By Gregory Hood | 12 Comments | 
Print
White Nationalism — The Only Realistic Solution
The entire conservative and libertarian movements have mobilized everything they have against the passage of ObamaCare. At this time, it looks like the Democrats will still succeed. Even if, by some miracle, the bill is defeated, socialist health care in this country is an inevitability.
The Republicans are not even a useful opposition on issues of limited government; indeed, the most likely presidential nominee in 2012 passed some form of socialist health care in his own state. Republicans can also not be counted on to be of any use in the looming battle over amnesty, as many of the most “extreme” conservatives (Dick Armey, Grover Norquist, and Sarah Palin) are all on the other side.
Conservatism, as an electoral force, is finished. The constituency for it is disappearing and the social order it once exemplified has disintegrated. The battle to restrain the size of the state has failed massively, and as National Review columnist Mark Steyn notes in an excellent column, once an entitlement like health care is passed, there is no going back. Similarly, regardless of whether amnesty for illegal aliens is passed this session or in the future, the demographic battle has already been lost. California, the state that gave us Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon, will never again elect anything resembling a conservative governor. Within fifteen years, Texas will be similarly lost to anything resembling conservatism.
There are essentially three responses about what to do with the large rump of white, conservative voters that will still be in an America that they no longer have any chance of governing through democratic means. The first is what the conservative movement will undoubtedly do, which is continue its program of foreign wars, cheap labor, deficit spending, and blaming the bigotry of its own supporters for its failure to win any minority votes. Conservatives are incapable of promoting white interests even for reasons of self preservation.
Hence, we get GOP head Ken Mehlman (Jew) apologizing for the “Southern Strategy,” which delivered innumerable victories to the Republican Party. We get Michael Steele (token Negro) installed as the new head of the Republican party, who promptly blows millions on a comically bad website filled with token minorities. He then manages to shovel money to failed candidates that endorse the Democrats and alternatively insults both the blacks he’s trying to recruit and the gullible whites that prop him up.
We get Mel Martinez, a Latino who attacked the GOP’s own base to try to win amnesty for illegal immigration.
We get silly buffoons like Dick Armey, leader of FreedomWorks and self appointed Tea Party pontiff who declares that his number one foreign policy priority is to protect Israel (not America) and who thinks that if all the anti-immigration members of the Republican Party are kicked out, socially conservative Hispanics (who for some reason have higher rates of out of wedlock birth, abortion, and crime) will vote for the party of tax cuts for millionaires. Not even the average Mexican illegal immigrant, who has less than a high school education, is as stupid as Dick Armey.
The second response is more interesting, and clearly the movement that is growing right now. This is the radically anti-state Right, exemplified by Ron Paul and the Campaign for Liberty and the less respectable elements such as the various constitutional militias and media figures such as Alex Jones. The problem with this movement is obvious.
For one, the culture of a “free state” would likely be even more degraded and degenerate than that farce of a culture that we have today, which is at least restrained by the timid remnants of a conservative, Christian, bourgeois society. However, even ignoring the question of culture altogether, libertarianism contains within it the seeds of its own destruction. Libertarians refuse to recognize the existence of race, they are just as defensive and cowardly as the Republicans when it comes to issues of political correctness, and they simply do not have the constituency that can actually lead them to victory. Leftists are fundamentally correct when they note that the Constitution and the abstractions about “rights” that libertarians hold to be sacred are manifestations of white privilege. They are. They were created by white men for a white nationalist society. They do not work and do not apply in any other context.
In a libertarian society that has no recognition of race, a colored underclass would quickly develop as the facts of racial difference in intelligence manifest themselves in the economy. Many Whites, absent civil rights laws and the fist of the managerial state, will associate with themselves and exclude blacks, Hispanics and Asians from certain establishments. While race mixing and miscegenation would undoubtedly continue, it would be far less prevalent. Class divisions would be even more associated with racial divisions than today. The white working class that would exist would have little stake in preserving a system that offers no guarantees for unemployment, medical care, social security, poverty relief, food stamps, or other social services, that, for better or worse, workers have come to expect and which serve as a deterrent from socialist radicalism. Absent these services, left wing extremists would be far more able to co-opt the white working class.
Ultimately, the libertarian society would need an active domestic security force and a radically limited franchise in order to prevent the colored masses from either voting in socialism or overthrowing the system. To his credit, paleolibertarian Murray Rothbard (Jew) noted that the truth about racial differences should be shouted from the rooftops in order to preserve a libertarian society. He stated that “if you scratch an egalitarian, you will find a statist” and held that opposition to Martin Luther King Jr. was true mark of a libertarian. He even endorsed something approaching the ethnostate.
Unfortunately, this paleolibertarian movement that Rothbard exemplified is dead. As the leftward migration of LewRockwell.com shows, even the better libertarians feel the need to mouth politically correct platitudes about racial egalitarianism. Today, they overtly champion the Hispanic Conquest of the American Southwest and mass immigration. They deny racial differences because there are no races, only autonomous “individuals” that sprang fully formed from the ether.
(Racial identity for non whites, however, is ok.)
They champion Rothbard only so far as he remains within the boundaries of permissible debate. When challenged, they fall all over themselves in their willingness to prostrate themselves before the gods of egalitarianism.
It has been said that a capitalist will sell a rope to a Communist on Friday, even if he will be hanged with that rope on Sunday. Capitalists will always give in to their lust for cheap labor (read, colored labor) even if it dooms them in the long run. A society that has as its only standard of morality the profit motive will not be able to resist the profit motive. Any libertarian utopia that did exist would not last very long.
There is only one realistic alternative to the problems facing the white masses that built this country. That alternative is white nationalism. White nationalism is not racial realism, or conservatism, or immigration restriction. Realizing that race exists and that there are differences between them means that you have transcended ignorance, but does not make you a white nationalist.
White nationalism is far more radical. It is a political, cultural, and social movement that demands, as a matter of right and survival, an ethnostate that is explicitly designated for white people.
Despite this radicalism, it is far more practical and realistic to work for a white homeland than to be a moderate reformist. White victory will be difficult, and, frankly, our odds are not good. That said, a Southern homeland, or a Midwestern homeland, or even an Aryan empire in the Northwest led by Harold Covington will happen long before “true conservatives” do something like secure the border, or scrap the income tax, or even cut entitlements in the most trivial way. All the scribblers and self appointed philosophers simply are irrelevant. Conservatism, libertarianism, and the rest of these reformist approaches are not just immoral, they are fundamentally impractical. They have never worked, and they will never work. Conservatism and libertarianism were tried and they failed. They are only useful insofar as they serve as stepping stones to the white republic.
That is not just the Sorelian myth that we need. That is simply reality.
Occidental Dissent, March 17, 2010
Excellent article. I couldn’t have said it better myself. As “unrealistic” as white nationalism may be, it is much more likely to produce results than any hope of co-opting mainstream conservatism for our purposes. I have adopted a personal policy of refusing to waste my time with any political organization that is not overtly pro-white. I canceled my membership in groups like the League of the South and Campaign for Liberty and canceled my subscriptions to magazines such as The American Conservative. I believe that if people with our views hope to have any success, we should focus our efforts on local politics and secessionist movements.
I think that many conservatives and libertarians hold white nationalist views but somehow think that in a free market economy, all of our problems will be naturally sorted out. I used to think so myself and viewed libertarianism as being a de facto pro-white political ideology. I now realize how wrong I was. This nation’s problems with race have to be met head on, and as long as libertarians and conservatives skirt around the issue, they are worthless to us.
A white home land is necessary, even if it initially only consists disconnected neighborhoods of 10 or 15 fully racially conscious families each; who are all home schooling.
Once Sean Hannity pronounced he liked the idea of Boddy Jindal (sp?), the Republican South Asian governor of Louisiana as the next Republican presidential candidate, I felt the Republican party was dead for us and all white Americans.
Actually it would be preferable for Jindal to be the next president.
Membership in Storm Front.org has about tripled since the nomination of Obama.
The sooner white Americans see a string of non-white presidents, the sooner they will realize the peril we are in if we stick to conventional politics.
“I believe that if people with our views hope to have any success, we should focus our efforts on local politics and secessionist movements.”
What? That doesn’t make any sense. The LoS is both secessionist, as well as pro-white. see: “A name and place among the nations” (http://dixienet.org/New%20Site/stayorgo.shtml ). And they mean nation in the real (blood bound) sense of the word, not the washed-down sense. I am a christian of predominately American of Anglo and Celtic descent, and therefore feel quite comfortable with their context.
Excellent, if despairing, article. I don’t question that corporate conservatism, with its self-destructive mania for cheap brown-black labor, and paleo-con libertarianism, with its atomized individualism, are long-term hopeless avenues. So, at least, in the short run, is White Nationalism: the vast majority of whites in America are so thoroughly brainwashed in favor of multiculturalism, so thoroughly Jewized that, if and when the ZOG enforcers come for them, they will fall to the floor, curl up in a ball and defecate, then die quietly. The problem is power. How to seize it when economic collapse weakens the ZOG to a point where it can be overthrown. That’s going to require someone who can, even if only for awhile, get all three rightist tendencies to pull in the same direction. I think that unifying idea is going to be hard-right Nationalism, which is viscerally real, not an intellectual construct like WN: all “ideas,” and no Will to Power.
Good article.
Some parts I liked:
“Leftists are fundamentally correct when they note that the Constitution and the abstractions about “rights” that libertarians hold to be sacred are manifestations of white privilege. They are. They were created by white men for a white nationalist society. They do not work and do not apply in any other context.”
I sometimes think we’ll have arrived when our response to the leftist charges directed at us and our ancestors isn’t “no. that’s not true” but rather “yeah!! so??”
“In a libertarian society that has no recognition of race, a colored underclass would quickly develop as the facts of racial difference in intelligence manifest themselves in the economy.”
Yeah, one even worse than the current colored underclass. One reason why I’m not a “race realist.” Also, the term says nothing about the value of our race. It just says I’m comfortable with race differences. A lot of Asians are “race realists.” I hate when we use that term.
Tim P.
Posted March 17, 2010 at 6:09 pm | Permalink
“I believe that if people with our views hope to have any success, we should focus our efforts on local politics and secessionist movements.”
What? That doesn’t make any sense. The LoS is both secessionist, as well as pro-white.
You’re joking right? The LoS refuses to address the race issue head-on and promotes ridiculous arguments like that the North were the real “racists.” The ultimate goal of the LoS is to create a fundamentalist Christian theocracy, any racial concerns are secondary. Even if the LoS were pro-white, the group’s leaders are not serious about taking any political action. It is just another website designed to dupe people out of $50 (or whatever their charging now) a year in membership fees. If the LoS were serious, they would be organizing protests all over the South right now to draw attention to the their ideas, which the public may actually start being receptive to. Instead, they are content to publish a quarterly newspaper promoting the virtues of establishing a Christian Taliban and promoting their revisionist history books in which Southern slave owners were civil rights leaders who kept slaves because they loved black people so much they wanted to be around them all the time.
We theorize about a future White Republic but lack the ability to form a political party, or even a lobbying group. … – An excerpt from a commenter on this article over at Occidental Dissent:
http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2010/03/17/white-nationalism-the-only-realistic-solution/#comment-41924
–
Many ‘Rightists’ out in the real world have even a very hard time forming friendships with eachother, let alone much of anything else, which is the basis for any cooperative, collective effort on our part.
Say what you will about the Left, but they, along with the Left-wing neoCONS, really know not merely how to formally organize, but know how to give everyone who comes on board their ship a sense and feeling of purpose … a sense of belonging … that each and everyone of them ‘matters’ to the Cause.
Sorry gang, but these are some things that are WOEFULLY LACKING within Our Cause.
I cannot tell you how many times that I and many other younger men have met the putative ‘leaders’ amongst the Right – on various levels. Almost to a man, I and the others got the same sorry response, that I was taking up their sweet, precious time, and that they simply couldn’t be ‘bothered’ – since they were (supposedly) so ‘busy’ — ’busy’, of course, with selling their books, panhandling for money, or intellectually ‘one-upping’ each other and with those who, like themselves, live in their libraries — not in the real world.
How demoralizing it is to the younger generations of men (and women) looking to get involved and help out the Movement, and get this condescending ‘snob treatment’ by people who, fundamentally, are in the same ‘low-status’ predicament that we all share (at least for now).
If We are to advance at all, We need to begin to genuinely care for one another — not merely to ‘network’ with — but to build meaningful, lasting friendships with eachother. This also weeds out potential infiltrators (much) more effectively.
To put it in the most basic and simple of terms: WE HAVE TO GIVE A SHIT OVER THE WELL-BEING OF EACH AND EVERY ONE OF OUR ‘COMRADES’… NOTHING BUT NOTHING ELSE WILL SUBSTITUTE, OR SUFFICE, FOR OUR ULTIMATE SURVIVAL.
Whittaker Chambers, in his book Witness, said it so succinctly when he stated that the greatest fundamental shortcoming of all ‘Right’ political movements is that “The Right never retrieves its wounded”.
In this, the darkest hour of Western Man’s existence, We don’t need that ‘old’ Right — nor do We need a ‘new’ Right. However, what We so direly need is a True Right, one that is dedicated to Truth, and, above all, to each and every one of its members, one that will never again make the mistakes of the past in abandoning its Own, as Chambers said, and one that will ‘have the back’ of those who are willing to sacrifice so much to see its success… and Ultimate Victory.
Dropped my LOS membership, became a waste of 50 dollars I could ill afford. I look at it this way I am only going to send money to orgs. that are learning to offer protection to their constituents from the words “racist” and “racism” and the actions taken to enforce those PC terms. CofCC is next on my list of defunding since it seems they are stuck in a time warp trying to elect Reagan all over again, and not learning to protect their paying dues members from the social ostracism the Left meets out. Huge number of Americans out there that would join an org. if it offered that.
Technically, WN isn’t an alternative to libertarianism or what the piece calls conservatism. WN just defines the citizenship of the state, not its structure or policies. What is the WN consensus on some of the issues listed: health care, social security, abortion? Maybe we should take these types of positions, but as of now we don’t.
“If We are to advance at all, We need to begin to genuinely care for one another — not merely to ‘network’ with — but to build meaningful, lasting friendships with each other. This also weeds out potential infiltrators (much) more effectively.” – Kulaks Never Learn.
FWIW,
You’re essentially correct. Caring should exist in the home, between family members and kin. And genuine friends are the next best thing to having a close family relationship. Unfortunately, real friends are few, personal, and long-term. This latter requirement, “long-term,” presents a difficulty for youth. A young man simply hasn’t lived long enough to have a history. Therefore many youthful white advocates, especially those who come from an emotionally estranged, geographically separated family, place a high priority on insubstantial Internet “networks” and “friendships.” Not only are they suckers for the cyber-con and easily manipulated into believing in a closeness which doesn’t exist, they are sorely disappointed upon learning the truth of the situation.
All is not lost, however. When all else has failed you have yourself. Life, family, and genuine friendship begin with you. No matter what has happened in the past, you are the beginning of a new family and social history. Transform yourself mentally and physically into something that is worth meeting, spending time with, caring for, and loving. Broaden your horizons. Acquire new interests, skills, and harden your body. Realize that the world does not revolve about you. Go out into the community and share yourself. Do this and I can guarantee you that you’ll find what you’re looking for. Very little but noise and broken promises are found on the Internet. Friendship, family, economics, and politics are local. Only locals retrieve their wounded. It all begins with you.
Hear, hear!
I hate using the term network, it is too Hebraic by far. You do something for me and I’ll do something for you. Wrong attitude.
What I and my Comrades are about is fellowship. Whenever a new Comrade comes to a meeting or BBQ they first come due to ideology but that is not why they stay. It is for the fellowship that they stay, that they contribute their time, money and in some events their safety [not that anyone in our line of politics should think much of such a bourgeois virtue].
I was at a local government meeting a few months ago and the new mayor described how he saw the area as an extended family, his remarks caused his more ‘conservative’ party members to froth at the mouth: We’re not a family! Yelled one old man, married to an Asiatic, we’re individuals, he repeated.
Wrong.
We whites are inextricably bound by chains, stretching in ad finitum. Chains of blood, soil, tradition, fealty, honour, etc. It is from this realisation, and this alone, that fellowship can truly arise.