William Pierce

[Thomas777]

I must confess...I have long reviled the "National Alliance" for what I perceive as their counterproductive, cultic/hobbyist approach to White Nationalism.

That said, I read "Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds" last night and I must say I found myself very impressed with William Pierce's intellect and ideas. I found it hard to reconcile this obviously gifted man's words with his dysfunctional conduct (i.e. his association with George Lincoln Rockwell, his bizarre personal life, and his flirtation with new age "religion").

I would like to know what the gallery here on the phora thinks of William Pierce, his ideas, and his legacy (if one even exists).

[Ambrosio Spinola]

I have his Turner Diaries on CD and listen to it now and then while on my way to work. I´m also suscribed to their magazine although I rarely ever see them with their inconsitant printing politics.

[Ixtab]

Have you read his Holy Book of Cosmotheism? It's really silly. I've only read the first 'book', though.

[jcs]

Have you read his Holy Book of Cosmotheism? It's really silly.
Speaking of silliness:
Turner Diaries
It's a vengeful racist's orgasm.

[infoterror]

The Turner Diaries was published only because, unlike actual philosophical texts, he could get people to read it.

The problem is low-quality "whites."

Until we rebuild an aristocracy, we're fucked. I mean, we cannot even tell the truth about white caste divisions here

[Excorcism]

The Turner Diaries was published only because, unlike actual philosophical texts, he could get people to read it.

The problem is low-quality "whites."

Until we rebuild an aristocracy, we're fucked. I mean, we cannot even tell the truth about white caste divisions here

They're here, but it's called owning wealth, property, and a house in the Hamptons. The caste division is very subtle, but it is there in a sense...at least with temptation by keeping open liquor stores and gunshops in ghettos and advertising rap music back to the low-income urban areas so the young people will be tempted to committ crime for petty material things. It's almost like as if it was purely intentional by some outside force.

[Petr]

Until we rebuild an aristocracy, we're fucked.
Who needs aristocracy? Socially speaking, we would rather need an ethically strong middle class, which is a sign of health in every society.

I am a sort of middle-class supremacist. I oppose both decadent elitistic aristocrats as well as low-class rabble. :p


Petr

[Hakluyt]

Socially speaking, the middle class in the nation-state is unsustainable for economic reasons (too much mobility, capitalism). The middle class needs to be broken as a political-economic unit - its natural and proper state is merely to be a pool of individuals, connected by nation and culture, both humbled by and aspiring toward aristocracy. This in addition to the low-class is ideal sum of the 'nation'.

Why oppose elitism? By all means oppose decadence, but it's not integral to aristocracy- conflating those 3 vastly different concepts is horribly short-sighted (typically middle-class, though)

[Petr]

I am by no means opposed to some sorts of pro-aristocracy arrangements - something ideal for others to look up to - but you only have to look to 18th-century Poland or early 16th-century Hungary to see what kind of an anarchic, hedonistic mess unconstrained aristocratic oligarchy can cause.

Do you subscribe to some sort of Dumezilian trifunctional idea, Haklyut?


Petr

[Hakluyt]

I'm not familiar with that (google yielded some neo-paganist webpages?) Anything you have on hand would be appreciated.

Aristocracy obviously has to earn its prestige, and the prospects for a stronger, moralistic aristocracy are infinitely better today within the context of the modern nation-state (and among an educated populace) than it was before the 18th c.

[Petr]

I'm not familiar with that (google yielded some neo-paganist webpages?) Anything you have on hand would be appreciated.
Here, I have put together a whole thread as a rebuttal to it:

http://thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1507&highlight=marcenay

(Dumezil had some quite interesting ideas, but I happen to think his neo-pagan admirers have way overblown them)


Petr

[OVERWATCH]

I must confess...I have long reviled the "National Alliance" for what I perceive as their counterproductive, cultic/hobbyist approach to White Nationalism.

That said, I read "Fame of a Dead Man's Deeds" last night and I must say I found myself very impressed with William Pierce's intellect and ideas. I found it hard to reconcile this obviously gifted man's words with his dysfunctional conduct (i.e. his association with George Lincoln Rockwell, his bizarre personal life, and his flirtation with new age "religion").

I would like to know what the gallery here on the phora thinks of William Pierce, his ideas, and his legacy (if one even exists).

WLP was a gifted and brilliant orator, check out some of the old ADV broadcasts. Who could forget such gems as "And when the last peice of rubble has been lifted from the destroyed World Trade Center, what will they find but a vile Jew, blinking his eyes at the light, and scurrying away like a cockroach with a handful of cash"...merely typing this doesn't give the feel of WLP's diatribes, because the true magic was in his choice use of inflection and emphasis.

I was an active member of the NA under Pierce for a number of years, but I have since discarded much of it's ideology as unpractical. There's no doubt that Pierce was very bright, his style of writing spread throughout the NA(and some other white nationalist groups) as others either consciously or subconsciously mimicked his style.

Plus, he held the NA together for many years, anyone who know white nationalists knows they are often combative, competitive, inflexible people often at odds with other white nationalists. Look where the NA is now- in the toilet.

[leondegrance]

It was quite a loss when WLP died. I enjoyed listening to his radio broadcasts very much. Just got done reading "The Turner Diaries" once again. A great fictional novel, though a bit satirical.

[infoterror]

I was an active member of the NA under Pierce for a number of years, but I have since discarded much of it's ideology as unpractical.

Plus, he held the NA together for many years, anyone who know white nationalists knows they are often combative, competitive, inflexible people often at odds with other white nationalists.

Times have changed. Back then, there was no hope of Nationalism ever getting an upper hand because conservatism was still viable. Now that's not so. Nationalists need to change tactics from talking about Negroes to talking about white people, and being more specific than "white." A lot of us don't want our daughters marrying Slavs or Irishmen either!

He held the NA together because he was a strong leader via his wisdom. He was focused on a task. Most people just want to be heard and have a clubhouse.

[Kodos]

Times have changed. Back then, there was no hope of Nationalism ever getting an upper hand because conservatism was still viable. Now that's not so. Nationalists need to change tactics from talking about Negroes to talking about white people, and being more specific than "white." A lot of us don't want our daughters marrying Slavs or Irishmen either!

http://www.ladyofthecake.com/mel/saddles/images/goodbye.jpg

"All right, we'll give some land to the niggers and the chinks, but we DON'T WANT THE IRISH."

[Kodos]

Who needs aristocracy? Socially speaking, we would rather need an ethically strong middle class, which is a sign of health in every society.

I am a sort of middle-class supremacist. I oppose both decadent elitistic aristocrats as well as low-class rabble.

Although I rather live as an aristocrat I agree with you here about the interest of society in being mainly middle class.

[jcs]

"All right, we'll give some land to the niggers and the chinks, but we DON'T WANT THE IRISH."
Nonsense. We don't want Africans and Asians, and we also don't want all whites to be thought of as belonging to one homogenous race. Germans and Spaniards and Finns--and, yes, Irish, English, and Slavs--belong to entirely different races(=ethnicities, defined by heritage and breeding population, separated by culture).
Miscegenation is lethal.

[Gleb]

Nonsense. We don't want Africans and Asians, and we also don't want all whites to be thought of as belonging to one homogenous race. Germans and Spaniards and Finns--and, yes, Irish, English, and Slavs--belong to entirely different races(=ethnicities, defined by heritage and breeding population, separated by culture).
Miscegenation is lethal.

I fully agree with such a point view. However if you separate English and Germans you can not speak of Slavs as belonging to one race either.

[Thomas777]

Nonsense. We don't want Africans and Asians, and we also don't want all whites to be thought of as belonging to one homogenous race. Germans and Spaniards and Finns--and, yes, Irish, English, and Slavs--belong to entirely different races(=ethnicities, defined by heritage and breeding population, separated by culture).
Miscegenation is lethal.

You're missing the point here. In a perfect world, all the tribes of Europe would be able to preserve their unique genetic legacy...and that is a laudable goal. However, we need to focus on the emergency at hand...and that is the invasion of the West by non-White populations. The presence of Englishmen, Norweigans or Finns in Germany for example does not constitute a threat to the fabric of German society...I'm sure you can see that.

[jcs]

I fully agree with such a point view. However if you separate English and Germans you can not speak of Slavs as belonging to one race either.
The English and Germans are of two different, albeit related, races, as are Russians and the Polish. I don't differentiate between Negroid peoples, either, because, frankly, I don't know shit about them. All I know about Slavs is that Tarkovsky, Tchaikovsky, and Dostoyevsky are cool, and that there are at least (possibly more) two Slavic nations: Russia and Poland. :p

You're missing the point here. In a perfect world, all the tribes of Europe would be able to preserve their unique genetic legacy...and that is a laudable goal. However, we need to focus on the emergency at hand...and that is the invasion of the West by non-White populations. The presence of Englishmen, Norweigans or Finns in Germany for example does not constitute a threat to the fabric of German society...I'm sure you can see that.
This is also a problem for non-European peoples. What you're basically doing is creating a Union of Us vs. a mass of out-group Thems. That's not really what's going on, as Europe is only being metaphorically (sensationally) invaded. In reality: people in the Middle East and Africa who don't like this-or-that aspect of their home, or who see some means of making a profit in Europe, leave their lands for greener pastures. They're not invading (the metaphor must be dropped; it only causes confusion and binary Us/Them thinking, as if we were in a simple conflict); they're just following their individual desires.
Plus, European country X doesn't really need the rest of the continent's consenting help to expell non-Europeans, and all other foreigners. Each people could try taking some damn initiative. Alas, even if they saw the problem, they'd probably refrain from acting...

And then we arrive at the final issue: actually, the presence of Finns, etc. is harmful to the German people.

I'm no pragmatist, as we can't really predict the future anyway, and the Possibility doesn't really rouse much conviction in my heart; and furthermore, I am incapable of finding motivation in any end. I'm no pragmatist--I leave that to the politicians. No, I know only how to do what seems right. Want to be pragmatic? Want to try to reach end-goals? The universe will undergo heat death, Earth will perish along with our sun (if not sooner by our hand), one day you'll die, and it is exceptionally doubtful that you'll ever see your goals realized. In the end, all ends are meaningless, and we're not left with consequences, but our actions themselves. Mine are guided by what seems right: in this case, that would be using sensibility to push for the separation of preservation of my culture. Drawing the battle lines for a race war (which is what the Us/Them division does, even if we don't get an armed Helter-Skelter) when that doesn't seem right, necessary, or helpful doesn't make sense to me.

[Thomas777]

And then we arrive at the final issue: actually, the presence of Finns, etc. is harmful to the German people.
Not really. The presence of other closely related Europeans in Germany does not prompt intractable ethnic tension and result in the creation of unassimilable enclaves of foreigners who are hostile to the German people and their folkways, faith, and culture.

I'm no pragmatist, as we can't really predict the future anyway, and the Possibility doesn't really rouse much conviction in my heart; and furthermore, I am incapable of finding motivation in any end. I'm no pragmatist--I leave that to the politicians. No, I know only how to do what seems right. Want to be pragmatic? Want to try to reach end-goals? The universe will undergo heat death, Earth will perish along with our sun (if not sooner by our hand), one day you'll die, and it is exceptionally doubtful that you'll ever see your goals realized. In the end, all ends are meaningless, and we're not left with consequences, but our actions themselves. Mine are guided by what seems right: in this case, that would be using sensibility to push for the separation of preservation of my culture. Drawing the battle lines for a race war (which is what the Us/Them division does, even if we don't get an armed Helter-Skelter) when that doesn't seem right, necessary, or helpful doesn't make sense to me.

I'm not drawing the battle lines for a race war...I'm realistically assessing the situation. You can engage in sophistry all you want, but when America is some Third World wasteland and Europe has been Islamified, your philisophical conundrums are not going to bear a whole lot of relevance on a situation that will have become dire for White peoples.

[Kodos]

Nonsense. We don't want Africans and Asians, and we also don't want all whites to be thought of as belonging to one homogenous race. Germans and Spaniards and Finns--and, yes, Irish, English, and Slavs--belong to entirely different races(=ethnicities, defined by heritage and breeding population, separated by culture).
Miscegenation is lethal.

That was a quote from the movie Blazing Saddles.

[jcs]

Not really. The presence of other closely related Europeans in Germany does not prompt intractable ethnic tension and result in the creation of unassimilable enclaves of foreigners who are hostile to the German people and their folkways, faith, and culture.
Assimilation is more destructive to culture than ethnic tension. In fact, ethnic tension is about the only thing that can keep two cultures living side-by-side distinct from one another.

You can engage in sophistry all you want
Define: Sophistry
Sophism was originally a term for the techniques taught by a highly respected group of philosophy and rhetoric teachers in ancient Greece. The derogatory modern usage of the word, suggesting an invalid argument composed of specious reasoning, is not necessarily representative of the beliefs of the original Sophists, except that they generally taught Rhetoric
To this definition, I would add: 'sophistry' is a term thrown around far too often by people who would prefer to avoid addressing issues; it is also a term that, being an escape-tool, is thrown around either desperately or as a means to be dismissive, thus often mischaracterizing the 'sophist' as a sophist where sophistry is not present.

Define: forum
n. place where thoughts are exchanged
Don't be dismissive; think!

when America is some Third World wasteland and Europe has been Islamified, your philisophical conundrums are not going to bear a whole lot of relevance on a situation that will have become dire for White peoples.
Define: sensationalism

[Thomas777]

Assimilation is more destructive to culture than ethnic tension. In fact, ethnic tension is about the only thing that can keep two cultures living side-by-side distinct from one another.
This little formula has not worked out real well for a lot of populations, my friend. I don't think that Red Indians benefitted a whole lot from the tension that accrued from living side by side with the White Man.





Define: sensationalism
I don't think its sensationalism, I think its the opposite. I'm a lifelong resident of an American city, and in the past twenty years, the neighborhoods I used to play in as a kid are no longer safe or habitable for White peoples. That is reality...its not some sort of abstract theory that I have about potential futures.

[jcs]

This little formula has not worked out real well for a lot of populations, my friend. I don't think that Red Indians benefitted a whole lot from the tension that accrued from living side by side with the White Man.
They didn't die out until they made their way into society.

[Thomas777]

They didn't die out until they made their way into society.
No. Whites obtained a demographic advantage and defeated them through superior ingenuity, tactics and firepower. Indians suffered the fate of conquered peoples.

[Watzy]

In principle I condone the defensive aspects of pan-Slavism as a logical reaction to German, Anglo-Saxon, Italian and other imperial intentions, but on the other hand I stand opposed to the Slavic unitarianism in any form, because historic experience proved it to be harmful for individual interest of smaller Slavic nations.

Ethnic nationalism is far more realistic and less hypocritical in respect to the artificiality of White Nationalism. There's nothing wrong with ethnic/racial segregationism, especially if such natural urges are not motivated by supremacy or disrespect toward other groups.

[Thomas777]

Ethnic nationalism is far more realistic and less hypocritical in respect to the artificiality of White Nationalism. There's nothing wrong with ethnic/racial segregationism, especially if such natural urges are not motivated by supremacy or disrespect toward other groups.

I can appreciate that...but America is not Europe. Many diverse populations of Whites in America find themselves similarly situated with respect to shared political, social and cultural interests. White Nationalism in Europe is an artificiality...in America, it is not.

[Watzy]

I can appreciate that...but America is not Europe. Many diverse populations of Whites in America find themselves similarly situated with respect to shared political, social and cultural interests. White Nationalism in Europe is an artificiality...in America, it is not.

I must admit my ignorance concerning inter-ethnic relations in US, but I wonder why would a Pole wanted to identify as 'White' instead as a Pole, or a Polish American or a Slav - knowing he'll be treated as some sort of a second grade member by WASP's in any case?

[Thomas777]

I must admit my ignorance concerning inter-ethnic relations in US, but I wonder why would a Pole wanted to identify as 'White' instead as a Pole, or a Polish American or a Slav - knowing he'll be treated as some sort of a second grade member by WASP's in any case?

Well, I cannot speak for the rest of the country, but where I have always lived, most Whites are of Polish, Irish, Italian, Russian heritage and WASPs are a relative minority. I've never known White Protestants in my community to look down on the Slavs or treat them as inferiors, but like I said, I am sure things are much different other places in this country, as it varies greatly between reigons.

That said, non-Whites (politically speaking) consider all Euro-Americans to constitute a monolithic competitor group and FedGov cultivates this tendency.

Hence, for a Pole or a Croat to effectively secede from the rest of White society would work against his social and political interests.

However, Poles, Croats, Irish, Italians, etc. do a pretty good job of maintaining the integrity of their own cultural enclaves here, and WASPs (myself included) tend not to take exception to that.

[jcs]

...why would a Pole wanted to identify as 'White' instead as a Pole, or a Polish American or a Slav...?
Because realistic, healthy racial views must be sacrificed for socially constructed 'racial' groups that are next meaningless on the cultural and biological level, such that whites can gain political power, because we live in a democracy and need to appeal to as large a demographic as possible to get anything accomplished!!!1!

A point I neglected to raise: when our racial views abandon notions of heritage in favor of political unity; when we place unity and solidarity and dreams of victory (whatever that may be) above heritage, above culture, even if not abandoning culture and heritage; when we look for common factors that bind us to one another and ignore those things that make us different from each other--when 'whites unite,' what sort of force bonds us? Listen to someone speak of his people and you hear pride and reverence and a desire to bring one's people honor, and all this bragging--for that is probably the largest part of what ethno-cultural pride is--keeps peoples together. The community can only get so big; once it reaches a certain point, the sub-communities notice more difference between one another than between the community itself and outside communities. Whites cannot unite--unless, of course, there is a 'spook,' some sensationalistic bit of frightfulness which scares the people into uniting to save themselves; whites cannot unite unless they are presented with an imperative: "You've seen the spook--now fight!"
The response: "Well, shit, I don't want that to happen, and I don't know what to do, I don't know how to assess the situation, and at least you've got a plan!"

We're going out with a whimper, but the white-unity plan acts as if there is going to be a bang--in fact, some WNs are half-trying/half-hoping for one.

That said, non-Whites (politically speaking) consider all Euro-Americans to constitute a monolithic competitor group and FedGov cultivates this tendency.
The reasons for this:
-scapegoating
-blacks have had a few 'bangs,' and have found that a long-term memory, combined with guilt-tripping, can be useful

Blacks had to unite because they were united by an outside force (whites), and so too with other 'colored' people. Blacks especially still try to use their 'suffering' for personal gain, but most often it is for individualistic, selfish ends; that is to say, there is no longer any real unity amongst non-whites either.

Maybe if trends continue, whites will be singled-out and will have to unite for their own 'civil rights,' but that is doubtful, as anti-white bigotry, though more acceptable now, is less abundant and will continue to die down.

[Lord_Lugdreg]

That said, non-Whites (politically speaking) consider all Euro-Americans to constitute a monolithic competitor group and FedGov cultivates this tendency.

non-Whites are also beginning to add in the jews with the European-Americans. (A good example would be Farrakhan) A rather alarming event and just one more reason why something must be done about these semitic parasites.