web analytics
2nd World War American civil war Civil war Currency crash James Mason Mainstream media

Annapolis shooting – novelist wanted

Siege’s most recent entry is important. Let’s take a look at Mason’s words:

At present the worst enemies of a revolution happening in America are: the unbroken sway of the System’s thought-control, i.e. the mass media; and the continued existence of this economy, as agonizing as it is protracted (and miraculous).

Regarding Mason’s second point, Mike Maloney, like millions of normies, may be a perfect western idiot. But it is worth watching his first four videos of why the American dollar is going to suffer a great setback in our lifetime.
Regarding Mason’s first point, there are limits to what one can say online. Perhaps a talented writer could write a series of novels in which the revolutionaries silenced the media by means of dozens of assassinations of anchors after the revolutionary front had warned: ‘An anti-white message in MSM leads to certain death’.
Strategically, those novels would be quite different from the quintet of Harold Covington. I’ve recently seen, on Twitter, that the Covingtonista who appeared on the last WDH podcast believes it’s possible to hostilely take over a piece of territory from the US and that, unlike what Uncle Sam did in Atlanta during the Civil War in the 19th century, and unlike the genocidal bombing of cities in Germany in the 20th century, this time Uncle Sam is going to behave and respect a neo-Nazi state!
The Covingtonistas are dreaming. Mason is down to earth. Again, regarding his second point above, the System itself will do us the favour of collapsing its own economy (those who have not yet seen the first four videos of Maloney’s course should watch them today).
Regarding silencing the media, we need a novelist with the talent of Covington who elaborates, in a fictional saga, the question of settling accounts with the media (as yesterday happened, in real life, in the Annapolis shooting).

48 replies on “Annapolis shooting – novelist wanted”

I find it funny that the Covington crowd adamantly reject what James says in SIEGE yet simultaneously advocate for guerilla warfare against the system. The only real difference between the two is naivete. The Covingtonistas have not only duped themselves into believing that the U.S. would tolerate them but refuse to accept the gritty nature of the war that would lead to the establishment of such a state in the first place.

I’ve heard similar. As far as I know it wasn’t direct but implicit. According to some friends of mine who are in touch, Mason shrugged it off.

I used to correspond with Uncle Harold after reading his whole quartet (this was before his Freedom’s Sons). After I became disillusioned with him I stopped listening to his podcasts.
In the very first novel of his quintet Covington put Pierce as an informant, which is a shame.

The basic Covingtonista strategy is to bankrupt the system by forcing it to fight an unwinable expensive war. It’s is anticipated that the accountants will surrender before the military. Who knows, maybe it could work?

Just think about it. When Israel finds Hamas soldiers hiding in hospitals, the Kikes do not hesitate to drop bombs on the buildings, killing how many innocents. The Western world blames the terrorists and not the Jews for the airstrikes on civilians because it was the terrorists who hide there in the first place. Now, baring in mind that Racists are considered the most evil creatures that could ever exist, why would the US Government not just drop a thermonuclear bomb on the entire Pacific Northwest as a prophylactic measure? No one would complain. It would be considered a necessary evil, like how the saturation bombings on Germany was considered a necessary evil.
If the System believes that the war is expensive and unwinnable, and does not just drop a nuke on the PNW, then they will do so when the Racist state is formed.
But forgetting this, Covington is still stuck in American values, things like the Democratic system and “freedom of speech”. Just see his Northwest Constitution and you will know what I am talking about.

In Covington’s quartet the White Republic is never bombed. Why? Because it is fiction and in fictional books the good guys always evade the bullets.
Yesterday I watched the opening scene of Moonraker. The Jaws character, who had appeared in the previous 007 movie, pushes James Bond (Roger Moore) out of the airplane without parachute. Since it is a movie, James Bond manages to land unharmed and even arrives to his appointment with the Prime Minister and Q in London.
Something similar happens in Covington’s quartet. When the US sends airplanes to bomb the New Racist State, the racists invented a blue ray to shoot the planes down (science fiction of course: in real life the blue ray doesn’t exist). And when the US president is about to nuke the New Racist State an heroine in the White House strikes a pencil through the President’s eye. The Racist State is thus saved—by a woman!
As fiction it’s okay. As a realistic plan… Keep dreaming Covingtonistas.
Unlike Covington’s sci-fi dreams, James Mason is absolutely right that ‘The only valid Fascist/NS action in America is that of the absolutely leveling of the existing State, state culture, its values—in short, the total destruction of “Americanism” as such. Only then can something organic (and thus Fascist/NS) be grown in its place’.

You’re implying the U.S. military has any regard for the expenses it incurs. As history has shown, it most certainly does not.

As long as the system can extort the tax revenue necessary to service the interest on the public debt; the system will endure. To bankrupt it, then, means suppressing its ability to collect that revenue. There is also the adventuristic tendency of the beltway morons to take into account. It is expected that, at some point, that they will overreach themselves in their fight for Israel’s glory and precipitate a social collapse on their home territory. Then as we say in Ireland; England’s difficulty is Ireland’s opportunity.

Although, what I think Harold has really done is to take contemporary Irish history of the seventies, eighties and nineties; transplanted it to the Pacific Northwest, and made for himself a nice little pension scheme.

That would have no real tactical value in a civil war. What Mason says above is that we have two main enemies. IMO the first one will be killed soon by the stupid System itself. Freedom fighters should handle the second one.

Good point. Actually, it reminds me of when Mason said that we should not get involved in silly squabbles that are counterproductive to the revolution. Although killing the Louis Vuitton pigs may feel good, it would have no value, like you say.

While I view Covington’s corner as unrealistic (for many reasons) I also view the belief that White Men will take over the whole US in a violent revolution as equally delusional. To be honest I don’t see much of a future for Whites in the US. I think they’ll be marginalized more and more without much of a fight as America becomes a majority Hispanic ‘Brazil North’. I could be wrong of course.
The population of non-Aryans in the US at the moment is about 150 million+ and I simply don’t see Whites ethnically cleansing 150 million coloureds from the world superpower in our lifetime. Is there any record in history of Whites engaging in such large-scale ethnic cleansing? Even back in the days of colonialism when our race appeared healthy we still refused to genocide the 80 million Blacks in Africa when we could have and instead opted for the compassionate option of keeping them alive instead. What is the likelehood that today’s modern American Whites would have any capability of Turner Diaries-style mass genocide? A hostile takeover of the US military’s nukes by a radical group like Atomwaffen Division seems just as delusional to me as Covington’s Northwest Front plan.
Theoretically an effective violent revolution is possible, but the track record of White racialists not fighting back in the US since WWII makes me think revolutionary racialists will continue talking about fighting but have little effect in the US itself.
I’d like to be wrong on this count and the future is uncertain and contains many variables. There is almost certainly going to be an economic crisis with the dollar and there are other factors like civil war and balkanization underneath the surface in the US. But I’ve come close to writing off the former Anglo-Saxons nations, both the US and the UK, as doomed as a consequence of their horrendous actions against their Fatherland during WWII and after.

I have finished reading a book called Iron Gates, where 75 years after a nuclear holocaust, the new rising power in the US is a Lovecraftian horror called the organisation. I wouldn’t recommend it, but it does show that even if the Struggle was made easier through nukes, it doesn’t mean the good guys will automatically win as a result.

Was there a point to that novel? The Atomwaffen types heavily promoted it, so I gave it a try. In the first 15 pages or so some dominatrix was murdering toddlers and guards were sodomizing each other. It ended up in my trashcan.

What the Atomwaffen types should be reading is Hitler’s Table Talk, Hellstorm, the abridged Gulag Archipelago, Who We Are and the forthcoming Christianity’s Criminal History (my translated excerpts from the first Kriminalgeschichte volume). Hitler was a fairly educated man. Are the Atomwaffen types so educated?

Mason isn’t advocating a “takeover” of the U.S.- he’s advocating for it’s ultimate destruction in every capacity. There is no attempt to take the U.S. by anyone other than the alternative right.
Certainly if more radical groups succeed on U.S. soil they will not be controlling much, if any, of the current contiguous U.S.

Mason isn’t advocating a “takeover” of the U.S.- he’s advocating for it’s ultimate destruction in every capacity.

Mason envisions “assuming open control” at some point, so it’s clear he doesn’t want to abolish the government, or abolish the media. He only wants to revise them along NS lines. He’s vague about what exactly that would entail, probably intentionally so. It’s also not clear whether the revolution he calls for is to be strictly a political revolution, or a full-scale cultural revolution. For example, by using the shopworn rhetoric of the right about “thought control” and the people “not being allowed to think” he could be taken as implying that there is some reservoir of resentment and rage at the government that is just waiting to be tapped; in short, that the masses of whites are ready for revolution, and eager for an NS-style government. If that’s what he means, it doesn’t seem to have occurred to him that this may not be the case; that white people of the US in general aren’t discontent, and with relatively minor reservations, actually approve its current policies. If his assessment is correct though, all that would be needed is a political revolution.
Alternatively, he could be interpreted to mean that the great mass of white people will need to be re-educated along NS lines, and at some point in the predicted future chaos a small elite of NS warriors could take over and use the media and government for this purpose. That’s how I read him; he’s calling for a political revolution followed by a cultural revolution. It’s an interesting idea, pretty common on the right, but I question whether it could work. Historically, cultures haven’t been successfully engineered from the top down. They’ve emerged organically, possess a certain inertia or homeostasis, and are induced to change in unforeseen ways mainly as a side effect of technological developments.

I have spoken to James, as of today he does not want to preserve any aspect of Americanism; however I do not know what he meant at the time but as far as I could tell SIEGE did not entail a “takeover” strictly speaking.

@esotericisms I know Mason was advocating for the complete destruction of the foul beast that is the USA, when I said “I also view the belief that White Men will take over the whole US in a violent revolution as equally delusional” perhaps I should have said I view the idea that White Men will create an organic NS State on the North American continent through the lone wolf terrorism that Mason advocates in Siege as unlikely.
Mason is vague at times in Siege as to outlining how he imagines the revolution to occur and what will replace ‘America’ once the NS revolution has been achieved. Times have changed since the Siege newsletters were penned and with this circumstances have changed. For example Mason envisioned Charles Manson as The Leader of the organic NS State, an idea which I agree with, but that possibility has passed as Manson has died and the opportunity was largely squandered by the unimaginative racialist right-wing when Manson was alive. Manson had the concept of Universal Order which as Mason elaborated on in Siege was a global concept of world-wide Order, the sort of New Order that would have existed if Hitler had won WWII (as Manson said “Hitler was trying to put order into the world”) but with Charles Manson as Fuhrer instead of Hitler. Indeed Manson saw himself as a leader of a one world government that would eliminate industrial civilization to conduct a “revolution against pollution”. To what extent Mason’s goal of the destruction of the ZOG System was related to Manson’s goal of the destruction of the System of industrial civilization as a whole is not made entirely clear in Siege.
As Spahn Ranch stated, while Mason does desire the destruction of the System and the ‘wiping the slate clean’ of the New Zion/Great Satan/Whore of Babylon that is the USA (whose citizens are “dead in the Jews money” as Manson correctly surmised), Mason seems to imagine that after the initial anarchy and chaos Universal Order will be established by an NS government. That can only occur if NS revolutionaries gain a monopoly on armed force in North America. I just don’t see how small bands of NS revolutionaries, operating primarily through the lone wolf attacks outlined in Siege, will gain control of the US military. If they don’t gain control of the US military they will be crushed just like the Covingtonistas in the Northwest and no NS racial state could be formed in North America.

I understand what you’re saying, and times have changed, however a collapse in the United States would see a total decline of it’s power. I believe that after a proverbial collapse that America will eat it’s self alive. It’s not as if negroes in the military will obey orders like they do now; they’ll be trying to get back home to their families as they know where their loyalties lie, and it isn’t with ZOG if ZOG is incapable of providing for them. Also I believe that the establishment of a form or another of an NS state would be largely informal, and probably rather small at first.
The point of pushing SIEGE is in order to normalize the thought of violence against the state among the racially aware who are all too comfy with their “let’s put the niggers back in their place!” reactionary Ideology.
Ultimately, I do not believe that the U.S. military will be able to operate competently whenever law and order degenerates. They’ll have some other, awfully large problems (such as rioting negroes, mestizos) to deal with before a few roaming bands of racists.

Why some take Charles Manson seriously is beyond me (as was beyond William Pierce and, hadn’t the Americans backed Churchill, beyond the surviving NS men). It speaks eloquently about the bankruptcy of the racial movement in the US.
Hermann1 Ronin says that those who imagine a NS state in NorthAm are hallucinating. He speaks of burning all things Murkan but as an optimist I believe that after the forest burns new life germinates among the ashes.
In what will remain of the US whites would start replacing the Old and New Testaments for The Turner Diaries and Who We Are as the basics of their new Bible. There’s no way in hell that their race may be saved without a real paradigm shift.

“In what will remain of the US whites would start replacing the Old and New Testaments for The Turner Diaries and Who We Are as the basics of their new Bible.”
We might hope that would be the case, but we should consider the possibility that a societal collapse may only increase Christian religious mania. From a racial point of view, the damage resulting from this might not be that bad, at least in the short term. If that happened, Christianity might be forced by circumstances to become more “muscular” again, and temporarily forget its anti-racist core. We have to acknowledge that Christians do have an almost infinite capacity for hypocrisy. In the long term though, unless Christianity is stopped from reverting back to anti-racism by a permanent technological collapse that makes such a reversion impossible, the danger it poses to the white race would recur.
Pierce’s books aren’t popular not least because people generally don’t want to know information that causes them discomfort by challenging their worldview. It’s called cognitive dissonance and it’s very painful for most people. Just look at the way Christians defend their faith-based worldview as important for white people to retain, despite the fact that it has completely failed to preserve the white race. It failed to preserve the Confederacy. It has failed in contemporary America and Europe. It again failed abjectly in Russia and South Africa. It even failed in NS Germany, where the leadership, at least, was aware of its defects and tried, rather ineffectually as it turned out, to counteract them. Yet, mysteriously, this record of failure doesn’t matter to Christians. In fact, they cite all of those failures as instances of glorious success! The victors in all of those struggles were also Christians, most of them white Christians who fought like demons for a raceless worldview, and all of their victories were over other white people. Christians have a long history of killing their Christian opponents. That’s how they have always dealt with heresy. In this way racelessness has become the dominant worldview, and except for a few extreme outliers like the people who frequent this forum, nobody wants to see that challenged. Jesus, you see, would not approve.

“Why some take Charles Manson seriously is beyond me …”
I don’t take him seriously, but I understand why others do, both his friends and his enemies.
It’s because Manson stood America’s Christian axiology on its head. It’s anti-racist, he was a racist. It’s law-abiding, he was a criminal. It’s feminist, he represented masculine power and domination of women. It’s uncomfortable with sex, and he was a Dionysus, a satyr, a force of Nature. It’s God-fearing, and he mocked its God. It’s materialistic, dressed for success, and he was a homeless vagabond, hiding out in the desert, dressed in rags.
Manson was everything America hates about itself in one diminuitive package. He was its bête noire, what it’s been trying to destroy within itself for 250 years. In his background are links to the Confederacy, the KKK, anti-semitism, and Hitler. He was America’s guilty conscience, a reminder of what has been lost, of who has been disenfranchised and dispossessed. He was the negative image of political correctness, opposing it on every point, and not with mere words, but with deeds. Manson was America’s worst nightmare made flesh.

Also, remember that Manson was a victim of abuse and the reform schools as a young boy. His existence was a reminder that America not only ignored abuse, but aided and abetted it. America created places for young boys where their innocence would go to die, and Manson was constantly telling them this with his very presence, never letting them forget. One could say that the Tate/Labianca murders were the fault of the System itself, not Manson and his commune.

In NorthAm the men to emulate must be Rockwell + Pierce = Hitler (or alternatively, a fictional Dr. Peters).
That some losers use Manson as a paradigm means, obviously, that they love the loser: which is why American racists never win within their current paradigm.

I do not see why they’d need to be Rockwell, or Pierce. Ethically speaking I understand Pierce however Pierce’s ultimate failing was his penchant for recruiting those he perceived to be “winners”- the middle class, people with no fighting spirit whatsoever. I think It’s funny that he continued to do this despite seeing Rockwell’s example insofar as recruitment goes. I see no harm in idolizing someone like Manson alongside both Rockwell and Pierce. The only real difference is that Manson does not conform to this glorified, middle class standard that so many WN’s (such as Anglin) and NS (such as Pierce) seem to idolize, for no reason, other than they believe that someone’s socioeconomic standing is somehow a valid appraisal of their character and ability.

No, I don’t. At least not the overwhelming majority of them anyway. And I don’t see why that should matter. Everyone I know who ‘idolizes’ Manson also idolizes Pierce and Rockwell in equal measure. Just because they’ve added another to their respective personal pantheon means nothing to me as I can’t see any negative repercussions of doing so outside of further alienating lemmings.

I see Manson as more a right-wing anarchist than a future Fuehrer. He wasn’t an organization man, at least not unless you consider the Family an organization. The idea of him running a vast, totalitarian state bureaucracy is frankly a little bit comical.
esotericisms makes a good point that Manson’s importance to the right lies in the fact that he doesn’t conform to middle-class values; he’s not trying to be “respectable”. The right has failed in America just because it has those values. They are unwilling to break the law; unwilling to risk poverty and privation, risk their precious reputations, or indeed, risk anything. In that sense, Manson the outlaw, the criminal, the societal reject, is a good role model. The outlaw risks his life merely by his opposition to the System. That opposition is what defines him and places him outside it. To the extent that the right isn’t on the side of the outlaw, it is itself a part of the System. No wonder then that it fails in its goal of revolution. It’s insincere, a phony opposition.

Covington’s aspirational (and increasingly delusional) conception of the Northwest Republic relies on a lot of plot armor to work. I’ve addressed his laser beam and Hunter Wallace fantasies before. However, in the novels, the NVA also maintains biochemical weapon caches along the Eastern seaboard as leverage.
Would this actually be a deterrent? Or would ZOG simply start vaccinating people left and right? Would the accountants surrender to such costs? Or would ZOG pull out of all its bases abroad (save Arabia) to shore up at home? The Northwest Republic would not be a plucky underdog, but a Great Satan in God’s Country. ZOG would exchange WMDs to dislodge it.
Rockwell proclaimed “This time the world!” and now Convington (ignorant of the past conditions that made the Northwest a prospective hotbed of revolution) proclaims “This time the tri-state area!” How have we fallen so low? The Northwest, or any region, must be perceived as staging areas for global reconquista – nothing less!

Yes: the US and the UK are doomed precisely because they have ridden el potro de la soberbia (‘the horse of pride’).
What is remarkable is that even WNsts are presently riding that haughty horse. They are unable to see that their culture is sinful. For example, Covington, the Covingtonistas and the guys at Occidental Dissent are clueless of the nefarious role that Luther played in the infection of the Anglo-Saxon psyche by introducing the Old Testament. Recently Hunter Wallace reviewed a book about Calvin and I am sure he hasn’t considered what we have been quoting from Nietzsche on the subject of the Reformation (Nietzsche himself came from a family of Reformed priests).
Covington is even more ignorant about history than Wallace. In his saga, he chose music from Luther as the new hymn of the White Republic! What you say is true but I wish that the next generation of racists will finally break away from Christian ethics not only in the religious sense (US) but as Heisman✡ told us in his essay about the Norman conquest (now the UK), in the secular sense as well.
It is such a huge ‘long night of the soul’ that Anglo-Saxons must endure while getting rid of the mental framework that’s killing them that I can understand your pessimism.
Presently WNsts are just playing like kids in the backyard of a MacDonald’s fast-food restaurant. But I have hope. When I started to comment in the WN forums in 2009 I did not expect that, after a few years, hundreds of teenagers and males in their early twenties would join the club in infantile forums such as The Daily Stormer.

But that’s only natural. We cannot expect that these lads start from our POV or that they may be imbued with our sense of gravitas. In a couple of months, I’ll be 60 years old. That means that I have had decades of immersing my mind in the havoc that Christianity has caused. Who among the younger commenters has had the time to digest what, for example, the late Deschner said in his Kriminalgeschichte? Even my approach to Nietzsche has involved editions of mature scholars, some of them not translated into English.
I may be relatively old but my POV is certainly more mature than what you see in Anglin’s playground or even in Wallace’s forum for young southerners. The secret of evolution is time and death. These people or their offspring will eventually reach my age. Could this site after my passing make a dent in the worldview of those who are still largely ignorant that Americanism must be obliterated?

“In a couple of months, I’ll be 60 years old.”
Haven’t you heard? 60 is the new 30. 🙂

I certainly feel that my intellectual potential has reached its peak at my age. There’s no question about it…

This discussion about Charles Manson has been some of the best I’ve read in a while!
@Jack Halliday “America created places for young boys where their innocence would go to die”
I actually don’t get it.
@Spahn Ranch “That opposition is what defines him and places him outside it. To the extent that the right isn’t on the side of the outlaw, it is itself a part of the System.”
The fact they can speak freely probably brings more harm to their own cause than good.
@César “Do you honestly believe that anyone in the 3rd Reich regime would idolize someone like Manson?”
We can answer it precisely!
“It is certainly true that some dubious elements found useful work in the fresh air of the new nation, but others who had demonstrated their moral weakness back home brought their antisocial or criminal nature along to poison the US-American population. For example, during the 1860’s criminals condemned to death for murder in Germany could be pardoned if they emigrated to America. Such blood elements could not contribute to building a nation.”
© America and Europe. Failures in Building an American People, 1942
Even though modern racists such as The Alternative Hypothesis can claim that the continuous extermination of criminals over the past millennium has overtly domesticated the nations of Europe.

What I mean is that the reform schools in Charlie’s day were designed to break little boys. Charlie himself was raped by 2 men in one of these places and one of the “teachers” would stick tobacco juice up his anus and shout “I got him lubed up!”. He was only 16 at the time.
Carl Panzram had it even worse. He was in a particular place called “the painted house” or something similar, due to all the little boys with bruises who wondered about. These boys and Panzram himself were all raped on a constant basis.
Brought to you by America – Land of the free and the home of the brave.

The USA is notorious in the Western world for tolerating child abuse, and is the only United Nations member state apart from SOMALIA which has so far refused to ratify the United Nations convention on the Rights of the Child. This is largely due to lobbying by Christian fundamentalists…

“Charlie himself was raped by 2 men in one of these places…”
What’s your source?

There’s also “manson in his own words”, a pseudo-autibiography authored by a Nuel Emmons, containing these details (the book is based on extensive interviews with manson).

“The fact they can speak freely probably brings more harm to their own cause than good.”
I’m not sure who “they” refers to in your sentence, but I believe you mean those on the right who praise Manson, such as James Mason, are harming their own cause. That’s the usual objection, and of course it is bad politics to praise a criminal if you are trying to build a middle-class political movement of non-criminals. But the very fact that such people won’t break the law or violate social norms makes them ineffectual, and explains the failure of right-wing movements in America. You can’t uphold the System with one hand, while trying to fight it with the other. People with a deep aversion to breaking the law (probably most people) are fair-weather friends to any unpopular cause, and will turn on it as soon as the System criminalizes it.

Comments are closed.