His latest comment at Majority Rights
Apologies for the length, but I got carried away.
Leon Haller: “The problem of white survival is rapidly passing from a philosophical to a military one.”
Well put. Indeed, it is already a military problem, in the sense that it is impossible to imagine our current system and form of government taking the steps necessary to cleanse our lands. As a practical matter, things have progressed well beyond that. I believe that Powell understood as much back then, that if things weren’t nipped in the bud very quickly, it would be too late. Too late, that is, for a peaceful electoral solution. Not too late for other approaches.
While not advocating anything, if we could skip into direct cleansing of our lands (the “military” solution), that would have obvious benefits. But without the necessary philosophical foundation, it’s simply not going to happen. There has to be a significant segment (it won’t require a majority, or even close) of the white population that becomes convinced that force is both moral and necessary in order to restore their ancestral homelands. Right now, we aren’t there yet. We don’t even have a proper sense of ourselves, of what we are, much less a firm conviction that it is proper to use force in order to secure our existence. Until that changes, our fortunes will not improve, at least not outwardly.
In fact, the anti-white philosophical revolution is still making progress in some areas, though atrophying in others. For example, the highest-ranking military officers are now incredibly politically correct, often shockingly so. (I don’t mention that to imply that the “military” solution must necessarily come from a formal, currently constituted military force). I doubt they are even faking it anymore. Our enemies have long feared a rogue military, and this fear has been evident for generations—see Dr. Strangelove as discussed by Yggdrasil. They have acted upon their fears and turned the military into pathetic, docile and subservient dogs. Goodbye old paint, and tradition and honor while you’re at it.
Point is that the philosophical foundational work cannot be skipped. There is no way around it. I’d love to be proven wrong on that, but I won’t be. Our enemies worked on spreading their ideas in the first half of the twentieth century, and by the latter half they had altered the worldview of a significant portion of the white population. They then were able to reap the benefits. Of course, we have to do our job with far fewer resources, and we will not be allowed to march through the institutions. But we have emerging technologies to work with, a cause that is just, and a little thing called truth on our side. In any event, we’re not gods capable of producing manna from heaven, so we must work with what is available.
As an example that I’ve written about quite a bit, I’ve personally observed the spread of libertarian ideas in our society, and while not nearly as suppressed as white nationalism, they accomplished much of it online or using other means that are available to us. There was no massive march through the institutions, etc., so there is more than one way to skin a cat. Point is that ideas can in fact spread with fairly minimal money and institutional support. You need some, but not as much as most would think.
I think one problem with white nationalists is that they have never really experienced the successful spreading of an idea with only limited means. As a former libertarian, I have experienced this. I understand how it is done, and as esoteric as some of our conversations are, I’m telling you that we’re doing it right here, right now. The usual suspects can snicker all they like, but this is one way that it works—and it does work.
As to White Zion, I’m interested in learning more. Once you guys get a site up, I’ll check it out. It’s good to have out of the box thinking, and on a related note I must admit that I’ve become more sympathetic to the Northwest idea as time has gone on (I realize your WZ concept is very different). But at the end of the day, unless whites regain a worldview in which they are willing to fight for their survival, I don’t expect much to come of anything.
Yet I have optimism on this point: I believe regaining a sense of ourselves is in fact going to happen. In fact, I believe it to be happening as we speak, though like other ideas that do not meet system approval, much of the progress is unseen, and will only manifest itself later—and then very quickly (the Ron Paul phenom was the result of decades of foundational work, in which most libertarians were viewed as weirdos, something from Mars, or a Larouchie). White nationalism is in fact coming along, though this won’t be obvious for some time. I’ve said it again and again: the ideas are progressing, and other than obvious system suppression, the biggest thing holding us back is the tolerance of kooks and liars—but even they can only slow, not stop the progress.
Of course, none of this changes the fact that a peaceful solution, within the bounds of the present system rules, is now impossible. But then again, it has been so for decades, it’s just that most of us hadn’t realized it yet (enemy ideas snuck up on us too, spreading over the course of decades, but with their full evil only apparent fairly recently, except to the far sighted few).
So, in a sense, the Rubicon has already been crossed. On one level at least, does it really matter whether the non-white percentage in one of our lands is ten percent, as opposed to twenty or thirty? Well before they reached ten percent, it became damn near impossible for our present system to eject them peacefully. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting that we shouldn’t try to stem the incoming tide as much as we can. We should, and it may be possible to do that to a limited extent with the present system and mainstream parties. But at the end of the day, it will still take force to remove the alien colonizers. Slowing the tide only gives us some extra breathing space (and not much of that), it does not solve the fundamental problem.
The tragedy of it all is that the longer it takes for the conflict to come to a head in the form of a civil war in Europe (or elsewhere), the greater the suffering and loss of life will be—on both sides. The faster our ideas spread, on the other hand, the less costly the ultimate conflict.
The conflict could take many forms, but I now believe it to be inevitable. At the risk of sounding overly dramatic, it is out of this crucible that a new world will be born, assuming that we win, and I firmly believe that we will.
For now it is the battle of the mind, not the sword. For everything a season.
4 replies on “Trainspotter comment”
We need first to justify the cause in the hearts of a great chunk of the White population. Internet may help but we have to keep also a front in the streets or we risk to become digital paper tiger’s. Democracy is not an option anymore, but we must keep using it only for propaganda while keeping a grassroots movement of militia man reading themselves for battle.
While using internet we must avoid engaging in pointless discussions as much as we can, instead of moaning and cursing our luck in the forums we must create cultural material and use this powerful tool of communication to distribute it. We must start making quality things not just for entertainment but for indoctrination while stressing the need of broader involvement in the cause in real non-digital actions.
Easier said than done… Lets get to work!
IMO, that is marginal. Relative to realpolitik, the biggest thing holding us back is the same thing that has held us back for 50 years: the ongoing factions and infighting, and the intransigence to not resolve it (more so NAmerika than in Europa, I would imagine). This is as it is. It will, by the looks of it, not be resolved by a well-intentioned group hug.
Even if and when the crisis results in conflict, it will still, at some point, have to be resolved politically.
My response posted yesterday…
Since GW (the MR admin) saw fit to delete this link from his site (and since on reflection I would expect the same treatment from Mangan or GoV if I was still allowed at either one), I will put it here instead
and I will add that it is insane stupidity and cowardice to act as though discussions of self-defense and methods thereof, particularly in the context of recent events in London, are morally and legally equivalent to advocating mass murder.
Government repression-by-fear of the right ONLY WORKS IF YOU GO ALONG WITH IT.
And what’s worse, they’re going to go all the way ANYWAY. “We be good, boss” will not save you in the end. Commit PCMC treason now, or commit it later because you have no other options left. Better to do it when there is still a chance of having some useful impact. Didn’t Churchill have something to say along those lines?
I have my disagreements with the Threepers, reflexively anti-racist as most of them are, but at least they get this, and at least they openly state the legitimate purposes of deadly violence. How do you think you get to the point Trainspotter is talking about if you can’t actually state your argument? “This is bad! This is really bad! I mean, wow, this is so bad!” Yes, ok, we know. But:
If you never have a “then what” clause in your argument, you are spinning your wheels. You don’t have to start right off with “then we shoot them all!” but there has to be an acceptance that, at some level, deadly force may be the only final restraint. That’s the nature of the state. Those against whom it can and will employ deadly force are those subject to its laws; the rest … are not.