By William Sheldon | 9 Comments | 
Print
Discovering Implicit White Communities, Part 2
Chapel at St. Photios National Shrine, St. Augustine, Florida
From The Occidental Observer, November 14, 2009
In “Discovering Implicit White Communities,” Part 1, we reviewed Kevin MacDonald’s article, “Psychology and White Ethnocentrism,” in which he presents the evidence from psychologists for the existence of a struggle in each European American, between our innate preference towards people like us and the need to conform to the multicultural (anti-White) ethic that emerged dominant in the second half of the 20th century. He illustrates his concept of implicit Whiteness with several examples: Republican Party, Country Music, NASCAR, and Evangelical Christianity. With MacDonald’s theoretical framework established we can now pull on a thread that is implied in his article: How do we plot all European American communities somewhere on a continuum between implicit and explicit and use this knowledge to our advantage?
Discovering European American Space
We frequently hear criticism within our ranks that we are little but an Internet virtual movement, that White “activists” will say things on the Internet that they would or could not say in our daily interactions with family, co-workers, neighbors. Take Guillaume Faye, for example, who writes:
Unfortunately for us, this same powerful tool [the Internet] allows people to think that they are advancing or fighting for the cause by simply talking on the Internet. Action, comrades. If talk leads to action, then talk is beneficial. If talk leads to simply a modified version of a Japanese Anime enthusiast Internet community with a different focus for its enthusiasm, then nothing has been done. Worse, the appearance of action has set us back.
Thus, one of the primary tasks set out before European-American activists is politicizing the physical space we inhabit through positive, empirical, systematic transformation. We must bring our ideas into the physical world. MacDonald again: “The first step [in changing this] is a psychological one: Proud and confident explicit assertions of ethnic identity and interests among White people, and the creation of communities where such explicit assertions are considered normal and natural rather than a reason for ostracism.”
Where do we start? How do we move out of the Internet echo chamber ghetto? I believe the answer is standing right in front of us. We need to literally practice what we preach. Just like learning chess or hockey, practice is the only way to build confidence and improve; and it is only sensible to practice expressing ourselves in places that are reasonable friendly environments. To identify the best places to start expressing ourselves we therefore need a heuristic:
1. Is the racial composition of those who visit the place overwhelmingly European American?
2. What is the historical significance of the place for European Americans? Does it have historical continuity and legitimacy?
3. Is it institutionalized by and for European Americans?
4. Is there a confident pro-European American group that has staked a claim or “adopted” the space as ours? . . . Read the rest of the article.
William Sheldon
William Sheldon is a librarian. He is founder and editor of the ourgazetteer.org project.
What’s the point of all this? We still haven’t proved that “White Nationalism” (It should probably be called White Hyper-Protectionism or Racial Isolationism) is a realistic 21st-century ideology. Sure, we could subvert a few swimming clubs and bowling leagues, but that isn’t going to have any effect on the “anti-White” WHITE people who rule our country. We have to prove to them that it is in their interest to help finance and promote racially conscious Whites.
I would add to implicit European-American space, crowds etc. the following:
It would be suitable to find first European-Americans who are implicitly oppositional to the present liberal anti-white power. Their identities are fairly vague, but have some promising contents. They have some combination of fairly clear/ clear grievances against the “elites”. They doesn’t have ties to institutions that are too limiting. They are stable enough to be reliable and resilient, but not to such extent that it prevents oppositional attitudes. They have social connections in their environment which they can influence if necessary. They are energetic people looking outlets to their energies. Etc.
a Finn: Can you provide a couple of examples or what you mean? To add something to my website I need a URL and description for a place, organization, publication or event.
William Sheldon,
My comment could be seen as a distilled product from large numbers of leftist sources, both books and studies; Michel Foucault, Jürgen Habermas, Peter L. Berger & Thomas Luckmann, John R. Searle, Steven Lukes, Andre Gorz, Herbert Marcuse, various feminists, various scholars extending the works of former, etc. It was a simplified psychological and social profile of a person who has a predisposition to change but is at the same time stable enough to work with reliably.
The leftists have opposed power in numerous organized ways since the French Revolution, so they are far ahead of us in this respect. The most of logical and factual errors in their works become understandable if they are interpreted in the context of power competition, e.g. the belief that there is nothing or barely anything ontological in identity; identity is (almost) wholly determined by social networks and power influences. This creates an intensified belief in their ability to change identities in their favor, thus intensified efforts to do so, thus maximum results in identity change. One of the basic functions of power is to define normal and abnormal, acceptable and unacceptable, we vs. they, favored vs. discriminated against, extolled vs. reviled, etc. Political organization is an organization of bias.
Power also keeps its underlying purposes and functions hidden, and leaves its opposition to fight against epiphenomena, mirages specifically created for this purpose, thus protecting the underlying power reality. When I have tried here and elsewhere to expand the political horizon away from the restricted criticism of Jews, it is not because of any disrespect towards those, who do it reasonably, although excesses are common.
There is no outside of power; power can’t be resisted from the outside; everybody uses and has power. Power is in social networks and their practices, ways, processes etc. Power is not in single “powerful” persons or clearly defined groups. Those who say they oppose liberalism also at the same time support it and uphold it in numerous ways every day. They consume liberally and enjoy malls; they status compete with money and material goods; they answer polls and marketing and scientific studies (knowledge, one of the steering mediums of power); they take advice from the experts without adequate analysis and filtering, guided by their needs and manipulated needs (internalization of power and becoming self-adjusting according to it in different situations); they are guided by the incentives and obstacles in their environment, which they mostly see as natural and impersonal, but which in reality are purposefully created to manipulate their functions and flows (money, architecture, city plans, transportation and other movement opportunities, placement and visual appearance of products, etc); they have several identities in different situations, which they see as natural, but which are created by social pressures, media, authority figures, incentives/ punishments/ manipulation etc.; they are dependent on power structures (work, institutions, state, schools, medical care, etc.); they have been manipulated to see their realities, problems and their solutions as personal or in various diffuse and ambivalent ways localized, thus excluding the possibility of true larger collectives (the two parties in the USA are just two more ways to channel collective impulses to uphold liberal power and inhibit change); scientists and others learn to see their fields in detached universals that are “objective,” outside time and particular realities, thus they fail see the potential to change revealed by historical and localized transformations; things and wares we use are not neutral in our manipulation, they change our culture, ways, consumption habits etc. (eating with fingers sitting in a stone creates a different culture than eating with utensils in a chair in modern restaurant); etc.
The good and bad in power is intertwined in difficult ways.
You can find useful information from the following page in pdf -form, but you must filter out the leftism, liberalism, atheism, etc.
http://ej.lib.cbs.dk/index.php/foucault-studies/issue/archive
a Finn:
I would be interested in reading an article length critique, from your perspective, of the approach I am trying to take to awaken European Americans. There is no doubt a small leap of faith from MacDonald’s article on ethnocentrism to what I am trying to accomplish with: What kinds of actions are most effective when we find an implicit white community?
William Sheldon,
You are implicitly asking a huge question. Rather than explicitly saying what you should do, I say instead what kind of evolving processes you should start.
But first, before you do anything else you could read two concentrated books on influence: Robert B. Cialdini, Influence, The Psychology of Persuasion; Robert B. Cialdini et. al., Yes, 50 scientifically proven ways to be persuasive. As always, filter out any and all liberalism and apply as is necessary to your work.
Establish evolving (real) community networks. Start from little things, communicating and meeting regularly. Establish social ties (when meeting, prefer coffee and tea over alcohol, clear thinking is necessary) and trusted relationships. Later when you ready, explore the possibilities to enlarge the scope of relationships to economic and other cooperation, more tying group rules, more exclusive membership etc., hopefully one day ending in rule based endogamous and largely independent (the more you can produce and create what is good for the group, the better) community networks. Members of the community doesn’t have to live beside each other, but close enough to meet easily. Learn from resilient communities (Hutterites, Jews, etc.), learn the principles of communities in general, local economies, and work and production skills. Study the latest production technologies, connectedness and leveraging that enable so called super empowered individuals/ group networks in technological innovation and their utilization, production and international trade (Global Guerillas site owner John Robb is an expert in this field). Apply to your situation as suitable. Some books related to this: John Hostetler, Hutterite Society; Rick Goldberg, Judaism in Biological Perspective; Joseph and Natalie Henrich, Why Humans Cooperate; Richard L. Moreland, John M. Levine, Small Groups; Elliot Sober, David Sloan Wilson, Unto Others, The evolution and psychology of unselfish behavior; Christopher Boehm, Hierarchy in The Forest; Robert Boyd, Samuel Bowles et. al., Moral Sentiments and Material Interests, The foundations of cooperation in economic life; Miles Hewstone, Wolfgang Stroebe, The Introduction to Social Psychology; Richard Douthwaite, Short Circuit, Strenghtening local economies for security in an unstable world; Steven Hassan, Releasing the Bonds (inverse the information and contemplate if it can be applied in some modified and benign way); Jack Schultz, Boomtown USA (about local businesses); etc.
Study, study groups, and discussion groups. Internet information is overrated. Read books regularly and discuss them with your pro-white friends over coffee or tea. Develop ideas and plans based on their information. Deal reading tasks in coordination with others so it is spread fairly evenly and there is no overlapping reading, when it is not necessary. Study power, politics, economics, political psychology etc. To the authors I mentioned in the previous answer I add Mitchell Dean, Governmentality, Power and rule in modern society; Graham Burchell, The Foucault Effect; Steward R. Clegg, Mark Haugard, Sage Handbook of Power; Luther H. Martin et. al., Technologies of The Self; Howard Lavine, Political Psychology; Michael Parkin, Microeconomics.
Our socities’ functions are steered with information. We must start to compete in information learning, use, and processing. This is our central task upon which other things are based.
Analyze environmental/ social/ psychological etc. influences on you and your group and environment in general. What dependencies you have? What incentives, influences and punishments steer, inhibit, prohibit, activate, confuse, etc. you, and who ultimately decides them? What are the limits of your allowed environment? What norms (norms are not used to reject or exclude, but to transform and correct according to it) you apply to your actions and self transformations and where have you acquired them and why? What productive and other flows (humans, transportation, capital, information etc.) there is and how much you can can influence them? What kind of operations and processes limit you; visible and hidden in the background or in history? What timetables you have, why, decided by who? Where you have to be in certain times and what functions you have to do, decided by who? What is the political environment? How discourse, both written and spoken, is related to these processes?
Test your environment. Make small peaceful civil disobedience transgressions to find out things about it, if necessary. How can you adjust, change, cancel, transfom etc. any of the functions, influences, flows etc., both related to you and others, in such a way that they give your group small or greater advantages (notice especially small things because they are more often overlooked)? If you can’t do a certain change, how much more information, power, skills, humans, resources, time, etc. you would need to make the desired changes?
Relation to incoming information. It is important to teach members to not just to passively receive incoming information from surrounding society, but to analyze it, compare it to other information, filter it, to use it in internal discussions and in discussions between people. This is generally better than just severely limiting the incoming information flow, because it gives immunity against large variety of manipulative, false and harmful information and at the same time enables one to receive useful information.
Translation of personal and small group to community or collective political. Translating and connecting every aspect of people’s life to community and political. Offering practical advice, what people can do. Start from easy feel good things that don’t require commitments and gradually progress toward more integration.
Legitimation crisis. What things in society’s functions cause tensions and problems to such extent that when they are combined, they cause significant legitimation problems, especially when they are made sufficiently visible to the people. Jürgen Habermas lists crisis tendencies in liberal capitalist societies in Legitimation Crisis:
Economic crisis: a) the state apparatus acts as unconscious, nature-like executive organ of the law of value; b) the state apparatus acts as planning agent of united “monopoly capital”
Legitimation crisis: e) systemic (capacity) limits; f) unintended side effects (politicization) of administrative interventions in the cultural tradition
a Finn:
Thank you for writing the article/syllabus I requested.
I hyperlinked the book titles and posted it to my website: http://ourgazetteer.org/?p=386
Very much appreciated. I’ll start reading.
WS
Ok, You are welcome.
Some additions to the book list. Filter away the leftism, liberalism, atheism, atomizing methods, universal/ centralizing philosophies etc. in them (Relevant despite some unusual titles. The books deal with methods of power, politics/ political philosophy, norms, stigmas, methods of resistance, discourse, etcetera):
Michel Foucault; The Order of Things
Michel Foucault; Security, Territory and Population
Michel Foucault; The Birth of Biopolitics
Michel Foucault; Psychiatric Power
Michel Foucault; Abnormal
Michel Foucault; Hermeneutics of the Subject
Michel Foucault; The Society Must Be Defended
Michel Foucault; History of Sexuality, The Will to Knowledge
Michel Foucault; History of Sexuality, The Use of Pleasure
Michel Foucault; History of Sexuality, The Care of the Self
Jürgen Habermas; Communication and the Evolution of Society
Jürgen Habermas; Theory of Communicative Action; Reason and the Rationalization of Society
Jürgen Habermas; Theory of Communicative Action; Lifeworld and the System
James C. Sott; The Art of Not Being Governed, An Anarchist History of South East Asia
Steven Lukes; Power, A Radical View
John Scott; Stratification and Power
William Downes; Language and Society