More on Dickie Spinster

Spencer.

[Note: "Dickie Spinster" comes from this book review]

Briefly following up on this, what lessons can be learned?

For the American rank-and-file - your "leaders" are essentially meritless affirmative action cases who have led you from one disaster to another; they all criticize each other, but one Quota Queen is as bad as the next.  And your "movement" is a complete catastrophe.

What lessons can be learned for individuals who wish to rise to leadership in dissident politics?  Basing your rise on actual merit rather than ethnic quotas would help, as the latter approach eventually leads to disaster as one hits the wall of their limitations. Speaking of which, remember the Clint Eastwood Magnum Force movie phrase -  "a man's got to know his limitations." Rather than being head of NPI, or any other sort of Grand Poobah in Der Movement, Spencer would have been best suited as a spokesman or political candidate - the "face" of the "movement" representing the older and more experienced Quota Queens (who, although inept as well, relatively speaking are bit more wise and more prudent) who could have told him what to do and say.  But if you have the attitude that people need to "bend their knee" to you, obviously such a secondary role would not be personally acceptable.

If you want to follow the strategy of emphasizing networking rather than content creation, then it is (obviously) imperative to cultivate, and not alienate, your most influential contacts and supporters. The ultimate problem with Hailgate was not the incident itself - which I thought was, while unfortunate and reflecting poor judgment, not the sort of catastrophe others made it out to be - but the inevitable, easily expected, reaction of people like Taylor and Brimelow. Losing - at least publicly - their support, coupled with the feud with Johnson (which we really cannot blame Spencer for since Johnson eventually ends up feuding with almost everyone), left Spencer with a limited number of networking options, many of them sub-optimal. The collapse of the Alt Right corporation led to more "breaks" in his networking, and other various events led to problems with Conte, Kessler, etc. 

Johnson can survive his many feuds and catastrophes because he is a content creator (if you like what he produces, which I do not), and manages a stable of other content creators. Johnson, despite his propensity for feuding, is fairly good at networking and "movement" politics (to the extent that he can control his tropism for fighting and feuding).  Spencer, it seems, lacks these skills as well as not being a significant content creator. In summary, if you put most of your eggs in the networking basket, you had better be sure your behavior doesn't smash those eggs.

Needless to say, if you are going to be a high-publicity leader, you need to control your personal behavior to limit scandal and to create an image of prudence and probity. Obviously, that's not what happened in Spencer's case, but to be fair, some of Spencer's Quota Queen critics are not any better in this regard.  Two wrongs do not make a right, however.

And, of course, sound judgment, good strategy and tactics, operational security, etc. are all important to build confidence so as to be accepted as a leader and to maintain that position. Seriousness is also crucial; the Beavis-and-Butthead aspects of the Alt Right may have been plenty of fun for its participants at the time, but how can you build and maintain a network of influential contacts and supporters if you behave like a juvenile jackass? And if you want loyalty from supporters you need to give loyalty back - and this inability is a fundamental and fatal flaw for almost all of the Quota Queens.

There's more to be said on this issue, but that is enough for now.