Prospects for Activism
By • 8/30/07 |
Freedom of Speech by Norman Rockwell. |
The Inverted World has been running for more than eight months now, and there has been no more gratifying time in my life. Although the work goes slowly because I have a full-time job with a long commute, I feel I have made substantial progress in the project I set out for myself last December of exploring the nature, causes, and consequences of the “whites as cancer” myth. I am grateful to those of you who have joined me for the ride.
However much I enjoy this work, it falls far short of what is needed to bring about real change in public attitudes. As long as our movement is confined to websites like this one and a few sparsely read publications, it will never have any real impact, and the broad mass of Americans will never hear our message.
I think that what we need to put our movement on the map is a lobbying group that advocates for race realism and combats the “whites as cancer” myth.
The Internet has made lobbying much easier than it used to be. With a few clicks of the mouse, activists can send messages by fax or e-mail to Congress, and such communications can make a difference.
Consider the extraordinary success of the immigration restriction group NumbersUSA. It currently has 447,000 members—that’s up from 50,000 in 2004. The group makes it easy for people to send ready-made faxes to politicians, although you can send a custom message if you wish.
NumbersUSA members sent over a million faxes to members of Congress during the debate over amnesty earlier this year. The organization’s director, Roy Beck, has rightly described his cause as a “David-and-Goliath struggle.” On one side were ranged President Bush, the United States Chamber of Commerce, the high-tech industry, the Roman Catholic Church, Hispanic organizations, farmers, restaurants, hotels, and the construction industry. On the other, a grass-roots activism group with a bit of nifty technology.
NumbersUSA’s ability to appeal to a large constituency has given them influence among politicians. The Immigration Reform Caucus in the House held weekly strategy discussions with the group during the amnesty debate.
However, NumbersUSA does not take a racial approach to the issue of immigration. In fact, their website comes equipped with the usual boiler-plate bleating about the evils of generalizing about ethnic groups. Consequently, their faxes deal with the negative impact of immigration on jobs, the environment, national security, and so forth. There is no hint that immigration will alter our culture because of fundamental differences between white and non-white populations.
Imagine what advocacy on immigration from a realist perspective would look like. A story that is much in the news recently is the murder of three blacks by Hispanics in Newark. The story has attracted attention because it is a powerful example of the effects of the sanctuary policies in place in most American cities, which restrict the right of police and other government employees to cooperate with federal immigration authorities. The suspected leader of the murderers, Jose Carranza, a Peruvian national, has been arrested three times before on assault and child abuse charges, yet he was never reported to immigration authorities.
A realist activist group could use this story to make broader points about the negative characteristics of Hispanics as a group. Hispanics are are three times more likely to be in prison than whites, and four times more likely to be in prison for murder. This episode would also be a good occasion to bring out Hispanics’ other underclass characteristics, such as low high-school graduation rates and high poverty rates.
Another issue that would be rife with possibilities for realist activism is the measures that municipalities are enacting to restrict the entrance of illegal aliens. Take the legislation passed by the town council of Hazleton, Pennsylvania in 2006. Hispanic gangs had brought drugs and crime to the small city, and Hispanic children were overcrowding the schools. After a fatal shooting in which two illegals were charged, the town council, led by Mayor Lou Barletta, passed laws that prevented landlords from renting to illegal aliens and employers from hiring them. Hazleton is part of a trend: more than 90 municipalities have enacted legislation to keep illegals out. Last month, however, a judge struck down the Hazleton law, saying it conflicted with the federal government’s exclusive right to handle immigration matters and the supposed constitutional rights of persons within the United States. This ruling threatens all similar laws passed elsewhere.
A realist group could use this case to argue for the right of whites to segregate themselves from other races if they choose. The meaning that the contemporary legal system gives to the Constitution would have flabbergasted and outraged the founders. The Constitution makes it clear that the federal government has no right to restrict people’s right to choose who they associate with, so the real abrogation of the Constitution occurred with the passage of anti-discrimination laws in the 1960s. This injustice forces whites to resort to roundabout means to exclude people who violate the principles on which white societies are based.
In the near future, of course, there would be little chance that we could influence legislation. The political class would consider the faxes we were sending them little short of demented. In fact, if our group was successful enough to be noticed, it is quite likely it would harm the immigration reform movement, at least in the short term, as the Left would try to use our efforts to discredit the whole movement.
What, then, would be the point? First of all, speaking the truth is its own justification and needs no other. Beyond that, such a group, if it were at all successful would garner enormous publicity. The very fact that racially conscious whites had formed a lobbying group would stun America, and people would be eager to find out what it was about. When they did, they would discover that what they call “racism” is not based in ignorance and hate. Rather, there are perfectly good, even overpowering, arguments to be made for racial differences and for racial discrimination. Such a revelation could only strengthen the immigration reform movement in the long run.
Finally, the group would give focus to the pent-up energy of American realists, who have nothing to do now except complain on websites or fritter away their lives in isolated anger and anxiety. Indeed, the fractiousness that characterizes our movement is in large part due to its impotence. An activist group would be a more productive and satisfying outlet for our frustrations.
Of course, I would not make the mistake of giving critics an easy target or incurring suspicion of a hidden agenda. As has been argued before on this site, it is not enough to ignore the Jew-hating contingent of the racial right. Rather, since white racialism has such a dismal history, race realists must prove their sanity and good will by actively speaking out against anti-Semites, as well as other types of haters. I have done this in the past, and I would go on doing so. Because the rest of the racial right is not willing to perform these hygienic measures, I do not think any serious political activism can be expected from them.
Our movement will grow only if we can connect race realism with mainstream viewpoints. Although the initial base of support for a realist activist group would be the racial right, we would have to focus on appealing to people of more conventional views. One tactic would be to develop and clarify the hints of race realism discernible in the conservative movement, which have been discussed in several articles on this site (see here, here, and here.)
My dream is only that. I have not yet investigated in detail would be involved in setting up and operating an activist group. But I have made some inquiries, and I can form some estimate of the bottom line.
The main expense at first would be my own livelihood because I would have to quit my day job to run the group. This would also give me more time to research and write; I might be able to set up a blog with daily updates as well. I can live thriftily, and I have some personal resources. Let’s say $30,000 per year would suffice to keep me alive and active.
The technology for sending electronic messages to politicians is not cheap. One company that I know of charges $17,000 to provide this service for the first year; the cost sinks to $11,000 per year after that.
Throw in $10,000 to take care of the unexpected. I estimate that about $60,000 per year would be enough to get the project off the ground.
People are naturally reluctant to donate money to someone without a track record of success. What I will propose to you then is this. I have enough savings to lease the software and survive for a year. If I show some signs of success after that time, would you agree to support the group in the future? You can answer either in the comments section, or by sending an e-mail through the contact page. Also, any other thoughts about strategies for activism or funding would be more than welcome.
People who read websites like this one see the first glimmerings of a great truth, and I believe that we can actualize that truth in the world of politics. However, accomplishing this feat will require sacrifice from all of us, and I hope that you will decide that my project is worthy of yours.
If you want this article to be exposed to a wide audience, take the time to recommend it at digg. Millions of readers traffic the site, and the more recommendations an article gets, the better its chance of being read. If you don't have digg account yet, registration is easy. Just click submit to get started. |
Click here to join the Inverted World mailing list. You'll get an e-mail notice whenever IW publishes new entries.
Wikitopian advises me to promote discussion among racialists of various stripes by starting a forum and encouraging readers to submit articles. However, I think his whole approach rests on a mistaken assumption. His view is that racialists will change the world by talking more to each other. However, I think we ought to spend less time talking to each other and more time talking to the rest of the world. Debates between Jewish racialists and Kevin MacDonald racialists, between pro-war and anti-war racialists will not change public opinion when 99 percent of the public considers the very idea of racialism abhorrent.
The racial right does not lack for forums; people start a new one every month or so. The kind of free, spontaneous discussion that Wikitopian wants is already going on at places like The Phora, Majority Rights, and Stormfront. Do you think those sites will get us anywhere? I doubt it. I think they have a depressing “Lord of the Flies” atmosphere about them. It’s as though a bunch of people had gotten stranded on a desert island and fell to fighting among themselves. A better idea is to figure out how to get off the island by making contact with the outside world.
Your comparison between the realist community and NAMBLA is misleading and defeatist. I suppose there is some superficial similarity between realism and pederasty in that both are taboo, but taboos can be overcome through argument, and I believe we will all agree that, of the two taboos, realism has stronger arguments on its side.
By on 9/1/07 at 12:49 pm
May I suggest YouTube videos? I doubt NumbersUSA would have become a central force in the immigration debate were it not for Roy Beck’s delightful “immigration gumballs” video, which was viewed by millions. Imagine a sharply produced video that attractively and entertainingly rehashes statistics from “Color of Crime” and “Hispanics: a Statistical Portrait”.
You’re probably right about the forums.
By on 9/1/07 at 1:11 pm
Hi.
I think the best hope by far for WNs/Race-Realists is to simply use current anti-racism laws against the Multiracialists to show to whites that the Multiracial agenda is actually an Anti-White agenda.
What specifically do I mean?
One example would be to encourage students at colleges to form student associations for whites.
When the college administrators inevitably ban the student associations, you could take the college to court for racial discrimination against whites.
Go to the SCOTUS if necessary and argue “The ban on white college student associations at this college is clearly racist because they allow black student associations, Asian student associations etc etc but not white student associations. We ask the court either to ban Asian, Hispanic and black student associations as well, or allow whites to form their own associations on campus.”
Turn the multicultural logic against itself.
Another example would be to try and sue public schools that don’t allow school prayer but do allow accommodations for other religions like foot washes for Muslim students and argue that the schools are discriminating against Christians in general and white Christians in particular.
Try and get some lawyers pro bono to take up the case and make the ACLU and other organizations spend their money defending the indefensible.
You would generate huge headlines and might win some cases in the John Roberts Court while helping to wake up whites to the fact that the main problem with multiracialism is that it’s true purpose is to destroy white America.
You would not have to promote any particular view that the white public would have a hard time digesting.
Oh no, you would merely have to argue that multiracial policies are logically inconsistent and directed against whites.
Let ordinary whites draw their own conclusions from that point. Once you put some doubt into people’s minds the correct answers will flow from there.
Also, you could use YouTube and start a “Race is Scientific Reality” series of film that explain how race is a biological fact of life that must be taken into consideration when formulating social policy.
These actions would be much more effective than just sitting on blogs complaining about blacks dating white women or formulating convoluted Jewish conspiracy theories.
By on 9/1/07 at 1:53 pm
One last recommendation, I would suggest rather than trying to form a single activist group you instead try and work with other race realists to create multiple white activist groups so that the media can’t focus all of its artillery on a single organization. Diffusing power among other groups will make you more effective and allow you to go in different directions and pursue different strategies.
By on 9/1/07 at 2:24 pm
YouTube, from what I understand, cracks down harshly on “racist” videos, and deletes them soon after they are flagged as “offensive”.
Despite their nominal ban on pornography, however, there are mountains of sexual or at least suggestive videos on there, and not all are behind their 18-and-over password barrier. They crop up routinely in lists of the most viewed or most rated videos, and in searches for innocuous terms.
The double standard, meaning the culture’s pervasive anti-white ethos, remains in full force. Point being, YouTube is not going to save us.
By on 9/1/07 at 3:22 pm
Don’t waste your money. Vdare’s founders were already huge in the media world. Jared Taylor ran AmRen for years before he finally used his own name (prior to that, he called himself Samuel Taylor in the AmRen newsletter while publishing his book under Jared Taylor).
At least 95% of the people who’ll tell you that they will give you money will not. Half of them know they are lying. The other half think they will give - but won’t when push comes to shove. You will be the last person in line for their money. Everything will come before you and there’s always some “need”.
Try to get people to do anything for you: add race-related news, write for you, etc. At least 90% of the people you ask for help who’ll agree will not actually do it. Even half the people who will actually reach out to you offering help will in the end do nothing.
What you need is create a huge number of participants. When your web site gets at least 5,000 and closer to 10,000 daily visitors, then you can think of making it a movement. Right now, it’s too early.
AmRen gets only 3,000 to 4,000 visitors daily. Vdare gets 6,000 to 7,000 visitors a day. When you reach those numbers, then you can try to start something. Right now, you must focus on building up your site.
Try to get as many people as possible involved in your site.
- Bring back daily race news.
- Start one article a day going (stop paying people, trust me, plenty people will write for free on this subject because they feel very emotional about it).
- Start a message board.
- Get some people with Ph.D.’s to conduct a legitimate scientific study on crime, education, etc. and send out the results in a press release to the media. Then send out faxes to the media and get them to interview you.
But don’t waste your money. I felt very, very sad for you when I read the article because I know exactly what will happen - you’ll lose your money and nothing will happen. Then all those people who swear they’ll give you money will abandon you. Please do yourself a favor and build up a movement by getting people involved rather than wasting your savings.
By on 9/2/07 at 3:40 am
Opinionated,
If we turn “multicultism” on itself, we are agreeing with multi-culti rules.
By on 9/2/07 at 3:49 am
Realist,
After reading your last article I was suddenly filled with a newly found feeling of hope. For the last six years (since I stumbled upon AR) I’ve been hoping to become part of an organization that advocated for Whites unapologetically.
Regretfully, rampant anti-semitism always reared its ugly head and forced me to into a deeper state of skepticism, frustration, and hopelessness. Growing up in a predominantly Jewish neighborhood (I’m Irish Catholic) I understand first hand the common bond I share with other White Jews. Most of my Jewish friends and acquaintances share many of the same ideas about multi-racialism and its effect on White people in the long run.
I’m not hopelessly optimistic regarding left leaning Jewish organizations. However, to me, they are no different than any other leftist, egalitarian political organizations out there.
Finally, once you get started, you can count on me for at least 50 dollars a month in support for your time and expenses. I truly wish it could be more, but supporting a family of four in the suburbs of America is becoming increasingly difficult.
Best regards,
Robert Haney
By on 9/2/07 at 5:11 am
“If we turn “multicultism” on itself, we are agreeing with multi-culti rules.”
Racial Non-Discrimination in this country can only work by discriminating against whites.
If we truly did not discriminate based on race, there would be no such thing as Affirmative Action, there would be far fewer scholastic attacks on white culture and history, etc etc etc. But anti-discrimination has to discriminate against whites in order to try to hide racial differences. If they can no longer legally persecute whites, liberalism will go into an ideological crisis and many ordinary whites will stop believing in it. Look at the fit the liberals threw when SCOTUS restricted the use of assigning public school students based on race.
By using anti-discrimination law against the anti-white ruling establishmnet, we can point out that Non-discrimination is anti-white.
Many whites still don’t realize that non-discrimination is bent on destroying them and their families. Bringing lawsuits against various elite institutions will help wake people up to this reality.
How about suing PRIVATE Universities for career damage caused by racial discrimination against whites in student admissions? (The Grutter decision by SCOTUS only dealt with public college affirmative action, it may be time to take action against the big private institutions.)
A lawsuit against, say, Yale or Tufts would be an excellent way to grab headlines even if you lose the case.
Why not sue schools that promote an anti-white curriculum for defamation against white Americans?
There are many other ways to use the law against the elite for promoting discrimination against whites.
I am surprised that nobody has tried this yet. I myself would try and set up such a legal organization, but I cannot afford to stop working.
Hopefully somebody with legal training will step up and form a “White Civil Rights” organization. We have to start organizing somehow because complaining on blogs won’t get us anywhere. Using class action lawsuits to point out that anti-discrimination laws are designed to discriminate against whites would be a great way to get the ball rolling.
By on 9/2/07 at 12:32 pm
First, thanks very much to Robert Haney and the other person who has written to me to pledge financial support if I ever start an activist group. I hope some day to prove myself a worthy of your faith in me.
I have more faith in people than Business Realist has, and I believe it is a great mistake to equate realism with cynicism. However, I appreciate his prudence, and I agree that it would be rash to sink my savings into a project before the time is ripe.
I’m not going to quit my job tomorrow and start spending like mad on messaging technology. Rather, I wrote this article to see whether my aspirations found resonance in the people who read this site. I will embark on my project only when I get an overwhelming number of pledges of support. If I don’t get an immediate response, I’ll wait. However, I am going to make sure a link to this article is always displayed prominently on the website, possibly by putting it on the home page navigation bar.
In the meantime, your advice about building the readership of this website is well taken. Readers have to understand that I need help to do so. Nothing worth reading comes easily, and it takes all of my energy to put up two articles every month. If I tried to do too much alone, I would do everything badly.
Here are a few ways of building the website.
I agree it would be good to start posting news on the site again. If any of you would like to do that, please contact me at http://inverted-world.com/index.php/site/contact/
You can post or link to my articles on other websites. Some of you do this already, and I am grateful for it. It is particularly important that you post my articles on non-racial right websites so that more people are exposed to realism. Currently, my articles only seem to get posted on racial right sites, and much (but not all) of the commentary on them consists of furious denunciations by neo-Nazi typing maniacs who think I’m a Jew or some other type of malignant schemer.
Business Realist says that I ought to be able to get people to write for me for free. I find this rather surprising. I’ve had the “Write for Us” link on the home page of my website ever since I started, yet the only person who has ever submitted articles is Sam Raymond. However, if you want to submit something, send it in. I’m eagerly awaiting a contribution from Business Realist himself! I’ll pay you for it if you need the money, but of course I’d prefer if you donated the article. Be aware that even though I’d like more articles, I’m choosy. Quality is more important than quantity.
I was a bit too harsh on the idea of a forum yesterday. My point was that I don’t think that another forum is going to go very far in changing public attitudes. However, there are things to be said for a forum, especially if there is no other workable way of providing daily updated content. If I see a groundswell of support for a forum and people volunteer to administer it, I’ll consider adding one.
By on 9/2/07 at 1:09 pm
Realist - I forwarded my first donation today. By my account, at this point, you have a 50 percent success rate in those pledging support to your vision. Consider my donation a down-payment. I’m sure the finished product will arrive in time. However, if you decide against starting an activist group the work you have done already is well worth the meager donation I sent today.
Cheers!
Robert Haney
By on 9/2/07 at 3:20 pm
I hereby volunteer to assist with forum moderation.
As for the “quality over quantity” reason for avoiding less formal and more topical pieces like what VDare presents on its site, I think you’re creating a false dichotomy. You don’t have to choose between accepting blog-like commentary and having scholarly articles with comprehensive bibliographies. You can have both, right?
As for the whole “raising money” thing, I know that I have invested money in racialist stuff, so there ARE people out there with money to offer toward the cause. I’m not promising anything, and I do admit that I have a lot of personal financial issues that supercede activism, but people out there do have money and will give it to you.
By on 9/2/07 at 3:43 pm
Realist,
I already publish a large ezine that takes up much of my time. We are not specifically a racialist publication and if you saw it, you we do publish race-related articles from a politically incorrect point of view regularly. I found AmRen after they linked to us. Every race-related site linked to us at some point. I don’t want to tell you the name of the publication because I like having a mainstream reputation, while allowing for non-MSM views. Otherwise, I might have the problem that you have: only the race-right will read what we have to say and we won’t be able to reach the mainstream.
But let me tell you this from my experience: your primary job must be to recruit volunteers. This is just as true in the media as it is in politics.
Go out and post ads in writers’ forums. Most people there are leftist, but enough will support your views.
Go to forums. Ask newsletters for Jewish right wingers (there are plenty of those on Yahoo and other places) to post an ad for you.
Ask people to join you by writing, adding news pieces, publishing a monthly newsletter, participating in a message board, and many other things. I got people do it for me and I see no reason why you can’t.
By on 9/2/07 at 7:10 pm
If you want to make a profit, put up book reviews with a link to where people can purchase the book. You’ll make at least something off it… more later when your site gets more significant traffic.
By on 9/2/07 at 7:38 pm
In terms of real life activism, one of my goals is linking the war on terror to domestic policy. I want people to equate illegal immigration and massive immigration with terrorist activity. I want people to realize Al Qaeda, for instance, could enter America via Mexico if the border is not secured. That takes the current political climate, and applies it to the restrictionist agenda.
Another goal I have is shrinking the federal government. Its the federal government that pushes diversity onto people, and does a lot of other “liberal” things. Given freedom of choice, people will choose to associate with their own kind, more often than not.
By on 9/2/07 at 11:42 pm
Realist,
The issue is becoming unnecessarily complicated. Here is the clear, concise, simple, way to pull this off. Purchase the domain WHITESUSA.NET (.COM has been taken). One introductory commentary is posted. A well written (by you) article explaining that every minority in America has a group advocating for their interests. You believe that it is only fair for Whites to have a group focusing on their interests. By signing in they will be able to send faxes to their senators/congressmen asking that they vote to end discrimination/unfairness toward caucasians. Issues such as: affirmative action, section 9 housing, government job hiring, crime,etc.
Key Points
1) Only discuss discrimination against whites, no negativity against other races. This may not sit well with some, but it is what will work.
2) Present factual arguments on each issue as to how it is unfair to Whites and should be changed.
3) Avoid any controversialism. You are espousing a simple argument to every issue. An issue is fair/unfair to Whites, here is why. Next step, ask them to send a fax. Maintain a neutral position as the moderator, present the facts and step back so that readers can see the unfairness of the current issue.
4) Always maintain the high ground, issues presented in a positive, factual manner. Keep it professional. This limits discussion but is needed.
5) No comments allowed for the issues. Not needed, your factually written introduction to each issue is all that is needed.
The majority of Whites have begun to realize that they are getting a raw deal in this country. They don’t know about White nationalism and it scares them off. They just want the unfairness to stop. These are the people that you need to reach because they have the highest numbers. They are dying to have their voice heard but don’t want to lose their jobs and are leary of white nationalist websites.
For future consideration:
1) Faxes to companies running anti-white commercials
2) After a few months ask for donations to keep the website going.
3) Further activism
Well that’s it. I have more ideas but I think you get the point. It may not be what everyone wants but it is the solution that works.
By on 9/3/07 at 10:28 am
I wrote this article to see whether my aspirations found resonance in the people who read this site.
I am English (too) and the owner of http://majorityrights.com so I might be in a good position to observe the failure of American loyalists to create political momentum in opposition to the liberal mainstream. As we all know, in Europe there are nationalist political parties at various stages of development. Some of these, like VB and SVP, are already strong. Some, like NF, are waning. In the context of the present post the question is: what does the European nationalist experience have to teach Americans?
It isn’t that complicated. Without a coherent and complete, alternative political ideology to liberalism (by which I mean not the American left but the politics of individualism which has dominated the West since the mid-18th century) it is literally impossible to build a mass movement of Euro-survivalism. The best you will get is a flare-up followed by a defeat - the European experience thus far. You HAVE to war with ideas - and WIN - before you fax Congress, before form a white ADL, before whatever.
This, of course, is the most difficult task. How the hell do you wish into being a philosophy that counters the grotesquely materialist and selfish complacency of liberalism (nowhere more ingrained than in America)?
Well, the only way is to appeal to intellectuals … to create the assurances they need that the high risk activity of declaring for Euro-survivalism is right and good, and will receive grateful support. You have to create the conditions in which the best European/European-American minds will be prepared to critique the zeitgeist, and formulate a revolutionary alternative.
A new ideological framework invokes a genuine revolutionary moment. Without it, the foundational strength of liberalism will not be overcome for perhaps another twenty years - and then, only assuming that it will collapse of its own accord.
By on 9/3/07 at 10:43 am
If I see a groundswell of support for a forum and people volunteer to administer it, I’ll consider adding one.
By The Realist on 9/2/07 at 11:09 am
I, too, wish that you would start a forum. There really is no alternative to the “Stormfront-type” forum for discussion of anything regarding race. AR only allows commentary on the articles that it posts, not on topics of interest in general to the posters. If you don’t care for the “Jew hate”, you really have nowhere to discuss issues.
By on 9/3/07 at 11:45 am
“The very fact that racially conscious whites had formed a lobbying group would stun America, and people would be eager to find out what it was about. When they did, they would discover that what they call ‘racism’ is not based in ignorance and hate. Rather, there are perfectly good, even overpowering, arguments to be made for racial differences and for racial discrimination.”
Selling the racial differences aspect will be much easier, than selling the logical policy outcomes that would evolve from the gradual “acceptance” of such differences which is described above as racial discrimination. I am not one who normally likes to honey up what I am expressing, but we unfortunately live in a era of euphemisms and prevarications. The greatest example of this being, the deliberately selective way in which the words tolerance and intolerance are misused; it simply translates into the self anointed “tolerant,” being obnoxiously intolerant of that which they hate from their sociopolitical, academic, and media spheres of power. This generalized object of their hatred being the world’s whites and more specifically the American Right.
Now most of us here know that, but sometimes redundancy really does have qualities not to be despised. I hate to say it, but advocating for “racial discrimination,” even as a nebulous long term policy outcome following a lengthy debate on real racial differences, will hold dangers. A term such as “positive separated self reliance” or better still, “community based equality of opportunity solutions” would likely be far more digestible to the general public. Soothingly opaque as they are, they would also be open to very aggressive defense against the expected attacks the “tolerant” would launch against them.
Senator Multiculturalism: ‘I cannot believe, that my esteemed colleague would suggest policies that would openly undo integration and promote discrimination between the races in employment, housing, and in our broad immigration policies…blah, blah, blah?’
Senator Race Realism: ‘What I cannot believe is that my venerable colleague would suggest that the continued tensions that governmentally enforced intercommunity contacts have brought us for the last 70 years is worth extending into the coming decades, for future generations to deal with, because he would maintain the status quo ? Does he really believe that not allowing for differing communities to have separate opportunities developed by themselves, will not reduce such tensions ? Moreover, does he think so little of the communities of color, that he truly believes that only using Federal force to place them in close proximity to the white community can uplift them into accelerated development…?’
In many respects, if forums such as this one serve an ongoing purpose beyond a gripe and moan factor, it is making such distinctions in language while preparing for future activism.
By on 9/3/07 at 1:03 pm
GuessedWorker, I don’t think the strategic situation in Europe is comparable to the United States.
For one thing, Europe still has a sizable amount of time to wake up because Western Europe is still roughly 90% white, and Central/Eastern Europe average over 95% white. The US unfortunately is 67% white and shrinking rapidly and only 55% of births in the US are white (Though US births would be 62 - 64% white if it weren’t for over 500,000 Hispanic anchor babies.)
Secondly, Western Europe’s growing anti-immigration backlash is directed against LEGAL immigration, in the US the focus has been on illegal immigration and any backlash against legal immigration is in a very embryonic stage. (For example, Mitt Romney says he wants to put a stop to illegal immigration but he also wants to increase legal immigration, a position no nationalist party - or indeed many mainstream conservative parties like the German CDU/CSU - in Western Europe would support.)
Europe’s main problem is not immigration so much as it is that the white birth rate in Europe is below the 1.85 white birth rate seen in the US. If Europe could increase it’s white birth rate to 1.80 or higher, that would still mean a shrinking population, but the population would age and shrink at a much slower/manageable rate.
So the situation in America is more precarious.
We need to start some sort of activism now because Europe is way ahead of is on the anti-immigration front and we have less time than Europe does to change course.
By on 9/3/07 at 3:04 pm
“The very fact that racially conscious whites had formed a lobbying group would stun America, and people would be eager to find out what it was about. When they did, they would discover that what they call ‘racism’ is not based in ignorance and hate. Rather, there are perfectly good, even overpowering, arguments to be made for racial differences and for racial discrimination.”
Selling the racial differences aspect will be much easier, than selling the logical policy outcomes that would evolve from the gradual “acceptance” of such differences which is described above as racial discrimination.”
The white ADL/lawsuit idea is more viable than pointing out racial differences because whites are trained to ignore racial differences.
However, if whites can be shown that the present present liberal political system is ATTACKING whites for BEING white, whites in large numbers will react defensively and then be open to WN policy.
Only by showing whites are under attack from racial liberalism can a backlash against the present system develop into a political movement.
So a “White Civil Rights” organization is the best way to go because such an organization would be able to legally expose the liberal “Double Think” on race.
By on 9/3/07 at 3:14 pm
I very much agree with GuessedWorker that the realist movement lacks a philosophy. In fact, we have not answered the most basic question of all: why should we want to preserve the white race? When you ask this question, racial right types will tell you, “It’s natural to want to preserve your race,” or some complicated variant on that idea derived from evolutionary theory. Or they’ll talk about our IQ and low crime rates.
Neither of these answers work very well. To the first point, people will likely as not respond flippantly, “Well, I like being unnatural!” And to the second, people will answer that Asians have higher IQ and lower crime rates than we do; wouldn’t letting more of them in be an improvement? Besides, if someone asks you why you love America or England, does “Because we’re so law-abiding” or “Because we’re so smart” seem like an adequate answer?
The fact is that there are untheorized, or poorly theorized, aspects of the white personality that cause us to build unique cultures. The effects of these personality traits are relatively easy to understand: no cultures have been as innovative as ours; it was white cultures that invented representative government and abolished slavery. Whatever is the source of these phenomena is our racial essence, and it is that which is precious to us.
What is the racial essence? A love of freedom? Tolerance of dissent? A strong will to speak truth to power? A sense of fair play? Fascination with the unknown?
We need to define this essence and figure out how to appeal to it so that people understand why we care so much about this cause. I actually think that Republicans are quite good at appealing to the white essence, although they misrecognize it as the human essence. When Pres. Bush tells us we have to invade Iraq in order to bring freedom and prosperity to the people there, he’s appealing to something very deep in the white psyche, the same thing that abolitionists in the 19th century appealed to when they fired up the British public with outrage over slavery in the Muslim world.
By on 9/3/07 at 5:49 pm
Opinionated,
I started MR with the idea of addressing the ethnic interests of all European peoples living under the liberal zeitgest. Geographically, this nets down to “the West”. The old Soviet sphere is not much affected, although creeping American culturalisation and the cancer of Human Rights will change that soon enough.
For us, though, the danger is shared. Yes, America and Canada are more advanced with racial change. But Americans and Canadians have space. There is a certain equality between the Old World and New, and anyway advanced liberalism does not treat the one more kindly than the other.
It is the universality of advanced liberalism that commends a universal redress … not in detailed application at the political level, of course, but in the architecture of the ideas and values and interests that will inform such politics.
You will say, “We do not have the luxury of time to think.” My answer is that you will find you have no choice. There will be no success, no lasting results if efforts have to be made within the prevailing zeigeist. Liberalism will not allow anti-liberal outcomes. Its elites, its activists, its true believers will defend at any cost the power dispensation that favours them. This is a revolutionary issue.
A while back I put up a long post at MR on the power elite that, I think, described the immensity of the real task …
The theory of competing elites can equally be applied to revolutionary war. There is one great difference, though. The revolutionaries sought to sweep away not only the physical presence of the old elite but the very ground upon which it stood among the people. If successful, the resultant systemic political change was the basis for a legitimation far beyond that of mere victory on the battle field. The American intelligentsia, for example, who made themselves revolutionaries under a British monarchy became Founders and political giants under the liberal democracy that they fashioned, and bequeathed their legacy to more than American posterity.
TIW asks why racialists have made so little progress over the last forty years, and concludes that the subject matter is too vulgarly addressed (in respect of the JQ). MR concludes that it is addressed on a basis far too limited and unambitious to challenge the ideological juggernaut that is running European Man down. Thinking is absolutely the way to go.
By on 9/3/07 at 7:47 pm
Guessedworker,
Anyone who had read the articles that have been posted on this site would recognize that we at IW do in fact understand the destructive effect of liberalism and that much more than the “JQ” is being addressed here.
By on 9/3/07 at 8:45 pm
Realist,
There’s a convergence in neuroanatomy, psychometrics, and history to indicate a uniquely strong propensity for abstract reasoning among Whites. The cerebral cortex is relatively larger. The creative problem solving and story problem resolution tests which we excel at indicate a similar emphasis on abstract reasoning.
A lot of our unique accomplishments can be traced to this propensity and our most humiliating failures can be traced to it as well. Whether it’s the Hindu Brahmins, Buddha, the numerous Greek sophist examples, or Dr. Timothy Leary, it’s the same ancient temptation to retreat entirely into the abstract.
As I perceive it, our overclass is succumbing to the siren song of absolute abstraction. If the vanishingly small number of Western intellectuals who remain grounded in our collective interests and the working class “hicks” and “rednecks” so despised by the overclass can’t stop them, they will drag us to precisely the same place that they drug India.
As for this contention that the intellectual class must be won before we can be a viable movement, I say “feh”. Let them smoke their hookahs in their ivory towers and congratulate each other on their ever more absurd, abstract, and universalist propositions. This really isn’t a philosophical matter. I have a family, a nationality, and a way of life to defend. It’s political, personal, and concrete.
By on 9/3/07 at 10:34 pm
Henry Stanton’s suggestions are simple, yet brilliant. Yes, Realist, if you want to make a difference, that’s the way to go.
By on 9/4/07 at 1:35 am
“Western Europe’s growing anti-immigration backlash is directed against LEGAL immigration, in the US the focus has been on illegal immigration and any backlash against legal immigration is in a very embryonic stage.”
I think this is a big mistake. Many white immigrants are WN. We all know about all the English emigres who have taken the lead, including Vdare founders.
But another good target for IW would be Russian immigrants, and specifically Russian Jews.
100% of Russian Jews who weren’t completely raised in the US are White Nationalists. I know you think this is a joke. Immigrants are supposed to be liberals. Jews are supposed to be liberals. But trust me on this, 100% of Russia Jews are White Nationalists.
I know you must be thinking, “can’t be 100%, nobody is 100% anything.”
Let me put it this way. I’m a Russian Jew and everyone in my family is WN. Every Russian Jew friend I have a WN. Every Russian Jew I’ve EVER met was a White Nationalist.
I do not EVER remember meeting someone who wasn’t, no matter whether they voted for Republican or Democrats or didn’t vote at all.
Now, some may not know the term “White Nationalist” so don’t ask them, “Are you a white nationalist?”
Make sure they know that you are not a politically correct fool, that you will not attack them for being realistic about race relations and then ask them if they would be willing to send their child to a school in Harlem, Newark or Compton? If they trust you or if you speak Russian to them, they’ll respond, “are you crazy, it’s full of blacks”. But even if they won’t be explicit, 100% will say no. Why not? Because the schools there are bad.
And prod them along and I guarantee you that this is how the conversation will go:
Why wouldn’t you send your kids to those schools? Because Blacks attend them. So? Blacks are violent and have a low IQ and the school will be terrible. My child will learn nothing and will get beat up.
Are you upset that Blacks get arrested more than Whites? No. Why? Because Blacks commit more crime than whites.
What do you think of affirmative action? It’s racism, and we are giving good jobs and spots in good universities because they riot to get what they want, and whites are afraid of them.
Shouldn’t blacks get reparations and affirmative action because of slavery? That’s stupid. Jews don’t demand money for discrimination during the Inquisition or for slavery in Egypt because we weren’t alive then, and today’s Blacks weren’t themselves slaves. The only Jews who got compensation are those who personally suffered in the Holocaust. If the Holocaust victim died, their children didn’t get a penny unless they could prove that a certain property (like a famous painting) belonged to them and was confiscated against the law without compensation. 99.99% of the children of Holocaust survivors got nothing, even if they could prove their parents lost money and property. You had to prove that this specific painting or this specific diamond ring belonged to your mother. If you knew that she lost a random diamond ring, too bad. Go find the exact ring, prove in court that it’s her ring and then we’ll talk. But certainly nobody would think to demand that just because your grandparents were in Auschwitz, you deserve to go to Harvard.
Who’s discriminated in the US? The whites! Why? Because of affirmative action.
What do you think about education? It’s dumbed down because of affirmative action.
Are Americans smart? No. Why? No person could possibly believe the politically correct BS American believe. We repeated stupid things about communism in the USSR, but we didn’t believe them. At first chance in the 70s, we organized businesses and bought private property. At first chance in the 80s, we brought down communism. If it weren’t for guns in our face, communism would’ve been gone by the 1950s when it was clear it wasn’t working.
Can Democracy work in the Mideast? No. Why? Because they are Muslim and their religion is crazy.
Should Muslims be allowed into Europe? No. Why? Because they are terrorists. That’s the only reason? No, because Europe should keep its heritage.
Are all cultures equal? No, the European / Judeo-Christian / Greco-Roman culture is superior to others and more humane.
Are Muslims vicious? Yes.
Who’s responsible for 9/11? Muslims. What about American interfere in the Mideast? No, it’s the Muslims. But aren’t Americans bad people? No, they are not. They are just naive and everyone takes advantage of them.
Should we legalize Mexicans? No. Why? Because they are just like Blacks, but hard working. Would you live in Mexican neighborhood? No. Why? Because they are violent.
Why are African and Latin America countries, and the housing projects, in such a terrible state? Because Blacks and Indians destroy everything Whites create, and can’t create anything of their own.
=========================>
I guarantee you that ANY Russian Jew will say that so long as he trusts you. They all say this in private… or in public, but then they switch to speaking in Russian (most young Russian Jews prefer speaking English over Russian after 1-2 years in the US because they feel that the US is nicer to them than Russia was).
If you don’t believe me, I can post here places where you can find Russian Jews. Go and talk to people there. It’s not political clubs, just random places where you may find Russian Jews who are there to play chess or dance.
There are some Russian Christians who believe the politically correct crap and other Russian Christians are similar to Stormfronters. But even amongst the Christians, probably 60% are IW-style white nationalists.
As hard as it may be to believe, 100% of the Russian Jews I’ve met, regardless of their political affiliation, agree with you on:
IQ
Affirmative Action
Non-White Immigration
Who’s truly discriminated
Crime
Education
And just about every other issue.
Rejecting people who are already WN and who do not need to be persuaded is stupid. Just because they are immigrants and Jewish, doesn’t mean they are the same as other immigrant groups and leftist Jews. GOP doesn’t reject Cuban votes just because other Hispanics are liberal, does it?
Just make sure they trust you enough to speak only to you without being afraid that you’ll yell at them for having politically incorrect views, and you’ll find your intellectual soul mates.
By on 9/4/07 at 4:18 am
“Henry Stanton’s suggestions are simple, yet brilliant. Yes, Realist, if you want to make a difference, that’s the way to go.”
By Business Realist on 9/3/07 at 11:35 pm
Agreed. Henry Stanton has some outstanding ideas.
This movement must be won on the basis that the spreading of “Whites as a cancer myth” is based on lies and half-truths; therefore, it must be regarded as immoral.
Our problem is one of marketing our message. The anti-Whites have Hollywood, Madison Ave, TV networks, government schools etc. to market their anti-white, pro-nonwhite message.
I know this is simplistic, but our message has to be crafted so as to attract young people. It must convey that it’s hip and fashionable to defend the white race against the daily defamation we endure. As we all know, the contrary is “all the rage” even amongst white youth…it has been for the last fourty years.
To defend against the anti-white orgy currently taking place, we desperately need popular cultural icons to stand in front of audiences at rock concerts, sporting events, political conventions, on the nightly News, and proclaim it to be morally repugnant to denigrate people of European decent; it’s totally-morally debase to cheer on their demise.
Maybe you, Realist, with the help of the supporters at this site can start that ball rolling. We need to hook up with some of those cultural icons sympathetic to our cause. We might try and start with the obvious such as Ann Coulter, Tammy Bruce, Rush Limbaugh, (Ted Neugent?). Who knows where that will take us, but it won’t hurt to try.
Also joining forces - if possible - with other sites who have similar strategies would prove helpful.
<a href=”http://www.resistingdefamation.org/”>http://www.resistingdefamation.org/</a>
By on 9/4/07 at 11:38 am
“Henry Stanton’s suggestions are simple, yet brilliant. Yes, Realist, if you want to make a difference, that’s the way to go.
By Business Realist on 9/3/07 at 11:35 pm”
Absolutely.
The Anti-discrimination laws are already on the books. All we need is a “White Civil Rights” or White ADL organization to take legal action on behalf of white Americans.
Since non-discrimination could not have formed naturally among the body politic due to non-discrimination’s suicidal nature, non-discrimination has to be enforced from the top down in order to get whites to accept non-discrimination.
One of the ways the elite impose multiracialism from the top down is through the use of the legal system to prevent whites from organizing politically.
If the legal system is used as a catalyst to organize whites as a political group, the legal system no longer becomes effective at suppressing whites from acting in their own interests and so knocks down a major pillar of anti-white policy (The other two pillars are the educational system and the media.)
By on 9/4/07 at 3:08 pm
What Henry Stanton proposes undoubtedly has a place in pro-white activism. But Stanton thinks that anti-white discrimination should be the sole issue for activists.
What I wonder is, how is what Stanton is proposing any different from what Ward Connerly is doing? Connerly, who has led successful campaigns to illegalize affirmative action in California and Michigan, has always said that discrimination against whites is wrong. Why would you need me when Connerly already has a track record of success?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Connerly
The deeper, related question is would a group that just took on anti-white discrimination be a pro-white group at all? Wouldn’t we just be campaigning for racial equality?
By on 9/4/07 at 10:40 pm
“What I wonder is, how is what Stanton is proposing any different from what Ward Connerly is doing?”
1) Connerly’s point is limited to “affirmative action is wrong”, whereas, the “White ADL” concept attacks via lawsuit, not only affirmative action, but as many state sponsored forms of anti-white discrimination as possbile, such as, negative portrayals of whites in history books and the banning of pro-white organizations on college campuses etc etc. Ie, we are trying to throw wrenches into the machinery of anti-white laws and governmental policies.
2) Unlike Connerly, the “White ADL” stratagem is designed to openly state that the government is actively and aggressively persecuting whites for being white. Connerly is merely advancing race neutrality. A White ADL strategy wants to alert whites that whites are under attack so that whites will start to wake up and organize themselves politically as an act of self defense.
“The deeper, related question is would a group that just took on anti-white discrimination be a pro-white group at all? Wouldn’t we just be campaigning for racial equality?”
1) A White ADL would be pro-white in a purely defensive sense, ie, it is openly stating that it wants to defend whites from an active campaign of discrimination, whereas Connerly doesn’t really put his anti-AA crusade in so explicit “whites are under siege” terms. Beyond white self-defense against the establishment, the White ADL should be silent.
2) The White ADL campaign would be for race neutrality, not race equality, as in the sense of equality of outcome.
True race neutrality (which is what whites are tricked into believing they are supporting) is anethema to the present liberal order. The liberal racial agenda is NOT race neutral, it is racially anti-white. By definition, a racially neutral society would not tolerate be able to support anti-white discrimination.
The White ADL strategy advances race neutrality for the sake of:
A) Getting whites who are afraid of outright WN and/or race realist ideology to start thinking about our own race’s legitimate political interests.
B) Convince whites they are coming under attack by the government/establishment.
C) Using race neutrality to sabotage the idea of race equality in the minds of ordinary whites, and so create the foundations for the creation of a new racially aware white order.
By on 9/4/07 at 11:22 pm
The Realist is correct about this “Stanton Strategy”. It’s already being done. Furthermore, it’s most effective when performed by people who have truly internalized the egalitarianist mythos. Ward Connerly is a spirited Black egalitarian who is indubitably a true believer in his cause.
White activists have for decades attempted to turn the mechanisms of White disempowerment against the overlords. The first example which comes to mind is the NAAWP, a straight parody of the NAACP. But, since everybody knew it was David Duke, and that David Duke is an anti-Semitic klansman, it never captivated the imagination of Middle America.
I doubt the efficacy of such a Machiavellian plot even if executed effectively. I doubt we can beat them at their own game, frankly. As I remember it paraphrased in a Sam Francis article, agreeing to fight on the enemy’s turf is a way to lose the battle before you even start. But most importantly, it’s a bit disingenuous.
I, for one, believe this nation was founded by White Europeans, with White European values, and White European ideals. I’m not going to concede that “European-Americans” are merely another identity group who deserve an equal share of the civil right slop slathered out by an Orwellian social Marxist regime. I demand a complete rejection of the regime.
Strategy: 1. Foster a community (articles, news, and forums)
- Offer (simple and explicit) activism instructions
Roy Beck has done more for White America as a peripheral result of fighting for sensible immigration policy in the last year than David Duke has accomplished with ideas like NAAWP over the last 30 years. It’s not my operation but, personally, I would choose to emulate Beck’s simple model (shown above).
By on 9/5/07 at 12:03 am
“Why would you need me when Connerly already has a track record of success?”
I didn’t realize Connerly was able to eliminate all anti-white discrimination. Must’ve missed when it was announced on the news.
We need more Connerlys out there, plain and simple.
Attacking blacks for having a high crime rate and low IQ can only work when you’ve laid the ground work that whites are being discriminated… which is then followed with… and the reason they are discriminated against is that we want everyone to be the same even though blacks are more violent and not as smart, on average.
By on 9/5/07 at 2:27 am
The Realist asks, How is what Stanton is proposing any different from what Ward Connerly is doing?
Well here is were things get somewhat complicated. Ward Connerly is a single issue activist (affirmative action). VDare is a single issue website (illegal immigration). The issues on the proposed site are of secondary interest. What is the point? Anti-white discrimination? No, that is a secondary issue. A fringe benefit.
The goal is to have Whites organize together in activism. For Whites to consider their own needs as a group. That is the seed that needs planting.
The website name/banner alone, “WHITESUSA” (or something very similar) let’s them know they are part of something. Over time this aspect of the website can be further emphathized.
Doesn’t sound like much? Well, tell me one other place Whites can go to get this? In this day and age to propose that Whites have a voice is a radical act alone.
By on 9/5/07 at 7:47 am
“I very much agree with GuessedWorker that the realist movement lacks a philosophy. In fact, we have not answered the most basic question of all: why should we want to preserve the white race?”
The question is not why, but how? When one considers the general attitude of whites toward their own survival, you have to ask yourself: Is it really worth it to sacrifice your time to try and save a people hellbent on destroying themselves?
For example:
http://globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=3293&cid=1&sid=104
and,
“White students cheered when Bill Clinton happily announced that their own people will soon become a minority.”
By on 9/5/07 at 9:07 pm
First and foremost we need to keep petty topics such as the Iraq War and Christianity out of our platform. Far too many other far right websites are making the mistake of turning many decent white people away from their cause by making these two issues front and center on their forums. If you are a good Christian who supports the Iraq War, this says absolutely nothing at all about your racial views. Time is growing far too short for us to divide ourselves as whites over these issues.
If Inverted World doesn’t go down the path that other websites have gone down I will be happy to support it. I agree that we need to commence a more blatant form of activism. On a personal level, I enjoy putting flyers in public places and spreading the word on other forums on the internet. Anything we can do as a group would be wonderful. I think the idea of forming a lobby group would be a great idea. In the mean time we need to become more active in making more people aware of who we are via advertising whether it is in our own communities or on the internet.
I hope this helps.
By on 9/5/07 at 9:28 pm
What I said earlier…
in terms of real life activism, one of my goals is linking the war on terror to domestic policy. I want people to equate illegal immigration and massive immigration with terrorist activity. I want people to realize Al Qaeda, for instance, could enter America via Mexico if the border is not secured. That takes the current political climate, and applies it to the restrictionist agenda. Another goal I have is shrinking the federal government. Its the federal government that pushes diversity onto people, and does a lot of other “liberal” things. Given freedom of choice, people will choose to associate with their own kind, more often than not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JgKJadwltM
This video exposes exactly what I warned of.
By on 9/6/07 at 10:48 pm
>>>”This video exposes exactly what I warned of.”
We’re drifting off topic but I too have been predicting/observing the same thing. You have too ask yourself: why is the government allowing the southern border to be wide open when we are embroiled in a war on terror? There are many reasons I can think of. Some are:
1)Advancing the NAU (North American Union)agenda. By allowing one-third of Mexicans population to cross the boarder for two decades and become intertwined in our communities and economy, the lawmakers will (in their own rational) say it’s virtually impossible to repatriate 30 million Mexicans;therefore, an amnesty bill must be passed into law. And believe me, it will be passed into law sooner or later.
2) With regards to the OTM’s (other than Mexicans), the government is well aware this is happening too, yet they still do nothing but portray a half-hearted attempt to detain a few of them. It certainly appears they are deliberately (but surreptitiously) allowing these Muslim terrorists into the country! But why?
Why is the government neglecting to perform their first and most important responsibility: that being to protect it’s citizens and secure it’s boarders? Could it be a small group of players at the top acually want several more terrorist attacks within our boarders? Could it be the government is deliberately fomenting chaos? If they succeed, wouldn’t that provide the pretext, or justification, for the President to declare Marshal-Law and suspend the Constitution?
I believe that’s the direction we’re headed in…can a WN movement hope to even exist under those conditions? I’m sorry to be so negative, but the architects of the NWO will stop at nothing to implement their agenda…even if it means getting us all killed in the process.
By on 9/7/07 at 11:24 am
I am very much in favour of creating a Forum where pro-Jewish Race-realists can express their Thoughts and Opinions on race-related Issues without having their Messages expurgated by antisemitic Moderators on insufficience cause. This frequently happens on such ‘racialist’ Websites and Blogs as the Phora, Majority Rights, Occidental Dissent, and Stormfront.
By on 9/9/07 at 6:31 am
A determined group of ten people is large enough to form a consensus on Wikipedia articles related to race.
Editing on Wikipedia is best possible real life activism. The internet encyclopedia is popular. I have already succeeded to make huge improvements to articles.
Please e-mail me if you are interested in participating.
By on 9/9/07 at 8:13 am
Wikiracialist,
I certainly believe a lot of folks seeking the truth have been given pause by the “Race and Intelligence” entry on Wikipedia. It’s what I use when I need reminded that I’m not radical or wrong in my racial realism - that the facts really do stand on their own in a whirlwind of competitive and cooperative peer review.
Each topic within “Race and Intelligence” has exploded into a massive separate entry. Everything is copiously footnoted. If you have the trepidation to read the entire article, you get the feeling that the race realists could have written it in barely over a page but that the egalitarians insist on grasping at every opportunity to veer from reality.
…only to be drug back to the facts.
By on 9/9/07 at 10:58 am
I am very much in favour of creating a Forum where pro-Jewish Race-realists can express their Thoughts and Opinions on race-related Issues without having their Messages expurgated by antisemitic Moderators on insufficience cause. This frequently happens on such ‘racialist’ Websites and Blogs as the Phora, Majority Rights, Occidental Dissent, and Stormfront.
If you are interested, you should join up with me. I just created one, its pro-zionist and pro-Jew. Join up with me. http://www.scopevision.org/forum I need members.
By on 9/9/07 at 11:31 am
I second Wikiracialist on his/her idea. I have tried to edit some of the articles over there, and it is a tiresome process because they have all these formal discussions going on that take forever and a consensus has to be reached before any changes are made. I would love to team up with others who perhaps know more about the mechanics behind editing over there. Something needs to be done over there; that is for sure. I wonder how many people that “encyclopedia” has brainwashed.
By on 9/9/07 at 6:11 pm
Highlights from the 9 Sep Democratic debate
Bill Richardson said, “I am of the view that Latinos can make a difference in this presidential election,” he said. “Forty-three million of us all around the country can decide not just what is best for Latinos but what is best for America.”
Senator John Edwards (N.C.) bragged that the small town where he grew up, Robbins, N.C., “is now half Latino.”
Obama likened the work of labor activist Cesar Chavez to that of Martin Luther King Jr.
I don’t think changing Wikipedia entries is going to be enough.
By on 9/10/07 at 7:34 am
Henry Stanton,
The point is that every little bit of activism helps. We never said changing Wikipedia entries was all we were going to do. In fact, I and many others (and I am sure you) have other ideas as well.
For example, there is a Libertarian website called Liberty Post that I along with another poster on here post on frequently. You can post articles over there and then generate discussions. I figured if enough of us did this together, we would generate more of a voice over there, and other posters would feel more comfortable agreeing with our viewpoints openly. I have been posting over there for quite some time and I am already seeing changes.
I think posting YouTube videos is a good idea as well (somebody else on here may have mentioned this). I am constantly on YouTube getting into debates with other posters over there on controversial videos that get posted (I haven’t gotten to the point where I post my own videos yet). It seems that every time there is at least one person who agrees with me, which is more than I ever expected (and remember I said “at least”).
The point is that there are all sorts of ways to get our viewpoints out there on the internet. I don’t think it does any good to sit here and be petty and criticize one particular idea that a poster comes up with. I see enough of this negativity and pessimism over on other unmentioned far right websites. I feel that every idea (no matter how small of an impact it will be) is a giant step in the right direction compared to sitting here doing nothing.
By on 9/10/07 at 10:58 am
Courtney,
I was expressing my general frustration over what is happening in America and it was written in haste. However, your post has swayed me to regret adding that last sentence. I commend you on the work that you are doing and I have been given some food for thought.
By on 9/11/07 at 7:57 am
Henry Stanton,
And I guess I was writing in frustation due to negativity I have been seeing on other forums. However, even if I sounded rude (at least I think so) I am glad I enlightened you. It would do all of us a lot of good to come up with more ideas, that is for sure.
By on 9/11/07 at 9:37 pm
The Realist, have you considered creating a blog similar to
http://blog.occidentaldissent.com/
or
http://majorityrights.com/
Non-antisemitic racial-realists need our own blogging communities.
By on 9/12/07 at 10:07 pm
The Realist, I think we also need a new terminology for a new movement.
For instance:
‘Race realism’ should superecede the term ‘racialism’, because (1) the term ‘racial’ is an absurd construction to anyone who understand the Latin language and how words are supposed to be formed by Latin elements; (2) ‘race realism’ implies that its advocates are realistic, its opponents unrealistic; (3) ‘racialism’ sounds like a mere variation of the term ‘racism’; (4) because of its appropriation by neo-Nazis and antisemites, ‘racialism’, like white nationalism, is something from which it may be well do disassociate ourselves; (5) ‘racialism’ is too ambiguous in meaning.
Likewise, ‘Western Nationalism’ should supercede the term ‘White Nationalism’ - for the three reasons: (1) white nationalism has become indelibly associated with antisemitism, Hitlerism, Holocaust denial, and the like crackpotry; (2) ‘white’ nationalism loses much of its appeal because of its strong empahsis on biology, whereas ‘western’ nationalism makes an appeal to entire cultural sphere, though it is racially connotative as well; (3) ‘whites’ should not be treated as a single unit.
By on 9/12/07 at 11:35 pm
Jewish Nationalist wrote Western Nationalism’ should supercede the term ‘White Nationalism’.
Western will not work as it is too soft, too intellectual, a term. It reminds me of the scene in the Tom Hanks movie where the bands named themselves the “Oneders”. Everyone called them the Oh-Nee-Ders rather than the Wonders. Manager Tom Hanks tells them “From now on you will be spelled the “Wonders” oneders is clever but nobody gets it”. Nobody will get Western Nationalism.
When a white guy walking through a black neighborhood gets beat up it is not because he is western.
When affirmative action is used it affects whites not western nationalists.
You said ‘whites’ should not be treated as a single unit. Well you see it doesn’t matter because every other group wants to be treated as a single unit. We either need to hop on the bandwagon or the parade will pass us by.
WE ARE WHITE AND WE WANT A GROUP TO REPRESENT OUR INTERESTS WE HAVE A VOICE AND WE WANT IT HEARD WE WANT EQUAL RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW WE WANT THE UNFAIR STEREOTYPING OF WHITES AS EVIL RACISTS TO STOP WE WANT THE OUT OF BALANCE BLACK AGAINST WHITE CRIME TO BE STOPPED BY THE AUTHORITIES WE WANT JOBS TO GO TO THE MOST QUALIFIED NOT METED OUT ACCORDING TO SKIN COLOR WE WANT NEWS REPORTING TO REPRESENT FACTS NOT ANTI-WHITE AGENDAS
Courtney, I hope you don’t think there he goes again. With your post I criticized a good idea for bad reasons. Here I believe I am critizing a bad idea for good reasons. To do anything else would be to betray my own conscience. Take care everyone!
By on 9/13/07 at 8:17 pm
Henry Stanton wrote:
<<Western will not work as it is too soft, too intellectual, a term.>>
Jewish Nationalist responds:
Is it not the intellegentia whom we should seek above all to win over, at least in this early phasis of the Western Nationalist career? Does the ‘softness’ of the term as an ideological self-designation really outweigh the manifold disadvantages of ‘white nationalism’ - namely, its appropriation by neo-Nazis and antisemites, its exclusive emphasis on the biological element of Western civilisation, and its implication that whites are a homogeneous group, each subdivision within the race being interchangeable with the others?
Henry Stanton wrote:
<<When a white guy walking through a black neighborhood gets beat up it is not because he is western.>>>
Jewish Nationalist responds:
You seem to be suggesting that Western nationalists, because they are called Western nationalists and not White nationalists, would be forbidden to make any reference to the victim’s race. This, of course, is an absurdity, to be stated only to be dismissed.
The “white race” does not have innate value to the average white citizen, and with good reason; it’s the civilisation, the culture, the way of life that whites have developed to which we attach value, and “Western nationalism” epitomises perfectly the desire to preserve that civilisation, that culture, and that way of life.
Henry Stanton wrote:
>>You said ‘whites’ should not be treated as a single unit. Well you see it doesn’t matter because every other group wants to be treated as a single unit.<<
Jewish Nationalist responds:
Ah, but most of these groups, with the exception of Negroids living in the United States, are sub-divisions within races - ethnic groups - not entire races. What I advocate is ethnic preservationism - of the English, the Jews, the Germans, etc. For white people are not a single, interchangeable unit, but a diversity of peoples. Even the most committed anti-racists are capable of some degree of ethnocentrism. Have you been to a Celtic heritage festival? These people are all liberals on racial issues, but intensly proud of their ethnic heritage. ETHNICITY is something that average white people, whether realists on race or not, are capable of feeling the intensest idenficiation with - much more so than that meaningless abstraction, devoid of any emotional content, “the white race”.
Henry Stanton wrote:
>>WE ARE WHITE AND WE WANT A GROUP TO REPRESENT OUR INTERESTS<<
Jewish Nationalist responds:
You need to accept the fact that ‘white interests’ simply do not exist. German interests are not the same as English interests. Jewish interests are not the same as Irish interests. White people are not interchangeable units. They are not a homogeneous group. They have their own unique cultures and ways of life and it is the conservation of those individual cultures and ways of life which I advocate, not the conservation of a monolithic ‘white culture’ that only exists as an abstraction.
By on 9/13/07 at 10:24 pm
Jewish Nationalist,
Okay then. I listed 7 goals for White Nationalism. What are the goals of Western Nationalism? One of your goals seems to be breaking whites down further into Irish, Jewish, English, Scottish, etc. groups. Many whites consider themselves Americans and do not know or relate to their ethnic background. Also, will separating us help us in the future when our minority status becomes apparent.
Jewish interests are not the same as Irish interests. Sorry, you will have to explain that one to me. I am english-irish does that mean I will be pulled in two directions? (LOL) What would a Jewish interest be that someone English would be deadset against? I am not trying to be obtuse or glib. I honestly am not sure what you mean.
You seem to be suggesting that Western nationalists, because they are called Western nationalists and not White nationalists, would be forbidden to make any reference to the victim’s race. Ah, but as soon as you do you become the evil WHITE guy. Actually either kind of nationalist will lose their job if they mention race. Unless the races were reversed of course.
By on 9/14/07 at 7:58 am
“You need to accept the fact that ‘white interests’ simply do not exist. German interests are not the same as English interests. Jewish interests are not the same as Irish interests. White people are not interchangeable units. They are not a homogeneous group. They have their own unique cultures and ways of life and it is the conservation of those individual cultures and ways of life which I advocate, not the conservation of a monolithic ‘white culture’ that only exists as an abstraction.”
That may have been true 100 years ago in Europe, but here, today, in the USA, MOST White people are an amalgamation of European ethnic heritage. For example: I am part Polish, German, Swiss, French, Sicilian, and even a touch of Jewish (my great grandmother on my mothers side). So ‘white intrests’ do exist especially in the US and Canada. Whites in North America form a more monolithic ‘white culture” than not.
Yes, my ideal, idea, of diversity would be a diverse Europe, meaning: English in England, Germans in Germany, Polish in Poland, Swedish in Sweden, Italians in Italy…you get the picture. But foreign genetic integration of those countries is progressing full steam ahead, and the masses of people have NO say in the matter.
The transforming of a diverse white-race into a monolithic phenotype race is not new news. I can distinctly remember my fourth grade teacher (back in 1963) telling the class: “In the future their will be no more blond or red haired blue eyed kids. She said, this result will occur due to the “the melting pot.” People of different ethnic European nationalities will intermarry resulting in all Europeans having brown hair and brown eyes.
She was on the right track, but what she wasn’t aware of was the rampant miscegenation of Negroids and non-Whites with Whites, or the massive non-white immigration from Asia, Africa, Central and South America into Europe and North America’.
I don’t know folks (scratching my head)…the majority of whites are too complacent and apathetic about their own race-replacement/ethnic cleansing. The task to preserve the white race seems insurmountable from where I perceive it. I am truly saddened that any attempt to try to bring awareness of the demise of the white race to the fore is met with outright viciousness and often physical attack…PARADOXICALLY, IT IS DONE MOSTLY BY OTHER WHITES, !!!
By on 9/14/07 at 10:02 am
Sorry for the back to back post but I got busy this morning.
I see the prospects for activism breaking down into two models.
Model#1 - The Assimilation model wherein other cultures are assimilated into the American culture. The closest standard would be America circa the late 50s, early 60s. Cultures are for the most part repressed and similarities between countrymen are emphasised. I believe this model is referred to as “Citizenism” by Steve Sailer in VDARE articles
PROS: An admirable goal to have people live together in peace. The country is more unified. CONS: Appears to work only in a mostly homegeneous society. Muslims, blacks, hispanics ain’t buying into this plan.
Opportunities for Activism: Reducing legal/illegal immigration to allow time for assimilation to occur, VDARE, etc. Stopping affirmative action, Ward Connerly, etc. Pointing out how ethnic oriented groups like the congressional black caucus, La Raza, are dividing America.
My opinion - I think the cat is out of the bag on resurrecting this model. Very soon the voting numbers will not be there to attempt it. Half of the nation cannot be in model#1 and half in model#2. Those in model#1 will get screwed every time.
Model#2 - The Nationalism model wherein all groups look out for their own interests and compete to get the biggest part of the pie. Ethnicity is emphasized in every aspect of life. Group differences are accented. History is written to reflect the whims of whatever group is currently wielding the most clout. Referred to as group identity politics. Could eventually leave to partitioning of a country or civil war.
PROS: Individuals gain power because they belong to a larger group. If they segregate to their own areas those areas remain low strife/tension. Society becomes more honest, no more looking over your shoulder to see who may be listening, people speak their mind. CONS: Major strife at all points where these groups border on each other. The government is disfunctional as every group tries to ram their agenda down their throat. Whites for the most part would have to overcome their embarrassment in sticking up for “whiteness”. This is not the America that we would have grown up in. Of course neither is the current America.
Opportunities for Activism: Henry Stanton’s original post (LOL)Other websites, but Jewish Nationalist is correct that they all have varying degrees of anti-semitic postings.
My opinion - Whites will continue to get slammed if we stay in model#1. We bought the load of goods to give up our identity and everyone would live happily. Well, we finally looked around and realized we were the only ones who bought into it. If we are to survive we have to move into model#2.
Jewish Nationalist, do your ideas fall into one of the models?
Western Nationalism - the desire to preserve that civilisation, that culture, and that way of life that whites have developed. sounds like Model#1
Ethnic preservationism - the conservation of those individual cultures and ways of life not the conservation of a monolithic ‘white culture’ that only exists as an abstraction. sounds like Model#2
The Realist, I believe you will have to choose which of these models you believe in before you can fulfill prospects for activism. If you choose #1 then welcome to the long list of other blogs/boards. If you choose #2 you could create the first non anti-semetic board that caters to non-radical white interests.
P.S. I had more ideas but I’m hoggin’ the board.
By on 9/14/07 at 7:08 pm
I understand why you are discouraged but why should we give up? Look at all of the nationalist parties growing in Europe. In America, we don’t have these same parties to represent us, but if you didn’t notice, an awareness is growing on the internet and on talk radio. I just don’t understand this pessimism that too many of us show. What good does it do us?
By on 9/14/07 at 7:34 pm
I think Jewish Nationalist has a valid point. American Whites aren’t really an exception to the proposition that Whites exist in relatively independent “nation/tribe” units. We may be genetically grafted from a vast swath of Europe, but our language, law, culture, customs, and general ways of life are uniquely Anglo-Saxon.
One would be hard-pressed to walk into a room full of Americans of English descent and then a room full of Americans of Irish or Polish descent and decipher which was of English descent from their accents, customs, or attitudes.
Sure, there are influences, but the only group that can claim to have kinda survived this integration would be European Jews. Even then, I would propose that a typical American Jew is now socioculturally closer to a pre-migration Englishman than a pre-migration Ashkenazi Jew.
I would like to analogize our predicament to that of a band of pirates on a ship where the captain and majority of shipmates are intent on ramming the ship into an iceberg.
We can either continue attempting to persuade the captain and crew of the impending doom, or we can abandon ship. I try to avoid being a pessimist, but the prospects of stopping Western Civilization’s race to destruction seem dismal. I would love to be proven wrong, but I think the issue is more one of “How do we guarantee that we and our progeny can continue our way of life in spite of the decline?”
I’ll spare you all my thoughts on developing communes and establishing new nation-states, but I really don’t see what other options are available. If the Amish can do it, I think we can, too.
But, no, I really don’t believe that “Whites” are a group.
By on 9/14/07 at 8:12 pm
It is incredibly exciting to watch the foundations of our movement FINALLY being laid down.
My first post on this website called for a white civil rights movement and because I love the sound of my own words…
http://inverted-world.com/index.php/column/column/whyistartedthiswebsite/
“I’m not a white nationalist. I’m just some guy that is against Affirmative Action, busing, and the demonization of Europeans. More importantly I believe that one should be free to associate with whomever they want in the private sector and their private lives.
I also believe that white gentile straight males need a respectable advocacy group. I am COMPLETELY sure that if this civil rights group is to come to pass, the group will have to eschew “White Nationalism” for “White Civil Rights” and promote our accomplishments (as opposed to other groups shortcomings) by fighting against individuals who defame us. Focus on the culture and the people that created concepts like The Bill of Rights and honor this achievement and fight to see that it is respected and preserved. The group would also bring lawsuits against any company or individual, funded by tax dollars, practicing discrimination against our kind. “
First, let me get this out of the way. I deeply regret typing “gentile”. I was trying to express fully a group who currently have zero “respected” representation. I wasn’t trying to exclude people that are Jewish.
Courtney, I hope you, and other wonderful ladies who care about our tribe, can forgive me for the same reason.
Realist, unfortunately no one can help you make up your mind with the next step. Other prudent people have said that you should be more patient and build your war chest and experience before taking the big jump. They are probably correct.
I feel differently. I think you should do what you’re planning. The immense pressure you would be subjecting yourself to would either make or break you and the fundamental makeup of your personality. You would sink or swim propelled by your own will and the heat of your pride.
Even if you failed on the first pass, you would have the wisdom to get off the ground on the second or third try.
This battle is a multi-generational one. We have only recently decided to do something about the current environment. We haven’t even begun to fight.
To those who want more than just a civil rights movement. All things according to their season. You’ll get what you want if you can accept that war is an event that has many different stages. You’re reaching too fast too far. If you want to win you first have to learn to play the game.
This has always been, and will be until the end, white vs. white.
First salvo, equality for whitey.
Everything else will come naturally based upon the principles of logic and the progression and expression of common sense.
Learn the language of the fool if you ever want to turn them to the side of wisdom.
God Speed Realist.
By on 9/14/07 at 8:51 pm
Whoops! My last post was directed at “About to give up!”. Sorry for not specifying that.
By on 9/14/07 at 11:55 pm
“In America, we don’t have these same parties to represent us, but if you didn’t notice, an awareness is growing on the internet and on talk radio. I just don’t understand this pessimism that too many of us show. What good does it do us?”
Courtney, I’m a talk radio fan. But the so called right-wing conservative hosts, IMO, are really liberals when it comes to white racial intrests. Hannity, Laura Ingrham, Bill O’reilly, Micheal Medved, Dennis Prager etc. are all race neutral on race issues(even Limbaugh is very measured in his commentary about the plight of the white-race). I never hear them even hint that the white-race is being ethnically cleansed off the planet. The one exception, ironically, is Michael Savage and he is under constant criticism and attack by the rest of his colleges.
As far as the Internet goes: who acually reads Websites that are geared toward white preservation other than those already predisposed to that message? Sure, there are a few liberals who are anti-race realists that read them, but how many of them become coverts to our cause? Maybe 1% at most?
Talk radio is lacking in our message, and the Internet is not enough. We need representation in the MSM…from Hollywood to Madison ave: from The New York Times to People Magazine; from “The View” to “The Today Show.” etc. etc. etc.
My pessimism is justified;however, I’m inspired by the likes of Realist’s insights into our racial debacle. As long as people like Realist, Henry Stanton, et al. are actively pursuing solutions to our problem, I’ll hang in there and lend any support I am capable of.
By on 9/15/07 at 1:59 pm
About to give up,
The fact that Micheal Savage even says the things he says is testimony to the changing times. Neil Boortz and Bill O’Reilly aren’t as radical but they certainly lean in that direction and drop plenty of hints on the matter. Ever since this huge immigration debate came up I have noticed tremendous changes in the way they talk. I doubt that your statistics on the internet are true. Over the past 5 years I have already noticed a growing awareness just by spending a long period of time on certain websites.
I was mainly reacting to the last paragraph in your previous post. It sounded like you think we should just give up. If that is how you feel then your pessimism is not justified as you say and it certainly doesn’t do us any good.
By on 9/19/07 at 1:35 am
It is easy to become pessimistic. I have to fight those feelings everyday. Please don’t give in to that way of thinking, it has harmed us enough.
To be honest this issue could turn on a dime. Like a TV show that almost gets cancelled and becomes a hit show the next year. Something like another OJ trial or a bad riot like in LA could make people wake up. It is not hardwired in our brains. It is a loose switch that if we could figure the way to give it a flick could turn in the other direction. Everthing the anti-wh
While VDare is the brainchild of Peter Brimelow, he created it as a coalition first and an ideological vehicle second. Both American Renaissance and Inverted World believe and support whatever the editor believes and supports. While both claim a set of “principles”, neither invite or encourage a wide array of supporters in the way that VDare has.
Would you be capable of boiling your “race realist” principles down to a single paragraph and then inviting atheists, Christians, evolutionists, creationists, supporters of the war, critics of Israeli influence on American foreign policy, and any number of other ideologues you disagree with to contribute to your site? While I’m not suggesting that you make the site for atheists and jews, I believe we atheists and jews are currently excluded from the existing racial realist coalitions (like the explicitly Christian Council of Conservative Citizens) and have a considerable capacity to contribute.
Change the format to a blog-like format and invite some of the more literate habitual commenters to contribute articles, articles that you don’t even moderate. Create forums that are self-moderated. Moderate comments on articles reactively, to encourage more discussion. Give the Jews in here a platform to confront and react to some of the more coherent anti-Semitic arguments. That would require easing some of the censorship on those who hold anti-Semitic positions.
As for the faxes and stuff sent by organizations like NumbersUSA, I’m afraid that we’ll continue to be a relative liability to our political causes, a NAMBLA-style political pariah. But VDare hustled its readers to NumbersUSA, posted lists of congresspersons who supported or opposed the legislation, and aggregated the immigration restriction commentary across the mainstream and alternative media landscapes. But VDare trusts its columnists and its readers, something that neither American Renaissance nor Inverted World do.
Save your money, keep your day job, and tolerate participation. Encourage participation. Beg for participation. I strongly disagree with your diagnosis of American Renaissance’s condition. Its condition is that it’s a traditional intellectual newsletter that happens to have a website but uses its website for mere publication, with participation from the web community as a sort of worrisome afterthought (a la: What if a commenter impugns our academic reputation!?!?).
Your website can publish its own articles, generate its own dialogues, and become a vehicle of political change while you’re brushing your teeth, walking your dog, or filing TPS reports at work. All you have to do is hand us the keys.
By on 8/31/07 at 1:20 pm