Saturday, August 30, 2014

Strom, Conservatism, and the National Alliance

Some points of agreement, some points of disagreement.

I’d like to comment on Strom’s latest broadcast, on the topic of conservatism. Excerpts from Strom are in italics, my comments are in plain text.

Almost all non-Whites in America, no matter how conservative some might be in personal habits or family traditions, cleave to the liberal line and the Democrat party — because the Democrats are the party of White dispossession, payoffs to the underclass, and wide open borders. There is no hope that these people can ever be brought to support American conservatism. The more tradition-minded Blacks have their churches. The more tradition-minded non-White immigrants have their Asian or Muslim or nationality- or race-based groups to fall back on. Their conservatism is based on conserving their culture and preserving their people. Both liberal universalism and the new universalist, non-racial conservatism are alien to them. True belief in “everyone-is-equal” universalism is limited almost exclusively to White folks, whom the more intelligent non-Whites probably, and rightly, regard as crazy.
Nevertheless conservatives try to out-liberal the liberals when it comes to race. They make sure that the very few Blacks or Mestizos who show up at conservative events are highlighted in their publications. They lionize the very mediocre Herman Cain to prove to us how “non-racist” they are.
Despite the fact that almost all American conservatives are White, the conservatives and Republicans would rather have a limb amputated than do anything to secure the continued existence of White people — or even admit that they represent White interests. They can get away with this because they know that White Americans have nowhere else to go politically. They take Whites for granted. They can keep all their White support by just being a little less anti-White than the liberals. And they can avoid being called “racist” by the Jewish media by taking the same tack — shouting “slow down a bit” at some of the more outrageous anti-White policies of the regime in Washington, but never taking effective action or even speaking out against White genocide — or telling us who’s responsible for it…
…A better name for the conservatives would be the comfortable cowards. As long as they could move to a relatively safe suburb, smoke their imported cigars, puff themselves up with dogmatic 17th-century morality, engage in purposeless militarism and utterly empty patriotism to a flag and not a people, they were content. They like the comfortable reservation their enemies have allowed them in payment for their treason, and in their softness they fear a direct battle with those enemies. So they never fight one. They just keep on making deals (with people who are much better at making deals than they are) and selling out their children’s future, right to the end. Eventually, the children of those conservatives will be a tiny and hated minority, most of them unable to advance into even the third tier of the new elite, and will be forced to live cheek by jowl with the lowest peons of the Third World underclass that the billionaire Jewish elite is importing to our country. Whites are being pushed down to the proletarian level everywhere in North America.
That is an excellent summary of the stupidity, mendacity, and cowardice of conservatism.
One especially egregious example of how conservatives are given false hope and offered false solutions was brought out on this program several years ago by the writer Hadding Scott:
“For years the Republican party has tried to smooth over the differences within its coalition by deceiving the pro-White supporters of the party into thinking that their stake in the party is greater than it actually is. One especially clear example of how persons of pro-White sentiment are fooled is the Jewish ex-Marxist David Horowitz. Horowitz has written several books with titles like Hating Whitey, intended to be sold a White readership — White people who of course are starved for recognition of some of their problems such as anti-White crime and anti-White discrimination. Any White person who cares about his race and reads Horowitz carefully, however — which most people do not do — will be disappointed to learn that Horowitz the Jew has no interest whatsoever in preserving the White race. On the contrary, he complains that the more blatant anti-White policies actually backfired and have increased racial separatism. That is the kind of thing that worries Horowitz; he is not interested in the survival of the White race at all. But this fact is missed by many readers, who seem to regard his books simply as collections of useful anecdotes for complaining about how ‘unfair’ things are, a typical conservative playpen activity.”
Once again, we see the danger of Jews in not only conservatism, but the “movement” itself.  Strom could very well have discussed Hart’s vision of multiracial “white separatism,” as another example.  Or Weissberg or Levin or all the rest, always watering down the agenda, making it more “user friendly” for the tribe, and user-useless for us.
Pretending to be the ‘true’ exponents of ‘fair’ multiracialism will not stop the importation of cheap labor and the proletarianization of the White worker. It will not prevent the ever-more-numerous members of the more favored non-White groups from pushing our children out of the best schools. It will not close the wide open sluices of non-White immigration into the West. It will not stop the rape and sexual slavery of our children and women by peoples with a very different understanding of their value than we have. It will not stop the rising tide of non-White crime and corruption. It will not stop the open pandering to non-White interest groups by our careerist politicians. It will not stop the academic establishment’s pushing of multiracialist values on our students. It will not change the anti-White alien control of our mass media. Accepting the multiracialist values promulgated by people who want to kill you, and meekly asking for ‘fairness’ from those people and their employees is not a formula for success. It is a formula for death.
To all of you good people who are supporting efforts based on that formula, I urgently ask you to reconsider. At this late hour, only an affirmation that we are White and that we must do whatever is necessary to ensure that our race survives can save us. White people have an absolute non-negotiable right to exist, to organize and govern ourselves, to have our own exclusive territories for our nations and peoples, and to keep the products of our labor for ourselves and our posterity. Only by taking that uncompromising stand, and backing it up with all the wealth and will and power we can muster, do we have a chance to provide for future generations of our people. Only by stopping our pretenses and halting our retreat do we have a chance of being worthy descendants of our ancestors.
I’m 100% against multiculturalism.  I’m extremely radical and in fact have been getting more radical with the passing years, not less.  However, I see value in the idea of “democratic multiculturalism” as proposed by Salter and Duchesne.  That’s not compromise, but strategy.  Whites are so totally deluded, so frightened by any expression of racial self-interest, that one technique that may help is to demand a place at the multicultural table for Whites, AND to have that place at the table filled by real pro-White radicals.  That can be the first balkanizing step to destabilize the multicultural consensus.  Note I said ONE technique.  I’m not saying that democratic multiculturalism should be the only strategy. Certainly, at the same time, the more radical message promoted by Strom can be used as well.  There are some Whites already primed for the full message.  However, others will need some preliminary steps to get to that point.  Whatever works.

That is the message of the men and women of the National Alliance. As our society descends into darkness, we must be building alternative structures of community and communication and racial and cultural preservation, structures which will survive this dark time and emerge into a brighter future of our own making. We need your help.Stay a part of the more timid efforts if you like, but with a goal of radicalizing and enlightening your co-workers there. Tell the other Whites in these groups about the Alliance. Support the Alliance with all you can afford in time and energy. Give as much as you can to the cause of our children’s future. Use your influence and intelligence to add to our efforts — and make them better. Take a stand. The half-measures and pretending of the conservatives are really a kind of lie, and a rather weak and ineffectual lie at that. The National Alliance represents the uncompromised truth...[Strom continues promoting the National Alliance].
So, he admits that "the more timid efforts" can have value in the process of radicalization. But what about the National Alliance?

Look, I agree with Strom on most things (NOT on Putin, though), but here’s a point of important difference. The “National Alliance brand” seems to me to be greatly compromised.  Certainly, all the unfortunate events since the death of Pierce have really tarnished that brand to an extent that I wonder if it’s worth trying to revive.  But the problem goes deeper.  With the benefit of time and perspective, and with hindsight, some view the National Alliance even under Pierce as a disaster.  All the time, money, and support from members – to what end?  So Pierce could stay isolated on the mountaintop, engaging in serial monogamy with Eastern European women?  What was accomplished?  Then, with his screed Who We Are, Pierce was exposed as a radical Nordicist, who must have had contempt for all the “Meds and Slavs” contributing “membership dues” to his “organization.” Well, it can be argued that those folks were only fooling themselves – after all, one look at the National Alliance’s book catalog, or a careful reading of The Best of Attack and National Vanguard, should have been enough to reveal the truth of the matter.  But, still, all in all, the whole endeavor was fundamentally dishonest, it accomplished nothing, and many view the entire National Alliance experience, including and especially the tenure of Pierce’s leadership, as a net negative episode in the history of the “movement.”  Thus, this attempt to revive the Alliance, and link it to the “glory days” of the Piercian era, is not going to make a good impression on those who would rather see that past buried and something new created in its stead.