Racial Communitarianism

albion

Registered
FadeTheButcher:
>>"... I believe that White Nationalism is infected with the disease of Nazism and that it probably unsalvagable at this point. Just look at how much time they spend trying to explain away Hitler's atrocities. This is why I am in favor of a clean break. Also, I pointed out above that I have concluded that White Nationalism is impractical. Such negative racialist solutions presuppose the existence of an organized self-conscious white community. Yet this does not exist. We are going to have to create that. We are also going to have to build an entire white infrastructure from scratch as well. The white community will have to be created and won over to our cause before we can do anything. Until we overcome racial nihilism, we will remain utterly paralyzed. Of course, there is the added bonus that by calling myself a 'Racial Communitarian' or a 'White Nat
ivist' or a 'Western Racialist' instead of a 'Wh
ite Nationalist' I don't have to unnecessarily associate myself with people like 'Saxon88' or 'HoaxThis'. "<<

>>"No one will defend the white community because so few people care about it. And so few people care about it because they elevate their own personal fetishes above the common good of our people.
Yet few people are interested in rebuilding the white community. That is the problem. They would much rather chew bubble gum and watch television or in the case of most of the "movement" types rant about J*ws and Negroes all day.
The White Nationalists have yet to realize that its white people who have the problem, that our racial problem is only a symptom of the decay of our own community."<<
-- Fade The Butcher http://www.phora.org/forum/
 
35

FadeTheButcher:
>>"... I believe that White Nationalism is infected with the disease of Nazism and that it probably unsalvagable at this point. Just look at how much time they spend trying to explain away Hitler's atrocities. This is why I am in favor of a clean break. Also, I pointed out above that I have concluded that White Nationalism is impractical. Such negative racialist solutions presuppose the existence of an organized self-conscious white community. Yet this does not exist. We are going to have to create that. We are also going to have to build an entire white infrastructure from scratch as well. The white community will have to be created and won over to our cause before we can do anything. Until we overcome racial nihilism, we will remain utterly paralyzed. Of course, there is the added bonus that by calling myself a 'Racial Communitarian' or a 'White Nativ
ist' or a 'Western Racialist' instead of
a 'White Nationalist' I don't have to unnecessarily associate myself with people like 'Saxon88' or 'HoaxThis'. "<<

>>"No one will defend the white community because so few people care about it. And so few people care about it because they elevate their own personal fetishes above the common good of our people.
Yet few people are interested in rebuilding the white community. That is the problem. They would much rather chew bubble gum and watch television or in the case of most of the "movement" types rant about J*ws and Negroes all day.
The White Nationalists have yet to realize that its white people who have the problem, that our racial problem is only a symptom of the decay of our own community."<<
-- Fade The Butcher http://www.phora.org/forum/
 
FadeTheButcher:
>>"I was never a Nazi, although I was something of an authoritarian racialist for several years. Now I am simply a racialist. I used to identify myself with 'the movement' unti I slowly came to the realization that it was anything but a movement. The so-called movement is overflowing with Neo-Nazis, crazed conspiracy theorists, self-hating Americans, deranged fantasists, skinheads, antisocial cranks, and irrational kooks who believe the J*ws are hiding under their beds, and anti-intellectual losers of every variety. That's not true of everyone, but these people are so predominant that they cast a long shadow upon those who are not like that.

>>"My first reaction to this was to hope that 'the movement' could still be reformed, that these people could be marginalized, and that it could take on a more respectable face that would att
ract the sort of people it needs to be successful. I tried to make
a push in that direction. In the course of that, I came to the conclusion that there were far and away more J.P. Slovjanski's and Alex Linder's within 'the movement' than I had initially thought. In fact, if you look at the roots of 'the movement' (which I take to be White Nationalism) then its Nazi roots become disturbingly apparent. The 14/88 crap is a reference to Hitler. A psycho like David Lane is considered to be one of its leading figures.

>>"Alright. That obviously failed. So I came to the conclusion that these people will never go anywhere, that they have nothing positive to offer me or anyone else, that they are in fact a burden, and that in hindsight I simply don't have much in common with these people to begin with so why bother with them. There is nothing that I or anyone else can do to change this situation. And they never failed to remind me of that. Most of these people are just ant
isocial rejects rebelling against society. They do not have the slightest interest whatsoever in p
recipitating real political change in this country. They are simply fantasists. Its all about them. That is why they so easily can dispense with rationality and realism.

>>"Thus you have perennial debates about whether or not it is a good idea to identify 'the movement' with the swastika and Nazism. What is self evident to any disinterested observer, that such an action does incalculable damage to 'the movement,' is a question of enormous importance to these people. This only makes sense once you realize that they are largely fantasists involved in their own petty political psychodrama. They are simply a bunch of people playing dress up and rejecting the real world in favor of a make believe Never Never Land where the Third Reich still exists.

>>"Once again, this certainly isn't true of everyone within 'the movement'. But these people do exist. These
people are hardly marginal either. Just take a look at the polls over at the Stormfront website, to say nothing of VNN. If anything is true, the
y are actually predominant within 'the movement', which is why it is utterly unable and unwilling to reform itself. And the result? These people alienate countless more people than they attract with their fantasy bullsh*t.

>>"A typical example is Linder. Here is a fellow who hates the Anglo-Saxons, hates America, hates Christianity, hates intellectuals, positively worships Adolf Hitler and Nazism, advocates the mass murder of the J*ws, endorses tyranny and the destruction of the principles and way of life Americans have enjoyed for generations. In addition to that, he is crude, vulgar, hateful, and repulsive in countless other ways. He is totally consumed by his own personal fantasy. He is totally detached from the actual circumstances of his situation, which do not even interest him in any real way.

>>"At some point many a
re forced to make a rational assessment of these people.

1.) Are they moving anywhere? No.
2.) Are they willing to reform themselves to move anywhere? No.
3.) Are they even
interested in reaching out to their contemporaries? No.
4.) Do you benefit in any positive way from associating yourself with these people? No.
5.) Do you have much in common with these people? No.

And this is where one begins to ask himself the most important question.

6.) Why would any rational person affiliate himself with 'the movement'? He wouldn't. There is no reason for him to do so. So he drops out. He concludes that 'the movement' is of no value to him and that he can accomplish more through his own iniatives by not affiliating himself with it.

And that is the point that I finally reached. These people simply don't have a snowball's chance in hell of ever going anywhere. They won't get their act together. They cannot do it. They are not even willing to do it.
"<<

http://www.phora.org/forum/showpost.php...95&postcount=27
 
35

FadeTheButcher:
>>"I was never a Nazi, although I was something of an authoritarian racialist for several years. Now I am simply a racialist. I used to identify myself with 'the movement' unti I slowly came to the realization that it was anything but a movement. The so-called movement is overflowing with Neo-Nazis, crazed conspiracy theorists, self-hating Americans, deranged fantasists, skinheads, antisocial cranks, and irrational kooks who believe the J*ws are hiding under their beds, and anti-intellectual losers of every variety. That's not true of everyone, but these people are so predominant that they cast a long shadow upon those who are not like that.

>>"My first reaction to this was to hope that 'the movement' could still be reformed, that these people could be marginalized, and that it could take on a more respectable face that would attra
ct the sort of people it needs to be successful. I tried to m
ake a push in that direction. In the course of that, I came to the conclusion that there were far and away more J.P. Slovjanski's and Alex Linder's within 'the movement' than I had initially thought. In fact, if you look at the roots of 'the movement' (which I take to be White Nationalism) then its Nazi roots become disturbingly apparent. The 14/88 crap is a reference to Hitler. A psycho like David Lane is considered to be one of its leading figures.

>>"Alright. That obviously failed. So I came to the conclusion that these people will never go anywhere, that they have nothing positive to offer me or anyone else, that they are in fact a burden, and that in hindsight I simply don't have much in common with these people to begin with so why bother with them. There is nothing that I or anyone else can do to change this situation. And they never failed to remind me of that. Most of these people are just antis
ocial rejects rebelling against society. They do not have the slightest interest whatsoever in
precipitating real political change in this country. They are simply fantasists. Its all about them. That is why they so easily can dispense with rationality and realism.

>>"Thus you have perennial debates about whether or not it is a good idea to identify 'the movement' with the swastika and Nazism. What is self evident to any disinterested observer, that such an action does incalculable damage to 'the movement,' is a question of enormous importance to these people. This only makes sense once you realize that they are largely fantasists involved in their own petty political psychodrama. They are simply a bunch of people playing dress up and rejecting the real world in favor of a make believe Never Never Land where the Third Reich still exists.

>>"Once again, this certainly isn't true of everyone within 'the movement'. But these people do exist. These p
eople are hardly marginal either. Just take a look at the polls over at the Stormfront website, to say nothing of VNN. If anything is true, they
are actually predominant within 'the movement', which is why it is utterly unable and unwilling to reform itself. And the result? These people alienate countless more people than they attract with their fantasy bullsh*t.

>>"A typical example is Linder. Here is a fellow who hates the Anglo-Saxons, hates America, hates Christianity, hates intellectuals, positively worships Adolf Hitler and Nazism, advocates the mass murder of the J*ws, endorses tyranny and the destruction of the principles and way of life Americans have enjoyed for generations. In addition to that, he is crude, vulgar, hateful, and repulsive in countless other ways. He is totally consumed by his own personal fantasy. He is totally detached from the actual circumstances of his situation, which do not even interest him in any real way.

>>"At some point many are
forced to make a rational assessment of these people.

1.) Are they moving anywhere? No.
2.) Are they willing to reform themselves to move anywhere? No.
3.) Are they even in
terested in reaching out to their contemporaries? No.
4.) Do you benefit in any positive way from associating yourself with these people? No.
5.) Do you have much in common with these people? No.

And this is where one begins to ask himself the most important question.

6.) Why would any rational person affiliate himself with 'the movement'? He wouldn't. There is no reason for him to do so. So he drops out. He concludes that 'the movement' is of no value to him and that he can accomplish more through his own iniatives by not affiliating himself with it.

And that is the point that I finally reached. These people simply don't have a snowball's chance in hell of ever going anywhere. They won't get their act together. They cannot do it. They are not even willing to do it. &
quot;<<

http://www.phora.org/forum/showpost.php...95&postcount=27
 
FadeTheButcher:
And why did Northern Democrats break up the New Deal coalition over race? Because Northern racial attitudes had changed significantly during the war. Racial discrimination had become permanently associated with Nazism (see the sources cited above). The NAACP and other Negro agitation organizations promoting antiracism were able to make major gains linking segregation in the South with Nazi brutality in Europe. Hitler was a godsend for the civil rights movement in every way. It was effectively dead before he arrived on the scence. During the 1920s, Marcus Garvey was leading a huge Back to Africa movement that dwarfed civil rights organizations in size and support.

But this invariably comes back to the J*ws. Where is the evidence that J*ws are responsible for change in American racial attitudes in the 1940s and 1950s? They certainly supported the civil rights movement en masse
(because of Nazism, as
explained earlier). But the civil rights movement would never have gone anywhere without the support of millions of white Northern liberals. Who were the J*ws who controlled the media at this time? And how did they discredit racialism? Why weren't they able to make any significant progress in the decades before WW2? Why were there similar and more extreme changes in Europe in countries without significant Jewish populations?

The answer, of course, is obvious. It was the experience of the Second World War that was the decisive factor in the change of racial attitudes. Hitler's racism was blamed for causing the war and by extension the deaths of tens of millions of people. The critics of racialism invariably attempt to associate racialists with Nazis even to this day in order to discredit them and marginalize their cause. Everyone here knows full well how offensive Nazism is to the American public and how much damage association with it has done to racialism in America. It
was the Nazis, not the J*ws
(although they certainly played an important role in it), who precipitated the revulsion against racialism in the West.

http://www.phora.org/forum/showthread.php?p=98521#post98521
 
35

FadeTheButcher:
And why did Northern Democrats break up the New Deal coalition over race? Because Northern racial attitudes had changed significantly during the war. Racial discrimination had become permanently associated with Nazism (see the sources cited above). The NAACP and other Negro agitation organizations promoting antiracism were able to make major gains linking segregation in the South with Nazi brutality in Europe. Hitler was a godsend for the civil rights movement in every way. It was effectively dead before he arrived on the scence. During the 1920s, Marcus Garvey was leading a huge Back to Africa movement that dwarfed civil rights organizations in size and support.

But this invariably comes back to the J*ws. Where is the evidence that J*ws are responsible for change in American racial attitudes in the 1940s and 1950s? They certainly supported the civil rights movement en masse
(because of Nazism,
as explained earlier). But the civil rights movement would never have gone anywhere without the support of millions of white Northern liberals. Who were the J*ws who controlled the media at this time? And how did they discredit racialism? Why weren't they able to make any significant progress in the decades before WW2? Why were there similar and more extreme changes in Europe in countries without significant Jewish populations?

The answer, of course, is obvious. It was the experience of the Second World War that was the decisive factor in the change of racial attitudes. Hitler's racism was blamed for causing the war and by extension the deaths of tens of millions of people. The critics of racialism invariably attempt to associate racialists with Nazis even to this day in order to discredit them and marginalize their cause. Everyone here knows full well how offensive Nazism is to the American public and how much damage association with it has done to racialism in America. It
was the Nazis, not the J*ws
(although they certainly played an important role in it), who precipitated the revulsion against racialism in the West.

http://www.phora.org/forum/showthread.php?p=98521#post98521
 
Back
Top