Quo Vadis Activist?

Rebirth of American White Nationalism.

After chronicling the death of American White nationalism, what now?  I have written many times, in great detail, about the directions that I believe that White racial activism, particularly in American should go; for example, see here. More broadly, I have outlined the fundamental principles of a New Movement. Thus, there is no need to rehash all of that again here, but to simply put forth the need for action and to underscore that we are at fork in the road.

Shall we continue the endlessly failed approaches of the past and present, or try something new for the future?

We need a clear set of principles, and principled adherence to those principles, instead of short-sighted obsessions about optics, mainstreaming, and “brands.”

Similar to the Legionary Movement, we need to concentrate on activist quality.  While our fundamental principles are crucially important perhaps just as important – if not more so – is the quality of the activist. “People are policy” as the saying goes – you can have the best policies, the best ideas, the best principles, but if you have defective, low quality individuals you will never actualize your principles in the manner you want. You need the proper human material. The Legionaries stressed The New Man over policy, and even if they went too far in their disinterest in policy (and I believe that they did), still, their laser-like focus on building a “new type of Romanian” was correct.

Starting from the standpoint of someone who is some sort of European ancestry, with no favorites among European ethnies (unlike the “movement” with its well-known preferences), what can we say should be characteristics of a desirable activist?

Of course, an activist should present a professional physical appearance and should try to be as physically fit as possible, constrained of course by considerations of age and of health issues that may be beyond their ability to effectively remedy. My readers know I am not a Nordicist; I do not have criteria about certain racial/subracial archetypes; obsessing over “Nordic/Nordish” “blonde/blue” phenotypes is not what any of this should be about. I also do not share the “movement’s” infantile obsession with (male) height, a characteristic that is not within anyone’s ability to control. Certainly, there are certain roles (e.g., physical security) better suited for some physiques over others, but we must remember when we are judging someone within our racial-cultural ingroup, their overall worth as activists should predominantly derives from traits that they have control over, rather than those they do not.  Superiority is not some sort of innate birthright; superiority must be earned.

What about character?

And it is even more salient today. If there is ONE single thing I would advise White racial activists to do today, it would be to emphasize, to focus on, character and moral rebirth, to focus on The New Man.  With that, anything is possible.  Without that, nothing is possible. Although ideology, science, intelligence, strategy, et al. are all crucially important, they take a back seat to character and moral integrity.  You cannot build a worldwide revolutionary movement on a foundation of quicksand; you cannot build a victorious movement on a foundation of freaks, grifters, phonies, frauds, the morally defective, perverts, liars, gaslighters, deranged fetishists, tin-foil-hat conspiracy theorists, individuals with all sorts of completely superfluous hang-ups and bizarre theories, weaklings, traitors, and all the rest. We have to remake ourselves before we try and remake the world.

Recruiting people of sound character is a must, and, just as important, helping them to further build on that and improve their moral character after recruitment is essential.

Please note that this is not a plea for an unattainable perfectionism, nor is it an expectation that all activists be a “finished product” of the highest quality from day one; of course, I make no claims that I myself am without fault (as my critics would be eager to point out).  We can instead view this as a continuous process of self-improvement, a striving toward the optimal.  Further, there must be some standards and, yes, some of these standards can be expected from day one –not perfection, not optimal, but a solid starting point, a solid foundation of good character from which growth toward the optimal is possible. Unfortunately, in the “movement” with its low standards – despite all of its empty talk about eschewing defectives – this solid foundation is missing for many activists. Let's identify defectives in the context of pro-White activism:

A defective is someone whose ideas and/or behavior will repulse, alienate, and turn-off most White people independent of racial nationalism.

The last four words of the definition are crucially important.  We acknowledge that just being pro-White is itself often enough to repulse many Whites and is enough to have one be considered "defective" by the mainstream.  What I'm saying is let's eliminate that variable.  Let's look at the person above and beyond their racial nationalism.

Also see this.

It is clear what needs to be avoided and hopefully our understanding of what should be strived toward is improving. We need both strong principles, firmly espoused, and the quality people required to promote our ideals and actualize them into reality.

Addendum

One should not underestimate the extent to which non-ideological factors influence the “movement,” particularly at its highest levels.  There is of course self-interest, rent-seeking, personal obsessions and preferences (and perversions), as well as ego, ambition, and money-grubbing grifting. Just as much, personal relationships play a major role. If you dislike someone, if you feud with them, then you attack their entire ethnic group and oppose their ideology. On the other hand, personal friendships, warm feelings, do the opposite. Quota Queens have personal positive, friendly, relationships with Derbyshire (*), who is married to a Chinese woman with mixed-race children, and who says the right (i.e., highly negative) things about Negroes.  Quota Queens visit the Derbyshire household, eat meals made by his wife, invite him to speak at meetings, etc. In this manner, HBD and Asia-worship have a greater influence on Der Movement than they would have had in the absence of those positive personal relationships.  If you think I am joking, I assure you I am not; I have never been more serious.  It may sound absurd, but the reality is that “Rosie” has had more influence on the current state of Der Movement than, say, Salter or Yockey. If you think about it carefully and dispassionately, you will see that I am correct; this is all basic human nature. That is of course just one example; I can cite others. Of course, from the standpoint of serious pro-White politics (broadly defined), this high degree of influence of the personal is clearly unacceptable, but here we are.  

*See this.

I am at too many psychological disadvantages. I like and admire John Derbyshire very much. His delightful wife has fed me Chinese food she made with her own hands and she grows azaleas that could win a prize. I have even met Mr. Derbyshire’s very pleasant children.

Now, you may argue that Taylor then went on to oppose miscegenation, despite his friendship with the Derbyshire family. Well, race-mixing is a “bridge too far” – one cannot maintain status as a “movement” “leader” if one doesn’t oppose miscegenation. But I never said that miscegenation is being normalized; instead, HBD, Asia-worship, and the acceptance of Asians in America is being normalized. One can, for the sake of one’s position (and personal preferences) oppose, at least in theory, miscegenation (particularly White-Black race mixing), but once you get to “delightful wife has fed me Chinese food she made with her own hands and she grows azaleas that could win a prize” would you support the enforced repatriation of such a “delightful” person?  Or would you instead promote memes about how “high IQ” and “law abiding” that “delightful” person and her ethny is?

This is why character is so important, as well as an adherence to principles. To allow the likes of Derbyshire to contaminate the “movement” because of “friendship” and the perceived positive characteristics of his racially alien Chinese wife is simply unacceptable.

See this.  Forget about GOP politics - these people, along with urban/suburban White ethnics are low-hanging fruit for a sensible racialist movement attuned to real people and real local communities. Instead, we get Savitri Devi and The Homo and the Negro. Do you still need endless "movement" failure explained? Is that all not an indictment of poor character and of a lack of principles?