Over 250 people gathered at the beautiful inn at Montgomery Bell State Park to hear from an exciting group of speakers. Though antifa promised to “smash” the conference, police and park rangers had clearly learned from the mistakes of Charlottesville. Courteous and professional officers kept antifa well away from us, and there were no confrontations. Anyone who stayed inside the conference center could barely even see, let alone hear, the 30 or so protesters. Police and park rangers set objective rules to allow both our guests and our opponents to exercise their First Amendment rights in the best traditions of our country. We are deeply grateful to the state of Tennessee for protecting the conference while enabling protesters to express themselves peacefully.
The police didn’t strictly enforce the anti-mask law in all cases, but, all in all, they did a credible job. At some point though, the Right needs to protect their own conferences.
There were foreign press and two documentary crews at the conference, but we kept out dishonest, flagrantly hostile media. Both Huffington Post and Vice wanted to cover the conference, but they can be counted on to slant their coverage to the point that the event would be unrecognizable, and—even worse—they have doxed people. Audience security comes first.
I’ll give Amren credit for being wiser than others on the Right in this regard. Apparently, some standards (other than: are you a Swedish homosexual? Are you an embedded Norwegian journalist?) were applied.
This conference showed a striking unity of theme throughout the weekend, as speaker after speaker emphasized the need to learn from mistakes…
Apparently, there will be many opportunities for learning.
Unfortunately, the reaction may not be quick enough, and whites could suffer the fate of the American Indians or the Australian Aborigines. “If you don’t or can’t stand up for your interests, very, very bad things happen to you,” warned Mr. Davies. “That is the nature of human society and human history.”
The “White Man’s Disease” in a nutshell: the unwillingness or inability to defend and promote your own group interests.
Mr. Davies therefore argued that white advocates must think very seriously about how they present themselves. He acknowledged that in the “soft totalitarianism” in the West, there is no way to be involved in this cause without sacrifice. Like dissidents in Eastern Europe, we must accept the fact that many sympathizers are too intimidated to come forward, and white advocates must think very hard about whom to attract. “We need to inspire and win over the best people in our societies,” said Mr. Davies, “and we are not going to do that by behaving in a fashion that attracts only the mob.”
You mean like Charlottesville Ragnarok?
Mr. Davies warned against the “Marxist fallacy” that history will break our way without anyone taking action or making sacrifices. We must also not make excuses for flawed leaders simply because they have thrust themselves forward.
Yes. Mr. Davies, meet Der Movement, Inc. Meet many of the people at the very conference at which you made this excellent comment.
He expressed amazement that white advocates seem to hold leaders to lower standards than those they set for themselves.
So, if Davies says that, he’s wise; if Sallis says that, he’s “crazy and bitter.” Affirmative action once again. Want better leaders? Ditch the official Der Movement Ethnic Affirmative Action Program. But, I have to say, given the people – the “leaders” – speaking at this conference, Davies’ comments either reflect sarcastic irony or a stunning sense of self-awareness. Some of the biggest failures of leadership shared the podium with him.
Mrs. Brimelow noted that both American Renaissance and VDARE.com have a proven record of accomplishment.
At what? Panhandling?
As regards Derbyshire, check out the comments thread for a debate about his presence at the meeting, as a speaker no less, and the misguided idiots defending this grotesque monstrosity.
One of my sanctimonious critics in Der Movement (someone who, by the way, has also sharply criticized Derbyshire and Derbyshire’s supporters yet spoke at this conference along with Derbyshire) labeled me a “low information moralizer” because I had the temerity to suggest that it would be good for the “movement” if he ended his childish feud with Richard Spencer. But if we want to see some real low information moralizers, check out the fools defending Derbyshire in the comments thread. Apparently, they believe the only issue is Derbyshire’s Chinese wife and half-Asian children. Perhaps if they had ever bothered reading this blog, they could have made the jump to being high information moralizers. Let me help.
First, Derbyshire not only engages in miscegenation, but he is a fervent supporter and promoter of the practice, vehemently debated Taylor in favor of it, and threatened violence against anti-miscegenation individuals who emailed him about it (i.e., “come over to my house and I’ll greet you in an appropriate manner,” or something to that effect – all at VDARE). The pro-Jewish Derbyshire wrote an offensive “hit piece” against Kevin MacDonald, labelling MacDonald “the Marx of the anti-Semites” and that certainly did not help MacDonald, who at that time still had an ongoing academic career and was subject to intense pressure over his views. Derbyshire did not take a “financial hit” because of defending pro-White positions – he was let go from National Review because of a self-serving essay he wrote warning his half-Asian children to beware of Blacks; I label that essay self-serving because it was part of his ongoing attempts to normalize his family to White conservatives, dividing Americans between “Black vs. non-Black” instead of “White vs. non-White,” and that his mixed children will be considered “White” by Blacks. Derbyshire was then welcomed with open arms by Der Movement (he’s English after all), and has been invited to speak at Amren conferences, despite previously attacking Amren conference attendees (you know, the cucks who now applaud him) by agreeing to their characterization as “latrine flies.” Derbyshire consistently labels “racial purists” as “nuts” and is not a pro-White activist but a HBD race realist/cognitive elitist. And I won’t even get into his atrocious comments about child porn. In my opinion, Derbyshire is a despicable excuse for a human being, it is hard for me to think of anyone in any way associated with the “movement” that I loathe more, and I have zero respect for any of his supporters and enablers, anyone who invites him to be a speaker at meetings, anyone who has him as a writer and/or podcaster for their sites, or anyone who shares a podium with him at a conference.
Several years ago, Johnson came out against Amren meetings and the time and money spent on them; now he attends and this year was actually a featured speaker. Not wanting to be a “low information moralizer” I won’t speculate as to why Johnson gets to speak and not Spencer, whether the lack of Spencerism was a lack of interest from the Amren side, or from Spencer himself (or both). I will note that Amren’s attacks against Spencer for “Hailgate” and alleged anti-Jewish attitudes is curious since Counter-Currents is no friend of the Jews, features positive articles on Hitler, and Johnson has been quoted as making “anti-Semitic” comments himself (“Jews have to leave America,” etc.).
As far as Dickson goes, after reading his interview, to me he’s just another “movement” apparatchik. A dime a dozen.
Der Movement, Der Movement, Der Movement marches on.