Blog has moved, searching new blog...

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

No Dreampolitik For Whites

From a hit-piece printed in the September 2010 Playboy, Imagination Nation - Tea Party Resurrects the Past to Deny the Present, by Stephen Duncombe:
Either party activists really are the ignorant hicks liberals believe them to be, or they truly believe the federal government is a foreign body (with a foreign-born president no less!) and their elected officials don't really represent them. All signs point to the latter.
Tea Party people are white-skinned, white-haired, white bread, white. You can wander the vast mediascape and not witness another sea of whiteness like a Tea Party rally. Over the past 50 years--partly out of political concern but mostly to reach as broad an audience as possible--the culture industry has largely rejected such bland homogeneity.
Conjuring up the past is another way of denying the present. "Take our country back!" is a cry you'll hear at a Tea Party rally. Back. Back to a time when white people were firmly in power and those of other ethnicities knew their place. But also back to an imaginary America that was almost entirely white. Back to Leave it to Beaver, My Three Sons, and The Waltons. Tea Party rallies--the costumes, the outrage, the provocative rhetoric--are so theatrical because they are theater: a way for a dying strain of white people to represent themselves in a mediated world that no longer recognizes them.
Politics, like entertainment and advertising, is about dreams.
Effective leaders and movements tap into our fantasies of the future, not those of the past.
Duncombe doesn't sympathize with White people, but he's not so alienated or consumed with hate that he can't see the grass roots motivations of the Tea Party.

Duncombe makes a living opining on the history and politics of media and culture. He's a cultural marxist:
Courses taught include: Struggle for the Word: History of Mass Media I, The Image: History of Mass Media II, Digital Revolution: History of Mass Media III, From Citizen to Consumer, Cultural Resistance, Politics of Media: Power, Persuasion, Perception, Politics of Style, The Social Construction of Reality, Walter Lippmann and the Manufacture of Dissent, Antonio Gramsci and the Power of Culture, Democratic Persuasion, Special Topics in Media.
His own milieu is a sea of Whiteness.

Duncombe is perhaps best known for his book Dream: Re-imagining Progressive Politics in an Age of Fantasy. Use Your Illusion, a Villiage Voice review from February of 2007, by Emily Weinstein, is subtitled "Stephen Duncombe explains why the left should indulge Americans' fantasies":
He was born into activism: Charles Dickens caricatured one of Duncombe's ancestors, a member of Parliament, as "the radical dandy," and others in his family fled Canada after participating in a failed 19 th-century rebellion against Queen Victoria. His father was a minister and civil rights activist—their phone lines were tapped when Duncombe was a child—and Duncombe refers, with affection, to his teenage "punk rock days" in early-'80s New Haven. ("That scene was exuberant," he says. "It was passionate. Politics should be like that.") He went on to co-found the Lower East Side Collective, a community activist group, and helped organize events with others, including Billionaires for Bush. Their demonstrations were carnivals, attracting revelers who'd dance in the streets. Then came 9-11, followed by war. "Politics became something deadly serious," he said. Liberals lost whatever sense of humor they had.

Dream could have simply been an elegy to that pre–9-11 era—a nostalgia piece for the recent past. Instead, it reads like a manifesto inspired by a pop culture fever dream. Seizing upon references high and low, Duncombe makes the case that spectacle can be an ethical and sophisticated means of appealing to, even seducing, the American public. Rather than bemoan the fact that people are obsessed with Paris Hilton and condemn video games like Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, both of which Duncombe discusses with a mix of awe and critical glee, liberals need to determine why that obsession exists—pop culture as road map into the American mind. "We can't afford to ignore it," Duncombe said. "If we do, we're writing off the passion of a hell of a lot of people."

The idea, which Duncombe dubs "dreampolitik," is that progressives, armed with strategies derived from sources as vast as advertisements, celebrity-gossip magazines, and the casinos on the Las Vegas strip, would then be able to enact a politics that enthralls a broader sweep of Americans. The left needs to start appealing to people's hunger for hope and attraction to fantasy life. What's more, Duncombe said, they have to let go of the belief—"naive at best, arrogant at worst"—that intellectual arguments should be enough to win people over, and that spectacle, as the Bush administration employs it, is something to which they shouldn't have to resort, a tawdry means to an end. "It's a pathos of the left," he said. "We're worried about selling out, but no one's buying." Besides, the point isn't that liberals move towards conservatism; it's that they become savvier and, ironically, more realistic about what it takes to win.
"The Democrats are going to lose unless they figure out a way of imagining the world," Duncombe concluded. "They need to figure out what utopia they want to sell."
Duncombe's assertion that "spectacle can be an ethical and sophisticated means of appealing to, even seducing, the American public", is made in a partisan spirit. Still, there's nothing here about spectacles drawing on the past being bad. And nothing about it being bad if it inspires stupid, evil White people. These are ad hoc modifications he's been forced to adopt just now, seeing that hopey-changey "progressives" have let him down while the Tea Party actually did what he advised. How humiliating this would be, if only "progressives" could be humliated.

Labels: , , ,

white

40 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think Obama did do what Duncombe advised, namely choose a utopia and sell it, and he got the reward that Duncombe promised, which was power.

It turned out that Obama's euphoric vision of the future as himself was a good basis for gaining power but a bad one for exercising it responsibly.

But I don't blame Duncombe for that. First, this is typical of the Left. Marxism has always provided great templates for seizing and consolidating power, but lousy ones for governing. Second, Duncombe's advice supposes that he is talking to people who have good solutions in mind, so all they need him to supply is means of gaining power, after which demonstrations of the benefits of these good solutions will do the rest. I know: if that is what Stephen Duncombe supposes, then Stephen Duncombe is an ass. But if a man offers you a solution to only one problem, the only one you admit you have, and that solution does work, as far as it goes, you have no cause for complaint.

- Daybreaker

9/01/2010 03:54:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now let's look at what conservatives and race realists offer, at three levels: the elite / governing level, the White masses only about a quarter of which believe that the Republican Party represents them, and would-be White power agitators.

At the top, John McCain offered Sarah Palin as a symbol of the future of the party. She was received by party activists with great enthusiasm, certainly compared to their (justified) lack of enthusiasm for McCain himself. But she was rejected by the liberal elite and by the neo-conservative Republican elite. Instead, as far as the party is concerned, the only official flag-bearer of the future is Michael Steele. The Republican Party elite has not come up with a satisfactory "Dreampolitik".

- Daybreaker

9/01/2010 04:06:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This guy is essentially a Jew. It makes me sick he doesn't identify as one.

9/01/2010 10:12:00 AM  
Blogger Rusty Mason said...

Good Lord, where do these low-lifes come from? Such rabid hatred against me, from someone I don't even know, is totally amazing. It's on every radio and TV station, in every magazine, in every school and government agency, I cannot escape it. They take and destroy without end. The Jews and the blacks have no idea what real persecution is.

9/01/2010 12:02:00 PM  
Anonymous Captainchaos said...

It is indeed an idealized vision of a future to come, resonant with a mythicized past, which makes political movements live. A heroic rebirth: palingenesis: National Socialism. Just the kind of thing the (yes, the opposition to palingenesis does seem to conspicuously adhere nearly unerringly to Englishness - at least over at Majority Rights, go figure - hence the "the") English over at Majority Rights would sooner chew broken glass than be a part of, even if that is the only thing that can be expected to energize the lemmings for a mass movement.

9/01/2010 03:17:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes he hates, but he has a point. As society becomes worse, and there is no way with steady mass immigration it won't continue to get worse, and as entertainment continues to get better (technically at least), a lot more people will be spending time in fantasy. If you want their energy and numbers, it might help if you offer them a political movement with at least some fantastical energy in it.

The Republican elite, which is now a Neocon elite, would rather lose than energize a White base that it doesn't like or represent.

So the base has invented its own fantasy, the revolutionary America of the Tea Party. This is brilliant, in my opinion. It is not a denial of reality, as Duncombe says, rather it is an acknowledgement of reality that is ready to engage actively and defiantly with the present power structure. Nobody organizes to take their country back without admitting at least partly that it is not their country any more, that they need to take it back because they have lost it, and that in their hearts they believe it ought to be theirs.

This is a breakthrough.

A second breakthrough is associated with it. Duncan is repulsed by the Whiteness of the Tea Party people, but the Revolutionary aesthetic implicitly rejects any demand that to be legitimate they have to be less White and more "diverse". The heirs of the American Revolution do not consider it "bland" and "homogenous" in some pejorative sense but exciting, relevant and fundamentally sound. And what goes for the Revolution goes for the Founders, and those trying to restore their work now, people who look like them.

- Daybreaker

9/01/2010 04:42:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Playboy: leftist fairies can wank to the articles, rightists can wank to the pictures. Everybody wins!

9/01/2010 04:54:00 PM  
Blogger Rusty Mason said...

Daybreaker,
You might as well put that very uplifting-sounding entry into verse -- I have no idea what you're on about. I see whites gathering in herds here and there, but not as whites. All I can see is more of the same spiritual degradation, spiritual vacuation and grotesque miscegenation. Sarah Palin, the loony Glenn Beck, and MLK are "our" national heroes. The Founders are out, the Obamassiah and Bernanke are in. The minorities and their white benefactors hold all the money and the power and are making it worse for us hour by hour. I have absolutely zero confidence that any of this will end within the next 200 years.

But sing to me anyway whilst I pop another cold Guinness, it sounds nice.

9/01/2010 07:51:00 PM  
Blogger Rusty Mason said...

rats, I meant to type: intellectual degradation, spiritual vacuation and grotesque miscegenation

9/01/2010 07:53:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rusty,
"I see whites gathering in herds here and there, but not as whites"

Yes they are or it wouldn't be predominantly white. You're starting to sound like a troll.


Anonymous,
"A second breakthrough is associated with it. Duncan is repulsed by the Whiteness of the Tea Party people, but the Revolutionary aesthetic implicitly rejects any demand that to be legitimate they have to be less White and more "diverse".

Right. If the Tea Party crowd was all muddy brown it would be "wonderfully diverse" but all white and it's "bland" and "homogenous."

The "whiteness" of the Tea Party is just not Duncombe's kind of white, which tells us what kind of "white" Duncombe is. LOL

9/02/2010 12:56:00 AM  
Blogger Rusty Mason said...

Anonymous 12:56,

If whites were gathering as whites, they would not be afraid to say so. They would not be so obsessed with trying to include minorities at every opportunity and they would not be embarassed and plead "non-racist!" whenever the whiteness of their event was pointed out. They would never embrace MLK as a national hero, nor allow their leaders to.

The crippling white guilt is literally everywhere white people gather, in nearly every church I have seen or heard of (save one or two small ones), in every historical organization, in every school and every government building. The only place I don't see it (yet) is at events such as C&W dance halls and concerts, rodeos and such. Even the races now are filled with it. The Teapartiers are especially pathetic. Their patriotism has been reduced to merely a neocon abstraction and includes no sense of themselves as a physical people. To most Teapartiers, anyone in the world can be an American, so long as they are legal and believe in Freedom, blah, blah, blah. They are heavily guilted by the relentless propaganda about the KKK, Nazi Germany, and the Holyhoax.

It is not the Teapartiers who are keeping non-whites away; they would be thrilled to fill large stadiums with them, in order to prove how non-racist/inclusive/Jew-DayO!-Christian they are. To stand up for their own nation, their own European ancestors and children is extremely uncomfortable for them.

You really should get out more.

9/02/2010 05:30:00 AM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Daybreaker writes:

So the base has invented its own fantasy, the revolutionary America of the Tea Party. This is brilliant, in my opinion. It is not a denial of reality, as Duncombe says, rather it is an acknowledgement of reality that is ready to engage actively and defiantly with the present power structure. Nobody organizes to take their country back without admitting at least partly that it is not their country any more, that they need to take it back because they have lost it, and that in their hearts they believe it ought to be theirs.

This is a breakthrough.


Rusty Mason writes:

The Teapartiers are especially pathetic. Their patriotism has been reduced to merely a neocon abstraction and includes no sense of themselves as a physical people. To most Teapartiers, anyone in the world can be an American, so long as they are legal and believe in Freedom, blah, blah, blah. They are heavily guilted by the relentless propaganda about the KKK, Nazi Germany, and the Holyhoax.

I think there's truth in both views. The one view more optimistic, seeing the rebellious instincts impelling people toward the Tea Party - their alienation from government and the two-party racket. The other view more pessimistic, seeing the powerful forces trying to shape and subvert that movement into the same old swindle - RedTeam-vs-BlueTeam and "anti-racism".

I think most Tea Partiers really don't want race to be any part of their politics. But they can't avoid it. The opposition and their own leaders are forcing the issue. More than a few Tea Partiers must already suspect that "anti-racism" means anti-White. The longer they grovel about race, or see their leaders and party-mates grovel, and get condemned for "racism" anyway, the more this suspicion will resolve to a certainty. The movement will be divided by this. A portion will accept and embrace anti-Whiteness, the core of whom already do, and a portion won't, because they will be forced to realize that hatred of Whites animates the opposition, whether or not they embrace their Whiteness.

I'm guessing the latter, eventually pro-White portion will be larger, though they will find their vehement opposition now includes the Becks, Palins, and other self-abnegating Whites, as well as the jews and other non-Whites who have insinuated themselves as leaders and spokesmen. The judeo-bolshevist media, which already demonizes them, will agree that casting out and silencing them and anyone who associates with them is too liberal. Far harsher repression will be mooted.

9/02/2010 07:40:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I accept that without a wealthy and connected pro-White elite to counter the wealthy and connected ant-White elite that rules now, Whites will lose.

What would it take to get wealthy, elite Whites, who individually feel they have a lot to lose, to stand up and support their own people?

I think to get people to lead, you have to show them that they would have an army willing to follow them, and to get them to salute a flag you have to run one up a flag-pole. The right "flag" is important at least twice: it has to have an appeal to a potential friendly elite, and it has to be one that a mass of Whites will rally to.

This is a matter of "dreampolitik". You need dreams that are exciting enough to get people off their couches, and serious enough to make them willing to risk the psychic costs of being accused of racism.

I don't expect a dream to outweigh the practical consequences of being accused of racism. But the first and most pervasive punishment for stepping out of line is mental: being accused of being a racist hater, genocidal, a NAZI, an enemy of society and so on hurts. Even in the absence of practical consequences, that's enough to discourage, intimidate and demobilize people. This is a wonderful form of attack for the anti-White establishment, because accusation is free, meaning it can be applied everywhere, all the time, and if the defense costs anything, you're winning a battle of attrition. The only cost-effective way of overcoming these nightmare accusations is with "dreampolitik".

- Daybreaker

9/02/2010 12:48:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tea Partiers are not consciously pro-White at all. So let's look at the "dreampolitik" of those who are consciously pro-White.

You can present secular images of a healthy, positive, pro-social White identity. This is what American Third Position does, with Charles Lindbergh as its icon. It's an approach that suits elites uncomfortable with overt religion, it tends to sideline religious quarrels, and it's fairly tightly tight to images of the White world at its strongest, before the 1960s revolution. I have only praise for this. The more people that get behind American Third Position and are influenced by its "dreampolitik" the better.

You can present conventionally religious, traditional Christian images. I'm for this too. Alas, the Catholic Church practically "owns" a lot of this imagery. (It's a different matter in Orthodox countries.) I say "unfortunately" because of Ted Kennedy in America, Jerzy Zubrzycki in Australia, and anti-White currents that are still strong in the Church for now.

You can present heterodox religious images. This is where I would put everything from "folkish" Asatru to the (brilliant!) thought experiment of kids deciding to breed themselves to be more like Tolkien's Elves. I think this is good, especially when it focuses on the future. Sure, expressing such things in the right way is challenging, but that's what real artists are for: to accept challenges and do something lively with them.

You can no-show. This is what American Renaissance has done. I'm a huge fan of Jared Taylor, but I have to dwell on this failure. When I found there was a place called "American Renaissance" on the web and it was pro-White, I was excited, because I thought it would follow though on the aesthetic and creative genius of Whites in every way, in its visual design, fonts, encouragement for creativity, tone of can-do-optimism and so on. Not a bit of it. It's drab. The only thing I can say for the visual side is that it's fast to load. Almost every story seems to be "ain't it awful?" However good American Renaissance is in may ways (and it sure helped me), this is not where people are going to get the dreams they need.

You can step straight into nightmare and embrace NAZIism, thus participating in the demonization of Whites and pro-White consciousness.

This is as helpful as if, in the days of Ancient Rome's decline, some aristocrats had decided to inspire their fellow Romans to push out the Goths (good idea!) or at least to agitate to forbid any more Goths coming into the empire (good idea!), and if they had chosen to "inspire" the Latin masses by ... parading around in Punic costumes, and telling people that this, Hannibal's boot on Rome's neck, was what opposition to unrestricted barbarian immigration amounted to.

- Daybreaker

9/02/2010 01:40:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nobody has any idea what will happen at any time now. Who knows what will fall in the favor of whites. Just stay on a consistent message. Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.

The Netherlands and Belgium are more crowded than Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.

Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.

What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?

How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?

And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?

But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

9/02/2010 03:35:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white."

They are indeed.

And for generations they have had vast disposable wealth, great networking and ethnic mobilization, control of the entertainment media (that is to say: pipelines into our dreams) and fiat political power, that is the power to make something "normal" because a judge or a legislature has laid it down (maybe in a bill no-one ever read, start to finish) and there's nothing a normal citizen can do about it except tell himself it's OK.

Getting free of this is going to look feeble, strange and awkward at first, like the wriggling of someone who has been tied up, which mentally (and in any other ways) we have been. That has to be accepted. We have to be optimistic and see the glass half full, to stay energized and keep going.

If there's a great gathering of Whites who implicitly reject the two party con game, but it's addressed only by speakers that are totally self-abnegating on behalf of Whites, I see the gathering as new and good, and the anti-White babble as only what's normal, unfortunately.

What's needed is more spectacle, more gestures, more attempts. We have to find different ways to express basic and legitimate appeals, like peace, land and freedom, so that they can be grasped by people who are just now looking up from a book or a playstation, because they prefer to just "get through" their working lives and "live" in fantasy, and who therefore don't have much background.

Fun and mockery are good too. There is so much about the way we live now that is inherently mockable. We should mock gently when we can, so people late to the party aren't repulsed by unexpected harshness, but we must mock. Theatricality and inventiveness are good.

- Daybreaker

9/02/2010 09:20:00 PM  
Blogger Robert said...

Tan,
You are invited to my new site.

http://notinfallible.weebly.com/

9/04/2010 06:10:00 AM  
Blogger Robert said...

Protest song.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19cEc_DVRrI&feature=player_embedded

9/05/2010 02:15:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

========================================


LIVE SHOW TONIGHT AT 11 PM EASTERN


http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/75473




========================================

9/05/2010 04:17:00 PM  
Anonymous anti-populist said...

The one view more optimistic, seeing the rebellious instincts impelling people toward the Tea Party - their alienation from government and the two-party racket.

What rebellious instincts? What alienation from the two-party racket? How does the ideology of the tea party meaningfully differ from that of the Republican establishment? What "rebellious" positions has the tea party actually adopted? Does anyone pretend that the tea partiers are going to actually DO anything other than keep voting Republican and keep trying to "prove they're not racist"?

It's unfortunate that so many racialists see something positive in the tea party movement. Does ANYONE remember the militias of the early 90's? The militias were nothing all that special, and were not openly racialist, but they were definitely a lot more serious than what we see today (i.e. heavily armed paramilitary organizations talking about confronting the government vs. Fox News-watching dumbfucks gathering in Washington D.C. to celebrate MLK).

How does anyone honestly see the tea party as a step in the right direction? Clearly the tea party is a sign that the last vestiges of resistance to cultural Marxism among mainstream conservatives are being rooted out.

9/09/2010 06:48:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The tea parties by definition consist of people who are showing up. This is praiseworthy.

http://american3p.org/

If every American White with more consciousness of their common good than is normal in the tea parties would just join the American Third Position Party, that would be great. It would be better if more "White nationalists" regarded themselves as one more warm body to take a place in the shield wall.

But, if you can't join a party and you are not yet creative to come up with something else practical, just talking on the Internet is good. It can keep people motivated, and ideas may come later. There is nothing wrong with endless chatter. (If being mouthy prevented a people from getting anywhere, the Jews would never have achieved success.)

Just about any form of activity can spur creativity, and vice versa.

Almost the only kind of participation that's a pure negative is knocking or undermining other people who are being active. (Showing up with a swastika while other people are trying to make a good impression is "undermining".)

- Daybreaker

9/09/2010 12:39:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

anti-populist: "How does anyone honestly see the tea party as a step in the right direction?"'

Activity beats inactivity.

anti-populist: "Clearly the tea party is a sign that the last vestiges of resistance to cultural Marxism among mainstream conservatives are being rooted out."

That's not clear at all.

- Daybreaker

9/09/2010 01:01:00 PM  
Anonymous Armor said...

Daybreaker: "There is nothing wrong with endless chatter."

Well said !

"Almost the only kind of participation that's a pure negative is knocking or undermining other people who are being active."

Criticizing the endless chatter is an example of a pure negative. It will discourage people from talking on the internet, but won't result in more activist work in the real world.

9/09/2010 02:20:00 PM  
Anonymous anti-populist said...

Activity beats inactivity.

500,000 Whites rallying in support of MLK, diversity, and Zionism? Sorry, I don't think that beats inactivity. I would have rather these pricks stayed home.

The tea party movement is an explicitly anti-White movement.

9/09/2010 03:38:00 PM  
Blogger Rusty Mason said...

You poor fish who think the Teaparties and the Glenn Beck rallies are white power in action: let's hear one -- just one! -- white person in one crowd of hundreds of white crowds proclaim that whites have a right to associate with whomever they please. A very mild statement. But you know that anyone who did would be disavowed by the rest of those crawling whites for "racism."

Just let me see it once on FauxNews or hear one of the Jew-paid whores on "conservative" radio & TV say it and not back down when challenged. Let one of them denounce MLK for all the right reasons and do it without apology. On that day you may say that there is a little progress. Until then, we continue being wiped out by the millions.

With this Beck rally, it's clear that most fully aware whites, just like the "conservative" failures before them, have become so desperate for even one tiny victory that they too are seeing mirages.


And don't anyone give me any nonsense about Beck, Limbaugh, et al., being some kind of triangulating geniuses. These phonies all work for multi-trillion$, Jew-run corporations, and have a very tight relationship with the American government run by said tribe.

Whites have given up ground every year for at least 70 years, mostly from believing in part-time conservatives such as Buckley, Reagan, Insanity, and Limbaugh. Until they break that lazy habit, it's all just methane gas.

9/09/2010 08:46:00 PM  
Blogger Rusty Mason said...

Oh, and when you look at one of these white crowds, remember that 10-30% of them, depending on the part of the country, have interracial marriages in their immediate families and believe their family diversity is just swell. Confronted, they will say, "Now, we must be nice, let's be Christian, remember that my children have freedom of choice, too. God loves everybody the same." To these people, it's now all about living the radical liberal, modern American dream of total freedom (a.k.a., chaos). The vast majority of our parents and grandparents today will not stand up for us or our heritage in any way. They have become the very liberals they used to fight.

There will come a day when the race-mixing fad has ended, but only after liberalism has destroyed almost everything good. We will be a tiny minority by then, so you'd better get busy making other plans, you silly dreamers. Nemo is coming to the rescue.

9/09/2010 09:09:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

There is a tendency to conflate the Tea Party crowds and what they want with the people who have so far thrust themselves to the forefront as spokesmen and what they want. It appears also that anti-Whites hyperbolize the evil "racist" Tea Party motives just as much as long-suffering White rebels find them lacking.

What rebellious instincts? What alienation from the two-party racket? How does the ideology of the tea party meaningfully differ from that of the Republican establishment? What "rebellious" positions has the tea party actually adopted? Does anyone pretend that the tea partiers are going to actually DO anything other than keep voting Republican and keep trying to "prove they're not racist"?

The Tea Party is animated by the anti-incumbent, anti-establishment, grassroots sentiments of disaffected Red and Blue teamers. Their primary rebellion is against the two-party shell game. The Tea Partiers oppose the transfer of wealth and power from themselves to others, be it in the form of taxes, bailouts, universal healthcare, or amnesty, whereas the establishment behind both parties favors it. The establishment recognizes this, and the Red Team leaders rightly see themselves as having a better chance of co-opting and re-bottling it while the Blue Team leaders are busy pathologizing it. The Tea Partiers themselves are fed up with the politics and antics of both parties.

Does ANYONE remember the militias of the early 90's? The militias were nothing all that special, and were not openly racialist, but they were definitely a lot more serious than what we see today (i.e. heavily armed paramilitary organizations talking about confronting the government vs. Fox News-watching dumbfucks gathering in Washington D.C. to celebrate MLK).

I remember thinking the militias were an overreaction. I remember being more interested in working and partying. I remember I didn't see race as having anything to do with politics. I remember seeing Berenger and Winger in Betrayed and thinking ZOG counldn't be anything but over-the-top fiction. I was mistaken. I was ignorant. I knew next to nothing about race. I knew nothing of jewish history or jewish media control. I knew nothing about William Pierce or the Order, and if I had I would have seen them and their views as hateful, divisive, etc. - I would have responded with the negative reaction we're conditioned to have for "racists" and "nazis", without realizing it is conditioning.

For the Tea Partiers who haven't already faced racial reality, their movement is pulling it out in the open, putting it on full display. The louder their anti-racist leaders proclaim that it's not about race, the louder the anti-Whites proclaim it is. The take-away: you can be White and crawl on your belly and your enemies will only detest you more.

How does anyone honestly see the tea party as a step in the right direction? Clearly the tea party is a sign that the last vestiges of resistance to cultural Marxism among mainstream conservatives are being rooted out.

Yes, as long as these Tea Party sentiments remain confined to literal anti-racist politics - the naive notions that this is about principles, not race, and we can defeat our enemies by reasoning with them - then their idealism will be undermined, channelled, dissipated, or otherwise undone.

We operate under a tremendous handicap in that the mainstream media and academia have been captured by our enemies and are hostile to us. Where some see hopeless "dumbfucks" I see misinformed, misled people who I sympathize and find common cause with for the simple reason that they are my people. Three years ago I was where they are. Many of them will soon be where I am now. I'm inclined to help them along that path and prepare for that future.

9/10/2010 11:02:00 AM  
Blogger Rusty Mason said...

I don't know, Tan. I know a lot of the Teapartier types (mostly RedTeam fans) and they are every bit the soft liberals I paint them as. They may grumble now and again, but they go along with all of this -- the race-mixing and the unthinking acceptance of all the liberal assumptions and language. They think Rush and Beck are really digging deep and dangerous, and they do not want to hear anything else from anyone. It's the economy and the RedTeam-BlueTeam game that matters to them, nothing else. Not culture, not nationhood, not tradition. They are still somewhat resistant to frontal assaults from MLK day, but overall, they are not going to raise a finger to help anyone.

Every Thanksgiving, Christmas, and 4th of July get a little browner in most of the families I know. Once that happens, most of that family is lost to the multicult. For these old farts, love of grandbabies always trumps love of race, and the racially concious objectors in the family can just shut the hell up. The young children will go along with these abominable arrangements as though the whole thing is as natural as can be.

I hope you are right, and the hundreds of "conservatives" I know or have seen personally are an unusual. I hope that a real awakening will happen soon, with action to back it up. That would make me very happy. But, I hold out no hope for it, and am living and planning accordingly.

9/10/2010 06:22:00 PM  
Blogger Rusty Mason said...

One good thing about my realist attitude is that I have absolutely no fear of speaking the truth whenever the opportunity arises. I am able to speak calmly and boldly to others, more so than when I was more positive. I just don't give a damn what most people think now, and that lets me think more clearly and speak the truth more confidently.

I will still fight to the last man with you, so don't think I've given up. I've just taken a different view of our chances and our priorities.

9/10/2010 06:38:00 PM  
Anonymous anti-populist said...

There is a tendency to conflate the Tea Party crowds and what they want with the people who have so far thrust themselves to the forefront as spokesmen and what they want.

I'm not convinced that the tea party people actually want something other than the leaders they've got. I don't see much evidence for that. They seem pretty content with Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin - basically typical Republicans with an extra dose of diversity worship. The tea partiers may talk a little bit about "opposing the system", but fundamentally they are allowing themselves to be led by the mass media and Republican party establishment. Psychologically, these people NEED the approval of high status institutions, particularly the television. I don't see "rebellious" instincts at work here - I see HERD instincts being the fundamental driver of the movement.

The tea party is playtime. It's just a replay of the militias and anti-Clinton movement of the early 90's. It's not going to lead to anything. There is nothing pro-White about it AT ALL, and it's not moving in a pro-White direction. If anything, the opposite.

9/10/2010 10:06:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

I realize that even men like Revilo Oliver have eventually come to view their own herd rather dimly. While this is an understandable consequence of a long, thankless struggle, I'm not there yet.

9/10/2010 11:40:00 PM  
Anonymous anti-populist said...

Speaking of Revilo Oliver, it's interesting to note that members of the Koch Family were among the founders and early financial backers of both the John Birch Society and the Tea Party Movement. The Birchers, as you likely know, were the worthless aracial conservative opposition movement of their day, much hated by Oliver. I don't think this fact bodes well for the Tea Party.

9/10/2010 11:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Paul Gottfried pours cold water on Fjordman’s optimism, in "Dreaming of a Culture War":

http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/left-right/dreaming-of-a-culture-war/

Fjordman seems so hungry for good news he's ready to see any doubtful case as a reason to be cheerful.

I know that's where I'm at. I grew up on adventure movies. When I see a horrible fate closing in on our heroes, I want to know how they get out of it. Or since I identify with multiculturalism's target population, how we get out of it.

Gottfried doesn't see it that way. He doesn't sympathize with the target population. He thinks they are doing this to themselves and they have it coming. It's the workings of the administrative state that fascinate him: how neatly it all fits together, how it goes from success to success.

I don't care now neatly this adds up. The consequences are unacceptable.

The odds are irrelevant, given the stakes. We should keep trying, on the basis of positive facts if possible, but if we're running on fumes and fantasies so be it.

We shouldn't be shamed by those who don't share our fundamental interests. We should be willing to be uncool, unsophisticated and un-resigned.

Hans Gruber: Do you really think you have a chance against us, Mr. Cowboy?
John McClane: Yippee-ki-yay (etc.)
- Die Hard (1988)

9/13/2010 01:53:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If more people read The Lord of the Rings all the way through to The Scouring of the Shire, I'd advocate going around with copies of the Horn of the Mark, and blowing them to hearten people.

Anything that might communicate the needed impetus is good.

What are we being paid to give up? If we accept our fate and don't indulge in any futile fantasies or gestures on the way down, what will we be spared accordingly?

Nothing.

- Daybreaker (also the author of the previous comment)

9/13/2010 02:36:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

PS: Much respect to Paul Gottfried, People who are absolutely fascinated with how something important works and who have no other agenda are adornments to academia and very useful.

It's just that while Paul Gottfried has no particular agenda calling for White survival, I do.

- Daybreaker

9/13/2010 06:38:00 AM  
Anonymous Armor said...

> Paul Gottfried pours cold water on Fjordman’s optimism

Fjordman's original article didn't seem overly optimistic. He didn't need any cold water. But Gottfried is right to point out that the government can ignore popular opinion if it grows impatient.

In the comment section, Gottfried says a few words about Jewish activists in Germany :

" As for the German situation, I don't know how a patriotic German can't loathe the Zentralrat fuer Juden in Deutschland, an organization whose three functions are endorsing the Zionist Right, besmirching the Germans and their entire history, and working ceaselessy to turn over Europe to the Muslims. Although Nazi anti-Semitism was vile and inexcusable, the organized Jewish presence in Germany is obnoxious enough to turn even anti-Nazis into raging anti-Semites. Jews in Germany, who refuse to view themselves as Germans and pretend to be on their way to somewhere else, should stop hating Germans and recognize they're in the same boat with the goyim. "

In his main article, he blames the "oligarchs" :

" One, people live with authority structures, and the “oligarchs” (...) are the ones we are now confronting. Those who are imposing “democracy” as a value-system, as well as a cornucopia of social programs, control their obliging subjects. They educate the young while their allies in the media supervise our entertainment and, to whatever extent they can, our access to information. The bloated partitocrazia, with its overlapping programs and parasitic “public servants” organize elections and keep the system from getting out of hand. "
(...)
" Two, although the “oligarchs” climbed to power as enactors of democratic equality through public administration, once ensconced with a massive electorate and equipped with public money and a vast welfariate, these pests are damned hard to remove. In fact barring a major catastrophe, it seems inconceivable that they can be driven from power. "

9/14/2010 06:34:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

The problem with Fjordman, Harris, Codevilla, Lasch, Gottfried, et al. is that the chatter of these oh-so-serious pundits about oligarchs and potential revolts studiously avoids the jewish component. It's like talking about a flood without mentioning water. Gottfried is the most willing to bring up jews, but like his "conservative" converso tribemate Auster, it's because he's interested in gate-keeping and drawing out "vile and inexcusable" "anti-semitism", not changing the status quo.

9/14/2010 09:41:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In case anyone thinks that matters of pure symbolism are not worth a struggle, let's remember that the Ashkenazi opposition, which has been vastly successful, thinks the opposite: that no quarrel is too petty to buy into and escalate, especially when it's over symbols.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/02/05/cross-placed-air-force-pagan-circle-prompts-probe/

In this story, everyone comes off badly, especially Sgt. Longcrier, who also ought to be called Loudcrier, Whinycrier and Bittercrier.

There have been real disputes about pagan rights in the armed forces. (Not being able to be buried with an appropriate symbol in a military cemetery was pretty serious, and that seems to have been purely about George W. Bush's opinion that Wicca is witchcraft and not a real religion like say Islam.)

This isn't one of those real disputes. Thor should drop a thunderbolt on Sgt. Sob Sister's head for being so unmanly as to be upset by having a wooden cross propped against his sacred stone.

Nevertheless:

Weinstein, whose New Mexico-based group represents more than 16,000 active duty and retired servicemembers, said the incident was "clearly" a hate crime and characterized any denial of that assertion to be preposterous.

"We don't think, we know it was a hate crime," said Weinstein, who compared the incident to spray-painting a swastika on a synagogue.

"It has the same impact, the same hurt, the same marginalization," he said Thursday. "That circle is their mosque, their church, their synagogue."


- Daybreaker

9/20/2010 12:59:00 PM  
Anonymous Just shoot me said...

Interesting, Daybreaker,

"everyone comes off badly, especially Sgt. Longcrier, who also ought to be called Loudcrier, Whinycrier and Bittercrier."

Aye.

Yeesh. What a baby. This guy's a soldier? We're doomed.

Speaking of babies, note the name of the Jew cheerleading his complaint:

"Mikey Weinstein, founder of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation"

Mikey? MIKEY?! A guy ostensibly associated with the Air Force goes by the name MIKEY?

Crikey.

9/20/2010 02:57:00 PM  
Blogger Tanstaafl said...

Know the enemy. The enemy recognizes that symbology and language are important.

9/20/2010 08:51:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home