It is currently Sun Jul 22, 2018 5:50 pm


The Organizational Nexus

  • Author
  • Message
Offline

John Flynn

  • Posts: 205
  • Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 2:16 am

The Organizational Nexus

PostSat Jan 10, 2015 6:16 am

The Organizational Nexus
by Dr. William Pierce
From Attack! Issue No. 65, 1978

PROBABLY THE GREATEST piece of foolishness current in America, after the notion that all the country’s citizens are inherently “equal,” is the belief that they are collectively capable of governing themselves wisely.

Wisdom and will are individual, not collective attributes, yet so steeped have we all become in democratic mythology that we personify the crowd, imagining that it possesses both. We seem to believe, along with the late Chairman Mao, that the ultimate repository of civic virtue is “the masses.”

The populist daydream, indulged in by rightists and leftists alike, is of a long-suffering, commonsensical American citizenry which, if left alone by the gangsters in Washington, could manage to keep the country’s wheels turning, maintain the common defense, and restore domestic tranquility, all through a sort of popular consensus.

The daydreamers of the right see the current enthusiasm for tax-reduction referendums as a manifestation of the people’s ability to spontaneously correct the excesses of government, just as those of the left saw a similar manifestation in Richard Nixon’s plunge from favor and consequent resignation after the Watergate revelations. The people, they think, will tolerate only so much foolishness or wickedness on the part of their leaders before rising up in their righteous wrath and homespun wisdom and setting things right again.

I recently read the unpublished manuscript of a piece of revolutionary fiction written by an aide to a conservative legislator. The story described a spontaneous uprising by America’s citizens’-band radio users. One morning the citizens just decided they’d had enough. Using small arms, their automobiles and trucks, and their CB radios, they took the country away from the politicians and the minority pressure groups.

No organization, no leaders, just a revolution. Once started, it just grew; as the word spread over the CB airwaves, more and more citizens joined in. The Jews were hunted down and dispatched by vigilante groups, while the Blacks, seeing the handwriting on the wall, quickly shed their uppityness and shuffled out of harm’s way.

A pleasant enough daydream, to be sure, and typical of those dreamed up by other right wingers. Three essential elements of all such daydreams are: 1) no fundamental changes are wrought, except settling the hash of the bad guys, because right wingers don’t really want any other fundamental changes; 2) the citizens who settle the bad guys’ hash do it spontaneously and anonymously, because that way no one has to stick his neck out; 3) there is a revolutionary consensus among at least a majority of the citizenry, so that the revolutionaries can maintain their good-guy, will-of-the-people self-image.

Unfortunately, such daydreams have little relationship to reality. There is, in the first place, no consensus among White Americans, revolutionary or otherwise. I would wager that a poll taken among CB users would find about the same proportion of citizens who voted for Jimmy Carter in 1976 as in the general population.

The same lack of consensus exists among somewhat more politically oriented groups, such as Proposition 13 enthusiasts, for example; a common dislike for taxes should not be seen as indicative of any deeper philosophical accord, just as a generalized resentment toward governmental favoritism for racial minority groups should not be seen as indicative of a general agreement on racial matters.

Put any dozen disgruntled White taxpayers in a room and you’ll hear a dozen different explanations of what’s wrong with the country and what should be done about it. If there is anything even faintly resembling a consensus among them, it is one manufactured by the controlled media; they are just as afraid of the taboos the media has set up as the average citizen is.

That’s why not a single one of the tax-revolt groups will take a forthright stand on race, just as none dares pinpoint the blame for a major share of America’s present economic problems on her Jew-controlled foreign policy and the quadrupling of imported oil prices which resulted from that policy.

Although spokesmen for the more rabid pro-minority groups, such as Americans for Democratic Action, openly declare that tax revolt is anti-Black and that the tax rebels themselves are fascists and racists who want to make non-White welfare mothers get a job so they can’t continue to breed 24 hours a day, the media masters have not gone so far. To express displeasure with taxes is still a permissible, if somewhat risqué, activity. But overt racism or any criticism of the Jews is strictly taboo, and the tax rebels are careful to toe the line in that regard.

And it is wrong to think that the public’s failure to face and take a stand on the really vital issues of race and minority control is only a surface phenomenon, while inside the citizens are seething with resentment against those who have imposed the taboos. A few certainly are, but by no means “the masses.”

Part of the reason for the lack of a White revolutionary consensus is ignorance. Most Americans — including most of those who know something is seriously wrong with the country — don’t have the basic facts needed to come to the correct conclusions.

Probably not more than one American in 10 is more than vaguely aware that the news and entertainment media are effectively under minority control. The ruckus raised by former Vice President Spiro Agnew and others about the Jewish domination of the media just hasn’t sunk in. And certainly not more than one in 10 of those who do know about Jewish media control — i.e., not more than one per cent of the general population — really understands its full significance.

There is a similarly appalling degree of ignorance on other vital matters. If you stopped 100 people at random on the street and queried them about the relationship between the increasing number of non-Whites in the U.S. labor force and the failure of industrial productivity to increase, or about the relationship between productivity and the average American standard of living, how many do you think would be able to give you more than an uncomprehending stare? My guess is, not more than two or three.

Even on matters which have been publicized to a certain extent through the controlled media, such as the horrendous influx of non-Whites into the United States in recent years from Mexico, the Pacific, and the Caribbean, there is a general state of misunderstanding and ignorance.

One of the things the National Alliance is doing about this unfortunate situation, of course, is disseminating facts. Each issue of National Vanguard sows a few thousand more seeds of enlightenment into a vast expanse of ignorance.

But if the education of the public were the sole key to White survival, we would surely be lost. The controlled media, the churches, the schools, and the government are pouring out deliberate disinformation on such a prodigious scale that the efforts of a few thousand racially conscious Whites to stem this flood are simply hopeless. Seven evenings a week, four weeks a month, John Chancellor and Walter Cronkite reach more than 1,000 times as many Americans as this newspaper does once a month.

No, we do not delude ourselves into thinking that we are “educating the public.” The seeds we sow may contribute a tiny amount to that end, but that is not their principal purpose. Anyway, even if we could reach as many Americans as John Chancellor and Walter Cronkite do, and as often, facts are not enough; it is not merely ignorance that causes Americans to act as they do and prevents the consensus which would allow the public to straighten out our national and racial affairs.

The National Alliance receives a steady trickle of letters from White Americans who have read a National Vanguard for the first time or who have seen our article “The Masters of the Media” reproduced on a leaflet and whose reaction is, so what? “If Jews are better organized and know how to handle money better than Gentiles do, why then they should be running the country,” these writers argue. “After all, we believe in free enterprise, don’t we?”

This sort of rugged capitalism carries with it the smell of, “I’m doing all right for myself, Jack, so let’s not knock the System. It’s no skin off my back if the Jews are encouraging racial mixing, because I won’t be around to have to live in a mongrelized America, anyway.”

Fortunately, such overt egoism is characteristic of only a minority of the most alienated Whites, but it is nevertheless symptomatic of the widespread and growing confusion of values among the public. It does little good to inform people of the threat to the future of their race, when they are not really sure they care whether their race survives or not.

It is a sad fact that most White Americans today, when confronted with an issue like that of non-White immigration, don’t really have the values needed to justify the tough decision which is required. As long as they feel that they themselves are not immediately and personally threatened by the alien flood, they find it easier to mumble some platitude about there being “room enough for everybody” in America, even when they know it’s not true, than to take a position which might subject them to official disapproval.

Racially oriented right wingers who imagine that their concerns for the future are shared by the majority of Americans are simply wrong — and so are those who imagine that all that is needed for a White consensus is to inform the people of the dangers ahead. Public opinion — and the fundamental values on which it rests — depend on more than facts.

As I mentioned above, we tend to be misled by the current democratic mythology into assuming some things about the average man which are incorrect. One of these things is that he can think for himself. The great majority of people, even if they have this latent ability, have never used it. They have always let others do their thinking for them.

Until about a century ago — and even later in many parts of America — people formed their opinions almost exclusively through their daily interactions with their immediate neighbors. In the marketplace, at the village school or church, in the blacksmith’s shop and the general store, among the hands in the fields and the members of one’s own family, there was the continuous exchange of feelings, impressions, experiences, and, especially, traditional concepts, all of which shaped the individual’s view of the world in general and his opinion on any subject in particular.

Neither a man’s religion nor his politics was the product of any rational process, but was determined almost always by the religion or the politics of those around him. There was a consensus — perhaps not a national consensus, including the inhabitants of geographically different areas with markedly different life-styles, but, at least, a number of local consensuses.

Central Nexus Guides Public Opinion

The real world was a man’s village and the surrounding countryside. From these he received nearly all his impressions. Anything as far as a hundred miles away was not entirely real. Even in the towns, where there may have been such exotic influences as newspapers, the writers and editors of those newspapers were of the same race as their fellow townspeople and generally shared the same consensus.

Thus, from antiquity until fairly recent times, a man’s mental connections were with his immediate neighbors. The village nexus (to coin a phrase) was the source of human consensus. This consensus might — and generally did — include patent absurdities and bizarre superstitions, local eccentricities and passing fads, along with the genuine wisdom of the ages. It was an organic consensus, however, and generally quite resistant to alien influences.

But the village nexus has now been broken almost everywhere in America and the rest of the industrialized West, and a new mental connection is taking its place: the central nexus. Urbanization, the tearing loose of the people from their roots in the soil, the depersonalization of work, alienation — this complex of developments has been treated by scholars a thousand times over during the last century, and another treatment will not be given here.

But the central nexus itself, which is an outgrowth of these developments, is easy enough to understand. Millions of Americans, whose great-grandparents lived all their lives on the same farm or in the same village and knew intimately all their neighbors, today live in high-rise apartments, change addresses every 4.3 years on the average, and don’t even know the name of the family in the apartment across the hall. In our larger cities, in many cases, they may not even be able to speak the language of the family across the hall.

Under these conditions the TV set, with its packaged-in-New-York network programs, has taken the place of the bull session in the blacksmith’s shop; the big-city daily newspaper, with its “news” filtered through the national wire services, the place of the parish church; the cinema, presenting the latest product of the Hollywood film industry, the place of the general store; the glass-and-concrete educational emporium, with its state-coordinated text and curricula, the place of the little red schoolhouse; the night club, with its rock band and Jewish comedian and strangers at every table, the place of the Saturday night barn dance among neighbors.

The transition is not yet complete, of course. People still talk about politics and race and other issues at the office, in the barbershop, in the plant, in the school cafeteria, and across the backyard fence.

But the trend is quite unmistakable. For all practical purposes people’s opinions are determined these days by the central nexus rather than by the village nexus. And the central nexus is neither organic nor resistant to alien influences.

In fact, as our article, “The Masters of the Media” demonstrates, the central nexus, with its flow of information outward from a few hubs to millions of individuals whose connections to their neighbors have been severed, is ideally suited to infiltration and manipulation by any well-organized minority — and that is exactly what has happened.

The Jews did not plan or cause the transition from the village nexus to the central nexus, but they have certainly taken advantage of it to steer the thinking of the American people into channels compatible with Jewish interests.

So far as public opinion — the “thinking” of the masses — is concerned, there is no way to beat the central nexus. The average man will believe what John Chancellor tells him rather than what we tell him, because he can easily reassure himself that John Chancellor is telling the truth just by switching channels and noting that Walter Cronkite is saying the same thing.

More important, he will adopt the basic values that his newspaper and his favorite weekly news magazine and the characters in his favorite television serial assure him are the values of all but a lunatic fringe of his peers. He will learn all the clichés with which he “thinks” from Little House on the Prairie and The Late Show.

Unless one can continuously bombard him with an equal volume of different clichés — that is, unless one can establish an alternate central nexus — one cannot hope to build a new consensus among him and the rest of the White citizenry. And, of course, one cannot establish an alternate central nexus with anything less than all the gold in Fort Knox plus all the petrodollars in Riyadh.

That is why none of the right-wing schemes for White salvation currently being promoted will work. The majority of the White population will not act spontaneously to save themselves, because that’s not the way the central nexus has programmed them to act.

The foregoing comments do not reflect pessimism and should not cause pessimism in any but those unalterably wedded to a pet right-wing project. But we must understand that majority-based solutions are not feasible under present conditions, so that we can focus our efforts on a program for survival that will work.

Any such program requires a consensus, of course, which in turn requires a new nexus. Since we cannot have a majority consensus, then we must do what we can with a minority consensus.

We can build a minority consensus through an organizational nexus, and we will see how that is done and what its significance is in future issues of National Vanguard.

Meanwhile, there is no intention to disparage the racially conscious elements among the tax rebels, or any other White people with sound motives. But they must eventually be made to understand that without a consensus based on an organizational nexus all their efforts are utterly in vain.
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: The Organizational Nexus

PostSun Jan 11, 2015 5:06 pm

John Flynn wrote:The Organizational Nexus
by Dr. William Pierce
From Attack! Issue No. 65, 1978

...[T]he trend is quite unmistakable. For all practical purposes people’s opinions are determined these days by the central nexus rather than by the village nexus. And the central nexus is neither organic nor resistant to alien influences.

In fact, as our article, “The Masters of the Media” demonstrates, the central nexus, with its flow of information outward from a few hubs to millions of individuals whose connections to their neighbors have been severed, is ideally suited to infiltration and manipulation by any well-organized minority — and that is exactly what has happened.

The Jews did not plan or cause the transition from the village nexus to the central nexus, but they have certainly taken advantage of it to steer the thinking of the American people into channels compatible with Jewish interests.

So far as public opinion — the “thinking” of the masses — is concerned, there is no way to beat the central nexus. The average man will believe what John Chancellor tells him rather than what we tell him, because he can easily reassure himself that John Chancellor is telling the truth just by switching channels and noting that Walter Cronkite is saying the same thing.

More important, he will adopt the basic values that his newspaper and his favorite weekly news magazine and the characters in his favorite television serial assure him are the values of all but a lunatic fringe of his peers. He will learn all the clichés with which he “thinks” from Little House on the Prairie and The Late Show.

Unless one can continuously bombard him with an equal volume of different clichés — that is, unless one can establish an alternate central nexus — one cannot hope to build a new consensus among him and the rest of the White citizenry. And, of course, one cannot establish an alternate central nexus with anything less than all the gold in Fort Knox plus all the petrodollars in Riyadh.

That is why none of the right-wing schemes for White salvation currently being promoted will work. The majority of the White population will not act spontaneously to save themselves, because that’s not the way the central nexus has programmed them to act.

The foregoing comments do not reflect pessimism and should not cause pessimism in any but those unalterably wedded to a pet right-wing project. But we must understand that majority-based solutions are not feasible under present conditions, so that we can focus our efforts on a program for survival that will work.

Any such program requires a consensus, of course, which in turn requires a new nexus. Since we cannot have a majority consensus, then we must do what we can with a minority consensus.

We can build a minority consensus through an organizational nexus,
and we will see how that is done and what its significance is in future issues of National Vanguard.

Meanwhile, there is no intention to disparage the racially conscious elements among the tax rebels, or any other White people with sound motives. But they must eventually be made to understand that without a consensus based on an organizational nexus all their efforts are utterly in vain.

37 years ago Dr. Pierce wrote that. Substitute Bill O'Reilly and Chris Wallace for John Chancellor and Walter Cronkite and it reads as fresh today as it must have read to open-minded independent thinkers back then.

That part above, highlighted in red, was repeated many times by Dr. Pierce, and in many ways, to drive home the strategy of the National Alliance: hold the hard, necessary Cosmotheist line that will ensure our race's preservation and advancement, and build a movement around those attracted to it (that minority consensus) -- not with the those who are not. I used a quote like that for my signature file at Stormfront until a week or so ago:

"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 The Legacy of Dr. William Pierce: Portraits of Dr. Pierce
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: The Organizational Nexus

PostSun Jan 11, 2015 5:10 pm

Oh, my new signature file at Stormfront::

"The Alliance has no interest at all in the so-called movement. We're not interested in uniting with the movement, and we're not interested in competing with the movement for members. If anything, we should be grateful that the movement is out there to soak up a lot of the freaks and weaklings who otherwise might find their way into the Alliance and make problems for us."
— Dr. William L. Pierce, National Alliance Founder, at NA Leadership Conference, April 2002 http://www.natall.com
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: The Organizational Nexus

PostSun Jan 11, 2015 5:19 pm

Got this complaint about my new sig file:

Quote:
Originally Posted by xxxxx
Not in bright red, choose another color. Just not bright red.

[WWW:]
What's your objection?

That's [b]blood red
, Pat: [color=#FF0040]. If it is good enough for the covers of Best of Attack! and National Vanguard, The Turner Diaries, Hunter, and the original National Alliance Membership Handbook, it's good enough for my signature file.

Thank you for linking to National Vanguard in your own signature.[/b]
Offline

Cosmotheist

  • Posts: 643
  • Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:41 pm

Re: The Organizational Nexus

PostWed Jan 14, 2015 9:36 pm

What Is to Be Done?
PUBLISHED BY ROSEMARY PENNINGTON,
ON JANUARY 13TH, 2015
http://nationalvanguard.org/2015/01/what-is-to-be-done/

Image
by Dr. William L. Pierce (pictured)

IN THE FACE OF treason and criminal irresponsibility on the part of the politicians, of apathy and ignorance on the part of the White masses, and of cowardice and selfishness on the part of most intelligent Whites, what is to be done to save our race, in spite of itself?

The answer is not difficult to state, although a bit of argument is required to present a convincing case that it is the only answer.

The answer, in brief, is that an organization must be built which satisfies the following requirements:

It must be, first of all, not an ad hoc organization, but an organization based on fundamental principles, an organization with a world view, essentially religious in nature, shared by every member of the organization.

It must be, in structure, a hierarchical organization, like an army — or a religious order — with the degree of understanding, of commitment, and of discipline increasing with the level of responsibility in the organization.

It must be, in scope, an all-encompassing organization, an organization which not only generates propaganda and which recruits and trains new members, but which becomes eventually a community unto itself, self-sufficient spiritually and materially, providing all the functions and capabilities needed for carrying out its task — ultimately a separate state within the state.

And it must be an organization which, in time, incorporates within itself the best elements of our people, developing from this elite minority a majority of will and determination, so that, at an exceptional moment, sufficient historical leverage can be exerted by the organization to effect a permanent change, in the desired direction, in the course of history.
Image


Now we will begin looking at the way in which the organization satisfying the above requirements can be built, and we will at the same time see why the various alternative answers to our original question which have been put forward by others are incorrect answers.

The first thing to understand is that there is no shortcut or clever trick which will achieve what we want: no tax revolt, no slyly worded Constitutional amendment, no Pentagon coup d’état, no secretly racist Presidential candidate disguised as a Ronald Reagan. These shortcuts have a fatal fascination for right wingers, but none of them will work, and the reasons why they won’t are both specific and general.

Consider, for example, the scheme of some of the tax-revolt enthusiasts, who are quite numerous at the moment. The great majority of the tax rebels, of course, are not right wingers and have no goal beyond reducing their own taxes. But some see the general dissatisfaction with high taxes as an opportunity for bringing about a shutdown of some of the Federal government’s least popular programs.

They reason that if enough people can be persuaded to refuse to pay their income taxes, the government can be brought to its knees. Then the tax rebels can dictate certain reforms: no more Federally enforced school busing, no more welfare payments or subsidized housing for Blacks, no more weapons and money for the Zionists, etc.

But the System doesn’t work that way. In the first place, most of the government’s money comes from paycheck deductions and from other taxes over which the individual taxpayer has no control. Only the self-employed person even has the option of refusing to pay his income tax.

In the second place, the government will always find the money to enforce its various race-mixing programs, to buy off the Blacks, and to support Zionist ambitions. The politicians will dismantle the U.S. Air Force before they will hold up the welfare checks or shut down the subsidized housing.

If necessary they’ll just print more money. When they are really squeezed they’ll push through whatever legislation they need to counter a tax revolt, and the Federal judges — who feed at the same trough — will back them up.

In the third place, if a tax revolt ever seems to be really catching on, the System will delegate one of its own to “lead” it, and the controlled news media will obediently “legitimize” him. Remember the man the media masters crowned as official spokesman for the “support our President” conservatives during Richard Nixon’s Watergate crucifixion? It was Caiaphas himself: Rabbi Baruch Korff.

This danger of pre-emption exists so long as most members of any movement receive the majority of their information and attitudes regarding the movement through System-controlled channels. It can be avoided only by a movement which is so tightly organized that members look to the movement itself for information and guidance.

There is just one thing that a tax revolt might accomplish, at the very most: it might cause temporary and superficial changes in the System’s way of doing things. If the natives become restless enough, the politicians and the media masters will certainly seek to appease them. They will even risk a little Black unrest in order to ameliorate White anger and resentment. They might even change the tax laws — perhaps even substantially.

And that would be the end of the tax revolt, because 95 percent of the rebels would feel they had accomplished their purpose — which, after all, is merely to reform the System, not to do away with it altogether.

The most lethal weakness of the tax-revolt movement is that it is an ad hoc movement, with nothing other than anger to bind its adherents together, and always subject to being pre-empted by the System. If it were a front or an auxiliary for a movement based on fundamentals, then it might have some tactical value — in stirring up public discontent, in breaking down the public’s awe of the System, in generating internal stress in the System — in helping to prepare the way for permanent and substantive change. But by itself, with nothing fundamental behind it, with no meaningful, long-range goals to further, it is only a trap for fools.

Conservative and right-wing racists work up a perennial enthusiasm for Presidential candidates who, they convince themselves, are secretly on their side. A few years ago their hero was George Wallace. In 1980 it will probably be Ronald Reagan.

Never mind that any politician who has been a state governor in these United States has already compromised himself thoroughly and repeatedly. The right wingers tell themselves he had to say those things to get elected, he had to appoint that Black judge in order to keep his job, he had to wear a yarmulka to that Israel Bonds fundraiser in order to fool the Jews. When he becomes President, they say, he’ll turn the tables on the rascals.

Suppose that, through divine intervention or some other extraordinary means, a U.S. Presidential candidate remained pure in heart up to the day of his inauguration, uncorrupted by the inherently corrupt process which brought him to the White House. Suppose he really were the man his right-wing boosters thought him to be. Suppose he really did want to overturn the System, clean out the entrenched Federal bureaucracy, and restore America to strength, honor, and White precedence (which is about as radical a program as the right-wing imagination can encompass).

How would he do it? He might conceivably have a large enough circle of trusted and true personal friends, also uncorrupted and sharing his secret aims, so that he could pick a cabinet from among them.

Suppose his new secretary of health, education, and welfare then proceeded to halt all racial busing programs.

The media would tear into the new President with a fury which would make their Watergate assault on Nixon seem like good, clean fun in comparison.

The Congress would not approve his budget.

The courts would declare his anti-busing moves unconstitutional.

The entrenched, lower-level bureaucrats would sabotage his programs.

If all that didn’t make him back down, George Meany, Jerry Wurf, and the other labor bosses would paralyze the country with a general strike.

And, of course, the Blacks would riot.

Suppose a couple of top generals in the Pentagon were in cahoots with the President. They could order out the troops to begin arresting the media masters and the Federal judges and the labor bosses and to machine-gun the rioting Blacks.

But the troops wouldn’t go out — not the troops who make up today’s U.S. Army! And there would be any number of officers down the chain of command who would understand what was happening and who would countermand the generals’ orders. There might be quite a bit of confusion for a few hours, even a bit of shooting, but there would be no successful coup d’état.

It is hardly necessary to paint the whole picture, even for the right wingers. The idea of a one-man revolution, or of a revolution by a small group of conspirators, or of any other sly trick which amounts to sneaking up on the System and slipping a sack over its head, is sheer nonsense.

In addition to the myriad specific reasons why such schemes will not work, there are two general reasons which apply to all of them.

First, the System which rules America is a massive, many-headed thing. Those who would change it must be prepared to replace not only the President and his staff and his department heads and the top military leaders, but also tens of thousands of people at the intermediate and lower levels of government.

It is not sufficient merely to shoot the top executives in the TV networks and in the editorial offices of the big-city newspapers. It is necessary to have people immediately at hand to replace them, people who are not only reliable but also competent. And it is likewise necessary to have replacements for the police chiefs of the major cities, for the superintendents of schools, for the Federal and state judges.

No revolution can be carried through successfully which leaves the nation’s legislators, teachers, preachers, labor leaders, business leaders, newsmen, and the leading members of every other segment of society unchanged, still loyal to the old order, still under the influence of old ideas. One must have not one man and not a small group of conspirators, but a revolutionary army which can supply from its ranks an entire social superstructure for the nation to replace the existing superstructure. And the members of this new superstructure must be not only ideologically reliable but also strong and capable people, willing and able to do what is demanded of them.

The second general reason why there is no shortcut to the new order is that America is far sicker than the right wingers realize — or are even capable of understanding. Their general tendency to oversimplify the problem confronting them by thinking in terms of replacing a small number of evildoers with good men, as outlined above, leads also to a failure to see the extent to which the problem is rooted in the general population.

The right-wing tendency is to put all the blame for America’s ills on a few people: on a clique of powerful conspirators (the “insiders”), on the Jews, on the international bankers, on the “trilateralists,” or what have you. (This also happens to be a left-wing tendency, if one excludes the Jews as potential culprits.) The masses of the people are seen as basically healthy but unable to put their sound instincts and their good common sense to work because of the control exerted by the evil conspirators at the top.

Such a view is sheer fantasy.

There are, to be sure, conspirators and conspiracies of various unwholesome sorts. And there most assuredly are Jews, who wield a great deal of power and use it to the enormous detriment of our race. But there is also a disease abroad in our land, and it extends far beyond the Jews and their conspiratorial henchmen. It permeates our whole society and afflicts the great majority of our people.

It does little good to complain about the thieves, the traitors, the Jew-fawners, and the incompetents in the Congress without taking into account the fact that the great, White masses of this country elected them to the Congress because they liked their smiles and their folksy ways. And they keep re-electing them, even after their treachery and their crookedness is revealed.

Image
Hubert Humphrey

The late Hubert Humphrey was one of the vilest pieces of filth to foul this world with his presence. He unabashedly groveled at the feet of the Jews and sold out the interests of his race over and over again during the more than three decades of his political career. And yet the good people of Minnesota — a nearly all-White state — repeatedly chose him as their senator in Washington.

Nor can the blame be put entirely on the System’s control of the political process for what the Minnesotans did. They may not have been allowed much of an alternative to voting for Humphrey, but it is clear that they did it voluntarily rather than under protest. When Humphrey descended to his just deserts early this year, many a White Minnesotan blubbered mawkishly for the TV cameras about how much “heart” good, old Hubert had.

Right wingers bemoan — and rightly so — the jungle music and the race-mixing TV programs which the Jew-controlled networks broadcast to poison the minds of our people. But they conveniently forget that White Americans listen to that music and watch those programs, not just voluntarily, but enthusiastically. Any right winger who tried to take their Jewish poison away from the White masses and give them something healthy in its place would be in danger of being lynched by those same White masses.

And it does no good to make excuses for the people, to blame their mores and their voting habits on alien influences. Changes in the public’s behavior and attitudes which may be wrought a generation after the overthrow of the System are of little help in overthrowing the System.

What must be taken into account are the facts as they exist now, and one of those facts is that there is no strong, general sentiment in favor of the changes which right-wing racists want to bring about. There is precious little concern even about saving the White race.

Anger at the government’s taxing policies, resentment at being forced to mix with Blacks, dissatisfaction generally with the flabby, inefficient, and corrupt government in Washington are all potentially useful phenomena, of course, but one must be careful not to read too much into them. In particular, one must not nourish with them the false hope that the White people of America will of their own accord rise up against the System — when things have become a little worse, when the confidently predicted “economic crash” comes — and set things right again.

Successful revolution and permanent change can only come through organization, and that is a matter we will examine in National Vanguard next month.

* * *


From Attack! No. 64, 1978, transcribed by Anthony Collins and edited by Vanessa Neubauer, from the book The Best of Attack! and National Vanguard, edited by Kevin Alfred Strom
Offline

Jim Mathias

  • Posts: 457
  • Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 8:48 pm

Re: The Organizational Nexus

PostMon Apr 16, 2018 12:47 am

"What is to be Done?" makes the clearest case for the construction of a revolutionary organization with which to have on hand should the opportunity come to govern our destiny. Well said, Dr. Pierce!

Return to Dr. William Pierce

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests