Dave Chambers: Know Who to Target, and Who Not to Target
When political campaigns send canvassers out to talk to potential voters, they tend to be quite deliberate in selecting which areas they target. This is extremely sensible, as there is simply not enough time or money to send someone to speak to every possible voter in person.
---
Who to target with pro-White material is such an importan topic. Thanks for raising it. My opionon is that recruiting people for our cause from a pool of potential voters isn't taking "high percentage shots." I'd call it the shotgun approach. What would you send them? But good luck if it works. Potential voters in political campaigns are likely to still believe Whites can vote our way out of the Judaized mess our country has become. We cannot.
Prompted by
Who Not to Target I found the recruiting advice I was looking for from Dr. Pierce to his National Alliance members 32 years ago. It's six types of defectives to avoid when recruiting for our organization. For brevity, here are the first three. Take them for what they're worth. I'll follow with the other three.
Part 1
The importance of keeping defective people out of our ranks cannot be overemphasized. It is not just that we want to be proud of our membership in an elite organization, nor is it just that some types of defective people are nuisances or distractions rather than assets. Defective members are the single greatest threat to the success or even the survival of the National Alliance, more so than the government or organized Jewry. For every organization which is brought to grief by a spy, an infiltrator, or a provocateur, a dozen are wrecked by a member with a severe character flaw.
A few of the more common defective types to be avoided by the recruiter are described below.
The talker: Gossip is an almost universal human pastime, among men as well as women. Most people, even if they don’t talk much themselves, like to hear other people talk about their neighbors and co-workers. The desire to express one’s opinions or to listen to a bit of gossip occasionally is not necessarily a weakness or a sign of poor character. In some people, however, talkativeness goes beyond reasonable bounds: the desire to talk becomes a compelling need.
Compulsive talking is generally regarded as a feminine trait, but the problem occurs in men as well as in women. It is a trait we do not want in our members.
In the first place, compulsive talking tends to serve as a substitute for action: The talker is seldom a doer. In the second place, it more often than not indicates an underlying personality defect: The person who talks too much to his friends is likely to be a weak person who will yield to pressure to betray those same friends if he finds himself in a difficult situation. And in the third place, any organization, like the National Alliance, which is surrounded by people who would like to see it come to grief must exercise some control over information about its members and activities; control is difficult to exercise if compulsive talkers are in our ranks.
The hobbyist: The inexperienced recruiter may assume that a person who reads many racially oriented periodicals, belongs to two or three other organizations, and likes to talk about personalities and activities in these organizations is a good prospect. Usually that isn’t true. The person who has made a hobby of the White resistance “movement” may be persuaded to expand the scope of his hobby by joining the National Alliance, but in most cases he isn’t the sort of member we want.
The hobbyist is a person who joins an organization primarily for recreational purposes and has little or no understanding of service, commitment, or loyalty. He may pay his dues every month, but he can never be entrusted with organizational responsibility, and we usually won’t want him to come in contact with our other members.
Like the talker, he has difficulty with the idea of responsibility. Whether he understands it or not, his most basic motive is to amuse himself, and his decisions often can be traced to this motive. He will choose to do what is exciting or interesting or titillating rather than what is prudent or useful.
The hobbyist usually lacks a sense of discrimination. To him any organization which asserts its commitment to the cause of White survival and progress is part of the “movement” and is worthy of respect, regardless of how infantile its actions or ill-planned its program; and any person who mouths the right slogans is regarded as a “comrade,” regardless of character or other personal qualities.
There are several telltale signs that often permit a hobbyist to be spotted immediately, or that should at least lead the recruiter to be wary:
Tip o' the hat to Dillon Rau for
finding this perfect image
• Wearing of exotic uniform pieces or insignia is a dead giveaway. Hobbyists are at heart game-players, dabblers in make-believe. Wearing an old Afrika Korps cap or a swastika lapel pin helps a hobbyist to feel that he is playing the game. Non-exotic uniform pieces — camouflage fatigues or combat boots in inappropriate situations — also may indicate hobbyism.
• Coming to a meeting with non-relevant “movement” publications in hand is a standard hobbyist failing. The hobbyist likes to play “show and tell.” He hopes that the material he has brought will make him the center of attention and provide a titillating subject for conversation. It does not occur to him — and it wouldn’t make any difference if it did — that he is distracting other members and defocusing their attention from the task of the National Alliance.
• Fascination with what is happening in the “movement,” instead of in the National Alliance, is a hobbyist characteristic. The “movement,” consisting as it does of scores of organizations, provides a much larger arena for the hobbyist to play his games. It doesn’t matter how inconsequential these other organizations are, since it’s all a game of make-believe anyway. The fellow who is bubbling over with information about the latest pratfalls of some Imperial Wizard or the details of a feud between two newsletter publishers is probably a hobbyist.
The gung-ho loudmouth: Not to be confused with the talker, who is usually of a passive disposition, the gung-ho loudmouth is a would-be activist who shoots from the lip. He likes to let off steam by proposing direct action against the enemies of White civilization, immediately if not sooner. He’ll pick up a newspaper, point to a news item about some outrageous act by Blacks or Jews or the government, and exclaim, “What are we going to do about that? Why are we just talking and publishing books? The time has come for action. Let’s go get those SOBs!”
His idea of “action” is something which will cause a public stir and get the Alliance mentioned on the evening news. He wants excitement. He wants to get in some licks. Often he imagines that he has had a “success” if he has been able to provoke an angry confrontation with some member of the public who has taken exception to a piece of Alliance material or to something the loudmouth has said. Sometimes he imagines that he has leadership potential which has been overlooked by the leaders of the National Alliance, and that the rank and file will gather around him if he talks and acts the way he thinks a leader should talk and act, based on his careful observation of many of Hollywood’s most dramatic and exciting action films.
Of course, there is a time for action of the sort this fellow wants. Some of the activities Local Units engage in may make the evening news. Most of the Alliance’s activities don’t make headlines, however. Most don’t involve street action. Most seem like pretty tame stuff to the gung-ho loudmouth. The recruiter must try to decide whether his prospect is capable of calming down and becoming a disciplined Alliance member when he understands the Alliance’s program better, or whether he is someone who is absolutely set on street activity for its own sake. In the latter case, if there is a Local Unit in the area which regularly engages in street activity, perhaps it can put a gung-ho recruit to good use; but if there isn’t, this fellow probably should be left to make his own headlines without getting the Alliance involved. As a member he would only cause morale problems — and perhaps legal problems — for other members with whom he came in contact.
continued...
