albion
Registered
What White Nationalism needs is a dose of realpolitik, which means coming to terms with the fact that none of their standardbearers is going to organize a successful coup d'etat or fight and win a civil war that's right around the corner (in their imaginations, that is). What this means is that the "all or nothing" approach of WN extremists will lead to the "nothing" option during their lifetimes.
The far Left in America and Europe managed to achieve their aims through stealth and incrementalism ("Fabian Socialism"), and they did so by working with moderate liberals and by working their ideas and rhetoric into a framework that was acceptable to anyone who was left of center. Their trick was that while very few people would support a far-left agenda wholesale, piecemeal they could always win on one issue at a time because any one leftist issue may seem "r
easonable" enough for moderates to accept and trivial enough for the Rig
ht not to fight. Hence the Frankfurt School takeover of most of America's cultural institutions: there was no coup, no revolution, just incremental implementation of their agenda.
Along the same lines, White Nationalists and others on the far-right should begin with goals that are modest and realizable. Don't have a party platform that demands sending the Negro back to Africa, rather, work with the moderate right to end affirmative action and other "anti-discrimination." Don't have a platform that demands all mestizos be shipped back to Mexico, instead work with "mainstream" individuals like Tancredo to close the border with Mexico. Don't tell people that the only way to end Jewish power is to establish Third Reich II, rather, work to end aid to and a de facto alliance with Israel because it is in foreign policy that Jewish power and influence is most pernicious (i.e. I can deal with Jewish
attempts to ban Christmas trees from the public square, I can't deal with Jewish attempts to use American blo
od and money to fight Israel's wars).
Work within these modest goals and you will win many individuals over from the mainstream right. While about half of the Bush voters were idiot Freeper types, the rest were probably conservatives to the right of Reagan who voted for the special-ed President because they had nowhere else to go. They won't jum aboard the "kill the k*kes and niggers" bandwagon or attend rallies alongside the brownshirt dressup crowd, but they might agree with the 3 goals outlined above (of which Jared Taylor so far only puts 1 and 2 at center stage).
I agree that Jared Taylor should run for Congress. Having a visible and viable candidate expressing his views on immigration, affirmative action, and race relations would do wonders for the cause. Furthermore, Taylor is very charismatic and telegenic, and his background makes it impossible for the Lefti
sts to use the "neanderthal bigot" smear to discredit him.
Recall that whatever his flaws (the most serious of which is his recent
endorsement of the special ed President), Pat Buchanan did more to make immigration control and foreign policy "isolationism" (i.e. anti-Zionism, opposition to foreign aid to the Third World) mainstream issues. Without visible political candidates and TV pundits expressing these views, racial and ethnic issues have been relegated to the fringe.
Mass psychology is a funny thing. The very same ideas that are unacceptable to the masses when expressed on a "fringe" website suddenly become acceptable when they're spoken by a TV pundit or political candidate. What this means is that Taylor should run for office, and we should hope that a version of Pat Buchanan with somewhat more spine comes along in the next Presidential election.
The far Left in America and Europe managed to achieve their aims through stealth and incrementalism ("Fabian Socialism"), and they did so by working with moderate liberals and by working their ideas and rhetoric into a framework that was acceptable to anyone who was left of center. Their trick was that while very few people would support a far-left agenda wholesale, piecemeal they could always win on one issue at a time because any one leftist issue may seem "r
easonable" enough for moderates to accept and trivial enough for the Rig
ht not to fight. Hence the Frankfurt School takeover of most of America's cultural institutions: there was no coup, no revolution, just incremental implementation of their agenda.
Along the same lines, White Nationalists and others on the far-right should begin with goals that are modest and realizable. Don't have a party platform that demands sending the Negro back to Africa, rather, work with the moderate right to end affirmative action and other "anti-discrimination." Don't have a platform that demands all mestizos be shipped back to Mexico, instead work with "mainstream" individuals like Tancredo to close the border with Mexico. Don't tell people that the only way to end Jewish power is to establish Third Reich II, rather, work to end aid to and a de facto alliance with Israel because it is in foreign policy that Jewish power and influence is most pernicious (i.e. I can deal with Jewish
attempts to ban Christmas trees from the public square, I can't deal with Jewish attempts to use American blo
od and money to fight Israel's wars).
Work within these modest goals and you will win many individuals over from the mainstream right. While about half of the Bush voters were idiot Freeper types, the rest were probably conservatives to the right of Reagan who voted for the special-ed President because they had nowhere else to go. They won't jum aboard the "kill the k*kes and niggers" bandwagon or attend rallies alongside the brownshirt dressup crowd, but they might agree with the 3 goals outlined above (of which Jared Taylor so far only puts 1 and 2 at center stage).
I agree that Jared Taylor should run for Congress. Having a visible and viable candidate expressing his views on immigration, affirmative action, and race relations would do wonders for the cause. Furthermore, Taylor is very charismatic and telegenic, and his background makes it impossible for the Lefti
sts to use the "neanderthal bigot" smear to discredit him.
Recall that whatever his flaws (the most serious of which is his recent
endorsement of the special ed President), Pat Buchanan did more to make immigration control and foreign policy "isolationism" (i.e. anti-Zionism, opposition to foreign aid to the Third World) mainstream issues. Without visible political candidates and TV pundits expressing these views, racial and ethnic issues have been relegated to the fringe.
Mass psychology is a funny thing. The very same ideas that are unacceptable to the masses when expressed on a "fringe" website suddenly become acceptable when they're spoken by a TV pundit or political candidate. What this means is that Taylor should run for office, and we should hope that a version of Pat Buchanan with somewhat more spine comes along in the next Presidential election.