Holding Dr. Pierce's hard line vs. blending in to get along

[Will Williams]

I found this back and forth between "Lew" and "Trainspotter" and feel it's worth sharing:
Posted by Trainspotter on August 22, 2010, @ Majority Rights forum: http://majorityrights.com/weblog/commen ... ht/#c96408
---

Lew:“Well, when a great mind like William Pierce fails to develop a viable method for propagating the ideology over the course of decades, it’s probably because the prevailing social and cultural conditions make the ideology impossible to propagate no matter who does the propagating, how often they do it, or how well they do it.”

Pierce only had access to the internet for a relative handful of years. In that time, he educated and informed many, many people. His “spinoffs” are all over the place. Probably most white nationalists have been influenced by him, including second generation types that don’t even know who he is. He also built up a fairly significant organization, not to mention penning probably the best known book to come out of modern white nationalism.

On the other hand, he had his limitations. For example, he was not very charismatic. I found his radio voice gruff and somewhat offputting at times. The Turner Diaries, while influential in its way, was hardly a magnum opus. Perhaps most telling, his organization did not meaningfully survive his death (some would dispute that, but you know what I mean). A “true” organization would have lived long and prospered, and that he failed to create.

Point is, he did what he did, he generally did it well (and at times superbly), but that’s as far as it goes. The idea that this proves that the spread of intellectual ideas is somehow not viable is rather ludicrous (not sure that you’re going that far). It proves no such thing.

Pierce made a major, and I do mean major, contribution to building the intellectual foundation of white nationalism. That is work that absolutely must be done. How can our vision ever spread, ever attain victory, if it is not even developed? Obviously, it can’t. The fact that Pierce did not deliver us an ethnostate in his lifetime doesn’t change any of this. It simply means that he wasn’t Superman, nothing more.

Lew:“In this sense, Pierce’s revolutionary ideology is most definitely a failure because he came up with something has no chance of success given our historical context.”

No, it doesn’t mean that at all. Does the typical revolutionary idea win overnight? Of course it doesn’t. First, it has to be developed and spread. Sometimes this can happen fairly quickly, but more often it takes a significant amount of time. What you are doing is akin to calling Karl Marx a failure, a man who died decades before the establishment of the first Marxist state. His ideas would in many ways dominate the twentieth century, a century that he himself would never step foot in. If that’s failure, then bring it on.

There is a distinct process that a revolutionary movement must go through, and this process is readily discernible from the historical record. I’m saying: let’s learn from that.

Lew: “Anyway, until the US reaches its own equivalent of 1920s Germany, propagating a revolutionary ideology that will always fail to move people has little real value.”

Not only does it have value, it is essential. We don’t know when the conditions will be *just right* for us. We don’t control those things. But if we aren’t ready when it happens, the historical moment may well pass us by. The Leftists did a tremendous amount of groundwork prior their successes. The intellectual foundation for their twentieth century victories was being actively built in the nineteenth, and they were ready when the time came. Right now, even if circumstances were favorable, white nationalism isn’t close to being ready. It tries to put the cart before the horse. It expects results when the groundwork hasn’t been done.

Lew: “If, for example, a White Advocate can work with local conservatives to make life uncomfortable for illegal immigrants while also nudging those conservatives toward explicit racialism, that seems to me to have a lot more value now than pushing revolution.”

Fine, go for it. But they are going to expect you to shut up and not discuss race. If you do bring race into it, they may very well boot you out in order to prove how open minded and tolerant they are. I don’t see any value in that. None whatsoever. Total waste of time. Because we haven’t taken the time and effort to spread our ideas, there aren’t enough of us. Therefore, the Hannity and Beck types aren’t interested in a coalition with us. We are not numerous enough to help them, therefore we are radioactive. Again, total waste of time. The solution is obvious: spread our ideas until we have enough adherents that we can’t be ignored. Right now, not only can we be ingnored, it pays to actively condemn us. You want to work these people? I don’t.

The truth, at this point in the game, is that if white nationalists blend into the woodwork, we’ll never be heard from again. There currently aren’t enough of us to transform the existing institutions, even by stealth. We need to concentrate on developing our own approach, making it as appealing and palatable as possible, and do our part to change the culture, not give into it. This is not to say that nobody should ever work within a more mainstream group. If someone is so positioned and so inclined, I say go for it. But the bottom line is that we won’t have a prayer of getting much in terms of results until we have spread our message much further than is the case today. On the other hand, as the ideas spread, you’ll start to see “friendlies” in all sorts of organizations, finding allies where you least expected it. At that point, mainstream organizations may well become more fertile fields to work in, But now? I doubt it. We need far more adherents first, and you don’t get them by blending in and disappearing.

[Will Williams]

Dr. Kevin MacDonald's Cultural Insurrections (2007) on page 4:

"Beginning on the fringes of Jewish society, Zionist activists eventually succeeded in making Zionism a mainstream Jewish movement, due in large part to the sheer force of numbers of the East European vanguard. Over time, the more militant, expansionist Zionists have won the day. They have succeeded in marginalizing less radical Jews....The result has been a heightened group consciousness among Jews and ultimately support for Zionist extremism among the entire Jewish community."

That's the essence of Dr. Pierce's strategy as he stated 35 years ago and held to until his death:
"Our task is not to persuade a numerical majority of the American population that we are right but rather to build the numerical minority of those whose values coincide with ours into a majority of will and determination." - Dr. William L. Pierce, National Alliance Founder, at NA's 1st General Convention September, 1978

That vanguard approach to Alliance-building can't be emphasized enough.

[Will Williams]

Alex Linder points out in this critique the folly of compromising on the National Alliance's hard line ideology in order to soften its image.

Linder's responses in blue interspersed with those of our Jewish watchdog Mark Potok
http://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=150839&page=7
--------


[outright thievery in canada, as jews influence/intimidate judge into stealing quarter million from NA]

From Canada, With Love

By Mark Potok, Senior Fellow

A Canadian court this June struck down a bequest valued at about $220,000 that was left by a citizen of that country to the National Alliance (NA), a neo-Nazi group based in the United States that has long promoted violence against minorities (this is simply a lie - and in fact, it's probably a legally actionable lie, had NA the money to pursue it). The presiding judge found the bequest violated Canadian law and public policy.

“The evidence before this court convinces me that in the case of the NA the purpose for which it exists is to promote white supremacy through the dissemination of propaganda which incites hatred of various identifiable groups which they deem to be non-white and therefore unworthy,” wrote Justice William T. Grant of St. John, New Brunswick. “Those purposes and the means they advocate to achieve them are criminal in Canada and that is what makes this request so repugnant.” (Again, how is it the responsibility of the judge to offer his opinion about the the moral quality of bequest? It's not his money. And it's not going to anyone in his jurisdiction. Is the NA not allowed to receive money? Of course it is. It has received money its entire existence. The judge breaks the law to enforce his (or the jew standing behind him's) politics against the will of the man who owns the property. This is outrageous. This is a pure power play by the jews, yet we have to listen to people talk about how we're committing suicide, or doing it to ourselves. I will create an enemy activity thread, and this will be example number one. Yeah, we dumb ol' whites should be our breasts. We're so incompetent to organize. We just have no idea how to do it, or raise funds, or anything else. It's all our fault.)

The judge permanently enjoined any transfer of funds or other parts of the estate, which includes a collection of ancient Greek and Roman coins, to the NA. Instead, he ordered it distributed to the brother and sister of Harry Robert McCorkill, a chemist who reportedly spent time at MIT, collector of historic artifacts, and longtime Canadian NA member who died in 2004. McCorkill’s sister, Isabelle Rose McCorkill, initially challenged the bequest, and she was later joined by two Jewish human rights groups in Canada as well as the provincial attorney general. (love that "later" part, which is complete bs. You can bet the jews gave her the idea. Notice how authority always does what the jews want, not what the white man wants. Even when it comes to the dispersal of HIS OWN PROPERTY. We're not living under a jewish dictatorship? What ever gave you that crazy idea?)

In July, NA lawyer John Hughes filed a notice that the group would appeal Justice Grant’s decision, which it characterized as rife with judicial errors.

In his June decision, the judge brushed aside claims by NA representatives that the group had been unfairly tarred in affidavits from the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and others that quoted the group’s foundational documents as well as other materials produced by its officials. "All of these publications can only be described as racist, white supremacist and hate-inspired," the judge wrote.

"They are disgusting, repugnant and revolting." Your opinion matters - why? You don't like a man's politics, so you can take and redistribute his money and materials as you see fit? What part of that is repugnant and dictatorial?

The court decision comes at a time when the NA, which a little over a decade ago was the dominant hate group in America, is struggling to survive. It has gone from an organization that once brought in about $1 million a year and had some 1,400 dues-paying members to a group that is nearly bankrupt and has only a smattering of supporters left. The group’s current leader is trying to sell much of its West Virginia headquarters compound to raise money, and he has sold off much of the wood on the site to logging companies for the same reason. A faction led by the brother of the group’s late founder has sued the NA in civil court in an attempt to regain control of the organization. And virtually all of the major personalities in the group, many of whom enjoyed serious movement prestige, have left.

The loss of the bequest could help finally destroy the remnants of the once-storied NA. The group seems unlikely to survive without a source of new funds.

The court’s initial decision thrilled human rights activists anti-white hate groups in Canada.

The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, which intervened in the case along with B’Nai Brith Canada, said the ruling was “a strong statement. Today, we are fortunate that the National Alliance is a severely diminished group barely holding onto its shrinking membership. The threat was that an injection of about a quarter of a million dollars might have breathed new life into this dying organization.”

“Justice Grant’s judgment was very direct in his findings of fact that the National Alliance is a neo-Nazi group and that their hate propaganda and stated goals of genocide and ethnic cleansing violate Canadian law six ways to Sunday,” added Richard Warman, a Canadian attorney who has brought 16 successful legal cases against hate groups and racist individuals in that country.

The Canadian bequest was first brought to public attention in June 2013, when the SPLC revealed that NA officials appeared close to settling the probate matter and forwarding the proceeds to the NA. Shortly after that, McCorkill’s sister, who like a second brother was estranged from her radical sibling and did not even know he was alive do you get how ridiculous this is? jews joined this process "later" - yet the person suing "did not even know he was alive" - are you kidding me? this is how brazen these liars are. They are nothing but highwaymen, and deserve the fate of same., filed suit, saying that she did not want to see the money go to a neo-Nazi group and that she also hoped to keep the coin collection in Canada. She didn't know the guy was alive, until organized jews came to her and told her they needed her for a front in a lawsuit.

The case against the bequest could never have been made under American law, which has unusually strong free speech and association protections. But Canadian law has a much fuller concept of the public good, and its foundational Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms allows speech and other “reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” Canadian law also makes public “incitement of hatred” — “willfully promot[ing] hatred against any identifiable group” — a criminal offense. Except the gift is going to someone in America, not Canada, so the judge has no jurisdiction. That's just the most obvious fraud here. NA is a legal group, and it's not up to a Canadian judge to decide which groups in foreign countries people are allowed to give money to.

Erich Gliebe, chairman of the NA, claimed in affidavits submitted to the court that the SPLC and others were trying to “smear” the organization by quoting its foundational documents and later statements from Gliebe and others. But Grant found that the NA had done nothing to distance itself from those documents.

And they were hair-raising. The affidavit submitted to the court by the SPLC quoted the group’s “What is the National Alliance?” essay as saying that the 
NA would do “whatever is necessary” to achieve “a White living space” and that it would not be deterred by any “temporary unpleasantness.” The document went on to call for “the racial cleansing of the land” and “a long-term eugenics program involving at least the entire populations of Europe and America.”

The SPLC affidavit also quoted an NA bulletin written by the group’s founder celebrating racial violence as “a healthy, red-blooded response to the current situation in America’s cities.” “Ultimately,” the document read in a particularly candid passage, “we will win the war only by killing our enemies.” In yet another document, the group spoke of packing “the homosexuals, racemixers, and hard-case collaborators” into cattle cars and plunging them into abandoned coal mines.

Although Gliebe tried to suggest that the NA had evolved into a kinder, gentler organization since the 2002 death of founder William Pierce, Grant pointed out that Gliebe alleged in a 2011 radio broadcast that “the Jews have lied for decades about the Holocaust,” which he described as a “money-making scheme.”

“[T]here is nothing ‘dated’ about the anti-semitic rantings of Mr. Gliebe, the current Chair of the National Alliance, in his 2011 broadcast,” the judge wrote. “Neither is there any evidence before the court that the NA has distanced itself from its ‘dated’ foundational documents,” a reference to “What is the National Alliance?”

All completely irrelevant. Canada is a jewish dictatorship with bought/intimidated judges. That's the bottom line.

Grant repeatedly referred to the strength of the case. The evidence “consistently show[s] that the National Alliance stands for principles and policies, as well as the means to implement them, that are both illegal and contrary to public policy in Canada,” the judge wrote. “[W]hat it stands for, anti-semitism, eugenics, discrimination, racism and white supremacy, violates numerous statutes and conventions that have been passed by Parliament and the [provincial] Legislatures and endorsed by the Government of Canada, including the Criminal Code.”

The judge also mocked Gliebe’s attempts to portray the NA as a cultural organization interested in European civilization, saying these “feeble protestations only call to mind the attempts by the Nazis in Hitler’s Germany to mask their true intentions through organizations like the Hitler Youth. History tells us that behind the mask lurked some of the worst evil ever visited upon the human race.”

Grant isn't a judge, he's a despot.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informe...nada-With-Love
__________________