Print this post Print this post

A New Podcast! 
Nationalist Strategies

74 words

Editor’s Note:

The following MP3 podcast is a recording of the first of two talks given by Kevin MacDonald in the greater San Francisco Bay Area on February 19th and 20th, 2011. To preserve the privacy of the hosts and guests, I have edited out voices other than Kevin MacDonald’s. I also kept my own brief introduction. The running time is just over 34 minutes. So, without further ado, I give you Kevin MacDonald . . .

http://www.counter-currents.com/audios/KMac02192011-SantaCruzEdited.mp3

If you enjoyed this piece, and wish to encourage more like it, give a tip through Paypal. You can earmark your tip directly to the author or translator, or you can put it in a general fund. (Be sure to specify which in the "Add special instructions to seller" box at Paypal.)

9 Comments

  1. Posted February 28, 2011 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

    I appreciate the point that trying to be friendly with Jews and pro-White at the same time doesn’t work, as far as appeasing the Jews is concerned. The Jews cannot be appeased because they are paranoid.

    But on the other hand, what MacDonald does not address, is the question of whether adopting such a pose makes it easier to gain the support of other Whites. It seems that White people sometimes just need a ready response to criticisms. They can say, But David Duke has changed! and then vote for him knowing that the change is mostly cosmetic. But Geert Wilders is not a nazi! He loves Jews!

    Unfortunately, MacDonald makes clear that Wilders is not that clever. He is genuinely philojudaic, and therefore a fool.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted February 28, 2011 at 9:57 pm | Permalink

      I think that MacDonald’s main point is precisely that such postures give voters deniability, and that this is responsible for the gains made by Wilders with Dutch voters, but not of course with Jews.

      • Posted March 1, 2011 at 8:25 pm | Permalink

        It seems to me that MacDonald stops short of saying that. I only hear MacDonald talking about White people being motivated by factors like the conflict between Islam and liberal principles, and some pragmatic concerns — the kinds of approved concerns that Rush Limbaugh might express.

        I don’t think that objecting to immigration on the basis of upholding liberalism is going to provide a long-term answer, because liberalism is by its nature individualistic, while racial thinking is what we need.

        Toward the end MacDonald does talk about White racial consciousness growing as a result of the negative effects that some White people personally feel, but insofar as these people have been radicalized by experience they do not need deniability in political candidates, and MacDonald does not mention deniability in that context.

        You can argue that there are points of agreement between the would-be defenders of true liberalism and the racial thinkers, but that is only going to go so far.

        • Posted March 1, 2011 at 8:37 pm | Permalink

          We can hope that the tendency to unify under abstractions will dissipate, but that presupposes increasing hardship. If the Defenders of Liberalism like Geert Wilders succeed in partially meliorating the situation (in the manner of Ronald Reagan) it could delay and diffuse the needed reaction without really solving anything.

          There is also a tendency for people to get trapped in the principles that they espouse.

    • Posted February 28, 2011 at 10:56 pm | Permalink

      Of course he is a fool, but a wise fool so to speak. Only an useful idiot, a Parsifal—in Wagner’s opera, “a pure fool enlightened by compassion”—can expose the double-think intrinsic in liberalism. E.g., Islam is inherently anti-gay, anti-women; therefore the Islamization of the West refutes the liberalism that in the first place empowered the Muslims.

      At the same time Wilders avoids the race issue: a subject that is de facto forbidden in Europe. Brutally honest white nationalists could never gain political power. Even the BNP had to set aside the Jewish Question. Only the naïve and candid Parsifals might have a chance.

      Yes: Wilders is a liberal who is taking the very first step that could destroy liberalism.

      • Posted March 1, 2011 at 6:22 am | Permalink

        “Even the BNP had to set aside the Jewish Question.”

        Under Nick Griffin they did. Under John Tyndall, as Griffin complains, the party was “frankly anti-Semitic.” The question is whether it is to this change that the BNP owes its small successes, and whether those small successes are worth the sacrifice of truth-telling.

  2. Wandrin
    Posted March 2, 2011 at 12:36 am | Permalink

    “I think that MacDonald’s main point is precisely that such postures give voters deniability, and that this is responsible for the gains made by Wilders with Dutch voters, but not of course with Jews.”

    If it’s true that people are held down by the pressure of the dominant culture then in lieu of undermining the power of the dominant culture “plausible deniability” should work to a certain extent as a way for white people to psychologically side-step the power of the dominant culture, and i think it does. The problem is the deniability doesn’t stop the other side from constantly repeating the same attacks and demanding the same denials. The constant denials act as a constant distraction (and reinforces the dominant culture) so it’s not perfect but it’s better than nothing.

    However, let a 1000 flowers bloom.

  3. Evan
    Posted March 4, 2011 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    Yes: Wilders is a liberal who is taking the very first step that could destroy liberalism.

    +1

    Keep your own understanding but let developments–Wilders, the BNP–unfold a little on their own terms.

    • Posted March 4, 2011 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

      Chechar said: “Yes: Wilders is a liberal who is taking the very first step that could destroy liberalism.”

      In fact it is liberalism reaching its own reductio ad absurdum, pushed to that limit by Jewish propaganda. It’s a tendency throughout history that Jews tend to push everything too far, even for their own good. Liberalism is more likely to die because of immigration than because of people like Wilders who would like to temper and save Liberalism.

  • Video of the Day:

  • Kindle Subscription
  • Our Titles

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    The Lightning and the Sun

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Forever and Ever

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Carl Schmitt Today

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    Generation Identity

    Nietzsche's Coming God

    The Conservative

    The New Austerities

    Convergence of Catastrophes

    Demon

    Proofs of a Conspiracy

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    The Wagnerian Drama

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    Notes on the Third Reich

    Morning Crafts

    New Culture, New Right

    An eagle with a shield soaring upwards

    A Life in the Political Wilderness

    The Fourth Political Theory

    The Passing of the Great Race

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Fighting for the Essence

    The Arctic Home in the Vedas

    The Prison Notes

    It Cannot Be Stormed

    Revolution from Above

    The Proclamation of London

    Beyond Human Rights

    The WASP Question

    Can Life Prevail?

    The Jewish Strategy

    The Metaphysics of War

    A Handbook of Traditional Living

    The French Revolution in San Domingo

    The Revolt Against Civilization

    Why We Fight

    The Problem of Democracy

    Archeofuturism

    The Path of Cinnabar

    Tyr

    Siege

    On Being a Pagan

    The Lost Philosopher

    The Dispossessed Majority

    Might is Right

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance