Hood vs. Metapolitics

Let’s consider.

Look at this again.  Emphasis added:

Obviously, public opinion affects what’s politically possible. Yet the Overton Window model is flawed because power can shape public opinion. There’s no neutral “marketplace of ideas.” It takes resources and platforms to spread a message.

Without strong political leaders, the government doesn’t govern. Policies are irrelevant. The media rule.

It’s time to rethink the Overton Window. The truth is already on our side. Many people already agree with us on most issues. If that were enough, we’d have already won.

Instead of trying to shock public opinion, we should focus on demanding platform access, creating financial networks, and building institutions and communities the media can’t destroy. Instead of focusing on ideology, we should focus on logistics. We need to change conditions on the ground and make it easier for white advocates to organize. Otherwise, we risk ending up like Georgia Clark, pleading for help from leaders who have already abandoned us.

If we consider Yockey’s definition of politics as “activity in relation to power,” then what Hood is talking about here is an emphasis on politics, broadly defined, as opposed to so-called “metapolitics.”

Is Hood correct?  It depends on what he means by "the truth is already on our side" and that people already agree with us. If he’s referring to the general idea that Whites have rights, Whites are under attack, Whites have legitimate interests and should be able to pursue those interests, and that Whites have to fight for racial preservation and a future for themselves and their civilization then, yes, the truth is “on our side” (putting aside the issue of who “our” is). How many White people already agree with us is questionable but, in broad terms, Hood is correct from this perspective.

However, if by “truth” Hood means the totality of Der Movement’s lies, half-truths, obsessions, dogmas, fetishism, and freakishness, then he’s 100% wrong.

Keep in mind though that the Left has been very successful in leveraging politics to achieve their goals, even though the Left is famous for its internal ideological squabbles.  They have been capable of doing both at the same time - power politics rallying around foundational paradigms while still struggling internally to sort out the deeper meaning underlying their paradigms.

Thus, the Far Right can and should engage in politics based on broad paradigms while the struggle for the mind, heart, and soul of racial activism continues. The two things are of course linked, in both directions.  First, the more powerful the Far Right becomes, the more familiar the masses will become to the deeper paradigms, and the more disgusted and repulsed they will become by Der Movement’s retarded dogmas, thus ending and reversing progress.  Long term progress will be attainable only if the correct paradigms underlie political activism.  Second, initial success in the political sphere will give more power for activists in the internal struggle to influence the paradigms; hence, political success by fetishists will backfire and doom long term success.

The main point I believe that Hood is making is that metapolitics is not sufficient; politics, activity in relation to power, is essential.  Anyone who is claiming that “changing the culture” – independent of politics – can lead to victory is either delusional or are openly lying to you.

I’m not a mind-reader and I am hesitant to ascribe secret agendas to any person; thus, I will not mention anyone by name.  In general, however, I suspect that, in some cases, what happened is that some of these people were genuine and sincere in their initial activism, but became disillusioned over time, and realized that they sacrificed the opportunity for a real career for a losing proposition. They then decided to grift and cynically extract a living from the “movement,” focusing on activities that will achieve nothing, all the time citing the inevitability of victory – just as long as people keep on sending them donations.

Regardless of those people, and regardless of the specifics of what Hood actually meant by “truth,” I endorse the main thesis of the last part of his essay.  Power is important; without power, all of the “truth” in the world won’t save you.  To get power, you need politics.

The grifters will, in response, invoke the example of the implosion of the Soviet Union and of communism in Eastern Europe. They’ll clam that it collapsed under the weight of its own lies, ineptness, and contradictions (will the same happen to Der Movement?). In actuality, that was only half the story, the internal problems of the Soviet bloc became fatal because that bloc was being pressured from the outside, primarily by the USA under Reagan, and, more generally, by decades of Cold War competition from the “West.”

There is no similar pressure being put against the System from the outside.  Oh, people will invoke ”Russia and China” – as if the civic nationalist Putin regime is itself not part of the System, and likewise for the White hating regime of China (*).  You can say that, well, even if the struggle is between competing factions of the same System that can still result in a useful collapse of part of the System.  But rather than collapse we’ll just get an internal power re-alignment of the System; Whites will continue to be enslaved, but the big bosses will have epicanthic folds rather than yarmulkes. There is no real “outside” here to exert pressure on the System as a whole.  Hopes about “peak oil” and “environmental collapse” are equally misguided, and “The Green New Deal” demonstrates how the System will leverage its own problems to bolster its own power and the anti-White paradigm at the foundation of its worldview. So, no my dear grifters, without the hard practical work of politics, broadly defined, there will be no change.  All of your “metapolitics” can be shut down by brute force; “truth” is meaningless when you are silenced and deplatformed, with no real outside power pressuring your enemies to force them to make concessions to you. Suvorov’s Law came into force in the USSR because the combination of internal problems and external pressure forced Gorbachev’s hand in implementing reforms. The “external” and “outside” pressure against the System is going to have to come from dissident forces within the System itself.

Hood is correct.  Johnson and all of the “we just need to change the culture” people are wrong. You can’t “change the culture” in the midst of severe repression. Only Suvorov’s Law can save us – the System has to be pressured into making concessions that begins the process of inevitable collapse. In the absence of a viable outside pressure source to “heighten the contradictions,” the “outside” source has to come from within – leveraging the System’s power against itself in a form of sociopolitical ju-jitsu – electoral politics and the holding of some of the levers of authority no matter how small (initially), democratic multiculturalism, community building and activism – practical, real world activity in relation to power.  In a word – politics.

*Speaking of the Chinese, the recent episode of Chinese illegal alien human smuggling exposes as a lie all of Derbyshire’s self-serving nonsense about an “Arctic Alliance” between Whites and East Asians. Asians are part of the problem, they are invaders the same as any other colored people.  How in the world is Chinese illegal immigration and human trafficking any different from that of, say, Hispanics invading the US? How is the Chinese invasion of Europe, legal and illegal, different from any of the other Global South influxes? There is no difference, except that “Rosie” is Chinese and not Hispanic, Black, or Muslim.