Lifers: Myth or silent?

[Thomas S NJ]

I've been doing a lot of thinking about outreach and Alliance-building lately (hence my somewhat ill-planned post regarding Christians). While my previous post - owing to the fact that its subjects include very close family members - was overly emotional and subjective, I do eventually hope to tinker it into a more useful form.
Its shortcomings got me thinking about the larger picture, and raised some questions for me. What is the current nature of our future recruits? From what groups would we draw upon? Are some pools deeper than others, or are we as likely to find recruits in any group in which our Folk can be found in appreciable numbers?
Mulling over these questions got me thinking about why you see the phenomenon of what Dr. Pierce called the "phone book fuhrers" decade after decade. Many of them certainly meet his descriptions of hobbyists and egoists, but not all. I recalled my own journey from a vocal Libertarian into the fringes of politics and how groups of us ended up clustered around a few individuals with their own media in place (such as Christopher Cantwell and Jared Howe). All of us had the same thought: clearly, what had been tried before wasn't working. So we formed new groups, new alliances, and new movements.
I realized that there was one common theme in these struggles for our race that demoralized me the most: the children of the leaders of before always seemed to be among our loudest enemies. From Hitler's nephew to the children of Rockwell and Pierce, it's the same story. Eager to prove they're not like their fathers, they become enemies of everything their fathers fought for. Worse still, it seems as though this phenomenon is not limited to the children of our leaders and other great men; the National Vanguard has an article that touches upon Arnold Schwarzenegger's SS father, for example. While the effects of "de-Nazification" of occupied Germany can excuse the Germans and Austrians, perhaps, we Americans have no such excuse.
Why is it that prior generations' efforts for the good of our Race are always so reviled by the children of those who fought hardest?
I have recently begun the process of exploring the political machine of my local township; I was heartened when I attended a meeting at our local fire department to see that all of the attendees were White. In some respects this gave me some hope for outreach, education and recruitment efforts. However, I quickly realized the deeply liberal sentiments that pervade my town's culture. My knee-jerk reaction as a Libertarian was to dismiss them all as fat, dumb and happy traitors. Yet this may not be the case and that brings me to my questions on recruitment pools.
I've been long-winded, though, so I'll wrap this up. Thoughts on recruitment pools in turn made me wonder: why does the Alliance even need recruits like me, Jim, or anyone else with a non-Alliance background? If building a White world beginning at the level of an intentional White community was the goal, where are the children born into this community?
This is what bothers me about the idea of the sons betraying the fathers. Are we building a community that will just be abandoned by its children? The Alliance has been around since my father was young, and I am a father of a teen and step-father to another. While I will find it very hard to undo the social programming of a teenager who I blindly helped program with the same lies I was fed in my own youth, I nevertheless try. I can understand as well as any the forces arrayed against us in that effort. Yet I can't say that I've heard from any here or on the National Vanguard commentary section who are what might be called "lifers": born and brought up in the Alliance. Are there none who are in the Alliance because their parents were and they were a part of it from birth - or, at the least, are not now among our foes?
I'm hoping that my fear is baseless. If I'm on to something, then I realize the most important pool of all not only doesn't include me, it's one with which I have no contact whatsoever: the children of the Alliance. We do all of this for the future generations of White children; is the Alliance the childless nanny of our Race, or a kernel of future forebears? Are we the fathers and mothers of tomorrow's Alliance, or must we survive only on constant new faces?
I'll close with noting I am not by any means being defeatist about this. Rather, I'm wondering if the pool we should be most desperate to draw from isn't disillusioned democrats or former republicans but lost Alliance descendants.

[RCavallius]

I'll respond to this as soon as I have some extra time, Thomas.

[Jim Mathias]

Our recruiting efforts everywhere are in the face of Jewed media and educational institutions that thoroughly indoctrinate all with their anti-White poison. This means that we face severe headwinds in recruiting others. As for family members, they too have to face society-wide anti-White indoctrination and being associated with us is seen as risking becoming an outcast. A very difficult situation!

As far as overcoming this, Dr. Pierce laid it out clearly: we need to build and expand our own revolutionary infrastructure to instill in Whites a sense of being White and to want to fight to the death if need be for our kind's survival. We badly need our own media (all forms of it too, not just National Vanguard and White biocentrism) and an educational institution that inculcates that "fight" into Whites of all ages. I'm not putting down our present platforms, quite the opposite, I support them and want us to expand in other ways. We can do more online as well, but that's a topic for another discussion.

The point is that our voice must be developed into a far stronger one than at present. And for that we need more serious and sincere Whites to join us and help, and for us to stay the course.

[Will Williams]

Mulling over these questions got me thinking about why you see the phenomenon of what Dr. Pierce called the "phone book fuhrers" decade after decade. Many of them certainly meet his descriptions of hobbyists and egoists, but not all.

Yeah they are. The term is phone booth fuhrers, because the "leader" could fit his entire movement in a phone booth. They wouldn't join NA because they thought they had a better way. They did not. Where are they all today?

I'll close with noting I am not by any means being defeatist about this. Rather, I'm wondering if the pool we should be most desperate to draw from isn't disillusioned democrats or former republicans but lost Alliance descendants.

I wouldn't call you a defeatist, but let's say you're a "doubting Thomas." Pun intended.

You'd do well to read this to understand why our people aren't quick to accept our truths: https://nationalvanguard.org/2014/09/th ... th-people/

Don't waste your time on folks who are not receptive to hearing the truth, then acting on it as we in the Alliance do. We are rare idealists. You can probably find Pierce's speech on one of our video channels. I don't have the time now to search for it.

[FolkishFreya]

We should be drawing recruits that meet the qualifications of joining that have a listening ear. Does it really matter their background? If one is willing to abide and be molded, would it matter?

As Jim said we need all types of media. I feel Alliance members who have those talents should be extending a helping hand and becoming involved in that "department". It's all hands on deck, so to speak. If one does not have those talents they could be donating monetarily as much as their budget allows. This is so that the Alliance can afford to expand on media with additional paid staff. Now, I am not sure of how all of the intricate cogs of the Alliance work exactly but it seems fair to assume this could be so.

The more seeds we plant and water the better the harvest.

[Will Williams]

We should be drawing recruits that meet the qualifications of joining that have a listening ear. Does it really matter their background? If one is willing to abide and be molded, would it matter?

As Jim said we need all types of media. I feel Alliance members who have those talents should be extending a helping hand and becoming involved in that "department". It's all hands on deck, so to speak. If one does not have those talents they could be donating monetarily as much as their budget allows. This is so that the Alliance can afford to expand on media with additional paid staff. Now, I am not sure of how all of the intricate cogs of the Alliance work exactly but it seems fair to assume this could be so.

The more seeds we plant and water the better the harvest.

That's right, FF. A majority of our people are not race-mixers, queers, or shiftless ne'er-do-wells, and have good moral character, so are eligible to join NA. Even if they are ineligible for one reason or another, they can still support us -- even registered Democrats. Eligibility requirements are found here: https://www.natall.com/about/what-is-th ... -alliance/

[RCavallius]

What is the current nature of our future recruits?

I'm not quite sure exactly what you mean by this. What is their nature? That's a pretty philosophical question, Thomas. We can't predict exactly who our "future recruits" will be, so we can't give you an in-depth analysis of their "nature." The important thing for you to know is that the revolution will happen in stages, and right now the Alliance is in Stage 1. Stage 1 involves building a leadership core which can help execute later phases of the revolution. Right now, we need to focus on recruiting a) people with leadership potential and/or specialized skills who can perform certain vital tasks, and b) people who will help support those leaders and specialists, even if they aren't necessarily leaders or specialists themselves. In addition to this, the Alliance also needs to build a strong revolutionary infrastructure which its leaders and specialists can use to carry out their important work (media, generation of revenue, acquisition of land, etc). Obviously, the Alliance has already made great strides in all of this. Our infrastructure is budding and our core group is getting stronger. You might not always be able to see it, but trust me: it is.

From what groups would we draw upon?

Military veterans, accountants, lawyers, realtors, web designers, mechanics, firefighters, doctors, police officers, martial artists, survivalists, gardeners, agriculturalists, college professors, economists, writers, artists, scientists, engineers, business owners, people with managerial experience, wealthy or financially well-off people, dedicated racialists of any background who are willing to contribute in whatever way they can - heck, sometimes even an ex-convict can make a good Member. You name it, we want it.

Are some pools deeper than others, or are we as likely to find recruits in any group in which our Folk can be found in appreciable numbers?

We are more likely to find recruits in certain circles, of course. Those who are already racially-conscious or have a healthy racial instinct are usually the best prospects, but sometimes you can teach someone about race and "awaken" them. The best recruits are usually self-selected, though: they find racial reality on their own, somehow, and then they find the Alliance during their journey and join us. But, try to recruit from anywhere you can. Our method is to cast as wide a net as possible and then filter out the quality applicants from the weirdos and time-wasters.

Why is it that prior generations' efforts for the good of our Race are always so reviled by the children of those who fought hardest?

In population statistics, there is a phenomenon called "regression to the mean." Basically, "regression to the mean" refers to the observation by statisticians that offspring of parents who are outliers, in any way, from the norm of the population tend to be closer to that norm than their parents. This is the case with anything. So, taking IQ as an example, high-IQ parents tend to have children whose IQs are somewhere between that of their parents and the average for their race. This is neither an environmental nor a genetic phenomenon, it's just a statistical probability. Most people are simply not capable of taking our side against the current cultural trends, whether their parents raised them right or not. I don't think regression to the mean gives us the whole answer to your question, but it does provide a good starting point for investigation.

[W]hy does the Alliance even need recruits like me, Jim, or anyone else with a non-Alliance background?

We need as many quality recruits as we can get, regardless of background, because those people can help us with our important work.

If building a White world beginning at the level of an intentional White community was the goal, where are the children born into this community?

The Alliance nearly collapsed after Dr. Pierce's death, or else it would be much further along in its development. I don't know where those children are, but keep in mind that the Alliance lost most of its Members and Supporters under Erich Gliebe, so it had to effectively start all over eight years ago. Had this not occurred, there is no telling where we would be today, but crying over spilled milk is a waste of time, so let's keep pushing. At any rate, there are Alliance children being born today. I can think of a number of Alliance couples who are raising their children according to our values.

Are we building a community that will just be abandoned by its children?

Some children will most likely abandon us as adults, yes. But, if we have a lot of them, there will definitely be some who stay on to carry out the fight. By having as many as possible, we can increase the numbers of those who will remain within our fold. This is basic.

Are there none who are in the Alliance because their parents were and they were a part of it from birth - or, at the least, are not now among our foes?

Again, the Alliance lost most of its Members and Supporters under the previous Chairman. This probably included many children. Where they are, I don't know.

We do all of this for the future generations of White children; is the Alliance the childless nanny of our Race, or a kernel of future forebears?

Probably the latter. I think the Alliance is stronger than most people, at least most non-Members, realize, and I also think that we are currently in a state of vigorous gestation. Keep in mind that only a fraction of Members and Supporters participate on this forum. We still have a long way to go, of course, but the Chairman and I have discussed the current state of the Alliance and he and I both think that we are close to making a big breakthrough. We just need a couple of key things things to be set in place, and we can really take off. There is a high probability that the number of Alliance families in Mountain City is going to increase before too much longer, and if we can make the aforementioned "breakthrough" it will almost certainly bring more couples into our ranks.

Are we the fathers and mothers of tomorrow's Alliance, or must we survive only on constant new faces?

I would say both. There isn't a whole lot more that we can do to bring in more children. The Alliance is an adult organization for serious revolutionaries, so we can't lower our recruiting standards to try and appeal to soccer moms and lukewarm, "alt-right" dads just because they've got kids. Remember, the revolution will happen in stages. It not yet time to try and transition into a mass movement. The time will come for us to go after the lemmings and the less radical elements of the pro-White "movement" (and their children), but for now we need to focus on building an infrastructure capable of sustaining such a mass influx when it comes. Let's keep Dr. Pierce's strategy in mind.

I hope this helps.

[Will Williams]

[...]
I hope this helps.

[...]

Good response to our resident Doubting Thomas, RC. But I'm afraid you'd never satisfy him with any answers because he'll always have more questions, more doubts about our Alliance's possibilities for success. Remember, he recalled his...

...own journey from a vocal Libertarian into the fringes of politics and how groups of us ended up clustered around a few individuals with their own media in place (such as Christopher Cantwell and Jared Howe). All of us had the same thought: clearly, what had been tried before wasn't working. So we formed new groups, new alliances, and new movements...

In healthier times many of us, including Pierce, considered ourselves "live and let live" libertarian types until we looked around at what was happening to our people and became serious race realists. Some had to go through folks like Cantwell and Howe (whoever in Hell they are), and some must eventually come to us through an avowed libertarian like Tucker Carlson who signs off his nightly show on "conservative" FOX News as "the sworn enemy of group think."

We're a group! Our race is a group, and, like other racial groups -- Jews, Blacks, Mestizos (with their La Raza) -- we must think like a group for our group's interests. It is that simple. We are group thinkers, no matter what opposed groups or shallow, deracinated, "anti-collectivist" libertarians think of us. Carlson has a large following of mostly White conservatives, who, should, as a man of his race, start saying, "William Pierce was right, our race is worth preserving and you fans of my program should join his National Alliance," he would lose his platform and his multi-million-dollar salary that night and become a pariah, a "white supremacist," an "anti-Semitic homophobic hater." He would go overnight from being popular to unpopular. We know the routine.

Rather than continue to respond to Thomas's endless doubts about our Alliance on White Biocentrism, I think it may be more productive to pose a couple of questions to him:

1.) What was it that attracted you to our Alliance?

You say you've read What is the National Alliance? here: https://www.natall.com/about/what-is-th ... -alliance/

Any White person (a non-Jewish person of wholly European ancestry) of good character and at least 18 years of age who accepts as his own the goals of the National Alliance and who is willing to support the program described herein may apply for membership.

2.) Do you accept our Alliances goals? Yes or no.

3.) Are you willing to support the Alliance's program that you say you read about in What is the National Alliance? Yes or no.

If your answers are yes, welcome aboard. If no, you should come back and reapply when you are prepared to answer in the affirmative. That is a requirement for membership. If you only wish to be a supporter, that's OK. I'll continue to send you our monthly BULLETIN as long as you pay your monthly pledge. Meanwhile you should familiarize yourself with the Alliance's 50-year history and its revolutionary approach to preserving our race: separate from those not in our group.

[Thomas S NJ]

.

Rather than continue to respond to Thomas's endless doubts about our Alliance on White Biocentrism, I think it may be more productive to pose a couple of questions to him:

1.) What was it that attracted you to our Alliance?

You say you've read What is the National Alliance? here: https://www.natall.com/about/what-is-th ... -alliance/

Any White person (a non-Jewish person of wholly European ancestry) of good character and at least 18 years of age who accepts as his own the goals of the National Alliance and who is willing to support the program described herein may apply for membership.

2.) Do you accept our Alliances goals? Yes or no.

3.) Are you willing to support the Alliance's program that you say you read about in What is the National Alliance? Yes or no.

If your answers are yes, welcome aboard. If no, you should come back and reapply when you are prepared to answer in the affirmative. That is a requirement for membership. If you only wish to be a supporter, that's OK. I'll continue to send you our monthly BULLETIN as long as you pay your monthly pledge. Meanwhile you should familiarize yourself with the Alliance's 50-year history and its revolutionary approach to preserving our race: separate from those not in our group.[/size]

I never intended to imply my answer on any of these questions was anything short of an unqualified “yes”.

My concerns were more towards wondering why we don’t see many folks in the work for our Race who are following in their parent’s footsteps. This is a fact that gives me pause, but not for the program of the Alliance, but rather a concern for our Race’s future ability to defend itself. If we make great strides now, could they be undone in the future? I ask that not to sow doubt but to brainstorm ideas for how we can prevent it.

If by asking I’m doing more harm than good I’d much rather ignore my worries and see this thread closed or deleted. I’m not trying to make trouble. I merely observed something that has bothered me and was hoping other members had ideas on how we can address them.

[Thomas S NJ]

As for question 1, what attracted me to the Alliance, I offer as my answer quite simply that the Alliance has its basis in the truth: the truth of history, the truth of race science and the truth of natural law.
What made me apply and continue here is that the Alliance’s program of total racial separation is the only one which will preserve our Race. I came to recognize some time ago that democratic politics were a sham, even before I had been instructed on the Jewish question. I also understood that without prior organizational efforts any revolutionary action of a more direct nature would be utterly crushed, leaving victorious enemies to rewrite the truth. Only the Alliance has a clear understanding of the need to build a community, organize, educate and build those connections that would form the backbone of any sort of future victory.
I hope this lays to reach any doubts you have in me as a member.