Print this post Print this post

Battered White Nationalist Syndrome

908 words

Matt Parrott: “Civic nationalism isn’t a softer form of what we want. It’s a completely different thing from what we want, a complete alternative to what we want.”

This is spot on. It’s amazing how many White Nationalists, including ones acting in good faith, are willing to support something quite distinct from and in many ways opposed to White Nationalism. My response is that if someone has a problem with the Fourteen Words, I have a problem with him. Certainly he will not get my vote, money or informal endorsement.

There is a big difference, as Matt astutely points out, between a “soft” White Nationalism and something that is simply not White Nationalism, even hostile to it. The “softs” are mildly acceptable in my book (though they warrant extra scrutiny, but I’ll leave that for another day), so long as they don’t attack the real thing. Apparently, Merlin Miller is attacking the real thing. Therefore, he is unacceptable and unworthy of support. If, through no intent of his own, he advances our cause, then great. But he is not worthy of our support. We’re not getting anywhere until at least some people start taking us seriously. That will never happen so long as we accept being spat upon, but still clinging fast like an abused wife.

If we won’t support our own, if we won’t take our own side, then who will? Nobody, obviously.

Those who advocate supporting people that are unfriendly/hostile to us love to imagine that a non-WN approach is somehow viable and can reach large numbers of whites. Well, if it’s so viable, then why do they need our “extremist” money? By trashing us, has Merlin Miller garnered meaningful support? I seriously doubt it. Where are his white throngs, filled with people who would support him and shun us?

The only alternative movement that has achieved any measure of support is the Ron Paul campaign and the Tea Party in general. Ron Paul undoubtedly cashed many a White Nationalist check (a couple of mine back in 2008, I’m sorry to say), while doing nothing to advance our core agenda. The fact that there is some overlap between his message and ours is inconsequential. We must advance our message, instead we helped him advance his. Who’s the winner there? Not us.

Even Paul’s message, as effective as he was at spreading it, is going nowhere. This is rapidly becoming a Third World country, and the takers now either outnumber the givers, or soon will. Further, Paul’s libertarian approach fails to address numerous genuine concerns of the intelligent white citizenry. Libertarianism isn’t the future, rather it’s a narrowly focused fetish.

We’re even getting to the point where a conventional Republican is going to have a hard time getting elected president. The idea that someone like Ron Paul could win is absurd. Or Merlin for that matter. This isn’t about winning in the conventional sense.

So let’s get serious: none of these movements are going to win at the ballot box. It’s literally impossible. So what’s it all about? It’s about spreading the message and, to the extent possible, encouraging grassroots organization. And it’s about money. So while Paul did not win, he did spread his ideas. He didn’t spread ours. Apparently Merlin is on the same path, if far less successfully.

Something further needs to be said. There is an unspoken assumption that White Nationalism is not attractive, that it doesn’t have legs. This assumption is not only false, but poison. In contrast, I think we can have an extremely attractive White Nationalist message, one that ties in our racial imperative with cultural renaissance, environmental and community sustainability, sovereignty, direct democracy, sound money, economic honesty and coherence, etc. Really, it’s all of a piece – so support Counter-Currents!

Let’s develop a powerful message centered around sustainability at all levels, and then take it out for a spin. That’s the future, not trying to be a pale imitation of Thomas Jefferson. The future is in homogeneous, high-trust ethnostates – the only societies that will have the social capital to meet real and varied challenges. We offer a real future, the non-WN alternatives are just lame retreads and economic fetishists.

We need to go forward, not backwards like the Paulists. They are the residue of a dead past; we are the harbingers of a new day . . . perhaps even a Golden Dawn?

Couldn’t resist.

Let’s focus on developing that message, and of course getting it out there. Let’s quit acting like abused wives, and support our own instead. Those that denounce us are either flat out losers like Merlin who enjoy virtually no support outside of our own ranks (think about the absurdity of that for a moment), or people like Ron Paul who, despite the fact that their cause is doomed, do in fact enjoy tremendous financial support, and therefore don’t need our money anyway.

Either way you look at it, it makes the most sense to support our own, and only our own. If you aren’t one us, you don’t get so much as the time of day. We’ve got to start being the cool kids, not the losers who get sand kicked in their faces, and then try to curry favor with the oaf who did it. Until we take that attitude, which is the proper attitude, we’re getting nowhere.

Meanwhile, and far away from the cabbage patch . . . Golden Dawn shows us at least part of the way.

 

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.)
This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

48 Comments

  1. Sandy
    Posted October 6, 2012 at 3:22 am | Permalink

    I think you guys are being too hard on Merlin Miller. Alexander Dugin in his Fourth Political Theory, a book distributed by C-C, tackles the issue of “racists’ spoiling the quest for a land of our own. We are only at the meta stage of politics and A3P is out there working at applying political theory into practical political action which is not an easy task.

    I’m sure Miller and A3P will make a few mistakes but lets wait until after the election and then the MacDonald s and the Sunics can give us their professional opinions on how to improve things. A step at a time.

    • Lew
      Posted October 6, 2012 at 6:59 pm | Permalink

      When the A3P emerged 2 – 3 years ago, the A3P seemed to be positioned to fill an important need. At last, it appeared, a credible, professional organization had emerged that could represent White interests and engage the mainstream issues that most people care about. The NSDAP did it in in their day. Golden Dawn does it today.

      People must have gone to a lot of time and trouble to complete the legal processes to get the A3P up and running in the various states, and do the grassroots groundwork. At this point, it appears to be 100% wasted effort. People went to all that trouble for nothing.

      I see this development as a vindication of some of Alex Linder’s main ideas. I don’t agree with everything Alex Linder says, far from it, especially not his outlandish personal attacks on people. But when it comes to Jews, conservatives, and what he calls “functional conservatives,” he has their number cold.

  2. uh
    Posted October 6, 2012 at 6:56 am | Permalink

    Have always loved your writing, happy to see it front-page.

    This could all be condensed to the following without doing it violence:

    “If we won’t support our own, if we won’t take our own side, then who will? Nobody, obviously.”

    • Trainspotter
      Posted October 9, 2012 at 1:15 am | Permalink

      Thank you, I appreciate it. Thanks also to Junghans, Kievsky, Ulf Larsen, Jaego and others for the kind words. It is appreciated.

  3. Posted October 6, 2012 at 6:56 am | Permalink

    Thank you very much for this, Trainspotter. If only more people could understand what you say in this short article, the obvious, we would be in a much stronger position. Instead, (conservative) white nationalists use the brilliant tactics of supporting the enemy rather than themselves!

    “Those that denounce us are either flat out losers like Merlin who enjoy virtually no support outside of our own ranks (think about the absurdity of that for a moment)”

    Indeed! And it makes me sick that supposed nationalists support them.

    But, such is the conservative mentality – totally irrational and craven. It alwas has been and it always will be. It was just the same in Germany when Hitler got started, and with Rockwell in the 1965: the effective fighters have always been denounced by the “clever” and rich conservatives who would rather placate the enemy than fight him.

    • Posted October 6, 2012 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

      editor: please change “the 1965″ to “the 1960s”. Thanks.

  4. Lew
    Posted October 6, 2012 at 10:24 am | Permalink

    This sordid turn of events at the A3P is disappointing, and “battered wife syndrome” is not the right metaphor for it.

    What is a battered wife? What does she do? She returns to her abuser despite repeated abuse. She repeats the same behavior expecting a different result. Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, she convinces herself “it will be different this time.” In this metaphor, the wife is engaging in irrational behavior, and the wife is the one who needs to be convinced to change her ways. With battered wife syndrome, while getting the wife out of the relationship is certainly necessary, the real root of the problem is the husband. The husband is the one preying on a weaker person who can’t defend herself.

    So if your intent is too address the A3P rank-and-file with this article and encourage them to “take our side” rather than back aracial civic nationalism, then your admonition is off the mark because the A3P rank-and-file isn’t behaving like the wife.

    If your intent is to address the rank-and-file, the better metaphor would be a wife who works 70 hours a week, gives her husband her wages, and then has him take it to a casino or frolick with strippers without her knowledge. Unlike the battered wife, she is not behaving irrationally. She is not refusing to change in face of compelling evidence. She is, in fact, doing the right thing by working for the betterment of her family. She simply unaware of that her husband is a foolish man who ought to know better than to blow the family earnings at the casino. Or, he is a man of very low character. Or, he is both.

    Has the A3P leadership not been advertising the A3P as a White party, both openly, and by strong implication given names like Kevin MacDonald, Tom Sunic, James Edwards, and Jamie Kelso in the top leadership? I believe it has.

    In response, the A3P rank-and-file, the membership giving over their time and money, has taken up the call. In the process, they have put themselves at considerable risk for openly associating with “white supremacists.” They have been trying to “take our side.” They haven’t been putting time and money into the Republican party or Ron Paul. They’ve been putting it into an organization that has been billing itself as pro-White. They’re not the problem; the leaders are the problem.

    The leaders and decision makers at the A3P are the ones who ought to held to account for this development. In most organizations, the board, the directors and the people giving over the most money make the decisions. So in who in that group made the decision to bring Merlin Miller into the fold? What was the rationale behind it? Those seem reasonable questions to me.

    • Jaego
      Posted October 6, 2012 at 2:41 pm | Permalink

      Good distinction. And yes, the leaders and promoters of this Party have some explaining to do.

    • rhondda
      Posted October 6, 2012 at 7:02 pm | Permalink

      Lew, I want to thank you for this insight about wives. Wow. Kudos

    • Fourmyle of Ceres
      Posted October 6, 2012 at 10:15 pm | Permalink

      Lew:

      First rate counterpoint on the issue of batterers. In fact, DoJ studies have demonstrated that battery is about 50/50 between spouses. We at the-spearhead.com have discussed this often. In light of VAWA’s “must arrest” and “spousal outcry” provisions, far too many men live in total fear of losing everything by a phone call.

      First rate counterpoint on seeing beneath the surface, and seeing Miller as someone who the Real Power in A3P backs. The rank and file will take the hits as “white supremacists,” like it or not. AmRen helps in developing politically acceptable formulations, counter-currents with the overview.

      The larger counterpoint is well-defined by Kievsky. After this election, the Republican Party will be a Southern rump, a sort of “loyal opposition” without power, without effectiveness. To what end does participation in conventional politics matter at all, save as useful tools for developing the political and organizational skills to lead? The models of VNN/F’s “Hugh” come to mind. Effectiveness will be foreclosed to us until we are effective. Arguably, a new model of political interaction is developing at the grass roots, with the Internet doing to the status quo what the printing press did to the Roman Catholic Church.

      There is where our opportunities will arise. Yes, the SWPL position works as a means to an end. This ties in well with John Robb’s work on Resilient Communities. Yet, these remain mere “White islands,” on the way to becoming “White archipelagoes.”

      In effect, there IS a “White Nation” in America. It has simply forgot about it, and now, faces a critical demographic – women between twenty-five and fifty – who are resolutely opposed to White men. This has the effect of blocking the formation of a critical mass of organizational energy. In effect, it is like wounding someone in combat, rather than killing them. The wounded combatant requires the energy of several other troopers to get him to “safety.” None of these forces are available to take the war to the Enemy. For that matter, there is really no “safety” to be found, in light of the ongoing cultural and economic onslaught we face.

      The only answer is to meld Kievsky’s localism with a model for transpersonal and transnational effectiveness.

      Transpersonal effectiveness means consciously developing the values and Mindset of the natural aristocracy, REGARDLESS of your economic circumstances. Even in the situation you find yourself in, you still have have access to greater resources, greater powers, than any Spartan, any member of any Nobility save precious few, indeed. You must stop waiting for someone to live your life for you. You must start tonight – TONIGHT – becoming who you must be as part of the Living Foundation of the new nation.

      Harold Covington has it right; the Northwest Republic opens the infinite plane of the Future to us, and asks us to help create the matters of Form needed for the developing matters of Substance to manifest.

      Covington notes that, if he had it to do over, he would start by forming a Church, a vessel in which a religion could operate. I’ve done a little bit of thinking about this, and the example of a wounded soldier engaged in painful recuperation offers some useful suggestions, up to a point.

      In the meantime, as we all have more than Loyola did when he started, we can all contribute financially to counter-currents.

      Today would be fine.

    • Trainspotter
      Posted October 8, 2012 at 1:14 am | Permalink

      Lew: “This sordid turn of events at the A3P is disappointing, and “battered wife syndrome” is not the right metaphor for it.”

      The metaphor is quite apt, but probably not worth debating per se. However, it appears to me that your problem with it results from an important misunderstanding, and one that calls for a response on my part.

      Lew: “What is a battered wife? What does she do? She returns to her abuser despite repeated abuse. She repeats the same behavior expecting a different result. Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, she convinces herself “it will be different this time.”

      That seems, to me at least, an appropriate metaphor for White Nationalists who continue to support those that denounce them. Which is why I used it. Note use of the word “continue.”

      Lew: ” With battered wife syndrome, while getting the wife out of the relationship is certainly necessary, the real root of the problem is the husband.”

      Yes, and White Nationalists need to get out of political/financial relationships with candidates who denounce them.

      Lew: “So if your intent is too address the A3P rank-and-file with this article and encourage them to “take our side” rather than back aracial civic nationalism, then your admonition is off the mark because the A3P rank-and-file isn’t behaving like the wife.”

      You are misunderstanding me, and it was this line in particular that made a response on my part necessary. Obviously they haven’t behaved like an abused wife…yet. Everyone just became aware of the battery recently, as far as I know. However, those White Nationalists who continue to support Merlin with money or other forms of support, knowing what they know now, are making a mistake. We’ve seen this movie before, it was titled “Ron Paul.” In other words, White Nationalists do have a tendency to return to their abuser, and it is this tendency that needs to be destroyed. We’re not getting anywhere until we support our own, and withdraw support from those that kick sand in our faces, batter us, or insert favored metaphor here.

      Lew: ” Has the A3P leadership not been advertising the A3P as a White party, both openly, and by strong implication given names like Kevin MacDonald, Tom Sunic, James Edwards, and Jamie Kelso in the top leadership? I believe it has.”

      True. That’s not in dispute. I respect and admire the men you name, and I don’t want my comment to be interpreted otherwise. Further, I certainly assumed that the A3P was at least “soft” White Nationalist. Maybe it still is, and Merlin simply ran off the reservation. That sort of thing can easily happen with a small, fledgling organization. Maybe, now that most of the checks have cleared and the campaign end is nigh, Merlin is thinking about his future career prospects, and decided it would be beneficial to be able to say that he denounced us. Who knows? My argument does not rest upon such pure speculation.

      All we know with reasonable certainty is that Merlin denounced us. We also know from recent history (Ron Paul) that there are some good White Nationalists that continue to support such candidates, even after being spat upon. They are making a serious error. My comment was aimed at such types, not to denounce them but, hopefully, to open some eyes.

      Lew: “In response, the A3P rank-and-file, the membership giving over their time and money, has taken up the call. In the process, they have put themselves at considerable risk for openly associating with “white supremacists.” They have been trying to “take our side.” They haven’t been putting time and money into the Republican party or Ron Paul. They’ve been putting it into an organization that has been billing itself as pro-White. They’re not the problem; the leaders are the problem.”

      I don’t disagree with this, and did not suggest otherwise. But it would be a problem if they continue supporting the guy after he denounced them. And, though beyond the scope of my argument, I’ll also say that this is one of the reasons why “soft” organizations deserve serious scrutiny. Once you get squishy, it’s easy to get squishier. With that sort of dynamic, one’s original mission can be totally lost, a mere footnote to a once vital project. Something to think about.

      In any event, I’m giving everyone but Merlin the benefit of the doubt on this one, and certainly am not blaming the rank and file for that which happened before the incident in question. I further would bet that good men like Sunic, MacDonald, and Edwards had no idea that Merlin was going to talk like that. But Merlin did, and now we have to respond. My response: no support for Merlin. Hopefully the A3P will be more careful next time, but we’ll have to wait and see. Hopefully, this clarifies matters.

      • Lew
        Posted October 8, 2012 at 11:31 am | Permalink

        Trainspotter,

        There is no reason this development should be laid off on Merlin Miller alone. Again, some person or persons within the A3P brought him into the fold. They must have been familiar with his thinking. Who gives a person a job without finding out what they think? Why don’t these parties, who have not identified themselves as far as I know, deserve more criticism than Miller himself?

        I decided to check my last few emails from the A3P. Their recent e-emails do contain some explicit language:

        August 11th : the A3P “needs more European Americans to join us and advocate for White American interests and White American issues.

        June 19th: This is the first time in 20 years that a political party — representing the values and interests of White Americans — and American interests above all…

        May 24th (email labeled from MM himself): No other party advocates for the White American majority.

        Since they haven’t completely dropped explicit advocacy, maybe it’s possible the A3P can reverse this trend. But, the solution is for the A3P to rid itself of everyone who favors the wrong approach, not just Miller, assuming that’s even possible. There may be legal entanglements that make it impossible. I’m speculating on that. In this case, the A3P is probably permanently compromised. With divided leadership and no way to purge this apparent implicit faction, I’m not sure how the organization can be effective.

  5. Roissy Hater
    Posted October 6, 2012 at 11:03 am | Permalink

    WN will succeed when we raise a generation of men who are irresistible in terms of personal charisma, intelligence, and resolve to accomplish the absolute.

    Our goal should be a new Sparta or Rome, rescued from the Semitic poison of egalitarianism and personal guilt. Right now we don’t have that quality of man walking around.

  6. Dave Logsdon
    Posted October 6, 2012 at 11:18 am | Permalink

    “cultural renaissance, environmental and community sustainability, sovereignty, direct democracy, sound money, economic honesty and coherence, etc.”; support our own instead”
    I concur whole-heartedly but for one point.
    “We need to go forward, not backwards like the Paulists. They are the residue of a dead past; we are the harbingers of a new day “

    We have been so detached from our origins via fifty plus years of propaganda and cognitive dissonance what we need to do is actually not new but what has been forgotten or hidden from our folk for generations. The Paulists are not representative of the mindset of our earlier ancestors but more a neutered broken remnant of those that came before. Things are so bad that the Paulist ability to think a fraction more freely than the average citizen seems preferable the sheeple. If there is one major stumbling block it is the four battling factions of the white nationalists of prominence. First being the Jared Taylor or what I would call the political wing believing that education (of non-aware whites) or political progress can eventually turn the tide. The second is the regional approach like HAC or Hunter Wallace (one for a homeland in the NW the other for a new Dixie). Those who feel it is more complicated than that like Linder, Johnson and Wallace e.g. who I feel are correct. Lastly those believing I perceive like Alex, Matt and you that some new solutions are readily available but WN don’t connect the dots.

    I would hope that honest analysis by all involved would conclude that a regional approach is absolutely necessary; however all pro-white power existing in the NW would not be as good as one power base in the NW and another in Dixie. They are not mutually exclusive. A pocket of power on two fronts with limited underground support (outposts) sprinkled in between make for a hard target to carpet bomb metaphorically speaking. Further a political presence will always be a necessity even if a distasteful one but not one with decision-making power like our current politicians. As for the multifaceted approach as hard as it will be to establish any all-white communities anywhere in the US we must admit it is the only starting point to the other goals.
    We virtually have the wagon trains all over the country and no one can agree on which direction to point the horses. There are some major aspects of our mindset essential to our success that you younger folks have not been accustomed to and many of the old sages have forgotten. Let me attempt to refresh. As Robert Griffin might say first we need to live White.
    Frugality- My folks had canned food that could last the winter and frozen food butchered meats as well. It was only in retrospect that I realized my family and immediate relatives were unique and that the other neighbors did not share that practice. My mother could sew, cook anything, grow food in large quantities and propagate plants of all description. My father was a sharpshooter, bar-room brawler and could build a shed or house with no power tools. He got me my first rifle at about nine and shotgun at ten. He took me to the range and gave me lessons in marksmanship and sportsmanship as a mandatory event. I of course loved it. I also went hunting and fishing with him and had a hunting bow as well. Before you think “you might be a redneck if” let me say that in those days it was part of being a man and a gentleman as well. Today it seems as if the last two generation think of stacks of newspaper, balls of yard and tin foil when they think of frugality. That’s not what it was about then and not what we need now either. Frugality is what Dirty Harry had when he left one bullet in the chamber to get the last bad guy. Or to put it simp ly it’s- having more than your enemy expects you to have. That could mean food, ammo, knowledge/skills etc. If a white family can comfortably live (and do so) below the median income for their area they can use any excess funds for all kinds of things and are a resilient adversary to our enemies.

    Think tactical frugality. Frugality and sustainability alone are a game changer for the white race. Whites (almost exclusively) thrive where others waste. It was our way at one time. Use new ideas and apply them to our old survival strategies and it is revolutionary. A rocket stove, a garden a few acres and a family well versed in sustainability and you have an outpost anywhere. My family came late to America from Europe I think that’s why they still had the fire and the survival skills. Our survival today will have to be built from the ground up by blue collar hard core whites that can’t be corrupted, keep to themselves and keep their mouths shut. Wagons ho my brothers!

  7. Posted October 6, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

    I completely agree, Trainspotter.

    They are taking the vote completely away from us by making us a minority and laughing like they pulled off some great coup, when it shall prove to be nothing more than an own goal.

    Voting hasn’t mattered in at least a century. The idea that we can vote our way out of this problem is the problem. Luckily for us, our enemies are solving that problem for us.

    What we need is to forget voting; forget “working within the System” entirely, and pursue a course of Spiritual and Cultural Resistance. The Muslims call it Jihad; the Jews call it Chutzpah. I call our version Mindweaponization, someone I know calls it “Neurosemiotic Kulturkampf.” Resistance on these levels will be much more powerful than trying to vote in a Knight on a White Horse politician. We need to BE the Knights on White Horses, the Nietzschean Overmen.

    Spiritual and Cultural Resistance, I am finding, begins with actually concealing one’s true views, so you are forced to do things besides proselytize; things that are useful, helpful, legal things that are badly needed by our sorely neglected civilization.

    So many people have “dropped the ball” that those of us who pick up the White man’s Burden, which is duty to us and ourselves alone, we will stand out. I can’t help but go back to Woody Allen’s saying, “90% of life is just showing up.” That is a very apt statement about the Modern Era — because most people have dropped the ball, the few who “show up” are the ones who decide.

    The big question is “show up for what?” That’s a tough but not impossible question. It is one I have answered for myself. I would say show up to SWPL community improvement projects which are implicitly White. I personally find community garden projects especially implicitly White and valuable. Practice Taqqiyah regarding your agenda of Spiritual and Cultural Resistance, and use appropriate Game and NLP on everyone.

    • Roissy Hater
      Posted October 6, 2012 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

      “Spiritual and Cultural Resistance, I am finding, begins with actually concealing one’s true views, so you are forced to do things besides proselytize;”

      Taking the above average Joe, who may have noble characteristics, off the street and begin to tell him that equality is evil, capitalism is flawed, and that the Jews control the world will result in ridicule.

      The best we can do is to act like elite members of our race, and by our conduct, manner, and speech, may be the right people will be attracted to us. And we can slowly begin to educate them. Very slowly.

      I see no other solution.

  8. Jaego
    Posted October 6, 2012 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

    I agree. No Enemies to the Right must be out motto, mantra, and pledge. Anyone who breaks this sacred trust is a warlock or oath breaker – and is to be shunned.

  9. Junghans
    Posted October 6, 2012 at 6:25 pm | Permalink

    Right on, as usual, Trainspotter.

  10. phil white
    Posted October 6, 2012 at 9:09 pm | Permalink

    Miller is an example of what I call the Rational Elites. He decries wars for Israel, “dual citizen ship people” that need to be rooted out of key government positions and inundation by immigration. He also says white nationalist have gotten a bad rap from media and there are a few white nationalist at high levels in A3P.
    Then he says we shouldn’t engage in white identity politics. Miller’s comments start in the second hour of the linked MP3. Zionist wars are attacked around 1:10 into the MP3.
    Open borders at about 1:25, and I think dual citizen shippers and around 1:27 I recall is where he says white nationalist get a bad rap.
    We should still support these people because they would root out our greatest enemies, Zionist and cultural warfare Jews. They would also support our political rights and freedom of association and cut immigration.
    But we shouldn’t waste much money or effort on them.
    Over the last year I gave close to 30 times what I gave to the A3P movement to white conscious raising, if you count supporting Storm Front, the Duke Report and Counter Currents, the Nationalist Times and probably a couple I’ve forgotten about.
    I gave much more to A3P than I did to Ron Paul, because A3P is much closer to us.
    They claim to be on the ballot in Tenn., Colorado and I think N.J. Plus there are provisions to allow you to write them in in about a dozen more states. Do so.
    Or write in Andrew Jackson if you prefer and can.

  11. guiscard
    Posted October 7, 2012 at 3:26 am | Permalink

    “You must stop waiting for someone to live your life for you. You must start tonight – TONIGHT – becoming who you must be as part of the Living Foundation of the new nation.”

    And that is why media/entertainment are such powerful tools against this concept. Far from inspiring people; the current TV/Computer Games are there to help you live out your heroic dreams. Become a hero in post-apoc America (Revolution) or save Skyrim for the Nords, and countless other fantasies can be lived. This is the live-vaccine method that ‘cures’ the inner need for personal heroic fulfillment.

    I believe the ancient Greeks etc would set aside certain days for entertainment/theatre/festivals… with good reason. Obviously this kind of regulation is impossible in a captialist/economic based system with the current levels of technology.

  12. Posted October 7, 2012 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

    Afternoon,
    I am not a white Nationalist, indeed I’m not white all. I am a Negro and a Black Nationalist ( I believe in Nationalism for all, atleast at this point). This article is very interesting and much of it is applicable to other nationalists groups.

    • Dominion
      Posted October 7, 2012 at 6:35 pm | Permalink

      Just looking at the blog in your link.

      Out of interest, do you believe in black racial separatism (a “black republic”) in north America, or more of a localist direction for black communities in multiracial areas?

      Also, are you a Traditionalist? In the wider sense of Guenon and Schuon, not just Evola, that is. And if so, do you have a particular religious bent, such as Christian, Santeria, or Rastafarian that you see as a way in which black communities can approach Traditional ideas?

    • Stronza
      Posted October 7, 2012 at 7:03 pm | Permalink

      It was a Negro acquaintance of mine who gave me the facts on the origins of transatlantic slavery industry.

  13. Sandy
    Posted October 7, 2012 at 12:26 pm | Permalink

    On another page Greg wrote the question was of the effectiveness of reasoned discourse, not moving racialism into polite society. which is exactly the problem A3P has. How to get the implicit to vote for the explicit?

    Fascinating topic and I look forward to the post election analysis.

  14. peppermint
    Posted October 7, 2012 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

    Great. Who are we supposed to vote for? The affirmative action guy? The Republican? The Green/Rainbow idiot? The glibertarian? Write in Ron Paul?

    Merlin Miller is the only person we can vote for to send any kind of pro-White message. We may not like him, but then again, the Blacks don’t like Obama as much this time around. They’re still voting for Obama because he’s the most pro-Black candidate out there. Can we stand for the interests of our people as strongly as the Blacks do, or are us Whites doomed to perpetually tear each other down until we vanish from history?

    I’m voting Merlin Miller. And next time, I’m going to evaluate the choices before me and choose which one is the most pro-White, and the most likely to get the attention of the traditional media.

    Some day, like Jared Taylor said, like the situation in Lebanon, a legitimate political party must form to stand for the interests of Whites. Maybe it will evolve out of the Republicans, maybe it will be the A3P or the glibertarians or something different.

    • Stronza
      Posted October 7, 2012 at 4:19 pm | Permalink

      Public bashing of Merlin, as is taking place here, is one of the worst things to do. No wonder we don’t get anywhere.

      • Trainspotter
        Posted October 8, 2012 at 3:48 am | Permalink

        Stronza: “Public bashing of Merlin, as is taking place here, is one of the worst things to do. No wonder we don’t get anywhere.”

        I understand your frustration, but remember that it was Merlin who bashed White Nationalism. As far as I know, his denunciation was unprovoked and gratuitous – after cashing who knows how many White Nationalist checks. Truly a cheap shot. I personally cannot imagine accepting a party nomination, spending its money, and then denouncing its founding ideology just shy of the election.

        I have a problem with White Nationalists gutting one another over minor differences in opinion, and certainly there is way too much of that. I’ve tried to be a peacemaker on more than one occasion, and explicitly refused to denounce my fellow WNs. But that’s not the situation here, as Merlin flat out denounced us after burning WN resources. To say that’s over the line is an understatement, and it is not something that can be ignored or overlooked.

        The desire to make peace among WN and to present a united front is natural and healthy. That desire can be employed to positive ends when it prevents, or at least mitigates, senseless internecine conflict. At the end of the day we’re going to have to support someone/something that we don’t entirely agree with. I hope people can accept that.

        But what we are confronted with here is a very, very different kettle of fish. The conflict isn’t internecine, because Merlin is not WN.

        In any event, Merlin is small fry to the point that it might not make much difference one way or another, but the loss of WN resources to the Ron Paul campaign was nothing short of staggering, hence its importance as an issue.

    • Posted October 7, 2012 at 5:34 pm | Permalink

      @Stronza,

      Perhaps there’s some very clever strategery going on here that I don’t get. But I don’t think so. His statements against us weren’t even forced. They were offered offhandedly, as a thing he felt the need to inform people about. Even Ron Paul has the discipline and tact to refrain from bashing us until he’s cornered.

      In your opinion, where should one draw the line? How far in lamenting our unfortunate presence, disavowing “racism”, arguing against “identity politics”, and boasting of plans to oppose racism within our own ranks should he be invited to go before somebody says something?

      Have you counted how many movement vehicles have been driven off the cliff of “civic nationalism” in the name of mainstreaming and popularity? If the A3P has decided to join National Review, the Democratic National Committee, the John Birch Society, the labor unions, the United States government, AmConMag, and innumerable other vehicles which once welcomed pro-White voices and positions but no longer do, then that’s their prerogative.

      I won’t be joining them.

      • Stronza
        Posted October 7, 2012 at 10:23 pm | Permalink

        The issue isn’t one of finding flaws or not. It is a matter of not publicly hanging someone out to dry who may be helpful down the road.

      • phil white
        Posted October 8, 2012 at 8:54 am | Permalink

        I believe about 1:30 minutes into the MP3 linked by your fellow traveler train spotter Merlin made ONE comment against identity politics. And that was in response to prodding by the talk show host. He was giving the best answer the shows audience would stand for at this point. He also stated white nationalist get a bad rap. He also said white nationalist have a point in that we are being inundated by immigration.
        The man is running for president to get a little publicity for white Issues. He is not running for Fuhrer of C-C.
        Earlier on in the MP3 he went on at length against Zionist wars and “dual citizenship” people in high government positions that need to be rooted out. He is also not running for president of the neo-con fan club. Perhaps that is what upsets some people most.
        We may not want to spend a dime on A3P, but if we vote at all it should be for A3P.

  15. Dominion
    Posted October 7, 2012 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

    I approach the racial question in politics as part of a wider discussion. The fourth theory suggested by Dugin suggests using using the existence, life and being of people and nations and civilizations in the world as the basis for this theory. As such, the racial question is subsumed into a wider sphere. It is good for peoples to continue existing and developing, which means that the European peoples and white Americans have a duty to live on throughout the future generations; it’s a joyful duty, light and easy to carry out. This is the way in which people have lived through the heights of civilizations and the ages of barbarism. An ethnostate was usually not necessary to carry this out, and if whites see this as a positive thing to do, then perhaps it will not be in future.

    Perhaps this is what is meant by a “soft” white nationalism. That’s probably the case, as I don’t identify myself as a white nationalist, but as a Traditionalist, integralist and identitarian. Race is an essential factor, but so is place. This is what makes Golden Dawn and Dyal’s ultras and neofascists so much more effective than the neonazi SS uniform wearer and the conference holders that North American white nationalist circles seem to focus on. The ultra and the GD member are defending not just their people, but their families and cities and homes. The white American and Canadian must tie his race to his city, town, ancestors, ethny and place. This is the union from which awareness of “being in the world” is born.

  16. Andrew
    Posted October 7, 2012 at 9:13 pm | Permalink

    I am going to take another stab at defending Mr. Merlin Miller, not sure if I will get anywhere. But, to address some points:
    1) “I don’t like White Nationalists” comment: Some people are reading a lot into this. What did Mr. Miller mean? You have taken a short sound byte and interpreted it in a very negative light. For most people, the term “White Nationalist” is a skinhead with a nazi tattoo on his forehead, and that is something the A3P should distance itself from. My guess is that Mr. Miller would describe his position toward Whites as “pro-European American rights”.
    2) Implicit Whiteness: The vast majority of successful Nationalist political parties around the world are implicit when it comes to race. Certainly no successful political party in the US is explicit in regard to race. A3P is a political party, not a civil rights organization. Its mission is to become a political force in the US, with a goal to enacting pro-White policies. For this to happen, it is critical that the party appeals to average Whites. The implicit appeal to race is a natural strategy, successfully used by political figures to gain votes, as we can see from Obama’s success in gaining minority support, as well as the Republican party’s implicit appeal to Whites. I would argue that there is nothing wrong with “Implicit Whiteness” as a strategy. In the case of Republicans, the problem is that this strategy is deceitfully employed. If that party was actually pro-White, and opposed immigration and so forth, then they would be worth voting for.
    3) The A3P must openly state it is pro-White, or I will have nothing to do with it. Why isn’t it enough that the party openly states that it opposes immigration, and supports the historic people of the nation? Why can’t this party pursue its mission to appeal to mainstream Whites, using the most effective campaign tactics? Most Whites are not ready for explicit appeals to race. Why is it somehow a betrayal of Whites if race remains implicit? The party has the substance, the pro-White policies that I imagine most WNs agree with, why must the party make declarations that are albatrosses around its neck in its infancy, that will harm its ability to flourish and grow?

    I am especially dissappointed that there are those that throw around the words, “traitor” and “betrayal”, when discussing the A3P board, which numbers among its members giants such as Mr. James Edwards and Dr. Kevin MacDonald. This is just way over the top. As far as I know, Mr. Merlin Miller has not had the opportunity to address the concerns voiced here. In spite of that, on the basis of a short blurb in an interview, we have people assuming the very worst, not just about him, but about the best minds in the WN movement. I think that is disgraceful.

    • Lew
      Posted October 7, 2012 at 10:24 pm | Permalink

      Re: #1,

      Can I ask how do you know that tattooed Hollywood Nazi types are the White Nationalists Miller had in mind? I don’t know that. Miller didn’t say that. For all I know, Miller was talking about voices like Jared Taylor, Matt Parrott and Greg Johnson — people who are nothing like those types. If he had some types in mind but not others, he didn’t make it clear.

      • Sandy
        Posted October 8, 2012 at 3:27 am | Permalink

        Lew, Politicians appeal to the general public and they have never heard of Jared Taylor, Matt Parrott and Greg Johnson.

      • Lew
        Posted October 8, 2012 at 9:11 am | Permalink

        Politicians appeal to the general public

        Sandy,

        No, this is not entirely correct. They don’t always appeal to the general public. In fact, they often do the exact opposite. Most Democrat/Republican appeals are specific not general. Racial/ethnic appeals are not the only type of explicit appeal. Both parties make explicit appeals to young, old, union, middle class, poor, small business, large business, women, homosexuals and every other constituency. This includes, of course, blacks, Latinos, Asians, even non-White Muslims.

        When looked at from this perspective, it’s clear that many if not most Republican/Democrat appeals are explicit not implicit. They do it to let subsets of the electorate know they’re on their side. How else are they doing to do it? Seriously, not trying to be wiseguy here.

        The only people the Republicans/Democrats appeal to implicitly are White folks as a group — the exact people, amazingly, that get no representation as a group. Think it through.

        Respectfully, Andrew and the people who agree with him are wrong on this point. In principle, if one defines mainstreaming as using appeals around education, crime, immigration and other issues of immediate, direct concern to people, then mainstreaming does not require self-censoring or blunting a message. Again, most mainstreaming straight from the major themselves does not rely on implicit appeals.

      • Lew
        Posted October 8, 2012 at 9:14 am | Permalink

        Greg or Moderator: I’m not sure how I got the same comment here three times. Please keep the last one.

    • Posted October 8, 2012 at 2:27 am | Permalink

      Andrew,

      1) “I don’t like White Nationalists” comment: Some people are reading a lot into this. What did Mr. Miller mean? You have taken a short sound byte and interpreted it in a very negative light.

      While that quote from that radio show is sufficient to make my point, it certainly did not occur in isolation.

      For most people, the term “White Nationalist” is a skinhead with a nazi tattoo on his forehead, and that is something the A3P should distance itself from. My guess is that Mr. Miller would describe his position toward Whites as “pro-European American rights”.

      There are two separate issues here:

      A: Should we be populist or polarizing?

      I’ve arrived at the latter, after long consideration. But I believe that we should strive to avoid infighting and backbiting between these two schools of thought. That brings me to…

      B: Should the groups turn on one another?

      I disagree with the Linderite Strategy of attacking implicit White Nationalism, on one condition: the implicit White Nationalists must not attack us.

      Now, theoretically, this could become complicated, as the Leftist media could theoretically make attacking us a precondition to being respectable. They’re already doing this to many people, of course…but they haven’t done it to Mr. Miller.

      That’s what was so boggling about Mr. Miller’s repeated remarks. Ron Paul only disparaged Don Black and praised MLK to the exact extent it was necessary to retain his “respectability”. Pat Buchanan does the same thing, keeping the groveling to a minimum and avoiding it wherever possible. Even many outright “mainstream” conservatives resist the temptation to score respectability points at our expense.

      If mainstreamers are of the mind that it’s positively necessary and appropriate to use this sort of rhetoric against us, even when unbidden, then a line has been drawn in the sand and all I’m guilty of is acknowledging it. It would truly be an unacceptable and unsustainable situation for those who want to support White identity to be bankrolling a man who’s going around explaining why civic nationalism is moral and ethnic nationalism is reprehensible “identity politics”.

      I believe we vanguardists ought to bend over backwards to accommodate and respect these implicit mainstreamer initiatives…but we’re not going to bend over forwards.

      2) Implicit Whiteness: The vast majority of successful Nationalist political parties around the world are implicit when it comes to race. Certainly no successful political party in the US is explicit in regard to race.

      There are two ways of viewing that. My way of viewing that is that the system simply will not allow our ideas and policies to win. As long as we agree not to win before we step into the ring, we’re allowed to play the game. It’s like being allowed into the store on the precondition that you buy something you don’t want for somebody you don’t like.

      There’s a desperate desire for any motion at all that constantly tempts us to settle for sideways and even backwards motion because there’s a wall stopping us from moving forward. We must tear down that wall, and will be either standing in place or wasting our time running around in circles until we do so.

      Furthermore, Europe’s racial situation is quite different from our own. Their parties can afford to play the religion and culture angle because the relevant groups have starkly different religions and cultures. America’s “culture” is too poorly defined, and its Blacks and Jews too superficially integrated into it, for that strategy to work coherently over here.

      Theory aside, the way identity-oriented movements have always worked in the past is through polarization. We clearly define ourselves as a complete, coherent, and principled alternative to the regime. This is a lonely and isolated outpost in the beginning, but the regime is rapidly burning through its own credibility. Austerity and inflation are coming to America.

      …and please don’t straw man me about “The Collapse”. A collapse of a regime’s legitimacy can occur without any Mad Max scenarios unfolding.

      3) The A3P must openly state it is pro-White, or I will have nothing to do with it. Why isn’t it enough that the party openly states that it opposes immigration, and supports the historic people of the nation?

      Because if we froze immigration tomorrow and fully embraced the basic paleocon platform, we would still be utterly hosed as an ethnic group? And that’s granting that you’ve resolved the paradox undergirding your proposal that we vote our way out of dwindling to a minority.

      Why can’t this party pursue its mission to appeal to mainstream Whites, using the most effective campaign tactics?

      They’re welcome and encouraged to do so, on the precondition that they don’t kick dirt in the faces of those who aren’t on board with giving civic nationalist paleoconservatism yet another old college try.

      I am especially dissappointed that there are those that throw around the words, “traitor” and “betrayal”, when discussing the A3P board, which numbers among its members giants such as Mr. James Edwards and Dr. Kevin MacDonald.

      Personally, I didn’t use it against the board. I have the utmost respect for them and acknowledge that they’re in an awkward situation. It may have indeed been over the top to drop the “treason” bomb…but subverting a party’s mission statement and replacing it with a completely different mission is technically a betrayal, is it not?

      This is just way over the top. As far as I know, Mr. Merlin Miller has not had the opportunity to address the concerns voiced here.

      Mr. Miller did respond indirectly in a recent interview, proposing that perhaps those who insist on being explicit are agent provocateurs. I respect his tremendous contributions on the subject of Zionist aggression, the USS Liberty, and other issues. I respect him a great deal, and I regret that he sees this as sabotage rather than as a necessary and proportional reaction to having been repeatedly maligned.

      I think that is disgraceful.

      I believe it’s disgraceful that he’s using his political air time to speak exclusively to concerns which are either unrelated to, tangential to, and outright opposed to the mission statement of the political party he’s been nominated to represent. I believe it’s disgraceful that so much sincere effort and activism went into propping him up, only to have him turn on the people who propped him up.

      • Posted October 8, 2012 at 4:49 am | Permalink

        Great comment, Matt Parrott. I agree with everything you say, except one thing:

        Furthermore, Europe’s racial situation is quite different from our own. Their parties can afford to play the religion and culture angle because the relevant groups have starkly different religions and cultures.

        Living in Europe (Sweden), I know this is not the case. The irrational philo-Semite (cultural conservative) strategy is a failure, even in Europe. As KMD has shown, it has given the neocon/counterjihad parties almost no Jewish support; instead it has only watered down the message and made the politicians look weak. Ethnicity, not religion, is the core issue in Europe as much as it is in the US. The Christian immigrants (and we have quite a lot of those) are as much trouble as the Muslims. Furthermore, we don’t want cultural integration or assimilation, we want (total) ethnic separation.

  17. Posted October 7, 2012 at 11:00 pm | Permalink

    There’s no good reason to bash White natioanlists. The vast majority of us are not doing anything violent, and we have cleaned up our image as best we could despite the Quangos (quasi-nongovernmental organizations adl/splc) constantly smearing us. I’m not ashamed of myself, or of Matt Parrott or Greg Johnson or, for that matter, Alex Linder. I can have disagreements on strategy with some of them, but at the end of the day we’re all comrades and to hell with anyone who bashes us and/or attempts to delegitimize us. Merlin Miller is going to find that he is now an Army of One.

    Morever, reality is quickly coming to our side. I was just in a coffee shop studying dmath and got into a conversation with a high tech worker guy sitting there with his girlfriend, and he said, “You know, the funny thing that our fathers and grandfathers said about race and racism, it may have been politically incorrect, but it turns out they were right!” Quoted verbatim, or as close to verbatim as I could get. I didn’t push it, instead i talked “shop” with him and got his email address, because I happen to have a lot of specialized knowledge in his field, and he likes to talk about his field. I also told him about state university tuition waivers, since he’s a veteran and he was very interested in going to state university for free, so I sent him info on that. So I’m going to get him talking, if he emails me back, and then I’m going to drop the heartiste.wordpress.com site on him, which is explicitly about pickup artists, but is implicitly a race-realist, site, less the discussion of Jews. It’s a slightly angrier version of isteve/half-sigma with PUA advice. Roissy slips great stuff in without saying “this is a WN site.” really great stuff and perfect for beginner haters.

  18. Stronza
    Posted October 8, 2012 at 4:00 pm | Permalink

    It is correct to post interviews in which Merlin (or anyone else) says things that are bad news for us. I was just trying to say that we should absolutely not, ever, wash our dirty linen in public. These things must be handled delicately. No gossip that makes us look in disarray! How we look matters a great deal.

    In any event, thank you very much to those of you responded to my initial post.

  19. Andrew
    Posted October 8, 2012 at 6:27 pm | Permalink

    Okay, a few more points of argumentation. Some smart political guy recently came out with a book, “words that work”, which is about choosing words that appeal to your audience to gain their political support. To do this, you speak to your audience in their language, using semantics and apologetics, connecting with them. Generally, persons of Whiteness are not yet ready for hard-core realism on issues of race or other WN views. Such a message will not gain widespread appeal. I think that accordingly, the A3P leadership has made a decision to get away from discussions that potential supporters of the party are not yet comfortable with. This is how I interpret Mr. Miller’s comment, that the party wants to distance itself from certain terms (like “White Nationalist”) and other rhetoric that scares off Whites.

    Take a look at the other side, the dark side, the Jewish success. The system was completely against them when they arrived here, and remained that way for a long time. Their various members embarked upon numerous endeavors across the political and academic spectrum, forming a wide variety of organizations. When interacting with the public, they used “words that work”, they did not feel constrained to announce to the White public the goals that were held in their highest councils. They slowly built up influence over a period of decades, through constant work, constantly pushing. Over time, they pushed the envelope to the point where their goals, once completely unacceptable, became accepted as completely normal and mainstream.

    The Jewish success was achieved because there was a movement. It wasn’t a particular individual or organization or media outlet, but the combined effort of a mass of people, with many differing views, but which together were acting to inexorably push their goals and objectives forward. The energies of these many thousands of people and groups were primarily focused on supporting each other, rather than tearing each other down. Their new Jerusalem was not built in a day.

    I don’t know Merlin Miller’s mind, but I do know that the A3P must have taken a great deal of thought in choosing him, and discussing their views and his on various subjects. And it should be remembered that he is not the party. The success of the A3P, whatever imperfections exist with its platforms or with Merlin Miller, is a very good thing for WN. The organizing of Whites into a political party that openly supports their interests is a very promising development. I think WNs take too much time criticizing individuals and groups within the movement, including the A3P as well as Jared Taylor, vdare, Patrick Buchanan, et. al. They are helping tremendously in their own ways, whatever their imperfections.

    The A3P is not going to win this election. Chances are, it will never win any election. Facing the demographic tsunami, by the time the party can build itself into a respectable political machine, there won’t be enough White voters to secure a majority. So what is the point? The point is that it is helping to build the movement, something greater than a political party. It is pushing the envelope, helping to gather Whites together, implicitly at first. It is part of a long process toward achieving Instauration for the Folk. We don’t know where this is going to lead, and building a political party should be viewed something that is part of a long process that might take perhaps 100 years to achieve (give or take a century or so). Could anyone in 1912 imagine what the situation would be in 2012? The same applies for us in the present day.

    • Lew
      Posted October 8, 2012 at 10:25 pm | Permalink

      When interacting with the public, [Jews] used “words that work”, they did not feel constrained to announce to the White public the goals that were held in their highest councils

      No, you are in this particular instance wrong. In 1913, Jews explicitly took their own side in the United States by founding the ADL. In 1918, they took their side by founding the American Jewish Congress. Jews were explicitly taking their own side 100 years ago.

      Jews laid down the template literally 100 years ago: take your own side explicitly but throw in some universalist language for cover. Our enemies have used this pattern over and over again. You can find this pattern in use right now on the 2012 editions of the La Raza and NAACP web sites.

      Despite this, you advocate whites and only whites continue to play the implicit game.

      • Andrew
        Posted October 9, 2012 at 4:22 am | Permalink

        Lew,
        I agree that the ADL and many other Jewish organizations are explicit, but their proceedings are not meant for consumption by the masses. When Jewish groups address the public, the dialogue is very different from what is spoken behind doors in their smoke-filled rooms. The public receives a carefully tailored message developed based on meticulous research for the purpose of persuasion.

        I am not suggesting that only Whites must remain implicit. Basically, my position is that I support whatever is building the movement, I don’t care what it is, if it works, I am for it. I am also for trying new initiatives of every type that have promise. I support explicit White Nationalism just about everywhere, in think tanks, publications and all manner of organizations. If there is another political party with explicit appeals to race, I support that party too, particularly if it is finding success. If explicit works, then that is obviously the way to go. However, unfortunately, at this point in time, explicit is like vinegar to bees as far as gaining support goes.

      • Lew
        Posted October 10, 2012 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

        I stand corrected on you wanting only Whites to go implicit.

        When Jewish groups address the public…The public receives a carefully tailored message developed based on meticulous research for the purpose of persuasion.

        Jewish groups almost always mention Jewish demands. They may not mention *only* Jewish demands when they make a statement on an issue, but they always relate the matter at hand to Jewish interests in some way. The same is true with the other ethnic interest groups as well.

        unfortunately, at this point in time, explicit is like vinegar to bees as far as gaining support goes.

        It will stay that way until enough sane-looking, clean cut, responsible and upbeat White folks come forward to make a case. Everyone I have seen in the A3P fits that description. The few who have stepped up are brave people. The only way to defeat the slander that a White Nationalist is a person who thinks like Wade Michael Page is to show by example that it’s not true. The leaders need to say it. Also, and just as important, people who can’t come forward in public are more likely to support an organization when it seems credible and professional as the A3P does. Assuming the mission is right, professionalism helps make people comfortable the funds will go to proper ends.

        unfortunately, at this point in time, explicit is like vinegar to bees as far as gaining support goes.

        Respectfully, I don’t feel you’ve answered one of the main objections to the implicit approach. Matt Parrott asked, in effect, what is Miller offering that Gary Johnson or Virgil Goode isn’t offering? No one here defending Miller responded to this specific point.

        Again, White interests are already being implicitly represented by many groups. NumbersUSA and the Center for Immigration studies make a case for drastically limiting immigration into America. Certain libertarian and leftist factions are against war on Iran. There are so many mainstream voices against war on Iran it’s absurd for Miller or anyone else to claim opposing war on Iran is a stance against mainstream opinion. It’s not. Yet, it’s a major theme with him. His talking point should be something like “we oppose young White folks being sent to die for a government that is hostile White America,” *not* “war with Iran is not in the Anerican peoples’ interest.” People are already saying the latter all the time. Miller isn’t adding any value for Whites.

        Implicit strategies are therefore redundant. They waste resources for this reason among others.

      • Lew
        Posted October 11, 2012 at 8:04 pm | Permalink

        Also, KMD writes:

        Despite the current cultural programming, white people are gradually coalescing into what I term “implicit white communities” in multicultural America—that is, communities that refl ect their ethnocentrism but that “cannot tell their name”—they cannot explicitly state that they are an expression of white ethnocentrism. These implicit white communities are insufficient for ethnic defense, however, and I conclude that progress in defending the ethnic interests of whites will happen only by legitimizing explicit assertions of ethnic identity and interests.

  20. Trainspotter
    Posted October 8, 2012 at 10:04 pm | Permalink

    Lew: “There is no reason this development should be laid off on Merlin Miller alone.”

    For now, it should. I don’t make allegations without solid evidence. At this point, all we know for certain is that Merlin denounced us. Sure, somebody brought him in, but we don’t know who or why. Further, my original comment was really not about the A3P per se, but about us as a broader movement, and why we must not support those that denounce us. Your posts raise legitimate points, but they have little to do with the main idea that I’m arguing for.

    Now, to address your concerns more directly. I’ve had some more or less meaningful experience in third party politics (as a big “L” libertarian back in my misspent youth), and so I have a sense of how these things can go. Small third parties are, not to put too fine a point on it, amateur hour. People screw up. There are decent people with good minds and hearts, but there are always a few kooks present. A lot can go wrong, and often does. I’ll have to say, though, that what Merlin did crosses a line that I don’t remember being crossed as a Libertarian. Not saying it never happened, but during my watch I certainly don’t recall someone taking the Libertarian nomination, burning our resources, and then denouncing libertarianism just shy of an election. It really blows the mind when one thinks about it, the sheer gall of it.

    Merlin should offer a clarification. If he said something to the effect of “I did not mean to convey the idea that I condemn those who seek to protect and preserve whites as a people, rather I was simply condemning the Hollywood stereotype of hateful, spiteful Nazis….” then I think that would be acceptable. So far as I know, he hasn’t done this, so we have no real choice but to take the condemnation as his real position. He attacked us, unprovoked and gratuitously, and has not offered a clarification or a de facto retraction. He caused this problem, and he aired it publicly across the radio waves. That’s way, way over the line.

    Apparently, he holds us in such contempt that he feels free to cash WN checks while denouncing WN. And yet he still has at least a few who defend him! There are now enough WN, and by extension WN checkbooks and wallets, that we could be taken seriously by at least some people, if only we could take ourselves seriously. We aren’t there yet, which of course was the reason for my original comment. Instead we let people dip into our well, and insult us as they walk away with their thirst quenched.

    Moving on. Assuming that he doesn’t clarify in such a way that de facto reverses his denunciation, then of course the next question is what the A3P does about it. They are obligated to respond, at least at some point (I won’t hold it against them if the response comes after the election). If they are fine with his denunciation, then we can conclude that the party is compromised and not a useful vehicle for our cause. On the other hand, if they have as much of a problem with it as we do, then I wouldn’t hold it against them. I see no reason to call for anyone’s head at this juncture. Now, if this sort of thing continues, that may change. If they continue to seek WN checks and cash, while running candidates that denounce us, that most certainly will change. But as of now, I’m willing to call it growing pains. Somebody screwed up. Well, people screw up. So long as they learn from the mistake, I’m good. If they don’t learn, then they become fair game for ridicule and mockery.

    My guess is that whoever made the call wanted someone with some mainstream credentials, and Merlin seems to fit the bill. The idea of using “softs” is to get across the following message: “Hey, ignore the cranks and kooks that the media shows you. I may not agree with everything that they say, but there are some highly intelligent white nationalist writers and thinkers, and they offer important ideas that are worth thinking about. I’m a normal guy just like you, and I think that there is some value here. Check it out.”

    Something like that. But never, never, never is it worth it for a soft to denounce us and insult us. That defeats the whole purpose of the approach, and that’s exactly what Merlin did. We’re paying softs to get more people to look at us and absorb our ideas, not scare them away and play into media stereotypes. It’s also ridiculous to pay softs to spread civic nationalism or libertarianism. Let the civic nationalists and libertarians who don’t care about the future of our people pay for that. We pay to spread our vision, not theirs. Let them carry our water, we don’t carry theirs.

    In any event, I’m still thinking the most likely explanation is that Merlin simply ran off the reservation, and now has them over a barrel with the election only weeks away.
    The A3P doesn’t even have to chastise Merlin directly, though he richly deserves it. They just need to issue a statement making it clear as to what their mission is, and that their intent is to only give the nod to candidates that are in keeping with that mission. We’ll all know what they are talking about. Keep it simple, but it better be damn clear.

    This little contretemps could actually help the party if it leads to greater clarity in their mission. Nobody knows the fire like the fool that’s been badly burned.

    • Lew
      Posted October 9, 2012 at 12:46 am | Permalink

      Trainspotter: Further, my original comment was really not about the A3P per se, but about us as a broader movement, and why we must not support those that denounce us. Your posts raise legitimate points, but they have little to do with the main idea that I’m arguing for.

      If I misunderstood your argument and moved the discussion in a direction you didn’t intend, I didn’t do it on purpose. I thought I was raising points directly related to your main idea. The question “should we support those who denounce us” naturally gives rise to the related questions “should we support those who give a visible public role to a person who has been lukewarm about supporting us and now openly denounces us” and “should we support implicit advocacy as a vehicle for white interests with time, money and effort”? While these issues can and should be discussed in the abstract, this incident gives us a chance to discuss a real-world case.

      That said, I don’t want to belabor the point or split the hairs too finely when I agree with you more than I disagree. I’m just less optimistic than you are that Miller landing in this role was someone’s one-off error as opposed to a conscious choice to give the job to a conservative moderate with weak racial views, or that it is an error that anyone at A3P will address.

      I’m not accusing anyone of anything. Neither one of us have insider knowledge (or I don’t at least). We’re both, I think, engaging in a bit of reasonable, measured and responsible speculation and discussion with an eye toward trying to figure out what’s best for WNism. You have your reasons for your position; I have mine. My speculation isn’t coming out of thin air (I’m not saying or suggesting by implication yours is). Mine is, I think, reasonably founded on public facts. In Matt Parrott’s audio, Miller said something to the effect he was brought in to moderate the party. Kevin MacDonald himself has said there is an internal debate within A3P on implicit versus explicit focus. As a recently as a few months ago, it came out that a board member was working with Ron Paul. Based on this, it seems clear there are people inside A3P who favor exactly the kind of soft, implicit, conservative approach that Miller represents and that many WNist radicals have repeatedly criticized. Given this, it seems quite plausible to me that Miller got the job in the first place because the implicit faction inside A3P has the energy on their side. Time will tell. It’s disappointing as hell to me we are having this conversation.

      • Trainspotter
        Posted October 9, 2012 at 11:34 pm | Permalink

        Lew: “If I misunderstood your argument and moved the discussion in a direction you didn’t intend, I didn’t do it on purpose.”

        Lew, I accept and appreciate that. The problem was that taking the discussion in a new direction could make it appear that I was criticizing a much broader range of people and behaviors than in fact I was. Hence my clarification, making it clear that I was only criticizing one person in particular (Merlin), but much more importantly I was addressing a very particular behavior exhibited by many good WN, namely returning to and continuing to support those that have battered them, or at least kicked sand in their faces. This is a vitally important issue, and we aren’t getting anywhere until this particular behavior stops.

        Having said that, the issues that you raise are legitimate and worthy of discussion, and needed to be addressed at some point, so to me it’s no harm, no foul.

        Lew: “I’m just less optimistic than you are that Miller landing in this role was someone’s one-off error as opposed to a conscious choice to give the job to a conservative moderate with weak racial views, or that it is an error that anyone at A3P will address.”

        I think it was clear from the beginning that A3P favored a soft approach which, sans denunciations, is not necessarily a bad thing – though I’m not convinced it’s the best thing either. In any event, I’m hoping that the denunciation wasn’t “planned” with the support of the party, or the dominant faction therein, but time will tell.

        Lew: “We’re both, I think, engaging in a bit of reasonable, measured and responsible speculation and discussion with an eye toward trying to figure out what’s best for WNism.”

        Absolutely true, and I’ve made clear that any discussion of the A3P, on my part, is merely speculation. At this point, the only thing we know with reasonable certainty is that Merlin denounced us, and as far as I know has not offered retraction or clarification. So it is what it is.

        Lew: “Given this, it seems quite plausible to me that Miller got the job in the first place because the implicit faction inside A3P has the energy on their side. Time will tell. It’s disappointing as hell to me we are having this conversation.”

        Disappointing to me as well, and while my original article was not about the A3P per se, but much more narrowly focused, I don’t see it as a bad thing that the conversation evolved into something else. If A3P has in fact been compromised, and is no longer a “soft” WN group, but an anti-WN or at least non-WN group, we need to know. We need to know if Miller simply ran off the reservation, or if his behavior was indicative of something more fundamental within the party.

        Better we find that out now (or soon), while the party is still small and not yet an overly significant part of the movement. At this point, I don’t see the potential loss of the A3P as catastrophic or even a significant setback, but that could change if more and more WN resources are put into it, and then it all comes to naught. The hour is growing late, and we simply cannot afford to continue into blind alleys and dead ends. So I’m still hopeful that things will turn out o.k., but if not the sooner we face reality the better. The main point will still stand: if the A3P feeds us, then we feed them. If they don’t, then we don’t. Fair is fair.

One Trackback

  • Video of the Day:

  • Kindle Subscription
  • Our Titles

    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

    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

    The Path of Cinnabar

    Archeofuturism

    Tyr

    Siege

    On Being a Pagan

    The Lost Philosopher

    The Dispossessed Majority

    Might is Right

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance