Alex Kurtagic’s recent article, “Mastery of Style Trumps Superiority of Argument ,” underlines the importance of developing an attractive image for our movement, one that appeals to our aesthetic tastes and offers a true alternative to the hostile establishment’s status indicators. But what would that style actually be?
In some of his other articles, Kurtagi? appears to favor a more martial look, one reminiscent of 20th century fascist movements and cogent with his affinity for Black Metal  and its attendant subculture . While I rarely find myself disagreeing with him, I believe this image is unlikely to coalesce with the spirit and direction of our movement, at least in the White American context.
Just as substance relies on style, style also relies on some degree of substance. The image must jibe with the spirit of the people and their idealized self-image. Kurtagi?s vision is clearly Continental, martial, urban, and collectivist. That’s dissonant with an American spirit which is more masonic than martial, more rural than urban, and more individualist than collectivist. While many in the New Right cast a jaundiced eye on American heritage and culture altogether, a serious and practical effort to outline our style needs to come from and speak to that White American heritage and culture.
White Americans are only beginning to realize the loss of the the power, esteem, and respect they once commanded, but there’s a pattern they’re likely to follow as they awaken. They’ll attempt to restore their former glory by restoring the symbols and styles they associate with their vision of America’s golden age. This golden age is not the proper Golden Age familiar to Radical Traditionalists, but a more specific one, particular to the White American ethnic people and their collective imagination.
When the National Socialists did this, they turned on the decadent modernism in their cities and scrambled to restore those things they identified with German greatness: Norse myths and runes, the Aryan racial ideal, and Prussian military excellence. This second spirit is a sort of revival of a nation’s ancestral memory. Like Spengler’s second religiosity, it’s less about ideology than instinct. It can often anachronistic and even paradoxical, as with contemporary Russia’s awkward fusion of Bolshevik and Orthodox nostalgia.
In America, this process is just beginning. The Tea Party movement is restoring a trove of long-forgotten symbols and styles from the American Revolutionary period. They’re dressing up in Continental Army uniforms, waving their Gadsen Flags, and rallying to the Lincoln Memorial. Never mind that Lincoln was the tyrant who extinguished the American Revolutionary spirit. Never mind that their trip to the Lincoln Memorial was a globalist and multicult farce .
The takeaway is that the American people are in the primordial stage of rejecting their decadent elites’ false idols and ideals. There’s a resurgent interest among young White American men in reclaiming their masculinity. There’s a growing rejection of the feminist movement and the barren life it yields among young White American women. There’s a growing sentiment among a generation in favor of reviving and traditional gender roles and responsibilities.
A new spirit of manliness is developing, similar to what emerged in fascist Italy , propelled by this new American Restorationary spirit. Masculine sites like The Spearhead  and Art of Manliness  are increasingly popular and influential. Even the more decadent sites like Roissy’s site  on “game” reflect a rejection of the emasculation that the modern misandry bubble  has wrought.
What we need to do is bridge this emergent nationalist spirit and our nationalist ideology through the development of a subculture that reconnects the White American heart and mind. The image we need to project is a Radical Americanist one, one that people will intuitively associate with our golden age. We need to embody the image of the self-reliant country gentlemen who founded this nation.
In place of a type-true people, born of and grown on the soil, there is a new sort of nomad, cohering unstably in fluid masses, the parasitical city dweller, traditionless, utterly matter-of-fact, religionless, clever, unfruitful, deeply contemptuous of the countryman and especially that highest form of countryman, the country gentleman.— Oswald Spengler, The Decline of the West
In practice, this would include dressing like a traditional adult American man: with a clean dress shirt, a simple analog chrome watch, a black belt with a chrome buckle, khakis or jeans, black socks, and black boots or dress shoes. He would also wear a traditional hat, like a fedora or a flat cap, and know when and where to doff  it. Aside from the hat, the costume is typical business casual. A ring, perhaps with an A3P logo or some runic characters, would be the only explicit indication of subcultural identity.
This look projects competence, seriousness, and and traditionalism. I’ve been impressed over the last couple years with how people carry themselves differently and speak a bit more formally when I’m wearing my fedora. It’s an immediately understood indication that I reject this Zeitgeist. It also serves as a “peacocking ” device, as grown men’s hats are virtually unseen nowadays.
In a way, our task is that of auditioning to be White America’s foremost organizers and advocates. So why not dress a bit like we’re interviewing for a serious job? If the look gains traction within a pro-White subculture, the subtle accessories will be sufficient to let our allies and enemies know we’re radical subversives. At the drop of a hat, we could slip our rings into our pockets and blend into corporate and blue-collar White America.