Scott: June 20, 2025
I think Dr. Pierce’s analysis on Mathews is way off-base, and part of the reason that I always eschewed him as a “Movement” leader.
---
You are uninformed and talking through your ass now, Scott. Pierce's organization was
always apart from the wider "movement" that you are in, You strike me as being a fault-finding hobbyist.
Not for you since you won't read it, but I offer this classic wisdom of Dr. Pierce from nearly 50 years ago for other readers to ponder. I've put this here on C-C previously: "Why Don’t All the Pro-White Organizations Unite?" at nationalvanguard.org
This is forward-looking advice from Pierce to his members in the January 2022
NA Members BULLETIN, a few months before he died: "WLP91: The So-Called Movement" also at nationalvanguard.org
.
.. [T]here are members who still have a fixation on something called the “movement” rather than on the Alliance. These “movement”-oriented members see the Alliance not as unique and irreplaceable, but merely as one organization among many, all working toward the same goal. “How much stronger our movement will be” they think; “when all these organizations are united. Now we are weak because we are divided, but if we all work together we will be stronger and more successful.” These members also tend to regard anyone who sticks his arm out and shouts “White power,” as a “comrade” much like a fellow Alliance member.
There can be no doubt that we are weak now compared to our enemies, but we will not become stronger by “uniting” with weak or defective organizations — and that includes virtually every “movement” group. The Alliance is not only far and away the strongest and most effective of all the organizations claiming to share our goals: it is the only organization in North America that has any prospect at all for effectively opposing the Jews and their allies in the future. I say this not to disparage any other organization or individual, but as a simple statement of fact.
The Alliance became what it is today by following its own course from its inception. It never saw an opportunity to become stronger by uniting with another organization, and it sees none now. If in the future a suitable organization with which the Alliance might unite comes into existence, then we can explore the possibilities for collaboration. That is not a likely prospect however, for the following reason: if someone decides to form a new organization, instead of becoming a member of the Alliance, it is either because he actually has a significantly different goal or ideology from the Alliance or is determined to use significantly different tactics, or it is because of personal reasons. By far the most common personal reason is egotism: he wants to have his own organization...
I don't expect you to ever apply to join NA, Scott, though you are probably eligible to apply. You do not support NA's ideology, its program and goals, so simply are not serious Alliance material. Since you are so wise about what is needed to preserve the White race, though, why don't you launch a new organization, like Pierce did 55 years ago from scratch, and lead it? He went on to say about the "movement":
I am not willing to compromise in any significant way the goals or ideology of the National Alliance. The examples that come to mind of other organizations or individuals that had similar goals but significantly different tactics are those that were too impatient to follow a course of legality and were determined instead to move ahead faster than the Alliance by using illegal tactics. So far such a course has not been successful, and it is my carefully considered judgment that such tactics are not likely to be successful prior to a major weakening or disruption of the government.
A member who disagrees with this rather dim view of the “movement” should choose a “movement” organization and join it, or he should start his own organization, but he should resign his membership of the Alliance.
Like I said, Pierce told his members that in his January BULLETIN and followed it up in his February issue with the following further guidance. Remember this was in early 2002, 23 years ago, prior the the explosion of social media when the internet was becoming like the Wild West, largely undisciplined:
One misimpression on the part of a few members is that they are no longer permitted to represent themselves as Alliance members except on an approved website. This is not so. Members are free to identify themselves as members in discussion groups, “chat rooms,” bulletin board postings, etc., as long as they make it clear that they are speaking only as individuals and not as spokesmen for the Alliance.
The views I have expressed in the past about discussion groups and similar internet entities have been largely negative, for two reasons. First, the anonymity and lack of accountability in discussion groups lead to irresponsibility and foolishness. Much of what goes on in discussion groups is beyond silly.
Second, the internet becomes a make-believe, alternate world for many people. Instead of using their time to disseminate our message and recruit in the real world, they escape into the more agreeable, make-believe, world of discussion groups and “chat-rooms” where they can feel themselves safely among friends. Indeed, the internet is like a habit-forming drug for many of our members. As soon as they come home from work they turn on their computers, and they stay glued to the screen until bedtime. As so often is the case in this soft, emasculated society, chatter takes the place of action.
A few members whose opinions I respect have tried to persuade me that internet discussion groups do have some potential redeeming value after all – provided that the members using them do so in a disciplined, purposeful way, keeping their minds focused on the objective instead of succumbing to the drug. Perhaps in the near future the National Office will offer some useful guidance to such members...
---
I can’t really comment because I don’t know what actual crimes Richard [Scutari] committed.
---
I told you everything you need to know about Richard already, but if you must know, the "crimes" that earned him a 60-year sentence in JOG prisons were trumped up "conspiracy and racketeering" charges -- no victims.
He is considered by many to be a martyr for our cause. He was given many opportunities to "tell all" and be released; he chose to remain silent (as in Silent Brotherhood). Richard, released on parole this year for good behavior, has been an honorary National Alliance member since 1992 because he was an exemplary, honorable political prisoner of the JOG, an unbroken warrior.
---
So far not many of us have really understood the nature of Power itself and Statecraft. Hitler obviously understood it, and I think so did Rockwell. Mathews and Pierce, not so much.
---
Says you. Dr. Pierce had plenty to say about Mr. Hitler, mostly positive; it's all easy to find at NV.
GLR was not only Pierce's early mentor, he was his friend. You, or others, may gain insight into their relationship by reading this that Pierce wrote 58 years ago, soon after Rockwell's assassination: "Lincoln Rockwell: A National Socialist Life" at nationalvanguard.org
Sorry, Scott, I have no more time to respond to you. I'm too busy.
