Conservatism Is for Losers 10/10/20

Post Reply
User avatar
Grimork
Posts: 453
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2020 4:34 pm
Location: North Carolina

Conservatism Is for Losers 10/10/20

Post by Grimork » Sat Oct 10, 2020 8:35 pm

https://nationalvanguard.org/2020/10/co ... or-losers/

LAST WEEK I talked to you about National Vanguard’s heritage, which began more than fifty years ago in 1969 with the National Youth Alliance’s tabloid newspaper Attack!. During those early years, in 1971, William Pierce wrote an article — “Why Conservatives Can’t Win” — that was so far ahead of its time that it remains important, even vital today. For more than ever now, we need to guide our people away from the trap of “conservatism,” which is a totally inadequate response — today, I would say a designedly inadequate response — to the genocidal war being waged by the Jewish-led left against our people. Conservatism will lead to failure. Conservatism will lead to our death as a race.

Under the direction of National Alliance Chairman William White Williams, our media department has made “Why Conservatives Can’t Win” into a mass-distribution pamphlet which you can order — or download and print yourself — and make it available for the education of every awakening White person in your neighborhood. If you see Trump posters — those people need a copy. If you see Confederate flags or “Don’t Tread on Me” flags, those people need a copy. If you see Betsy Ross flags, those people need a copy. If you see “Blue lives matter” signs — those people need a copy. If you see any indication of opposition to mandatory vaccines or other forms of modern-day tyranny — those people need a copy of “Why Conservatives Can’t Win.” Consider it an act of love: Conservatism is for losers; conservatism will certainly lose; and we love our people and don’t want them to lose everything they love, and everything they are. We don’t want them to stop existing, which is what our enemies are actually trying to do to us. “Why Conservatives Can’t Win” is able to put the best of these good people on a path that actually includes the possibility of victory. That is an act of love.

And it’s about time that this message was made a part of our American Dissident Voices lineup and our 24/7 National Alliance Radio Network. So today I present to you in audio form “Why Conservatives Can’t Win.” These are the words of William Pierce.

* * *

Why Conservatives Can’t Win
by Dr. William L. Pierce

SOME OF MY best friends are conservatives. I sincerely like them and I admire them for their genuine virtues: for their sense of propriety and personal integrity in an age of corruption, for their independent spirit and their willingness to stand on their own feet in an increasingly paternalistic society.

Therefore, I hope my conservative friends will forgive me for what I am about to write.

A Tragic Choice

There is not the least doubt in my mind that if I were forced to cast my lot with either conservatism or with the left, I would choose conservatism.

But fortunately, none of us is faced with such a limited choice. It would surely be tragic if we were. It would be tragic in the great sense, in the Spenglerian sense. We would be making the choice of Spengler’s Roman soldier whose bones were found in front of a door in Pompeii — who, during the eruption of Vesuvius, died at his post because they forgot to relieve him. We would be choosing what is right and honorable and in accord with the traditions of our race — and certain to fail.

For conservatives cannot possibly emerge victorious from the life-or-death struggle in which they are presently engaged. Although their opponents on the radical left may not attain their own goals — indeed, cannot attain them, because they are based on an erroneous conception of man and Nature — conservatives have proved themselves utterly incapable of preventing the destruction of their own world by those same radical leftists.

Revolutionary Advantage

Conservatives cannot win because the enemy to which they are opposed is a revolutionary enemy — an enemy with revolutionary goals and guided by a revolutionary way of life.

The advantage has always lain — and will always lie — on the side of the contender who is prepared to take the offensive, rather than maintaining a defensive position only. And the evolutionary natures of the conservative and the revolutionary determine that the one shall always play an essentially defensive role and the other an offensive role.

Besieged vs. Besieger

The offensive-defensive dichotomy does not apply absolutely to tactics, of course, but it does to strategy. The conservative may launch brief counterattacks — he may sally forth from his fortress to harry his revolutionary besieger — but in the long run he is always the besieged and the revolutionary the besieger.

The goal of the conservative is to protect what is, or, at the extreme, to restore what recently was. The goal of the revolutionary is to radically transform what is, or to do away with it altogether, so that it can be replaced by something entirely different.

Raceless Nirvana

Thus, the conservative talks of halting crime in the streets, of keeping down taxes, of fighting the spread of drugs and pornography, of keeping Big Government in check. And the leftist strives for a utopia in which there shall be no war, no “repression,” no “discrimination,” no “racism,” no bounds on the individual’s freedom of action — a raceless and effortless nirvana of “love” and “equality” and plenty.

Never-Never Land

The conservative’s goals may seem reasonable enough — and attainable. The leftist’s goals, on the other hand, lie in a never-never land far beyond the horizon of reality. And that is precisely what gives the advantage to the left. When the conservative makes some minor gain — such as getting a conservative into office — he is likely to act as if he had just won the whole war. He sees the achievement of his aims just around the corner, he lowers his guard, and he settles back to enjoy the fruits of his imagined victory. But the leftist is never satisfied, regardless of what concessions are made to his side, for his goals always remain as remote as before.

The conservative works in fits and spurts. He reacts with alarm to new depredations from the left, but is satisfied if he is able to fall back, regroup his wagons, and establish a new line of defense. The leftist keeps on pushing, probing, advancing, taking a step back now and then, but only to be able to take three steps forward later.

Defeat by Halves

If the leftist makes new demands — for example, for the forced racial integration of schools or housing — the conservative will oppose them with a plea to maintain “neighborhood” schools and “freedom of association.” When the smoke clears, the leftist will have won perhaps half what he demanded, and the conservative will have lost half of what he tried to preserve.

But then the conservative will accept the new status quo, as if things had always been that way, and prepare to defend it against fresh attacks from the left with the same ineptitude he displayed in defending the old position.

Evil Ideology

This continually shifting position is almost as great a disadvantage to the conservative as is his chronic inability to grasp the initiative. The revolutionary left has an ideology, evil and unnatural though it may be, and from this ideology come the unity and the continuity of purpose which are indispensable prerequisites for victory.

What can conservatives, on the other hand, look to as a fighting credo, an immutable principle for which they are willing to sacrifice all? They have been retreating so rapidly for the last 50 years or so that they have completely lost sight of the earlier ground on which they stood. It has simply receded over the ideological horizon.

“Racists” Are Radicals

Consider race, for example. A century ago men like Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard were spokesmen for the conservative position on race. They argued eloquently, albeit defensively, for the preservation of the West’s racial identity by maintaining strict barriers against miscegenation, adopting sound immigration controls, and applying eugenic standards to the problem of population quality. Today no “responsible” conservative would be caught with the books of either of these men in his living-room bookcase, for by present conservative standards they are both “racists” — hence, “radicals,” rather than safely respectable conservatives.

Free-Enterprise Pitfall

How about rescuing the free-enterprise system from the evil machinations of Big Government?

As a matter of fact, the free-enterprise system was still relatively intact during the period when alien forces subverted our governments and took over our countries, and it cannot be said that free enterprise slowed them down even one little bit. The people who gained control of our biggest newspapers and our motion-picture industry and our radio and TV networks did so with the aid of free enterprise, rather than in spite of it.

More than Economics

These comments should not be considered a condemnation of free-enterprise per se, nor a belittling of the importance of economic problems in general; more than one nation has gone to ruin through economic mismanagement. The point is that our problems today go far deeper than any governmental or economic reforms can hope to cure or even substantially ameliorate.

The youth of America are smart enough to recognize these things for themselves, and, consequently, are not to be blamed for having few tears to shed for the demise of either our institutions of government or laissez-faire capitalism.

The left can find plenty of misguided young fanatics willing to set themselves afire or blow up a police station in order to further the cause of “equality” or “peace” but the idea of young men and women assembling bombs in candle-lit cellars to put an end to the progressive income tax or social security deductions is simply ridiculous.

Until conservatives can offer something more inspiring, the youth will not rally to their standard.

Conservatism’s two principle failings, lack of a spirit of aggressive activism and lack of any clearly defined ideological basis, go hand in hand. The one cannot be had without the other.

Ultimate Goals

In the words of an outstanding anti-communist leader: “The lack of a great, creative idea always signifies a limitation of fighting ability. A firm conviction of the right to use each and any weapon is always bound up with a fanatical belief in the necessity of the victory of a revolutionary new order on this earth. A movement which is not fighting for such ultimate goals and ideas will never seize upon the ultimate weapon” …and, needless to say, will never emerge victorious from a struggle with an opponent who is so motivated.

Revolutionary vs. Revolutionary

Though conservatism cannot win against the left, a new revolutionary force, with the spiritual basis that conservatism lacks, and advancing with even more boldness and determination than the forces of the left, can win!
That new revolutionary force is being built now by the men and women of the National Alliance. Its ranks are being filled with disciplined, idealistic young men and women.

They have examined and found wanting both the drugs-and-sex libertinism of the left and the economic libertinism of the right.

A New Order

They are fighting for a new order, based not on the fads and whims of the moment, but on the fundamental values of race and personality — values which once led Western man to the mastery of the earth and which can yet regain that mastery for him and lead him on to the conquest of the universe.

They know that the time is long past when conservative rhetoric or conservative votes might have saved the day. They understand that the West’s salvation must now come from young men and women of revolutionary spirit and outlook who are through talking and instead are willing to do whatever is necessary to take back their nation.

Richard_G_603
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:34 pm
Location: New Hampshire

Re: Conservatism Is for Losers 10/10/20

Post by Richard_G_603 » Sun Jan 24, 2021 12:16 am

this is an incredibly marketable message right now. Seeing what people are now willing to say on enemy controlled platforms like Facebook, this weak conservatism needing to be replaced sentiment has exploded in the last few months and this message would ring well with many.

User avatar
Jim Mathias
Posts: 2322
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 8:48 pm

Re: Conservatism Is for Losers 10/10/20

Post by Jim Mathias » Sun Jan 24, 2021 12:18 pm

Richard_G_603 wrote:
Sun Jan 24, 2021 12:16 am
this is an incredibly marketable message right now. Seeing what people are now willing to say on enemy controlled platforms like Facebook, this weak conservatism needing to be replaced sentiment has exploded in the last few months and this message would ring well with many.
Agreed that it is still a highly effective and relevant message. Dr. Pierce was thinking of the long term back then.

The same problem of conservatism is still afflicting millions of Whites, distracting us from taking responsibility for the only thing that's important: our race's existence and future path. And our time to be able to challenge the jews' power grows ever shorter. Whites are now becoming totally disenfranchised these days and it's now more apparent than ever before in the consciousnesses of millions. This, I believe, is good as they're more ready than ever before for this message.

If you have a few who you know might be ready for this essay, email them the text and the link. Call it "food for thought."
Activism materials available! ===> Contact me via PM to obtain quantities of the "Send Them Back", "NA Health Warning #1 +#2+#3" stickers, and any fliers listed in the Alliance website's flier webpage.

Old Aardvark
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2020 3:23 am

Re: Conservatism Is for Losers 10/10/20

Post by Old Aardvark » Mon Jan 25, 2021 8:32 pm

With the theft of the recent 2020 federal elections, our enemies have confidently removed their masks and are saying exactly what they have planned for whites who do not submit completely. These are radical times, and I agree that one can find far more violent language on Facebook and other online sources than one finds on NA web sources. A large percentage of socially conservative whites now see the anti-white regime for what it is. Things could develop so rapidly that the NA risks becoming bypassed by the accelerating events.

The financial problems the regime faces could also soon bring about its collapse which would leave a wide-open power vacuum at the local levels in all areas of the country. I believe only a small percentage of NA members realize how thin the financial ice truly is right now, and how it is growing thinner with each passing month.

Here is a link to a financial writer. Although he is white, like most whites he does not share our worldview; however, he does understand how weak the regime's finances are, and he urges readers to understand, do their part to bring on that collapse and then prepare for a time when the present regime loses its power. Everyone who shares our worldview should understand what the writer understands. https://www.silverdoctors.com/headlines ... -may-fail/

BTW, be sure to scroll down and read the comments in the discussion forum linked to this article. You will find like-minded individuals to yourself. You will also find several whites who are clearly radicalized, who understand their present situation as whites, and who can no longer be considered "conservative."

User avatar
Jim Mathias
Posts: 2322
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 8:48 pm

Re: Conservatism Is for Losers 10/10/20

Post by Jim Mathias » Mon Jan 25, 2021 9:47 pm

Old Aardvark wrote:
Mon Jan 25, 2021 8:32 pm
With the theft of the recent 2020 federal elections, our enemies have confidently removed their masks and are saying exactly what they have planned for whites who do not submit completely. These are radical times, and I agree that one can find far more violent language on Facebook and other online sources than one finds on NA web sources. A large percentage of socially conservative whites now see the anti-white regime for what it is. Things could develop so rapidly that the NA risks becoming bypassed by the accelerating events.

The financial problems the regime faces could also soon bring about its collapse which would leave a wide-open power vacuum at the local levels in all areas of the country. I believe only a small percentage of NA members realize how thin the financial ice truly is right now, and how it is growing thinner with each passing month.

Here is a link to a financial writer. Although he is white, like most whites he does not share our worldview; however, he does understand how weak the regime's finances are, and he urges readers to understand, do their part to bring on that collapse and then prepare for a time when the present regime loses its power. Everyone who shares our worldview should understand what the writer understands. https://www.silverdoctors.com/headlines ... -may-fail/

BTW, be sure to scroll down and read the comments in the discussion forum linked to this article. You will find like-minded individuals to yourself. You will also find several whites who are clearly radicalized, who understand their present situation as whites, and who can no longer be considered "conservative."
How do you mean "the NA risks becoming bypassed by the accelerating events" Mr. Aardvark? Our goals, short and long, are generally the same with whatever comes and in large part they're of an existential nature so I don't see those being bypassed.

The article seemed to make two action items as its "solution" for people to follow, "starve the beast" (stop paying taxes) and buy gold/silver/platinum/palladium. This seems oversimplified as people have far more needs for survival than what is suggested here. A family that has a few silver rounds saved up isn't going to go far if a repeat of Venezuela's present situation comes about here. But there's a survival subforum or a few threads here where this can be addressed more at length. As our racial, economic, and the hostility towards Whites by the government and others intensifies in becoming worse, these may be popular topics. If the internet even remains open for our participation!
Activism materials available! ===> Contact me via PM to obtain quantities of the "Send Them Back", "NA Health Warning #1 +#2+#3" stickers, and any fliers listed in the Alliance website's flier webpage.

Old Aardvark
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2020 3:23 am

Re: Conservatism Is for Losers 10/10/20

Post by Old Aardvark » Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:14 am

There is nothing wrong with the goals and the program of the National Alliance, but had Dr. Pierce lived, I know he would have wanted the NA to be much larger by 2021 than it is now, with much greater ability to influence the course of events. But such is not the case, largely because of his untimely death. My point is that things are changing rapidly, and there are a number of scenarios where the Jewish-led regime could lose a great deal of its control. We could easily enter a period as unstable as Imperial Russia was in 1916 and 1917. The Jews were prepared to step in and take control at that place and time. Who is prepared to do that in this time and place? Certainly not the NA or anyone in the white-racial-right. I suspect most whites will be on their own and will have to adapt quickly or die.

I find the discussion forums at Silver Doctors of interest because it is not a white-racial website, yet you frequently see posts that criticize Jews for their destructive behavior and manipulations, whether that be in finance, foreign policy or mass media. Other posts display a sense of white identity... under racial pressure. I see comments like that, and I get the sense that a lot of white people are realizing "conservatism is for losers." In fact, it's obvious the majority of Republicans are ready for something more radical than the Republican Party. After Trump, few people are chomping at the bit for a leader like Marco Rubio or anything that smacks of their father's Republican Party. For decades the NA was a distant vanguard for our people... but the herd is rapidly catching on and catching up.

My fear, though, is that the white masses will turn to the usual bull-shit artists rather than something based upon sound thinking like the NA. This was a big part of Trump's appeal: a mixture of bull-shit with a dose of reality mixed in. The Q anon thing is another example. It's just the sort of thing poorly-educated whites without critical thinking skills always seem to respond to. I suspect Q anon is a Deep State operation to manipulate whites and neutralize their growing radicalism.

Soon whites will be looking for bold leadership with a much more radical agenda.

Richard_G_603
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2020 1:34 pm
Location: New Hampshire

Re: Conservatism Is for Losers 10/10/20

Post by Richard_G_603 » Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:13 pm

The issue with "more radical" as you put it it that its about changing everything at once in one big sweep. A revolution of some kind if you will, be it financial, militaristic, secessionist, or accelerated collapse, is what they are predicting and portraying. The issue is that a revolution of that kind, a flash-in-the-pan ractionary event, often creates a worse situation than there was before, with even less stability and security, and are highly prone to corruption of intention/ideals.

However a slow grown movement with solid and clear beleifs, ideals, and motives, with clearly set out and agreed upon CONSTRUCTIVE goals (the creation of, establishment of, organization of etc,) rather than DESTRUCTIVE goals ( the overthrowing of, abolition of, or annihilation of), creates a stable foundation and organized structure that is able to withstand the chaos of the change and can effectively shape it and direct it, control it in other words, for their ends, rather than flying by the seat of their pants and simply letting pragmatism rule the day for them.

Would it be better if the NA were larger? CLEARLY. Would it be better if the NA were larger at the expense of its constructive belief based ideals and motives being uniformly held by all members? NEVER. Dr. Peirce's image for the Alliance was those who understood it's task as nearly divine, as nearly holy, less of a political dissident group and more of a holy order. If the NA is slow growing members of quality like that then it will be as the redwood which grows slowly, with strong growth for support, deep roots, and resistance to fire and pests. It will outlast all and be near immortal and near indestructible. If it sacrifices the quality of the members and ideology for faster growth it will be a new growth pine that falls in the wind, is ravaged by the pests, and burnt to cinders by the first trial-by-fire that comes it's way.

User avatar
Will Williams
Posts: 3006
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Conservatism Is for Losers 10/10/20

Post by Will Williams » Fri Jan 29, 2021 10:28 am

Richard_G_603 wrote:
Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:13 pm
The issue with "more radical" as you put it it that its about changing everything at once in one big sweep. A revolution of some kind if you will, be it financial, militaristic, secessionist, or accelerated collapse, is what they are predicting and portraying. The issue is that a revolution of that kind, a flash-in-the-pan ractionary event, often creates a worse situation than there was before, with even less stability and security, and are highly prone to corruption of intention/ideals.

However a slow grown movement with solid and clear beleifs, ideals, and motives, with clearly set out and agreed upon CONSTRUCTIVE goals (the creation of, establishment of, organization of etc,) rather than DESTRUCTIVE goals ( the overthrowing of, abolition of, or annihilation of), creates a stable foundation and organized structure that is able to withstand the chaos of the change and can effectively shape it and direct it, control it in other words, for their ends, rather than flying by the seat of their pants and simply letting pragmatism rule the day for them.

Would it be better if the NA were larger? CLEARLY. Would it be better if the NA were larger at the expense of its constructive belief based ideals and motives being uniformly held by all members? NEVER. Dr. Peirce's image for the Alliance was those who understood it's task as nearly divine, as nearly holy, less of a political dissident group and more of a holy order. If the NA is slow growing members of quality like that then it will be as the redwood which grows slowly, with strong growth for support, deep roots, and resistance to fire and pests. It will outlast all and be near immortal and near indestructible. If it sacrifices the quality of the members and ideology for faster growth it will be a new growth pine that falls in the wind, is ravaged by the pests, and burnt to cinders by the first trial-by-fire that comes it's way.
Very good, Richard. Like Wolf Stoner said in last month's BULLETIN, "Grow oaks, not radishes."

Image
Old Aardvark wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 3:14 am
There is nothing wrong with the goals and the program of the National Alliance, but had Dr. Pierce lived, I know he would have wanted the NA to be much larger by 2021 than it is now, with much greater ability to influence the course of events. But such is not the case, largely because of his untimely death...
Your first sentence is true for sure, OA; he would have been more than just disappointed that his successor & pals more or less unilaterally jettisoned the Alliance's Cosmotheist foundation in favor of the stupid "broader, Christian-friendly, big tent outreach" that resulted in the loss of 98% of NA's membership and all of its Local Units that were in place at his untimely death. Had Pierce been around during the disastrous 12-year Gliebe/Walker/Ring descendancy he would have taken them out behind the proverbial woodshed for a Cosmotheist "prayer meeting," then summarily eliminated them to make an example of them for other members.

All Founders of movements eventually die, but it is not true that their legacies must necessarily die with them. Our Jewish watchdogs, their compliant media, and even those in the Christian Patriot "Movement" continue to claim the Alliance is now "defunct." Nothing could be further from the truth as the NA has slowly been put back on on stable Piercean Cosmotheist tracks by those of his followers who, Richard_G_603 rightly says "understood it's task as nearly divine, as nearly holy, less of a political dissident group and more of a holy order."

It is time for those like yourself to come home, OA. The Alliance needs you and it needs Richard.

Post Reply