Saturday, March 17, 2018

Two Levels of Insurgency

Outer and inner.

Any student of insurgency, of warfare against a stronger power, of guerrilla tactics, of dissent opposition, understands that the fundamental strategic objective of the insurgency is to maintain its existence.

Insurgent armies will often avoid full frontal assault against the entrenched power, will engage in hit-and-run tactics that weaken that enemy while preserving the existence of the insurgent force.  The mere continued existence of the insurgency, in the face of a more powerful enemy, is itself a victory, it undermines the power of the enemy and the confidence of the people in that power, and it allows the insurgency to exist to fight another day.  As long as the insurgency exists, it has the potential for overcoming the enemy, if by attrition if by no other mechanism.  The continued existence of the insurgency will attract followers, it will allow for growth and adaption, it may attract the support of other powers; this is why the enemy state prioritizes the complete elimination of the insurgency – “containment” is not good enough, it is an admission of defeat – and why the insurgency itself puts a premium on existence.  Thus, the brilliant strategy of George Washington in the American Revolution, the Fabian Strategy (despite the negatives that strategy can bring and Washington’s own frustration at his critics), that allowed the Colonial army to survive in the field long enough so that important foreign support, and eventual victory, was achieved.

In this context, the Outer Insurgency is that of racial nationalists/nationalists/Far Right against the System, against the globalists.  Priority number one has to be continued existence of the Far Right opposition; after all, if you do not exist, you will be unable to eventually come to power yourself.  At the current time, the power imbalance between the Far Right and the System requires the former to engage in a Fabian strategy and guerilla tactics against the latter, a form of memetic/political/metapolitical ju-jitsu to use the clumsy bulk power of the System against itself.  A wonderful example of this is the “It’s OK to be White” meme, which puts the System in a lose-lose situation. If the System ignores the meme, ignores the posters and leaflets, then it displays weakness and emboldens imitators and others to push the memetic envelope further; if the System acts against the meme, then it “heightens the contradictions” and makes people wonder: “why isn’t it OK to be White?”  The System is forced to choose between being weak and being openly anti-White in a ham-fisted manner; the System cannot simply say, “Yes, it is OK to be White,” since the System’s entire foundational ideology is anti-Whiteness.  That’s a form of ideological guerilla warfare, a memetic insurgency, which attacks the System at its ideological core without putting the existence of the still-weak insurgency at risk.  Priority one: existence.  Priority two: attack and undermine the opposition. Leading to priority three: systematically replace the opposition and achieve power.

The second form of insurgency – the Inner Insurgency?  That’s the insurgency within the “movement” itself; relatively weak dissidents, presented by EGI Notes for example, staking out a niche in opposition to the (in relative terms) clumsy ham-fisted “movement,” which needs to be critiqued and undermined. Thus, it is the first priority for the Inner Insurgency to survive, to have a continued existence, to engage in a Fabian Strategy when necessary, to mimic on a smaller internal scale the same struggle that is taking place on a larger scale at the level of the Outer Insurgency of Der Movement vs. The System.

The “movement” has made this Inner Insurgency necessary by not engaging in the necessary reforms and by not giving dissidents “a place at the table” to bring their legitimate grievances to be aired without being summarily dismissed or labeled “crazy.”

Indeed, this “craziness” derives from the same source as consistently being correct about things, recognizing problems at an early stage, and realizing trends before they become apparent (if they ever do) to the “sane” among us.

I attempt to view things as they are, without sentimentality, or pity, or self-delusion, or moral posturing, or dogma, to get to the core of an issue, understand it, and project trends going forward.

This of course gets me into trouble both in Der Movement and in “real life,” as I come up against people (the vast majority of people fit into this category) who view things through one prism or another of the aforementioned characteristics that distorts their vision, often giving them whatever picture they want to see, or one that comfortably fits into moral conformity and social acceptability.  To them, I’m “crazy” or “bitter” or “impossible” or “autistic” or “cruel” or “cold” or whatever other ad hominem critiques of my character (some of which may have a kernel of truth) that enables the people in question to disregard my message and feel good about their own delusions.  Also, by disparaging my character, these people don’t have to engage with the unpleasant reality that I’m right in my prognostications 99+% of the time.  Rather than dealing with the hard realities inherent in a truthful message, the weak-minded turn their fear and frustration against the messenger.

I am of course not infallible and do make error; this is usually when I am relatively uninterested in an issue or outcome and do not dissect too deeply into it.  For example, I was wrong about Trump’s chances of being elected in 2016; however, while that was important, it wasn’t an issue of deep existential concern for me.  My real interest was how the Trump campaign was affecting the political, social, cultural, and moral climate in America, its potential to promote racial balkanization and sociopolitical chaos, and the long-term effects of Trump on future populist/racialist “demagogues.”  Much of my predictions in this regard have come true, and we’ve seen the spectacle of System hacks like Frank Rich repeating certain points of my The Nazi Next Time essay two years after I wrote it.  So it goes….

The Inner Insurgency continues.

Crush the Infamy!