It's a Start

What to do?

I have been asking "movement" "leaders" to consider contingencies in case of different election outcomes, and, to his credit, Taylor has at least broached the issue.

See this.

Of course, we will support Senators and Congressmen who aren’t bootlickers, but our efforts will mainly be local.

That's fine.  But we need to become involved in electoral politics ourselves, at the local level if that is what is possible, but at the state and national levels if opportunity arises. This doesn't have to be as all-out "White advocates" in all cases - Trump has shown there is a national-level niche for implicitly White right-wing populism.  For now, the probable formula would be - the lower the political level, the more explicitly White you can be (dependent upon local conditions). The bottom line is that "local efforts" will be for naught if there is no local political protection behind them.

As the federal government and some local authorities go steadily more insane, resistance will harden in white areas. Some of us will move to where we can build communities, and campaign in city, county, school-board elections. 

"Campaign." OK, that's what I'm looking for. But, to be honest, those are the sort of things that should have been already happening. The four years of the Trump Interregnum were the perfect time for this consolidation and expansion. Instead we got Unite the Right, Pepe and Kek, and articles about Chinese IQ and Savitri Devi.

We will use Big Tech while we can, but you can expect it to become a wasteland of ideas, that is to say, a mouthpiece for the New York Times. We will build up the alternatives: Gab, Parler, Bitchute, Entropy.

And when those alternative become silenced?

In our own lives, we will educate our children at home and build groups to share teaching responsibilities. 

That's great. If it is so easily done, why hasn't it be actualized yet?

We will get firearms while we can and learn how to use them. Second Amendment groups will soon be hated almost as must as racial dissidents; they’ll be fertile ground for recruitment, alliance-building, and finding spouses.

Maybe.

We must start using the S-word: Separation. It will be hard to reverse 60 years of nonsense about integration, but integration was supposed to be the end to all forms of racial solidarity. Whites kept that bargain — but no one else did. As anti-white hysteria rises, more people will be open to the idea that reconciliation is impossible, and that we must be free to go our own way. At the local level it will be possible to save our way of life. Ultimately, we must think in terms of another S-word: Secession. Only then will be free.

Back to the broad ideas without any analysis of how to get from here to there.  By the way, this call for "separation" means increased radicalism for those whose vision of America is Leave It To Beaver and "sweet business deals."  America is dead, the corpse is beginning to stink, and it's time to move on from failed "Amnat" approaches. Politically speaking, the "wignats" were right, it just that their "optics" and tactical approaches were all wrong.

But remember: Even if Trump wins, it’s only a reprieve. We will have a little more time to consolidate locally — but that’s all. 

Great.  Why hasn't Der Movement done it the last four years?  If Trump wins in 2020, what guarantee do we have that Der Movement just won't go back to taking about IQ and hobbit holes?

Unless we build white strongholds and defend them, we and our civilization will be ground down, denatured, washed away by people who cannot be us and don’t want to be us.

Talk is great.  But it is not enough. Leaders need to do more than talk - that's been Trump's problem all along, all talk and no action. Der Movement's bigwigs need to realize at some point that if they want these things done, they are the ones who need to get the ball rolling. Or else, we'll be back in 2024,with everything much worse (and Amren still online?), and we'll be reading these same things with no progress made toward achieving them.

We have the right to be us, and only we can be us. And only we will save us.

"We" - all the rank-and-file "activists" out there - have chosen "our" "leaders." Now, I personally disagree with those choices, but the masses of Type Is have spoken.  We have (affirmative action) "leaders" and those are the people who need to show the leadership to "save us."  

Now, as an "insane" "low information moralizer" I may be too harsh here.  Obviously, public online forums are not the place for our fearless leaders to discuss details; perhaps the proper behind the scenes work is in fact being done.

But, there is much more that needs to be accomplished besides even those things I myself mentioned above.  We need proper legal defense infrastructures, political lobbying of a sort, more of an analog presence (including as I have written before to be prepared to go back to analog paper publishing if the digital world is cut off), infiltration of more mainstream rightist groups, free speech advocacy - that's just the start.  That's going to cost money of course.  At some point, we need to stop flushing millions of dollars down the "movement" toilet.  At some point, people other than myself need to question the appropriateness of someone earning $180,000 per year for "running an Internet publication."  

We need to get serious.

Frankly, I'm not sure these guys have it in them. I hope they prove me wrong.