Another rambling piece that doesn't come to any definitive conclusion. Note the appeal to authority, using William Pierce of all people (one could use Yockey as I have done, is one inherently better than the other?). I thought Pierce was one of those Old Right types that the New Right is supposed to eschew. Indeed, I recall Pierce being criticized on Counter-Currents for his Lenin-like bloodthirsty promotion of genocide in The Turner Dairies. Is Pierce now the final word on the utility of ethnonationalism?
Having said that, despite the fact that this blog is a peaceful and pacifistic proponent of non-violent social change - and let there be no doubt about that whatsoever! - I must say that it is precisely Pierce's bloodthirstiness that is the best aspect of the man's character. Indeed, one is hard-pressed (from a purely theoretical standpoint of course) to find any fault in his "Table-leg Therapy" as outlined (emphasis added):
Senator Fulbright and the Reverend Berrigan are still on the wrong side of every issue except Palestine, and they are on the right side of that issue for the wrong reasons.
In other words, liberals — including the consistent ones — are just as sick as ever and just as dangerous to the future of America as ever. The only way the great majority of them will get their thinking straight, eventually, is with a sturdy, oak table leg applied smartly and repeatedly alongside the head.
Nevertheless, the present dissension in liberal ranks is of inestimable value. It is the most fervent and influential of the liberals who are now taking an anti-Zionist position, and their numbers and influence are growing daily.