial nationalist like Grant (who defined his race specifically in terms of Nordic) to anti-Nordics (and anti-Whites) like FDR and Ike?  Answer: they all picked on those poor, innocent Asians.  The whole world must be explained in terms of Asian interests, don’t you know.  And if you object, then you’re a “Jew” or “suck Jewish cock.”

The Silk Roaders essentially use anti-Semitic rhetoric as a smokescreen to conceal Asian supremacist and Asian imperialist motives.  Throw a few “It’s the Jews!” bones in the direction of “movement” Nutzis and hope they don’t realize your entire agenda is about enriching Asian interests at the expense of that of Europeans.  The idea that someone can be opposed to BOTH Jews and Asians doesn’t quite register on the memetic maps of these Asiatic swindlers.

Meanwhile, the Alt Right, for all their faults, at least critique Trump for valid reasons.  You know, a pro-White site actually cares about what’s good for Whites, instead of what’s good for Asians.  Paying attention, GW? Remember when the “Majority” in your “Majority Rights” referred to Europeans and not Asians?

One basic problem with the whole Silk Road Asian Alliance/Derbyshire Arctic Alliance nonsense is that it presupposes a set of conditions that would render it irrelevant.

This is common sense and logic.  Who in the White world would make such an alliance with Asians?  Who?  Merkel and other anti-White, liberal, globalist leaders?  The American System?  Who?  Well, the answer would come, it would be White/Euro-nationalists who would make such an alliance.  Uh, well, that’s great, but such nationalists are not in any position to make any grand international alliance as envisioned by the Silk Road/grovel-to-Rosie crowd, a grand geopolitical/strategic/military alliance to keep out the hordes of the Global South.

Thus, it would need to be White/Euro-nationalists in positions of power.  In other words, the grand alliance would need to occur after the White world is governed by ethno/racial nationalists.  Who else would want to make such an alliance and be in a position to do so?

Very well.  But, if ethno/racial nationalists are in control of the White world, then what need to they have for Asians and an alliance with Asians?  The current invasion of the White world by the Global South (which, truth be told, includes East and South Asians, who are migrating to the West the same as all the other Coloreds) is a social and political problem, it is a problem of will. It is not a technical or military problem.  If Whites decided tomorrow that they wanted an end to the invasion, then the invasion ends.  There is no way for the Coloreds to force their way in if Whites absolutely refuse. The problem is that Whites, particularly the globalist elites who control White nations, do not want to stop the invasion; instead they want to encourage and facilitate it.  Likewise, if Whites wanted to expel all non-Whites from White nations, they could do so – it wouldn’t be easy, and would require some bloodshed no doubt, but it could be done.  Whites do not need Asian help to enact these measures, and Whites are the ones who need to decide that it must be done.  No one else can do that for us.  Indeed, one could expect that Asians, at least some Asians, would object to such a renaissance of White Will and White Power, since Asian immigration to the West is one safety valve for their teeming hordes (and infiltrates the West with Asian influence).

So, why an alliance?  What possible benefit could it confer?  And at what cost?  The Silk Roaders talk about ceding the entire Russian Far East to Asians, they have talked about having Asian colonies in White cities, having Asian colonies on the borders of Europe – as if Europeans need those Chinese girls with guns (pictured at Silk Road blogs) to defend them. And what price Derbyshire’s Arctic Alliance?  That we need to have an Asian and Jewish technocratic elite living in White nations, insisting on our “measured groveling” and intermarrying with high-IQ Whites to form a Jeurasian overclass?

No thank you.  This is all cost and no benefit.  Any alliance is unnecessary and would confer unacceptable costs.  Instead, the most we should strive for is peaceful coexistence, peaceful competition.  Any further than that is madness.

Trump vs. White Nationalism

Here is an excerpt from a comment someone left at MPC, emphasis added:

Trump Will Dash the Hopes of White Nationalists

Despite what little Richard Spencer says, you’re not getting a white ethnostate, at least not with Trump, and probably not within our lifetimes. This shouldn’t have to be repeated, but Trump is a nationalist, not a white nationalist. While his vision of America does not include the 50 million beaners and the several million towelheads and skinnies currently here, it most emphatically includes blacks. 

And why shouldn’t an American nationalist movement include blacks? Blacks are Americans. They’ve been here longer than the overwhelming majority of Italians, Irish Catholics, Polacks and Jews. They’re dysfunctional, stupid, violent, shitty Americans, but they’re still Americans, and as such, Trump has vowed to Make America Great Again for them, too. 

Moreover, Trump seems to genuinely like blacks in much the same way he seems to genuinely like ordinary Americans. He gets a kick out of blacks, likes hanging around with them, and is a good friend to them even when they’ve disgraced themselves.

That’s pure Sailerian citizenism, and that is what the beta race cuck civic nationalist Trump is all about.  I supported Trump’s candidacy, and voted for him, for long-term strategic reasons outlined here ad nauseam.  I have also made quite clear my low opinion of Trump the man, and my equally low opinion of the Trump fanboys and Alt Wrong HBDers, quota queens, etc., and their raging stupidity of “Trump is the last chance for White America” and “we’ve won.”  Morons and imbeciles.

Trump’s victory has expanded the range of possibilities, it has brought us some breathing room, it has emboldened some people, and it has heightened the contradictions.  If managed corrected by the far-Right, Trump’s victory can be a net gain.  But that will be in spite of Trump, not because of him. From this point on, the long-term objectives of Trump and of WNs diverge, as the pro-Trump MPC comment makes clear.  Trump wants to stabilize and strengthen multiracial America; WNs – true WNs – want that version of American destroyed.  Trump wants to bring “all American citizens together,” while the true and just objective for White survival is to set “Americans” of different races against each other, to promote a balkanizing chaos.  Trump wants to foster hope for a brighter America; in contrast, WNs must foster hatred, bitterness, division, despair, rage, disillusionment, and disgust – with true hope being actualized only when the current rotten System collapses.

Anyone who considers Trump a “great man,” a “savior,” the “last chance for White America,” or anything similar is an unmitigated idiot.  At best, Trump is a tool for our side, at worst, an enemy to us and a tool for the opposition.  

Note to Der Movement: Stop the hero worship and get to work.

Planning For Two Trumpian Scenarios

Alternative scenarios.

Let us consider what Der Movement should do if Trump loses (likely) and, to a lesser extent, what should be done if Trump wins (unlikely). This is obviously not a comprehensive or final list but merely the beginning of the discussion.

What if Trump loses? Let’s assume it’s the “day after,” Roissy is weeping softly, and Der Movement needs to figure out what to do next.

We need to clean out the flotsam and jetsam of Der Movement. All the people who said “Trump is the last chance, the last hope for White America” – according to them, all is lost if Trump loses.   All the people who are confidently insisting that it was virtually 100% certain Trump will win – in a landslide, in a Trumpslide, in “the Trumpening” – what about them?  All the folks who tightly associate WN with Trump, what about them? If Trump loses, they all need to go.  Actually, they would still need to go even if Trump wins, because their appalling lack of judgment and overall stupidity remains either way, independent of the outcome of the election (which they have no real control over).  However, human nature being what it is, error in theory is only recognized by the masses when it coincides with error of fact; thus, impetus to rid ourselves of this trash is realistic only if Trump loses. Unfortunately, even if Trump loses in a landslide, I know these people are not going anywhere.  They’ll all just pretend it didn’t happen, they never wrote these things, and business should continue as usual.  I’ll write more on this if Trump actually does lose. Regardless of what will happen, what should happen is clear: flushing these morons down the activist toilet.

Continue with metapolitical content and community building.  All the things discussed by Greg Johnson here with respect as to what needs to be done is relevant whether Trump wins or losses.

Reaching out to the Trump base.  This is probably easier said than done, but that’s what the Alt Right is for, isn’t it?  Look, I’ve been critical of the Alt Right, but mainly because of the idea that he Alt Right will come to represent the totality of the far-Right in America, which would be a travesty, a disaster. However, as one component – of many – of the far-Right, the Alt Right has its uses. If one buys the “gateway hypothesis” – that people tend to enter the “movement” through its more moderate precincts and then gradually become more radicalized – then the Alt Right can serve as that gateway for elements of the angry and disillusioned Trump base.  Where else will they go?  They can “move right” in our direction, they can stay static and follow whatever civic nationalist “media empire” Trump may establish after losing, or they can “move left” into mainstream cuckservatism.  We need to capture as many of these people in the “move right” camp as possible.  Now, I myself am very skeptical of the “gateway hypothesis” and see many folks stuck at the “gateway” permanently, while others actually go straight into radicalism – but, hey, let’s make the Alt Right/gateway folks “put their money where their mouth is.”  A Trump loss – actually, a Trump win as well – is the perfect opportunity to prove the “gateway hypothesis” is correct and that the Alt Right approach is beneficial.  Go to it then!  Show us your success!  I would love to be proven wrong and see lots of radicalized WNs passing through the “gateway” from the Trump camp.

This would require though not only that the whole Alt Right gateway hypothesis is correct, but that the Alt Right and its leadership have the character, the ability, and the planning to pull it off.  To say I’m skeptical about that would be an understatement, but again, I’d love to be proven wrong here.  Another problem is that going after the Trump base means actually going after the real base, and not “movement” delusions about what that base is or what the “movement” wishes it could be.  The elements of the White population that supported Trump vs. the cuckservatives in the primaries – that’s the Trump base.  Can Der Movement get over its ethnic fetishisms, its affirmative action programs, and its fossilized dogmas in order to reach out to those White Americans it has heretofore ignored and despised?  Once again: I’m skeptical, but please prove me wrong.

In any case, a concerted effort needs to be made, led by the overt public faces of the Alt Right (minus those elements who should be run out of Der Movement for the reasons discussed above) to burrow into the Trumpian base and scoop out as many good folks as possible for WN.  Propaganda needs to be thought up, actions need to be planned, and strategy and tactics need to be elucidated.

Agitating the Coloreds/Left.  Agitating the other side would be easier if Trump wins for obvious reasons, but perhaps it really doesn’t make as much of a difference than we think. There is an inherent difference between Right and Left. The Right, when it wins any small victory, declares victory and goes home; when the Left wins its big victories, it congratulates itself briefly, and then goes on the attack again.  A Clinton victory may, paradoxically, enrage the Left as much or more than a Trump victory; emboldened by their victory, Colored/Left bullying of White folks would increase, setting up a White reaction, as long as Whites are not allowed to be hoodwinked over what happened (see below, about the “narrative.”). Careful work by Der Movement can assist and enhance this process of balkanization and increase the natural conflicts and tensions that are part and parcel of any multicultural society, and which will be turbo-charged under a Clinton regime. Action and reaction, reinforcing each other down into the abyss of raciocultural conflict and societal disintegration. 

Challenging the narrative. If Trump loses, the cuckservatives, backed up by the Left and the controlled media, will attempt to spin the loss as a repudiation of right-wing populism; we will be told once again that the GOP must turn away from nativism and embrace pluralism, that the GOP needs to become “diverse” (in other words, going back to taking their base for granted and routinely betraying the base and spitting in its face), we need “immigration reform,” we need “outreach to minorities,” that the Republican Party needs to eschew its own White male base and go back to the post-2012 “autopsy,” etc.

The counter-narrative must be:

1. The only problem with Trump was one of character, not policy.  When Trump’s populist views on immigration and economics were attacked, Trump’s popularity rose.  Trump’s fall was primarily due to attacks on his character through cheap moralizing and virtue-signaling regarding Trump’s penchant for vulgar buffoonery and an inability to restrain his impetuous tweeting.  The election was a referendum on Trump’s character not a referendum on Trump’s policies.  Indeed, the Clinton campaign-GOP Establishment alliance all but gave up critiquing Trump’s policies for the (ultimately more successful) approach of appealing to a retarded feminized (redundancy?) America with accusations of “sexual misconduct.”  With respect to Trump’s policies, the same message, the same policies, championed by someone with the intelligence and character beyond the level of Beavis-and-Butthead will meet with success.  

2. Even with Trump’s defects, it still could have pulled it out, if the media was not relentlessly hostile to him and if he was not consistently sabotaged and undermined by the treasonous Republican Establishment. As I have written before, the GOP Establishment needs to be politically destroyed. That’s the same Establishment that’s been telling the White base for decades that they had to support Establishment cuckservative milksops because “we need to have Republican solidarity to defeat that dastardly liberal Democrat.”  Now that the shoe’s on the other foot, and the base picked their own candidate, the Establishment has been throwing a temper tantrum, actively sabotaging the campaign of the base’s GOP candidate and supporting a very dastardly liberal Democrat (even in some cases openly endorsing her).  Why the hell should the base EVER vote for an Establishment candidate ever again? All that is required is that some fraction of Trump supporters stop voting for the cucks and, given how class most national and state-wide elections are, the GOP Establishment is “toast.”

3. What about the idea of actual election fraud? Unless there is rock-solid evidence to support this, Der Movement should not make such conspiracy thinking a main part of its post-Trump approach, for doing so violates the premise outlined here that asserts that defectiveness can be defined as needlessly multiplying perceptions of “movement” freakishness above and beyond the core of racial nationalism itself.  Having said that, promoting the idea of election fraud can be useful for delegitimizing the System and spreading anger, rage, disillusion, despair, and division.  The key is to be highly targeted: aim the message to those elements of the pro-Trump base already inclined to believe it, and those spreading the message should not be the “movement” mainstream (such as it is) but the more “loony-tune” elements of Der Movement, those who already have the reputation of being weirdos (even in the context of racial nationalism) and hence have little to lose (division of labor, so to speak).  Of course, if that rock-solid evidence presents itself, then the issue of election fraud can be spread by everyone.  I doubt however that the System would be so crude as to leave its fingerprints behind in such an obvious fashion.

What if Trump wins?

Of course, if Trump wins, he would need to purge the GOP of the cuckservatives and Necons – if he can.  But that would be his problem. With respect to Der Movement, some of the recommendations in the event of a Trump victory are similar to those for a Trump defeat. Der Movement needs to identify areas of White interest in Trump’s right-wing populism and proselytize in those areas to win some fraction of those people over to WN. Agitating the Coloreds and the Left may be easier after a Trump victory as these elements would be hysterical in their reaction to a triumphant Trump; thus, Colored/Left radicalism can assist in preventing Whites into falling into a “victory euphoria” and the usual rightist “prematurely declare victory and go home” mindset.

Agitating the Coloreds and the Left would of course be easier if Trump actually follows through on his populist promises; if Trump “cucks out” and reneges, then the fury and frustration of the betrayed base could be used to Der Movement’s benefit.  If the still-entrenched Establishment blocks Trump from enacting his program, then that would be a salutary lesson for the White masses on how the System is rigged against them even in the event of a right-wing populist electoral victory.  There are many ways to play a Trump victory for WN benefit.  The fact that people “love a winner” and are conformists who like to hop on bandwagons is also beneficial, given the linkage in the public mind between Trump and “Alt Right White racism.” Thus, the moronic public would conflate a victory for Trump’s civic nationalism with a victory for WN; that could rebound to the benefit of WN IF, once again, “victory mania” is avoided, and it is pointed out that virtually ALL the work lies ahead and that, honestly speaking, very little of lasting value had been actually accomplished by a Trump victory.  The metapolitical work and community building mentioned by Greg Johnson is also relevant here.

In the unlikely event that Trump does win, we can all consider how to leverage that victory in more detail, fleshing out the bare bones mentioned here, but unlike the fever-dream crowd over at Chateau Heartise, I’m under no delusions about Trump’s chances.  Why waste any more time discussing a Trump victory at this point?  If he does win, time enough to deal with the ramifications then.

Motgift Interview: Greg Johnson

Some good stuff.

Good point about Asians: crammers, cheaters, ethnic networkers.  It would be good if at some point Greg Johnson would follow up with a full-blast attack on the Asiaphilic and Judeocentric HBD cult.

Also good insights on invasive species, hybridization, extinction

Good points as well about the Jews knowing that they are promoting White genocide

I disagree (possibly) with some of the comments about the Alt Right…I guess I’m among the paranoid and xenophobic folks, with the proviso that I do not mind if the Alt Right is restricted to reach out to “normies,” but not if Alt Right becomes absolutely synonymous with WN.  I do agree that we should use the Alt Right in an instrumental fashion to advance WN goals, and we must be vigilant, and be careful of the Crowderites.  So, in a sense, I agree with Greg Johnson, but I’m leaning more to the “paranoid” direction. We need to keep the Alt Right sufficiently quarantined so that it cannot contaminate real WN.  So, basic agreement with a difference in emphasis: Johnson is more optimistic about the Alt Right; I am more pessimistic. There is a place for the Alt-Right in our strategy, but only as a tool, not as the main event.

You’re Just a Freak…Like Me

A message for White liberals.

Let’s consider this scene from the second of the Batman trilogy movies; let us consider the Joker (considered “insane” by the masses) as akin to White nationalists and Batman as akin to typical White liberal “good Whites” (and to an extent similar to the general White masses, who believe they’ll somehow survive the coming Colored darkness).  

You’re just a freak…like me.

White liberals like to think they can make common cause with the Coloreds, that they are “good Whites,” that they are allies to “people of color,” that they will be accepted as individuals, and that they will seamlessly fit into the progressive multicultural world of tomorrow.  Truth is, Whites – all Whites – are considered by Coloreds (including Asians, by the way) as The Enemy, simply by virtue of their race.  In the end, White liberals are considered as racial “freaks” just as are White nationalists.  Do you doubt this?  Look at how often ultra-cuck White liberals are accused of “racism” by their Colored “allies,” all the nonsense about “implicit bias” (even if you are an anti-White ultra liberal White you are still somehow an anti-Colored racist, it’s in your blood), and the even greater nonsense about “White Privilege” (even the good White liberals benefit from that “invisible knapsack,” don’t you know). Whites anywhere and everywhere can never escape from their Whiteness, regardless of what they do and what they believe.  And in some cases, the “freakishness” is considered literally: thus, Whites are “Ice People,” creations of the “mad scientist Yakub,” and “Whiteness is a relatively new genetic mutation.”  

So, as a WN I say to the White liberal that you are not one of them, regardless of how much you would like to be.  You’re just a freak…like me.

They need you right now, but when they don’t, they’ll cast you out….

As a corollary to the above, White liberals will be tolerated by the Coloreds for just as long as those Whites are useful.  Once Whites are safely a minority everywhere, the good Whites will be cast out just like the rest.  The “progressives” below deck on the ship in The Camp of the Saints were killed by the brownster hordes once Europe was reached, no?  When Fanon said that Whites would be eliminated with the indispensable help of the Whites themselves, what’s going to happen to the Whites after that?  And the Jewish leaders of the Colored hordes tell us that the White race (all of us, not just the “bad” Whites) must be “abolished.”  There’s no future for Whites in the Colored Future.  White liberals: you’ll be cast out of the progressive paradise along with the rest of us.

You have nothing to threaten me with…

On the surface, the System can persecute WNs, and does so very well.  But the concept of WN, the inner necessity of WN, the ideals of WN are beyond threatening by a corrupt System, which, despite all its strength, cannot even save itself.  So, yes, just as Batman physically threatens and attacks the Joker, WNs are persecuted, but just as the Joker remains unbroken in his inner self, so does WN survive.  In reality, the only ones who can really destroy WN (for as long as Whites exist) are WNs themselves (and unfortunately they are going a fine job of doing just that).