This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Table of Contents
5. Looking Ahead – August 1974 10. Principles of Organization – November 1974 15. “Are We Winning?” – November 1975 19. Robert J. Mathews – December 1984 26. Black Helicopters and Related Matters – July 1994 30. Watching Things Unravel – August 1994 33. Why the Slowdown? – September 1994 36. Feedback – October 1994 45. Lessons from Our Membership Handbook – November 1994 48. Why More Progress Isn’t Made – December 1994 52. Character and the Changing Public Mood – January 1995 57. The Current Which Serves – February 1995 60. Promoting Victory – August 1995 62. On the Nature of Public Opinion – September 1995 65. Cult of The Turner Diaries – October 1995 67. New Opportunity in California – November 1995
69. The New Zeitgeist – January 1996 72. The War Escalates – May 1997 76. Coping with Tyranny – June 1997 83. Dealing with Fear – July 1997 86. The Meaning of Loyalty – August 1997 89. Tenacity and Patience – October 1997 92. Stay Focused! – November 1997 95. The Old Faith Faileth – January 1998 98. Dealing with Individualists and Cowards – April 1998 101. The Purpose of Activism – May 1998 104. Set Your Priorities – June 1998 106. A Thought on Strategy – December 1998 109. What Makes a Hater? – February 1999 113. Redefining Patriotism – April 1999 118. Revolutionary Lessons – June 1999 123. The Nature of Revolution – November 1999 127. Losers, Hobbyists, and the “Movement” – March 2000
Dear Friends and Fellow Fighters for a New Order: Spread out across the country as we are, often isolated, our people sometimes become discouraged. I receive many letters from Alliance members and supporters who wonder whether their efforts are worthwhile. They suggest that perhaps it is already too late and that nothing we can do will avert a national collapse and racial extinction. The Enemy is too well entrenched and has already carried his destructive work too far. The American people have been corrupted beyond redemption. Things are very bad indeed, but they aren’t quite that bad. We still can win, and we shall win. But even if we thought the situation hopeless we would still be obliged to fight. Men and women of our race are accustomed to going down fighting rather than to surrender. Nevertheless, it is understandable that some of us occasionally become discouraged and feel like quitting. In order to combat this, I shall tell you a little about what I foresee for the Alliance in the future. I believe that when you understand a little more clearly what lies ahead you will more readily be able to share my conviction that the future, indeed, belongs to us and that our efforts will inevitably be crowned with victory. For the past three-and-one-half years we have been doing two things: disseminating our ideas to the public and building our National Alliance/NYA community. We have built the prestige and circulation of our newspaper, ATTACK!, until it stands alone as the standard which others attempt to imitate. During the next few months, using newsracks on the streets, we shall give a much greater public exposure to ATTACK! than it has had before. Instead of being known primarily in radical circles, it will become generally recognized by the public as the voice of White racial idealism and opposition to the genocidal System. It will become as well known to our enemies and to the uncommitted as it now is to our friends.
On the organizational front we have developed from a rather shaky youth organization, which nearly succumbed to a massive assault by an ADL-connected “conservative” front in Washington three years ago, to a solidly based revolutionary organization that is actively recruiting members from every occupational apparatus needed to control and guide the growth of a much larger organization in the future. Within the next few weeks we anticipate the start of a new organization-building activity: public meetings. These will be initiated in the Washington area and will provide an important new mode of contact with the public, as well as an indispensable means for cementing and building our National Alliance/NYA community of members and supporters. Before going into the details or our organizational plans, however, let us return to propaganda. The basic problem confronting use here it hat none of the established media will serve us for the propagation of our message to the general public. We can force them from time to time to publicize our activities, but our ideas will reach the public through them only in the most grossly distorted form. We must, therefore, develop our own media for communicating with the people. The most important medium we have now is ATTACK!, and it must be developed into a mass medium. Instead of reaching a few tens of thousands of Americans once every five weeks or so, we must gradually build to the point where we are reaching a few million of our fellow citizens each week. That is, we must increase our circulation a hundredfold at the same time we increase our frequency of publication, first to a firm monthly schedule, then to twice a month, and then to once a week. Such a development cannot take place, of course, inside the closely restricted confines of the “right wing,” in which the traditional propaganda medium consists of newsletters or tabloids with esoteric contents mailed out to lists of the faithful. When such material does occasionally fall into the hands of the public, it is largely incomprehensible.
Thus, the emphasis has been shifted recently from increasing ATTACK! circulation through mail subscriptions to street sales, and this shift in emphasis will become greater in the future. This shift has resulted in some changes in the content of ATTACK!, and these will be further changes. Eventually, each issue will be designed with the thought that it will serve as our initial contact with new readers. For this purpose it should present a more-or-less comprehensive exposition of our ideas. Specifically, each issue will have rather standardized articles on race, economics, foreign policy, the controlled media, etc. In order to avoid too much repetition for regular readers, this means that the size of each issue must be increased. In addition, certain new features, designed to catch the interest of a relatively unsophisticated readership, will be added to the paper. The difference between us and the armchair warriors is that when we talk about smashing the System and building a New Order, we really mean it. We understand that nothing we want to achieve can be had by wishful thinking, but only by the most careful planning followed by the most diligent and determined action. Nevertheless, for those who are truly looking for excitement and an opportunity to take chances and face physical danger – rather than just talk about it – there is no limit to what is already available right here at the National Office. One does not beard the Enemy in his den without taking risks and suffering casualties. We do not say to ourselves each morning, “Today we shall begin overthrowing the System.” If we did, we would soon become cynical and discouraged in the face of a seemingly overwhelming task. We do not even say, “Today we shall begin building our own mass medium,” because that is also a discouragingly enormous task. We concentrate instead on taking the next step toward these larger goals. This is something we can comprehend and grapple with. Now, for example, we think each day about such things as putting our newsracks in new locations and adding new members to our National Office staff so that ATTACK! can be increased to 16 pages within the next few issues. One other propaganda medium we shall utilize to a greater extent in the future is the leaflet. The leaflet offers two advantages over our
other printed propaganda material, namely, ATTACK! First, it deals with a single topic and, thus, focuses its recipients’ attention on the matter at hand without introducing other ideas which may distract or even alienate them. Second, leaflets are well suited for mass, free distribution. An entire community can be saturated with them in a way that would not be economically feasible with ATTACK! or a pamphlet. But neither leaflets nor newspapers can be developed into an effective mass medium unless there is a corresponding organizational development. Our propaganda capabilities and our organizational strength must grow hand in hand. The first task of our propaganda, through whatever medium it flows, is to win new recruits for building our organization. Likewise, the first task of our organization is maintaining and expanding our propaganda. The second task of our propaganda is the disruption of the System, while the second task of our organization is to prepare itself for replacing the System. As an example, we may design and print a leaflet which is a propaganda masterpiece. But if it is to have any effect it must be quickly and efficiently distributed among the public. That requires thousands of willing and obedient hands – in other words, a strong organization to back up the propaganda. Likewise, we may build a marvelous organization which functions as smoothly as a Volkswagen. But unless it devotes its energies primarily to propaganda aimed at recruiting new strength from the public, it is a sterile organization without a future. These fundamental principles of propaganda and organization underlie all our plans, and it is in accord with them that we will be expanding our ATTACK! newsrack installations in the Washington area and simultaneously holding public meetings. Also underlying our plans is the fundamental assumption that there still exists in America, in the midst of the widespread alienation, self-indulgence, cowardice, and cynicism which permeate our society, an
idealistic minority capable of self-discipline and self-sacrifice from which we can continue to recruit the revolutionary cadres of our movement. In summary I emphasize these points: We have a plan which will carry us all the way to our goal. The essence of this plan is the building of an organization which is in effective and continuous contact with the general public through its propaganda and which, in its structure and in the composition of its cadres, has the full capability of taking the place of the present System in all it aspects: communications, internal security and the maintenance of order, legislative and judicial establishments, public education, economic regulation, military leadership, etc. We can see the steps which must be taken in order to bring our plan to its final realization. They stretch out before us for years into the future. But we have no time to sit and daydream about what must be done next year or the year after that. Instead, our attention and our energies must be concentrated on the step immediately before us. Only in that way can we make real progress toward our ultimate goal and avoid the cynicism and defeatism which are the deadly enemies of our revolution. Nevertheless, I shall share with you in the future issues of ACTION many- thought not all – of the details of future steps in our plan and the considerations which lie behind those steps. In the next ACTION we shall look at some organizational developments which lie ahead and at some considerations governing various types of organizational activity.
Principles of Organization
Dear Friends and Fellow Fighters for a New Order: The proper structure of any organization depends on the goals of that organization and the conditions under which it is obliged to strive toward those goals. The long-range goals of the National Alliance are of unprecedented magnitude, and the conditions under which we must work, while not unprecedented in difficulty, are certainly formidable enough. We want to build a whole new world, and we want to build it on a radically different ideological basis from that of the present world. In order to do so we must contend with the most determined and even fanatical opposition from the carriers of the Judeo-liberal-democratic sickness and from all those with a vested interest in the present System. Unfortunately, our opponents are able to marshal overwhelming forces against us and have almost unlimited resources at their disposal. Their chief strength, of course, is their monopoly control of the mass media. Not to be forgotten, however, are their dreadful power of the purse and their ability to deploy all the police powers of the state against us. We are at present not only a minority but an unpopular minority. If our fellow Americans had not been hypnotized by the mass media, most of them would find themselves in agreement with the ideals for which we stand. But the Enemy has managed to raise a barrier of fear and misunderstanding between us and the public, a barrier which we must break down. Although a national awakening is already beginning, until we have been able to completely overcome the insidious effects of the Enemy’s brainwashing of our fellow Americans – and that is a task which must be measured in years – we must count on the continued indifference or hostility of many of those we are trying to reach, and we will remain a minority, albeit a growing one.
These considerations condition the general organizational principles which guide us in the building the Alliance. Those general principles are: 1) FUNCTIONALITY. The Alliance must grow in a functional way. Its form and structure must be determined, first, by its primary task, which is the propaganda of our message of hope for a spiritual rebirth and a new life for our race; and, second, by its secondary task, which is to provide, eventually, the complete organizational framework for a new society and a new government. In other words, we are and will remain, first and foremost, a propaganda-making organization. We understand the term propaganda in its broadest sense, including both propaganda of the word and propaganda of the deed – in short, all feasible means for capturing the hearts and minds of our fellows. But we are also the see of a new society, a new racial and national community. As time passes and we gain members, that seed will grow into a complete and functional community within the larger community which it will one day replace, a state within the state which it will one day supersede. 2) MASS ORIENTATION. The Alliance must have a mass basis of support and of participation in its program, and it must keep is propaganda oriented toward a mass audience. It must avoid dependence for its support upon the representatives of any single special interest, and it must not restrict its appeal to any segment of the population defined in terms of occupation, income, age, geography, educational level, or present ideological orientation. 3) PERSONALITY. From the generalized mass which responds to its appeal, the Alliance sifts out those most capable of strengthening its cadres. The structure of the organization must always be such that the man or woman with greater understanding and self-discipline is able to fill a proportionately greater role in its program and make a larger contribution to its efforts than those less well endowed.
4) UNITY. The Alliance must be monolithic in purpose, in doctrine, and in strategy. Although it draws its recruits from left and right, from both radical and conservative elements of the population, and although it utilizes them in many different ways and to many different degrees, it must keep them always directed toward the common purpose. 5) FLEXIBILITY. In tactics the Alliance must remain completely flexible. Any means are permissible in achieving its ends, so long as the means do not contradict the ends. Though our purpose remains unchanging, we may change tactics from day to day or use different tactics in different places at the same time. Our doctrine is based on the eternal and Godordained laws of Nature, but our tactics are based on the demands and the resources of the moment. The ways in which these five principles of organization are applied to the structure and growth of the Alliance cannot be fully discussed here, but a few illustrative examples can be given. The principle of functionality lies behind the relative emphasis given to the production and public distribution of ATTACK!, as opposed to other activities which might receive this emphasis instead. An ultra-left group, such as the Symbionese Liberation Army, can kidnap someone or blow up a government building, and the news media will glamorize that group and disseminate its message to the public. That doesn’t work for us, however. If we want the public to recognize and understand us, we must reach them through our own channels of communication. Since our aim is to replace existing institutions with our own, we must develop the basis for a smoothly functioning propaganda machine which can grow and diversify and become stronger until it if effectively competing with the controlled media for the attention of the public. The principle of mass orientation has not played as large a role in the growth of the Alliance as it will in the future. When the economy is functioning smoothly enough so that the average citizen can maintain his
accustomed standard of living, it’s hard to attract his attention to even the most urgent racial, social, or political issues. The world may be crumbling into ruin around him, but so long as he can sit in front of his TV set with his beer, he doesn’t care. Only a racially conscious minority will respond to the appeal of the Alliance under such conditions. But when the economy falters, the masses become more receptive to criticism of the System and more willing to consider alternatives. There has already been an increase in emphasis on economic issues in our propaganda in the last few months, and the future will see a further shift in this direction as well as the introduction of new propaganda techniques more suited for reaching a mass audience than our previous efforts. Our mass orientation affects the choice of our means of propaganda as well as its content. Thus, we have shifted from mailing as the primary means for the dissemination of our propaganda materials, to street distributions. Mailings generally go to a minority which has already given some evidence of a particular ideological orientation, whereas street distributions reach everyone. The principle of personality stems from a recognition that human history is a record of the thoughts, achievements, and deeds of exceptional individuals. Applied to the structuring of a society or an organization, it tells us that the most progressive structure is the one which has built into it a mechanism of natural selection for bringing those individuals of greatest ability and will into positions of leadership. Thus, the Alliance provides a maximum opportunity for individual initiative on the part of its members. Those who seize this opportunity are able to play a leading role in the development of the Alliance. Those who do not will never be artificially boosted into leading positions. Authority within the Alliance is always earned, never bestowed as a favor. The policy of the Alliance, which consists of members widely distributed geographically, is maintained through the leading role played by the National Office. Although individual members and Action Units often produce their own leaflets dealing with local issues and otherwise
engage in propaganda on their own initiative, ATTACK! provides the ideological guidelines for everyone. As the Alliance grows there will be other regular publications besides ATTACK!, but the National Office will retain its overall editorial role in coordinating their contents with the Alliance’s program. And the National Office will also continue to provide the unifying link between all the component parts of the Alliance, no matter how large it becomes.
“Are We Winning?”
People often ask me, “Are we making any progress? Are we winning? Can you see victory ahead” I answer thus: “Yes, we are making progress, but not enough. The Enemy, despite a few setbacks he has suffered recently, is gaining ground faster than we are. Therefore, we cannot claim to be winning at this time. Nevertheless, I can see victory ahead – far, far ahead, and the road to that victory is rocky indeed. It runs through a vale of sorrows the likes of which we have never yet experienced.” Let me explain my answer, because a full understanding of it is essential to all of you who have made, or may soon make, the decision to travel that road. The Alliance has gained new members in the past year, and we have increased our capability for generating and distributing the printed word, although our rate of growth has not been what we would like. The real progress we have made, however, is of a different sort. It is progress toward a correct assessment of our situation and of its necessary remedy, progress toward the new outlook and the new attitude and the new attitude we must have before we can begin winning, progress toward truth. There was a time, 10 years or more in the past, when virtually all racially conscious, decent White Americans were “conservatives” or “right wingers,” and all “radicals” and “revolutionaries” were either Jews or degenerate Whites. Gradually, however, the realization has dawned on more and more White Americans that the situation in which our race has gotten itself admits to no “conservative” remedy. A correct assessment of the implications of the biological time bomb which the Enemy has built in American is beginning to be made. Former “right wingers” are beginning to understand that the growing non-White army of occupation in America, now 40 millions strong, cannot be made to go away by writing any number of letters to their
Congressmen or by passing any Constitutional amendment or by undertaking any other sort of reform. It is a biological problem, and it requires a biological solution. There is no other way. Without a doubt, those who have understood the unpleasant fact are still only a tiny minority, far outnumbered by those who will waste untold time and resources trying to get Mr. Wallace or Mr. Reagan elected next year. But the mere fact that ATTACK!, with its uncompromisingly revolutionary message, is now read by thens of thousands of substantial and respectable citizens each month – and not just by the “losers” and social dregs who are always ready for a revolution – is an indicator of real progress. Willingness to recognize the necessity of revolution, as opposed to reform, is only the first part of the change in attitude we have been working to bring about. It is far easier to tear down an old, decayed structure than it is to erect a new, sound one in its place. What we must do now is infuse our revolution-oriented minority with a new outlook, a new world-view which will not only sustain them on the long and difficult road ahead but will guide them in the building of a new society and a new world when victory has been won. Otherwise that victory will not be lasting. This is an important point. One does not simply take a number of small businessmen, lawyers, housewives, students, farmers, and factory workers, convince them that the government in Washington is filled with traitors who need to be hanged, and then build a revolutionary army from these people who will proceed to do what needs doing. First, the task facing them is so difficult that extraordinary motivation is required. Second, they must have a unifying creed which serves as a guide to proper action in all matters. We have until now concerned ourselves almost exclusively with various practical matters involved in building our army and in fighting the Enemy. We have worked to increase the circulation of ATTACK!, to distribute leaflets, and to do other necessary things, but we have not devoted as much thought as we should to the spiritual side of our struggle. Now we must work harder than ever at the things we have worked at before, but we must also begin making sure that we all know the answers to certain fundamental questions.
Among these questions are: Why is it necessary that the White race maintain its biological integrity? What is God’s will in this matter? What is the proper relationship of the individual to his race, and of the White race to the rest of Creation? In what way do our lives have an absolute meaning and value? What is the purpose of man’s existence? How does the individual attain immorality? What are the basic values on which we want to build a new society? It should be noted that these questions aren’t new. But our answers to them are, even though in some cases we may simply be looking at an old answer in a new way. And the integrated whole of which the answers to these questions are parts is the new creed which must sustain and guide us. The degree to which we assimilate this creed and live by it is just as much a sign of progress as the numbers of ATTACK! newsracks we set up or the number of leaflets we are able to put into circulation. In the long run it will be more necessary for our victory than anything else. To some the foregoing may seem an exaggeration. They may say: “We know who the Enemy is. The only other thing we need to know is how to destroy him. Tell us how, and let’s get on with it. We don’t need any fancy philosophical notions.” Such an attitude might be acceptable if we were faced only with a tactical problem having a reasonably quick and easy solution, but that is not the case. The problem before us is one of enormous depth and complexity, and its ultimate solution will be anything but quick and easy. It is so difficult a problem that few will tackle it and fewer still continue to grapple with it for long years on end, unless they first have a completely convincing answer to the question: “is it necessary that we attain the goal we have set for ourselves?” Is our effort necessary? Are all our sacrifices necessary? Is it necessary for us to prevail over the Enemy? That question has been asked, in different forms, by men of our race through the ages. Previously it might have been, “Is it necessary for good to prevail over evil?” Or, even earlier, “Is it necessary for the forces of Light to prevail over the forces of Darkness?”
But for us the most general form of the question is: “Is it necessary that the world continue its evolution toward ever higher states of existence?” And, in view of the clearly demonstrated intentions of the Enemy, the specific form of the question which is pertinent to our present struggle becomes: “Is it necessary that the most highly evolved race of man, the pinnacle of Creation, maintain its integrity – that it protect and preserve its unique features and give free rein to its creative urges, rather than drown these things in the cesspool of miscegenation? Is it necessary that man continue his climb toward the superman, rather than plunge again toward subman?” And if we understand the great, upward course of evolution of the universe, the eternal process of Creation symbolized in our Rune, to be the self-manifestation of God – then it is clear that what we are doing is necessary. Our struggle is that part of God which is in us seeking its own self-realization. It is the struggle of the human toward the divine, of manhood toward Godhood. In our race this divine spark, this upward urge, has always been too strong to be denied. In this age of the ascendancy of the powers of Darkness, however, the minds of many are confused. The urge is still there, but it has been misdirected. The Enemy has blinded most of us to the fact that the inchoate gases of the void; the silent, frozen mountain peaks; the rustling trees of the forests; the teeming jellyfish of the oceans, and man are parts of the Whole, which is God. God existed before man and will exist after man has surpassed himself, but man is now, for a period, a part of God, of the ever-changing, ever-evolving whole. All the parts of the Whole serve God’s purpose, but of those parts only man is capable of a consciousness of that purpose and a willful contribution to that purpose. Once we have freed ourselves from the false teachings of the Enemy – once we understand the inequality of all things, the inequality of the races – then the consciousness of our purpose can be restored and the necessity of our struggle becomes apparent. To be continued…
Robert J. Mathews
(Note: Dr. Pierce’s writing on this subject spanned different sections of the December 1984 issue of the BULLETIN. They are reproduced here along with the usual commentary section.) Robert J. Mathews, killed December 8 in the fiery explosion of his Seattle-area headquarters during a gunfight with nearly 100 FBI agents, headed an organization variously named in the press reports as Aryan Resistance Movement, Silent Brotherhood, and White American Bastion. It was, claims the FBI in court documents, modeled on “the Organization” in The Turner Diaries. Mathews, who owned a small farm near Metaline Falls, WA, was a member of the Alliance from November 1979 until last year, when he asked to be dropped from active membership. During his four years in the Alliance he recruited tirelessly, placing advertisements in a number of different publications, writing letters to the editors of newspapers throughout his part of the country, speaking at meetings of farmers and truckers, and visiting other patriotic organizations to distribute Alliance materials. He designed and arranged for the manufacture of the attractive Alliance caps which were introduced at the 1983 General Convention. At that convention Mathews spoke of his recruiting experiences among his fellow farmers and ranchers in the Pacific Northwest. He closed his brief but moving account with heartfelt words which everyone there always will remember: “We are born to fight and to die and to continue the flow of our people…. Stand up like men and reclaim our soil!... Kinsmen, arise! Look toward the stars and proclaim our destiny!” He was an intense, passionate, courageous, utterly committed man. He was a “straight arrow” in his personal life and in all of his dealings with other Alliance members. He lived entirely for the Cause for which the Alliance works, and he was ready to die for it without hesitation – even gladly, if by doing so he could set an example for others.
A few days before his fiery death, knowing that he was the target of a massive manhunt by government police agents, the 31-year old Mathews wrote a letter to serve as his last testament. Portions of it are quoted here: “For the past decade I have been a resident of northern Pend Orielle County. When I first arrived in Metaline Falls I had only $25 to my name, a desire to work hard and be left alone, and the dream of someday acquiring my own small farm. “During my three years at the mine and seven years at the cement plant, I can safely say that I was known as a hard worker. I stayed out of the bars and pretty much kept to myself. Anyone who is familiar with Boundary Dam Road knows how my late father and I carved a beautiful place out of the woods. All of the goals I had when I arrived were accomplished but one: I was not left alone. “Within months of my arrival the FBI went to the mine office and tried to have me fired from my job. I was working in the electrical department at the time, and my foreman, fortunately, had a deep and lasting dislike for the Feds. He was informed of the situation by the mine secretary. Had it been the mine manager instead of the secretary that the government goons talked to, I would have lost my job. “This campaign of harassment and intimidation began because of my involvement in the tax-rebellion movement from the time I was 15 years old. The government was on me so much for nothing more than a misdemeanor tax violation. “I left Arizona and the tax rebellion when I was 20…. “I soon settled down to marriage, clearing my land, and reading. Reading became an obsession with me. I consumed volume upon volume on subjects dealing with history, politics, and economics. I was especially taken with Spengler’s Decline of the West and Simpson’s Which Way Western Man? I also subscribed to numerous periodicals on current American problems, especially those concerned with the ever-increasing decline of White America.
“My knowledge of ancient European history started to awaken a wrongfully suppressed emotion buried deep within my soul, that of racial pride and consciousness. “The stronger my love for my people grew, the deeper became my hatred for those who would destroy my race and my heritage and darken the future of my children. “By the time my son had arrived I realized that White America, indeed my entire race, was headed for oblivion unless White men rose and turned the tide. The more I came to love my son the more I realized that, unless things changed radically, by the time he was my age he would be a stranger in his own land, a blonde-haired, blue-eyed Aryan in a country populated mainly by Mexicans, mulattoes, Blacks, and Asians. His future was growing darker by the day. “I came to learn that this was not by accident, that there is a small, cohesive, alien group within this nation working day and night to make this happen. I learned that these culture-distorters have an iron grip on both major political parties, on Congress, on the media, on the publishing houses, and on most of the major Christian denominations in this nation… “This I have no choice. I must stand up like a White man and do battle. “A secret war has been developing for the last year between the regime in Washington and an ever-growing number of White people who are determined to regain what our forefathers discovered, explored, conquered, settled, built, and died for… “I have no regrets or apologies to mark for Gary [Yarbrough] or myself. In fact I am proud that we had the courage and the determination to stand up and fight for our race and our heritage at a time in our history when such a deed is called a crime and not an act of valor…. “I am not going into hiding; rather I will press the FBI and let them know what it is like to become the hunted. Doing so, it is only logical to assume that my days on this planet are rapidly drawing to a
close. Even so, I have no fear. For the reality of life is death, and the worst the enemy can do to me is shorten my tour of duty in this world. I will leave knowing I have made the ultimate sacrifice to secure the future of my children.” In Robert Mathews the race has lost one of its noblest warriors. His memory, however, lives on, and it will inspire countless other warriors in the years to come – for the war in which he fought continues and grows. Debra Mathews, the widow of Robert Mathews, became an Alliance member in February 1984. She is left with a 53-acre farm and a three-year old son. Other members who wish to send donations to her should mail them directly to Box (number removed), Metaline Falls, WA 99153. The Turner Diaries, as has been pointed out in the BULLETIN a dozen times in the past, is fiction. It is not a secret plan for a White revolution, even if the controlled news media and the FBI claim that it is. It is not even a recipe book of urban guerilla tactics, devices, or techniques. Although the author has a great interest in such matters, he has never overthrown a government, assassinated a public official, or blown up a power station, so he cannot claim expertise in anything beyond the gadgetry of revolution and sabotage. Someone who wants to know how to carry out a revolution is better advised to read the works of Lenin, Mao Tse-tung, or Che Guevara than those of Andrew Macdonald. The entire purpose of The Turner Diaries is not to instruct the reader in the mechanics of overthrowing the U.S. government, but to present certain ideas to him. The plot serves only to maintain his interest and help him assimilate the ideas. It is what Earl Turner thinks and says that is important, not what he does. The action merely serves as a medium for the message, and the specific details of that action are largely irrelevant. The Turner Diaries was meant to be inspirational, but it was not meant to inspire anyone to illegal activity. For one thing, the action in the book does not even begin until 1991 – and that is probably a wildly optimistic estimate of how soon a White revolution in America might be feasible. Armed opposition to the government is certainly not feasible at
this time, nor is it likely to become feasible during the next decade. That, also, has been pointed out at least a dozen times in the BULLETIN. It is this conviction of infeasibility, not any love for the government or its laws, which is behind the standing Alliance policy of refraining from all illegal activity. An action-minded young member may find this restriction intolerable. A member of any age may look at what the enemies of his race are doing and become so filled with rage that he cannot hold himself back from striking out at them. But he should resign from the Alliance before he acts. And he serves his race better if he refrains from acting at all. A man of Robert Mathews’ quality is too precious to squander in premature action; he will be missed sorely when the suitable time for action does come. Nor can the average member who yields to the temptation to take up arms against his race’s oppressors now count on becoming an honored martyr like Mathews. A much more likely fate for him is to spend long years, unremembered, in the hellish nightmare of a racially integrated Federal prison, worse than any medieval dungeon. Finally, for those who absolutely are determined to go beyond the Alliance’s approved activities of personal recruiting and distribution of Alliance publications, and who believe that it is necessary to begin building a guerrilla army now, here is a little advice: keep it legal. There is no overwhelming need to accumulate machine guns and hand grenades, when there are so many excellent semiautomatic assault rifles available. A member who must have a machine gun should acquire it legally by paying the required Federal transfer tax. And there are many activities for guerrilla trainees to engage in without putting themselves into legal jeopardy; physical conditioning, marksmanship, ideological training, first aid, map reading, unarmed combat, etc. There are secure communications techniques to be devised and learned. There are a hundred vital questions to be answered: What are the criteria to be used in selecting recruits? How does one detect an infiltrator? How should various emergency situations be handled?
Tentative answers should be found to all such questions, and then the answers should be put to the test in realistic simulations. To satisfy their craving for action, would-be guerrillas should try getting through a survival course modeled on one used by the U.S. Army, not blowing up government buildings. Building a guerrilla group capable of holding its own against the government’s secret police agencies is a task requiring years of hard work, with scrupulous attention to every detail. And during those years one of the details with which the group’s leaders will have to concern themselves is legality. They must do their work without illegal weapons, illegal actions, or illegal conspiracies. It is possible, but is it not a task recommended for amateurs.
Security is something which, in these dark days, every Alliance member must keep in mind. There is not only the ongoing ruckus about the Aryan Resistance Movement, but the Jews and their Federal servants increasingly are alarmed about the string of successful bombings of abortion clinics across the country, about a rising public approval or armed vigilantism in the nation’s crime centers, and about the increasing threat that overseas enemies of the Jews may bring their direct action to the United States and even link up with domestic patriots. As public alienation continues to grow, “right wing terrorism” (to use the mediaapproved term) is certain to become more widespread. The government already is reacting to protect itself and its masters. The FBI and other secret-police agencies are operating now without many of the restrictions imposed on them in the wake of Watergate, Mail covers, phone taps and other forms of electronic surveillance, and the use of informers and agents provocateurs are up sharply. The situation will become much more oppressive in the future, with grand juries harassing patriots and seizing their records, the politicians falling over one another in their rush to pass new police-state legislation, and the controlled media cheering on the prosecutors and attempting to generate public hostility toward all White dissidents. And the American Civil Liberties Union will be very busy sitting on its hands and contemplating its navel.
The Neo-conservative element which has become so strongly entrenched in the Reagan government will move much more decisively to defend itself and crush its enemies than Jimmy Carter’s liberals ever did. The National Office has taken some measures to protect itself and members, such as the burning of old correspondence and other records on a regular schedule, instead of permitting them to accumulate beyond the period when they really are needed. Sometimes the lack of records causes inconvenience, but on balance it seems a prudent precaution. It is not at all inconceivable, for example, that secret policemen could show up unexpectedly at the National Office armed with a subpoena for the names and addresses of everyone who has purchased a copy of The Turner Diaries. No such list has ever existed, and few lists of any kind will exist in the future. Individual members also can take precautions: • Never save correspondence or other papers which might be used to incriminate yourself or others. If you have ever written a letter saying you would like to blow up the White House, burn the carbon – and be more careful about your rhetoric in the future. Never permit yourself to be drawn into conversation about illegal matters. If someone offers to sell you an illegal hand grenade or machine gun, don’t say anything which later could be construed as evidence of your intent to commit a crime. Don’t report the incident to the police, but do report it to the National Office (not by telephone), where a decision can be made as to whether the offerer is a government provocateur or merely a careless patriot who needs a warning. Never engage in gossip, even with close friends, about rumors of illegal patriotic activity you have overheard; otherwise, you may be the cause of some patriot losing his life or his liberty. Loose talk is the greatest threat to any liberation struggle, and it is also a ground for expulsion from the Alliance.
Black Helicopters and Related Matters
A lot of really nutty mail comes across my desk. Recently some of it has contained alarming warnings about black helicopters flying around the country on government business, presumably up to no good. One newsletter which just arrived claims that “one million UN mercenaries” are being housed now on “closed-down military bases” in the United States, that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has set up concentration camps and “liquidation centers” all over the country to handle suspected gun owners and patriots, that thousands of black helicopters are being prepared for airborne assaults by UN troops, and that cryptic plastic stickers which have been appearing on a number of highway signs in some areas are there to direct UN ground troops when the roundup of patriots begins. This is the latest manifestation of a long-running conspiracy theory about the takeover of the United States by the United Nations. A few years ago, before the self-destruction of the Soviet Union, this theory had Soviet tanks massed just south of the Rio Grande, waiting for the word from the Conspirators to roll north and begin liquidating any pockets of patriotic resistance to the New World Order. Now the Soviet tanks have been replaced by black helicopters filled with UN “peace keeping” troops, according to the theorists. This is proof positive, they say, that the handover of sovereignty is imminent. One of the most active proponents of this sort of thing is a female attorney in Indianapolis, Linda Thompson. Ms. Thompson first came to my attention last year, when she made a very impressive video documentary about the Waco massacre by the FBI and the BATF. Her raw material was newsreel footage, and she did a good job of editing and narrating it, although her assertion that the government used flamethrowing tanks to incinerate the Davidians was not really proved by her video images. Now her communiqué’s are full of black helicopter sightings, and she is busy organizing a “militia” to march on Washington with arms on September 19.
I don’t know what’s going on in this woman’s mind, of course, but if she keeps up her call for an armed march on Washington she’ll get a dozen or so “militia” members who actually show up in Washington with guns on September 19 locked up for a long time. Meanwhile, she’s got patriotic circles buzzing with some of the most bizarre rumors I’ve heard in a long time. The “movement” hobbyists love it, of course, but it has also worried some more responsible, though credulous, patriots: they don’t know whether they should pack up their families and head for the hills, or what. Probably the net result of all this rumormongering will be positive: the more citizens who come to hate and fear the government in Washington, the better, even if their hatred and fear are based on faulty information. The rumormongers themselves may be discredited by coming events, but there always will be replacements. In the Alliance, however, we want to keep both feet on the ground and not be led on any wild goose chases. Certainly, the Clinton government is the most evil institution on the planet, and if an armed march on Washington anytime soon could destroy it we’d be marching in the front rank. Anyone who imagines that Linda Thompson or any other “militia” leader will be able to do any substantial damage to the government in September, however, is dreaming. There are indeed hundreds of people who are now involved in various “militia” groups, of which Ms. Thompsons’s is only one, but the great majority of these people are merely hobbyists, and they will drop their guns and run like rabbits when the shooting starts. Even if all of them were serious citizen-soldiers, however, the government could wipe them out without even working up a sweat, and the rest of the White population, in its present state of ignorance and demoralization, would cluck approvingly while munching potato chips and watching the slaughter on TV. What about the black helicopters? I don’t know. It is true that there a number of military training installations in the United States for military personnel of other countries. Some of these installations are for training the operators of military equipment sold to other countries by the U.S. defense industry. Some of them may have more sinister
purposes. It may or may not be true that UN troops are being ferried around in black helicopters. It is extremely unlikely, however, that either Bill and Hillary or their keepers in New York and Tel Aviv are planning a sudden handover of power to the UN within the next year or two. A much more plausible scenario is a continuation of the current process of gradual transition to the New World Order. There will be a dozen more Iraqs, Somalias, and Haitis to condition the American sheep to the idea that it is the normal thing for UN “peace keeping” forces to go in and slaughter the local citizens wherever they have Politically Incorrect ideas about running their own affairs. Then the sheep will see nothing amiss when the same thing happens in the United States. Even if the government were planning to herd all patriots and their families into liquidation centers before the end of the year, our most urgent task would remain what it is now: to continue building the means for reaching all the White men and women of the world with our message. Until we are able to communicate effectively with a substantial portion of our people, no armed rebellion against our enemies has any chance at all of success. It is important to remember this, because the nutty rumors will only multiply, no matter what happens this summer. When a society is in its death throes, wild and alarming rumors are the norm. Some of our weaker members will them themselves be unnerved by them. In July a member of our New York Metro Unit resigned, expressing the hope that in doing so he was saving himself from one of those purported “liquidation centers.” Yes, we still have a few such fools and cowards in our own ranks. We should understand, however, that those who head for the hills now to begin playing at “militia” have suffered just as much a failure of nerve as those who hope to save themselves by denying us to our enemies. There is a certain degree of stress associated with our task. We see things falling apart all around us. We see the Jews gloating and smirking on the television news nearly ever evening, and we see their collaborators counting their silver. We want to strike out at them now. We want to smash the Jews’ grinning faces. We want to knock the blood
money from the hands of the collaborators and make them dance on air. But we have no the means for doing these things now, and wishful thinking will not remedy that shortage. Therefore, we must grit our teeth, resist both fear of our enemies and the temptation to strike at them prematurely and ineffectively, and continue our work of building bridges to our people. This is the real mark of character, of nerve, of judgment: to be able to continue with our necessary task despite the stress, and to let nothing to deter us, including rumors of black helicopters.
Watching Things Unravel
At the National Office the only television we watch is the NBC Evening News. One reason is that we don’t want to contaminate the women and children with what passes for television “entertainment” these days. Another reason is that the only signal strong enough to give us a picture here in the mountains comes from a station 90 miles away, and it’s so full of snow that more than 30 minutes in front of the tube can produce a severe case of eyestrain. We really do enjoy our daily half hour of the Bill and Hillary Show, though. Even on evenings when we aren’t able to see Bill put on his most disarmingly boyish smile and tell us a few whoppers, we get a kick out of watching Tom Brokaw put the best possible face on the latest catastrophes to befall the Western world. No matter what it is – another thousand or so AIDS-infested Haitian “refugees” admitted to the United States, the latest increase in the pregnancy rate for White teen-agers, another huge “gay” demonstration – Brokaw narrates as if he were doing a travelogue. And then he gets to the really important stuff: the baseball strike and the O.J. Simpson trial. After breathlessly telling us about the negotiations between the players and the owners and then letting a few baseball fans on the street give their opinions as to which side is to blame for the strike, he takes us to Mr. Shapiro’s latest press conference. While the Black defendant gazes silently skyward, his Jewish lawyer plays to the crowd with hints about a new “mystery witness,” who will save O.J. from the gas chamber, and Brokaw treats it with the utmost gravity. All of this would be much funnier if it weren’t our civilization we’re watching unravel each evening. One series of NBC Evening News performances this month which were more instructive than amusing were those dealing with the effort of the Clintonistas to get their so-called “crime” bill through the Congress. I watched this effort with mixed feelings. On the one hand, I sympathized with all of the decent men and women, especially those in
America’s big cities, who desperately wanted to remain law-abiding citizens – and also to keep their only means for defending themselves and their families against the steadily encroaching jungle. On the other hand, I thought how nice it would be for the Congress to legislate another ten million or so White Americans into armed outlawry. After all, the ones who would turn in their guns are the ones who won’t use them when the time comes anyway. When the bill was voted down on the first try, it was instructive to watch the response of the Clinton gang. It was clear that the politicians in the Congress were more afraid of the wrath of the gunowning voters than they were of the wrath of the Clintonistas. Clinton could have gotten easy passage of the bill by dropping the ban on semiautomatic weapons, but he did not have that option: the weapons ban was the raison d’ etre for the bill, and Clinton’s behind-the-scenes controllers did not let him forget it. So he began the arm-twisting and the threats and the bribery aimed at changing a few votes. It reminded me of so many other efforts by the Jews to get something they really want, whether it was making the late Martin Luther King’s birthday a state holiday in Arizona or getting the United Nations to revoke its statement that Zionism is a form of racism. If they fail on the tenth try, they saturate the public with another tidal wave of television propaganda, twist a few more politicians’ arms, offer a few more bribes, and try again, until the stupid goyim finally “get it.” Persistence is an admirable trait. Another interesting aspect of the Clinton effort on behalf of the “crime” bill was the electoral demographics involved. It was clear that the segment of the public opposed to the ban on semiautomatic weapons was quite passionate in its opposition, and that no section of the general public was as passionately in favor of the bill. Clinton could have gone through the motions of “fighting crime” with a bill which would have pleased the idiot-liberals by providing money for more basketball courts and more “rehabilitation” centers, and also would have pleased the idiot conservatives by providing for more street cops, additional death penalties, and “three strikes and you’re out.” The idiot liberals, of course, would have preferred a weapons ban too, but they would have been almost as happy without it. Only the Jews and their conscious
collaborators absolutely, positively had to have a ban on weapons of the sort which have a revolutionary potential. And so that’s what Clinton went for, at great political cost to himself and his party. Divide the U.S. electorate into two groups. Put all the Jews, other non-Whites, feminists, homosexuals, and the idiot-liberal contingent of White males in the first group. This group is about 80 per cent in favor of banning the private possession of firearms. The numbers range from about 99.9 per cent among the Jews to about 70 per cent among Blacks and other non-Whites. Put the rest of the population in the second group: normal White men and non-feminist White women. Throw the idiot-conservative White males in too. This group is about 80 per cent in favor of keeping the Second Amendment intact. The Clintonistas have completely written off the second group. Even if his Jewish handlers hadn’t told him that he must outlaw semiautomatic weapons, Clinton would have been happy with a weapons ban. His kind sleeps easier at night knowing that decent men have been disarmed. Besides, his constituency is almost entirely in the first group. With the possible exception of the idiot-proletariat (a rapidly declining breed of White men who always vote Democrat, no matter what sort of filth heads the ticket, “because Democrats are for the working man”), no normal men and relatively few normal women voted for Clinton. So screw ‘em! Who cares what they want or don’t want? They themselves be outvoted by the perverts and psychos, by the descendants of their former slaves, and by their own born losers, and so no they must pay the price. That’s what democracy is all about. As I said, it would be much more amusing watching all of this happen, if it weren’t our society, our civilization, and our race that it’s happening to.
Why the Slowdown?
Recruitment of news members has slowed noticeably during the past few months. It’s important for the National Office to understand why this has happened, and I will appreciate feedback from the membership on this problem. There are always short-term ups and downs in recruitment: random fluctuations, a statistician would say. What we are experiencing now, however, is more than that: after approximately doubling during each of the three previous years, the rate at which new membership applications were received actually dropped this year, and we need to know why. In the National Office we are doing the same sorts of things we were doing a year ago – building our radio network, generating new printed materials, expanding our book distribution, trying very hard to recruit new members – but we are getting less response from the public. It is not merely a National Office problem: individual members who were doing an outstanding job of recruiting in the past have reported that it is much more difficult now for them to sign up new members. Two major obstacles to recruiting always have been fear and passivity. Many people who begin to understand how evil their government is become frightened instead of angry: instead of resolving to do whatever is necessary to change the government, they resolve to protect themselves by not getting their names on any government blacklist. They decide to “go along in order to get along.” They cancel their subscriptions to Politically Incorrect periodicals and send frightened letters to the National Office demanding that we remove their names from our mailing list. We receive a few such letters each week, but there has been no significant increase lately. If there is in increased fear among the general public, it hasn’t made itself manifest among that segment of the public with which we’re in contact. What have you observed in this regard? Passivity is often a constitutional problem: most people are observers and talkers, but not doers. Sometimes the reason if selfishness, and sometimes it’s an impaired grasp of reality as a result of too much
television. The prevalence of constitutional passivity may change from one generation to another as child-rearing practices change, but it doesn’t change noticeably over a period of a few months. Passivity can also affect people temporarily, however, as their perception of the world around them changes. If people become discouraged – if they become convinced that there is no hope for the future – they may become passive. When the White South Africans handed their country over to Blacks this spring, many racially conscious White Americans became discouraged. One would expect that the sector of the population most discouraged by this catastrophe would be Alliance members, but there has been no noticeable increase in resignations or dropouts attributable to it. Response to our message also drops when the public decides that things aren’t really as bad as they had seemed, or when it believes it sees an easier, less dangerous solution then revolution. With the Clintonistas in power, it seems unlikely that many people who might otherwise be responsive to us now think things aren’t really so bad; actually, the government has hardly ever had lower public esteem than it has now. Nor is there any high-profile “conservative” racketeer leading the gullible away from us in large numbers at the moment. Economic uncertainty also has a role in the responsiveness of the general public. Generally, the worse the economy is – or more accurately, the more uncertain and unstable the economy is – the better recruiting is. It is clear that most White Americans are still far too comfortable – but are they more comfortable today than they were a year ago? So what is the problem? Is it fear? Discouragement? Something else? Please share your thoughts with me. Meanwhile, I and other members of the National Office staff will continue doing the best we can. We are understaffed, underpaid, and overworked, but there is no fear or discouragement among us. One way or another we will boost our recruitment rate, and we will find the new people and the new resources we need to increase our capabilities.
If we need to change our tactics, we’ll do it, so long as the changes don’t conflict with our principles. In order to make changes intelligently, however, we need intelligent feedback from our members.
Last month I asked members to share their thoughts with me about what change in the attitude of the public has taken place during the past year which could account for our lowered rate of recruitment. Some members didn’t understand the question and told me what the National Office should be doing or is doing wrong. Undoubtedly the National Office is doing some things wrong, and all of us are not doing many things we should be doing. But the question was, how has the public changed? I suggested that probably the public is more frightened or more discouraged than before, and most members seem to agree. The votes are about evenly divided between fear and discouragement, with a few members believing that the problem is a larger than usual number of conservative Pied Pipers – Rush Limbaugh, Ollie North, etc. – convincing the public that there Is an easier, safe, and more painless solution than revolution. In the latter category is member Maurice F., of Lakewood, CO, who writes:
I believe the answer is growing competition by groups which offer easy solutions. The Christian Right is one such group. It addresses the problems which have become undeniable and unmistakable in America and offers easy and socially acceptable solutions. A friend of mine who is a member of the Christian Right has a partial understanding of the media, AIDS, the Fed, politicians, etc. He also believes that the earth was created 7,000 years ago, minorities are dark-skinned White people, Jews are God’s persecuted Chosen People, and pride is a sin… Another competing group is the Spotlight crowd. I met a group of men peddling the Spotlight at a gun show in August. They were as weak and fearful as the Christians. The point of everything they said is that there is really nothing we can do to resist what is happening, except pass around stories about black helicopters. Easy and socially acceptable. They seemed to feel very threatened by my National Alliance position. One of them waited in the parking lot to get my license plate number. He wrote it down and went back in as I left.
I believe that for the first time large numbers of right-wing Christians, Spotlight subscribers, and the like are moving in the right general direction. I believe that once they have absorbed what they are learning, many of them will be ready for the National Alliance. Let’s try not to alienate them or denigrate them. The next wave of new members should be much larger.
Another member who believes Pied Pipers are the problem is Tom C., of Auburn, NY:
Before Clinton the left wing was basically anti-White, and the right wing was basically pro-White. Apathy was the right wing’s biggest problem. When Clinton was elected we thought, oh boy! Now there will be plenty of unhappy people out there to listen to us. Unfortunately, the Jews saw this also. They reprogrammed radio and TV to accommodate the changing mood of the listeners and viewers. The kosher liberals like Larry King were replaced with kosher conservatives like Liddy and Limbaugh. G. Gordon Liddy has eight to 10 million listeners every day, and Rush Limbaugh may have even more. Kosher-conservative talk shows have trained the right wing to be color blind just like the left wing… G. Gordon Liddy attacks anyone but the Jews and as come out with some surprising statements lately. He attacks the BATF very strongly. He comes right out and says, “If they bust down your door to take your guns, you should shoot them.” There is something very appealing to the masses about these talk shows. The listeners can call up and participate in the program, which helps a lot for their popularity….
Member Dan L., of Houston, TX, also sees conservative radio as a major problem for us:
The people who are most likely to join us have been sidetracked by the popularity and prominence of the conservative kooks and cranks on talk radio and in several grass-roots populist organizations. I disagree when you say that there’s no high-profile conservative racketeer leading the gullible away. There’s a cornucopia of them: Rush Limbaugh, G. Gordon Liddy, Chuck Harder, “Bo” Gritz, Pat Buchanan, Ross Perot, plus local ones here in Houston and in cities all across the nation. The big ones are backed by organizations which have money to burn and can safely
present themselves as “solid Americans” without the “taint” of racism or antiSemitism. I went to one of their local meetings. I had hoped I could pass out some National Alliance material. However, one look at the crowd showed most of them to be old, conservative cranks, constantly raving about the New World Order “Gestapo”, the “Nazi” gun grabbers, black helicopters, etc… I know we would not want most of these people in the Alliance, but it just demonstrates how successfully the growing conservative movement has stolen our thunder, much like in the Reagan years. One such organization is “For the People,” which is similar to Liberty Lobby, but without any mention of Jews. Liberals newly turned conservative and conservatives newly turned revolutionary should be turning in our direction, but they are being intercepted by these new groups. There are also the right-wing Christian groups, which are attracting lots of followers. In short, the patriotic movement has become big business, and it is being led down a harmless path by numerous diversionary organizations. If the Republicans are swept into power and do as they have promised – cut welfare, get tough on crime, etc. – the Black population will explode in violence. After honest people see that a Black “conservative” is no better than a Black welfare thug and that the same groups of Jews and White traitors are getting rich off the whole mess, then Whites will be ready to be radicalized.
Not being a radio listener or a television viewer, I may have failed to appreciate the impact of the Liddy-Limbaugh assault on the public consciousness. If it is true that the Pied Piper appeal is the principal cause of the decline in the number of new membership applicants, there’s not much that we can do except continue our efforts to increase our own impact on the public consciousness: more radio stations in our network, more comic books, more leaflets, etc. Being the one organization dedicated to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth carries a certain liability: we always are open to preemption by groups which tell sugar-coated lies or, at most, only a part of the truth. The public has never been noted for its powers of discrimination. Preemption is a tactic which the enemy has seldom hesitated to use. It is a very effective tactic against any group which depends primarily upon support from the masses.
If the conservative Republicans do take control of the congress – a matter which will be decided about the time this BULLETIN is mailed – we’ll have a new and interesting situation in America, but the Pied Pipers probably will grow even stronger, because conditions will become even worse. I do not share the optimism of our members in Colorado and Texas who believe that the Pied Pipers will help to prepare people for us, however. The masses will never be ready for us. The masses are never interested in what is true or right, and being swindled never teaches them anything. They always will be suckers for anyone who promises them an easier or safe solution. I am sure that the Pied Pipers have sidetracked some people who otherwise would have joined us, but I do not believe that they are our biggest problem. I believe that most of the people who are attracted to the Pied Pipers never would have become Alliance members. I believe that the growth of “kosher conservative” organizations should parallel our growth rather than interfere with it. I believe that they and we are responding to similar problems but recruiting different types of people, although there is some overlap. The members who believe fear is our biggest problem mentioned two types of fear. First, there is a general perception that we now have a gangster government, which twists the law to suit itself and care nothing for the Constitutional rights of it opponents. People are afraid that if the government finds out that they belong to the National Alliance, their homes will be targeted for a Waco-style assault, complete with helicopters, flamethrowers, and government thugs in ninja costumes coming in through the windows. Member Harry D., in Alvin, TX, writes: The Waco deal and massacre of Iraq, along with the fact that 10 per cent of the traffic on the road is police, have got most folks bothered. The media have been able to inculcate the idea in the brain-dead zombies… that anyone who openly objects to the policies of the current democrat/republican regime is a serious traitor… The media also have inculcated the idea that [being Politically Correct] will save them from the fate reserved for those bad, bad racists… Member Ed R., of Watsonville, CA. concurs:
The Ruby Ridge-Waco incidents, where children were killed [by government gunmen] may have slowed the rate of recruiting new members. These ghastly incidents might be considered major victories fo the Clinton gang in intimidating millions of Americans…
Such fears may seem extreme and irrational, but too many White man and women – especially men – have grown up in an unnatural way in this era, raised on a heavy diet of daily television and out of touch with reality. The lack of normal, healthy experiences – including repeated exposure to physical danger and learning to overcome their attendant fears – which should have led them to manhood or womanhood has left them cowards instead, magnifying their fears and leaving them unable to act in a manly way. I myself have encountered many people who claim to be patriots, but who are afraid to take even the first step toward opposing the enemies of our people. They really believe that their telephones are tapped and their mail monitored, apparently because the government is able to detect their Politically Incorrect thoughts. People of this sort undoubtedly have been made even more fearful by the perception of government lawlessness which has characterized the Clinton administration. Watching the Waco holocaust on television, instead of making them angry enough to fight, has made them even more determined not to get on the wrong side of the government. I do not believe, however, that terror of physical assault by Janet Reno’s thugs is a major hindrance to our recruiting. We hardly need more people of this sort in the Alliance anyway. There is another type of fear, thought, which was mentioned by many members. It is fear born of cynicism and defeatism. It is the same sort of fear which lies behind the military adage: “Never volunteer for anything.” The military man who believes in this adage is not necessarily a physical coward: he may fight rather than crawl if cornered. He simply doesn’t believe that there’s any good to be gained by sticking his neck out. More than anything else, he wants to be a survivor. The slogans and pep talks aimed at inspiring patriotic fervor no longer move him. He has become cynical about the mission of his army. He will follow orders if he must, but let someone else take the chances. This condition might be better named demoralization than fear. Indeed, several members used the words “fear” and “discouragement” or “demoralization” interchangeably.
Member Leo S., of Sulphur Springs, TX, writes:
Passivity is caused by the discouragement of not being able to do anything about [the government’s increasing interference in people’s lives], fear of the government. Whites are increasingly feeling these problems [of governmental meddling] are more pressing than the task of working for a White world.
Member Rod B., of Minneapolis, MN, writes:
The most common reason people give [for not becoming members] is that they don’t want their names on government lists. The next most common reason is that they believe it is a losing battle. The media have brainwashed them into apathy. [The media have convinced them] that it is inevitable that the sub-humans will inherit the earth….
Member Cliff S., of Fairview, WV, listed a number of different reactions he has received from people he has tried to recruit recently. He summed them up:
[They] are basically cowards, who shoot off at the mouth in small circles but don’t have the guts to take a stand publicly and assert themselves. There is no doubt in my mind that if political power were to shift into our hands tomorrow, these individuals would strut and crow about how much they supported us. A disgusting lot and very representative of the cowering mass in my area…
Member Philip H., of Gould, AR, reports that the people he has approached seem demoralized:
The spirit that made this country great is dead and gone. The outer form is the same, but the inner substance has changed. To be honest, White people in their present state are not worth saving and deserve what is happening to them. People deserve whatever they permit.
Our Arkansas member then goes on to note correctly that we are not fighting to save most of these people anyway, but to save the race of which they are merely defective parts, the race which still has the potential for greatness.
From San Francisco, CA, member Chad S. sends his opinion that too much has happened too fast recently, and many members of the public have simply overdosed on it:
It looks to me like a kind of psychological shock and what the popshrinks like to call “denial.” These conservative friends of mine have no seen armed personnel of the federal government act in a way they used to associate with the Soviet Union or the police in some banana republic, and they are profoundly shocked. It seems a bit more shock than they can handle, and so they denying that they are seeing what they are seeing. Both of the shocked, denying conservatives I’ve described [earlier in the letter] happen to be heavy consumers of television, which may be relevant…
Member Stephen R., of Richmond, VA, believes that White Americans have simply given up and retreated into hedonism. They don’t want to be bothered with a cause they believe is lost:
If the White guys haven’t given up and turned queer, they have said, “Who cares? Let’s go fishing.” Between the parking lots at the boat landing and the golf course, it’s a wonder there are any White guys left on the weekends to keep the system going.
We’ll come back to this problem of fear / demoralization / hedonism. First, however, let’s note one other type of response from our members. Several said that what’s needed to inspire the public is direct action against our enemies now. Member Mark S., of Lyons, TX, writes:
The time for action was yesterday. Calls to “keep our powder dry” and “the time is not yet” are [too weak]. My response is, “If not now, when? And how much longer?”
Member Eddie L., in Franklinton, NC, agrees:
Violence is the only way to gain more members… White people in general are too comfortable. The majority of them sit in front of their TVs and allow the system to brainwash them… We must adopt the tactics of the leftists… This is the 1990’s and it is time for ultra-radicalism from the patriots, radicalism like the lefts has never seen. The Whites will wake up once their TVs are destroyed… Violence is the answer. When White People understand that they must fight, or they will die, they will respond [correctly]…
I must admit to a certain sympathy, at the gut level, for the feelings of Mark and Eddie. Every time I turn on the evening news, I hope that there will be a report of another Cessna flown into the White House, by a more skillful pilot than the last one. I know how good it would make me feel to hear that someone had thrown a hand grenade into Janet Reno’s office or blown up the CBS headquarters building in New York, and so there are probably many other White people out there who would be inspired by the same sort of action. Nevertheless, I will not lead the Alliance in such a direction, and I cannot seriously condone such actions even by non-members. That is, although I may cheer such deeds, I cannot recommend them as a course of action for anyone, simply because they cannot be successful at this time. Any success we achieve will only come from a sustained, longterm campaign of action, and we cannot sustain a long-term campaign of violence and terror on a scale large enough to be effective. We do not have the resources for it, and, even though a small minority of the public might cheer us from the sidelines, most members of the White public still have no developed to the point where they would respond positively. I believe that we are losing a few potential recruits because they think we are not militant enough, but I don’t know where else these militant individuals believe they can go – nor am I aware that they’re performing any militant acts on their own. I do believe, however, that there are other ways to inspire the great mass of discouraged and cynical White people besides going on kamikaze missions with Cessnas or throwing grenades. I believe that it is possible to strike responsive chords in our people strongly enough so that they will overcome their fear of having their names on a government blacklist or being considered unfashionable by their neighbors. I believe that even among the crowds who fill up the parking lots at the boat landings and the golf courses, there are many individuals who will leave their hobbies, if they can be shown that there is a possibility of defeating the evil which has fastened its grip on our world. This always has been our position, of course. Until the last few months we have been persuading a growing number of idealistic White men and women that it is worth their while to take chances and make
sacrifices for a great cause. Something very recently has happened to discourage them and make most of them believe that there no longer is a possibility for regaining control of the future. I believe that the overwhelming evil represented by the Clintonistas and their masters in the controlled media has become so manifest recently that people are shocked, and have recoiled, as our member in San Francisco said. In the last two years we have witnessed a number of disasters: the mass suicide of White South Africans, engineered by the Clinton administration of the most bizarre collection of freaks and moral degenerates ever to hold public office in this country, in the Supreme Court and in every department of the executive branch of the government; the almost overnight elevation of homosexuality from an abhorred perversion to a “normal” condition, entitled to the full protection of the law; the very noticeable increase in the barrage of anti-White propaganda coming from the Jewish media, which are behaving as if they smell our blood and already are sharpening their knives to feast on the corpse of our race. This upsurge in evil has shocked our people into passivity instead of goading them into militancy. If I am correct in this belief, then a very important development could be the elections early next month. If the Republicans gain control of the Congress, then we will have a condition of governmental gridlock in the United States, and this will be viewed by most healthy White Americans as a great setback for the forces of evil. They will see the possibility for victory again. The Pied Pipers may prosper more than ever, but we also will see a great increase in the receptivity of the public to our message. Whether or not the Clintonistas are given a major setback by the voters in a few days, we still have the responsibility to perform deeds which inspire the people we want to recruit. We must strive even more than before to make accomplishments which give people hope. Most of our work has been quiet work, out of the public eye. It is good that there are occasional actions which attract public attention, such as the mass distribution of our “Free Money” leaflet vie the Internet. We don’t want to be lured into the performance of publicity stunts, but we do want to remember that the public we are trying to reach needs encouragement.
Lessons from Our Membership Handbook
In the June issue I wrote briefly about the importance of proper child-raising practices in the first few years of life. In summary: 1. The two most essential character elements an adult can have are self-discipline and a strong sense of identity. Both these elements are set very early in life, or they are not set at all. Thus, the environment during the earliest years of a child’s life are the most important for determining his quality as an adult. 2. Self-discipline does not develop in a child without external discipline from parents or other adults. 3. A child’s sense of identity is determined to a large degree by role models, who may be either real or imaginary adults. It is extremely important for parents to structure a child’s environment so that he has proper role models. If the child is permitted to find his role models in Jew-inspired television characters, he may be seriously flawed for life. From these basic requirements we can derive some practical guidelines for parental behavior. A child must have structure and discipline, as well as proper role models, in his earliest years. The people best able to provide these things are his parents. Unfortunately, the ability to provide them is severely limited by the life-styles most modern parents have chosen. An urban environment, with both parents employed full time outside the home while the children are in the care of strangers, is almost the worst possible arrangement. If we look back through our history for model life-styles better suited to raising children of high quality, almost any period will do. Personally, I favor the life-style which existed in most of Western Europe
during the Middle Ages – in fact, from the decline of Roman power until the Industrial Revolution. The essential thing about this period is that children were close to their parents most of the time. If a family lived on a farm, as most did, it was an economic unit of which the children were essential parts: the whole family, down to children only three to four years old, worked together to provide their food and shelter. The same was true for most families which lived in villages or small towns. The merchant’s or cobbler’s or silversmith’s or weaver’s or baker’s or candle maker’s family lived above his shop, and everyone had a role in the family economy. Even the smallest child could sweep out the shop in the evening. Another important feature of this period was the extended family. Not just two, but usually three and sometimes four generations lived under the same roof, or at least within shouting distance. Children always had guidance by related adults, even when both parents were occupied elsewhere. One could go back thousands of years further, even to the time when we were living in caves or in huts made of mud and animal skins, and still our people had lives suited to raising strong, psychically healthy children. Comfort and security often may have been lacking, but these are not essential elements. The Industrial Revolution had many negative effects, but one of the worst was breaking apart the long-established family structure and family economy. The workplace of one or both parents was separated from a family’s living place. The parents’ labor became depersonalized, and the children no longer could participate. Even so, until the Second World War conditions were usually tolerable, except for the lowest strata of the proletariat. In America, mothers almost never were employed outside the home. Except in the largest East Coast cities, most families with children lived in single-family houses with yards around them. Although most fathers worked outside the home, they were usually only a few minutes away. Many were able to eat lunch at home. Neighborhoods and schools were White, and there was no television.
Parents today usually will argue that they have no choice in such matters. Economic necessity, they believe, requires them to live in urban areas and requires both parents to work outside the home. It may be true that not all parents can move from the cities to small towns or rural areas and either subsist on the father’s income alone or support themselves with a cottage industry which allows both to be at home. The small, racially-conscious minority which puts the proper raising of children high among its priorities can do these things, however; where there is a will there is a way. Unfortunately, most parents today, even racially conscious ones, were themselves raised under modern conditions. Consequently, many simply lack the will and self-discipline to overcome their present economic circumstances and make a new environment for themselves which is better suited to raising children. Many mothers and fathers are themselves so strongly addicted to television that they do not have the will to ban it from their homes. Many have become so accustomed to spending money on all sorts of unnecessary things that they are unwilling to cut expenses and live on the father’s income alone. Certainly, a revolution followed by a forceful restructuring of the economic life of our people will be needed to bring back healthy childraising conditions for most of our people. Prior to that, however, Alliance members who are parents or who anticipate becoming parents can do much to accomplish this for themselves. I’ll write more on this subject in a later BULLETIN.
Why More Progress Isn’t Made
I’ve said this before, but it obviously needs to be said again: the National Office needs more help if more progress is to be made. The few of us working here are doing as much as we can. New projects will require new staff members. If we are to produce more types of printed materials, or produce our established types more frequently, we must have more staff members with good language or graphic skills. Although we can continue building our radio network with our present staff if we have more money, we cannot do new things with the radio medium – such as add a live, call-in program – until we have at least one staff member with language skills. If we are able to make the best use of the media we already are using, we need a person with good marketing skills to expand our distribution network. If we are to make the maximum use of our members, many of whom are not self-starters, we must have one or more staffers in the National Office to work with them, providing encouragement and advice. And if I am to be freed fro the burden of administrative chores and correspondence which occupy most of my time now, so that I can use my time for new projects, I must have a good executive secretary – a person with good language and office skills. Now, if we were located in a metropolitan area, convenient to shopping and entertainment, and were offering $125,000 a year for staff salaries, plus full medical coverage and good retirement benefits, I have no doubt that all of our staff openings would be filled immediately. I know that we have members with all of the required skills who are earning less than that in their current employment.
I was discussing staff work with a potential recruit recently, and I told him that we could pay him $1,000 per month. He thought that I was joking. He was quite certain that it is not possible to live on $1,000 per month. He spends more than that each month just in payments to his various credit card accounts. He spends three or four times that much on his annual vacation trip. I could see that there was no point in pursuing the subject with him. I could have proved to him eventually that not only is it possible to live on $1,000 a month, but that many of the mountain folk who reside in the vicinity of the National Office actually raise families on less income than that. But that would have been like persuading a heroin addict that life is possible without heroin. It can be done, but to what avail? A consumer addict is no more likely to break his money habit voluntarily than a heroin addict is to break his drug habit. Verily, I say unto you: It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle…. That leaves us with three possibilities: 1. Someone will bequeath $10 million to the Alliance. We will invest it at 8 per cent and with the income pay staff salaries comparable to those which staff members could earn elsewhere. 2. Blacks and mestizos, unhappy with Republican measures to trim welfare, stem illegal immigration, and get tough on criminals, will begin large-scale rioting and will kill all the honkies they can get their hands on. This will persuade many urban and suburban White survivors that they don’t really need to continue working in the cities like they thought they did: that they can, in fact, learn to do without a lot of luxuries they had believed were necessities. 3. We will continue struggling along as we have been, always on the lookout for those rare individuals who have both the skills and the outlook of true revolutionaries. While we’re waiting for the first or second possibility, we’d better do what we can with the third. Toward that end, let me point out a few things which members with useful skills who are tempted to cut their ties to the Great Satan and become full-time revolutionaries might consider. First, if you have young children and want them to grow up with White values, in most cases you must send them to very expensive private schools or teach them at home. Even then, it will require more
self-discipline than most parents can muster to keep them free of Jewish influence: “If Bobby’s parents let him watch television, why can’t I?” In rural West Virginia a large percentage of parents school their own children, and their political clout has resulted in the West Virginia government having the least restrictive policies on home schooling to be found anywhere. Even if you decide you can’t cope with home schooling, the public schools are virtually all White. The drug problem in the schools is minimal, and the crime rate is the lowest in the country. As for television reception, one must have either a satellite dish or a cable hookup (not available in many rural areas here) to get any at all, which makes it easier to persuade the women and children that they don’t really need it. Furthermore, it’s easier to cope with peer pressure when you’re part of a group which shares your life-style and your values. Second, if you’re like many urban White I’ve met, you are very poorly prepared to protect yourself and your family when the lights go out for good, and the roving gangs start looking for something to eat. Having a rifle in the closet isn’t enough. Are you proficient at getting gasoline from a station with electric pumps when there is no electricity? Can you do emergency repairs on a motor vehicle? If you succeed in getting your family safely out of the city, do you know how to use an axe or a chainsaw? Have you ever even built a fire in a wood-burning stove? Do you know how to reload pistol or rifle cartridges if you can’t get factory ammunition? Do you intend to wait until the hungry gang is at your door before you start learning survival skills? How do you intend to learn them at all if you continue living and working in the city? Here we have the happy opportunity to mix the learning of survival skills with our work in the Alliance: cut firewood and wax your boots before breakfast, spend 10 hours working on radio scripts or correspondence with members, and then sharpen your chainsaw after supper. It’s better for your body and for your soul than your present lifestyle. We have tried hard to minimize our dependence on others. We could sustain ourselves even if the people in the rest of the country were starving and eating each other. Third, what’s more important to you: saving money so that you child can go to Harvard and join the enemy, or raising your child in a
healthy environment and preparing him spiritually to sweep the filth out of places like Harvard some day? In other words, have you really thought about your own values? Do you really believe in the things the Alliance stands for, or have you already permitted your soul to become corrupted? Do you understand that a person who becomes overly dependent on his physical and economic ties to an evil system inevitably will be spiritually dependent as well: he will not truly want to destroy the system from which he draws his sustenance. Fourth, living on $1,000 a month isn’t as hard as you think. The mountain people are able to do it because most of them own their own land and therefore pay no rent. Many of them use their spare time to grow a portion of the food they eat. It’s a life-style urbanites should consider. Land is inexpensive here. Rent is also very low: about a quarter of what it is in most urban areas. And there are virtually no transportation expenses: no commuting, and no outrageously high automobile insurance. Think about it, and then let me hear from you.
Character and the Changing Public Mood
My request in last month’s BULLETIN for National Office staff volunteers received several responses from members. One of those who responded is a 30-year old member with a degree in political science from the University of California (minors in literature and history) and the requisite language and office skills to fill one of our staff positions. He will relocate to Hillsboro as soon as he can make arrangements to sell his home in California and move his dependents to a satisfactory replacement home here, probably in March or April. More important for us than this man’s skills and work experience are his character and his commitment to our cause. These latter qualifications are sorely lacking in far too many of our members. It is on this subjects that Sacramento Unit Coordinator Jim Ring wrote to us this month:
I found it both amusing and disturbing that the member mentioned in your last commentary that he couldn’t live on $1,000 per month. When I worked for another patriotic organization five years ago as a full-time staff member I was paid $100 per week, plus a room. I would often spend as little as $14 a week for food and still eat reasonably well, although nothing fancy. I was single at that time, and I was able to get along all right on that amount. Probably just as our staff does now, I worked six and seven days a week, 10 to 12 hours a day and sometimes more. I did this for nearly four years, and it was a most rewarding job while I was doing it. It was rewarding because I was doing something every day, all day, for my race. Every hour was absorbed by the cause, and thus I felt whole, complete, and self-actualized. My life truly had purpose. It didn’t make any difference what I was doing: meeting people, writing letters, stuffing envelopes, managing the business. Even tending the garden, shoveling snow, and mowing the grounds were labors of love for the cause. Thus it was all the more crushing when the organization lost its sense of mission and direction and became inactive, and I decided to leave.
My work for that organization opened my eyes to one reality: most people in our circles are not truly committed. People like to talk a good talk, but few have faith and a sense of mission. Most people I’ve known over the years want to “belong” to a group without dedicating themselves to it or immersing themselves in its philosophy of life. In other words, they don’t live every day as a representative of the cause. They don’t think of all the small things they could easily do every day for the cause, without much effort. The member you talked about is like many others, playing it safe. You’ve said this very well yourself, and another has said it earlier. He said that for most people it is enough to say, “I believe,” and chip in their $10 a month. Only a few not only will believe but also will say, “I will fight!”
True enough. And perhaps it always has been that way, but my impression is that today the lack of character and commitment in our people is worse than it has been in the past. My impression is that or men are weaker, more timid, and less willing to accept responsibility; and our women more materialistic and self-indulgent than in earlier generations. If this loss of character is real, then we may argue about its causes. I am inclined to believe that urbanization and television conditioning have been factors in weakening our people, but that the most important factor has been our soft, protected life-style, beginning in infancy with permissive child-raising practices. Children are taught from their earliest days that obedience is optional, that there are no punishments or penalties for failure, that a plausible excuse is always an acceptable substitute for proper performance, and that gratification is always immediate. This teaching is reinforced in school, where everyone eventually graduates, and confirmed in the workplace, where the workshy and the chronically inept never really go hungry. Only the exceptional person raised in such an environment will reach adulthood with the strength of character which used to be the norm. There’s nothing we can do, outside our own families, to remedy this situation until after a successful revolution. Prior to that a prolonged period of civil disorder and the breakdown of governmental authority, by killing off most of the weaklings, could help prepare the ground for institutionalized changes in child-raising and educational practice in the
post-revolutionary future. For the immediate future, however, we are obliged to seek the exceptional few in building our cadre. Our standards for general membership, of course, are not as high as those for cadre membership. The strength of character of our general membership, in fact, probably is no appreciably higher than that of the general population – unless we accept the theory above-average courage is required for a person to join an organization which is opposed to the current power structure. I believe that most rational people understand that the physical and economic dangers of membership are minimal, but there are members who believe that fear is the controlling factor in limiting our membership. If they are correct and I am wrong, then Jim Ring and I have underestimated the character of our average member. And if they are correct then we should expect membership to increase greatly only when some tangible benefit of membership can be shown to potential recruits: the security attendant on belonging to the toughest gang in the neighborhood, for example. It’s still too soon to report with confidence on any new trend in membership, but January has been a relatively good month for recruitment: approximately twice as good as the monthly average for 1994. Although some of January’s recruits are the result of organized recruiting efforts – especially in North Carolina, which had the best record of any state for the month – most of the new recruits are scattered randomly. The latter fact is indicative of a trend. In December and January we also saw a substantial rise in the number of lapsed members reapplying for active membership; perhaps an indicator that some people who formerly were discouraged have become more hopeful. It also was called to my attention in January, when we recruited two more university faculty members, that the representation of our members in higher education is substantially better than the representation of the general population. If we assume that 0.4 per cent of the adult U.S. population are members of a teaching faculty at a university, college, or junior college (500,000 faculty members out of 125 million adults), then the Alliance has five times as many faculty members per capita, and our percentage is growing.
What does all this – the possible beginning of a new growth trend, the reenlistment of former dropouts, and the growing percentage of the brightest people in our ranks – mean? I shouldn’t stick my neck out by speculating until more evidence is available, but I will anyway. I believe that we are at the beginning of another general mood swing in the White population. During the Clinton era things were so bad that most people gave up: the average American saw the Jews gloating and smirking as they moved from one victory to another – the destruction of White South Africa, galloping gun control, two new Jews on the Supreme Court, outrageous abuses of power by the Department of Justice, and Housing and Urban Development – and he lost all hope for the future. Suicides shot up, and people retreated into selfishness and hedonism. They saw no possibility for beating the Jews, and so they were not inclined to take chances or make sacrifices. The controlled media, of course, exacerbated the general malaise the commentators and editors showed their pleasure with the way things were going, and by using selected spokesmen supposedly representing the public made it seem that most people agreed with them. The average person concluded from this display that if no one else is willing to buck the Jews, then he isn’t going to stick his neck out either. Then the elections last November proved that reality is quite different from the picture painted by the media. It suddenly became apparent that most people are not happy with the way the Jews and Clintonistas have been moving things. This has restored hope to people who had given up. Some are deciding now that maybe the future is worth fighting for after all. And the brightest and most perceptive members of the population are deciding earlier than the rest. That’s my intuition about the recent indications of an upward turn in our recruiting. The next few months will show us whether or not that intuition is correct. Regardless of whether our recruiting improves slowly or rapidly, we will still face the problem of poor character and weak commitment, both in the general population and among our members.
One thing is certain: as our strength increases, so will the effort of our enemies to stop us. They will find their collaborators in the ranks of those who have no sense of responsibility to their race or to the future: businessmen committed only to their profits and politicians committed only to the careers. Perhaps we should be grateful to the social engineers of this century that the average character of these people will be weak. Among our own members, perhaps we will see a rise in the average strength of character, as repression frightens the fainthearts away. We must strive to build our recruiting machinery rapidly enough so that giving up the weaklings does not cause a numerical decline in our ranks. I do not anticipate any major moves toward repression in 1995: I believe that we have an opportunity now to build our numbers substantially before the storm comes. And certainly, as we build we will not lower our standards or the average strength of character of our members, even if we do not increase them. At the same time, however, we must raise our standards for those who become members of our cadre – in particular for those on the National Office staff. They are the ones who must not yield when the storm comes. We can only build the bigger staff we need by having a bigger pool of members from which to draw staff volunteers. Recruiting new members for the Alliance therefore is doubly important for us in 1995. Let’s get to it while it’s still relatively easy!
The Current Which Serves
“There is,” noted Brutus, “a tide in the affairs of men, which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune; omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries.” What was so for the affairs of Brutus and Cassius and other men – indeed, for all those who dare to venture from the sheltered harbor in which more timid men ride out their whole lives at anchor – also is so for organizations and movements. The Alliance is now afloat on a full sea, and we must take the current which stands ready to serve us or lose our ventures. I’m not using the term “a full sea” quite the way Brutus did: I do not mean a White public desperate with fear and hunger, inflamed with hatred of the government which has betrayed them, and eager for a final reckoning. The Alliance still has much to do in the way of preparation for that day: in fact, most of our task must be completed by then, with only the reaping of the ripened harvest remaining. What I do mean is the objective situation which has developed, rather than the reaction of the masses to that situation. The situation we have today is one of total bankruptcy for the liberal/egalitarian/Judaeo-Christian system which has been ascendant since the end of the Second World War. What is more, this bankruptcy is now manifest: every perceptive, intelligent White man or woman still able to reason clearly can see it. He can see the multiracial pestholes America’s major cities have become and which Europe’s major cities are fast becoming. He can see what has happened to our public schools and our universities. He can see what has happened to literature and the arts. He can see what is being promoted by television and the other mass media. He can smell the level to which electoral politics and government have descended. And he can remember all the promises and programs and propaganda of recent decades. It is clear to him or her that things will continue to become worse in the future, despite all of the promises. It is clear that all of the
government’s programs to make things better are in fact making things worse. It is clear that the propaganda of “equality” and “diversity” and “multiculturalism” consists of malevolent lies. He may have no sympathy for us or event no knowledge of our ideology and goals. He may be such a spineless coward that he would deny he knew us if he did. He may even be a collaborator, hoping to gain a short-term advantage for himself by serving the Jews. But he knows, in broad terms, what has happened. He is no longer fooled, if he ever was, by the babbling of the fools and scoundrels who call darkness light and evil good. There always has been a perceptive minority who understood what was happening and could see where things were heading. Today, however, that minority has grown to include nearly everyone able to stand aside from the mob and makes an independent judgment of the situation. There are still Christians, their minds ruined by years of poring over Hebraic scriptures, opining how happy Jesus must be about the way things are going; there are still feminists, choking inwardly on their bitterness and chortling outwardly about the wonderful “freedom” women have achieved; there are still fools of other sorts, so tormented by some problem of their own that they have no power of judgment; and there are still the masses, hypnotized by whatever comes from their television screen at the moment. But none of these latter people, crippled either by their personal problems or the inability to put off the yoke of fashion, really count. There will be a time later when the masses, because of their sheer weight, will be important: a time when we must give them direction and move them. But all we are interested in now are the perceptive and independent individuals. And they, finally – nearly all of them – are ready for us. Our job is to reach them with our message: to fill in the details for those whose understanding still is not complete, to provide an ideology and a purpose for those lacking them, to give courage to those needing it, to give collaborators pause and make them recalculate where their own interests lie. Again: they are ready for us! We must redouble our efforts now to reach out to them.
The Jews and the others who know that only the hangman awaits them in a liberated Aryan world understand also that the tide has come in, and a perceptive observer can see their exultation over the destruction they have wrought giving way now and then, in various little ways, to desperation, as they seek to protect themselves from the retribution which lies ahead. For each member of the Alliance there is now a current ready to serve, its particulars depending in each case on the individual talents and situation of the member. In some cases – where the member has exceptional leadership ability – it leads on to fame and glory. Those who stand out as leaders I the coming struggle for the future of our planet will be celebrated in story and legend for as long as our race endures. In other cases – those where the member has some artistic or literary talent or a useful technical skill – it leads also to lasting recognition. He who creates now something useful to our struggle could make no more rewarding use of his ability: a book, a song, a poster by him will be admired by all the generations to come, because of the role it playing in making the existence of those generations possible. And the member who donates his resources or his disciplined labor, thereby making possible the success of the Alliance, shares in that success, regardless of the form his donation or his labor takes. The office worker, the recruiter, the organizer, the technician, the expediter, or the member whose support makes the activities of any of these possible – each who willingly accepts a part of our task thereby makes his life useful beyond anything he could achieve outside the Alliance. The National Office still needs additional staff members in order to take advantage of the rapidly developing opportunities now before it.
The National Office was very fortunate last month in recruiting Evelyn Hill. She should be able to help us in handling many of our internal chores more effectively. By freeing me of much administrative work, she will give me more time to write and plan. This should result in more printed materials coming out of the National Office in the future, as well as the undertaking of entirely new projects. Our greatest shortcoming as this time is the absence of a real businessman on the National Office staff. Actually, a better description of the person we need is a promoter with a good business head. We need such a person, because there are many opportunities for increasing the effectiveness of our work which are not being exploited. We are in an era now in which we can begin using mass media effectively, but we are not. That is to say, the time has come when a significant portion of the masses – the men and women who lack independent judgment and are able to act only in a herd-like manner, to oversimplify the matter a bit – can be influenced by our message if it is delivered to them through the right media, but we are not using such media on a significant scale. We need a person who can enable us to begin reaching the masses if significant numbers. Consider our radio effort. Radio is a mass medium, and we know how to produce fairly good radio programs: good enough that the Jews and the Clintonistas are trying to keep those programs away from the American public. What we are finding more difficult than making good programs is building our network, so that those programs reach tens of millions of people instead of tens of thousands. We can use more scriptwriters and other people with creative skills, so that we can improve the quality and quantity of our programming, of course, but we need much more urgently someone who can increase its coverage. That’s a task requiring genius and energy. The person doing it must be imaginative; he must understand popular psychology; he must be able to solve ordinary business problems; and he must have an extraordinary talent for
operating successfully in a big-money arena with relatively little money, because the mass media all are big-money operations. Or consider The Turner Diaries. The message in the book has been effective in educating and inspiring a substantial portion of the people who have read it. If a hundred times as many Americans had read the book as actually have, it would have mass influence. During the past four months alone there has been an opportunity to sell ten times as many copies of the book as we actually have sold during the 17 years it has been in print: there has been an opportunity, in other words, to get a significant number of the masses to read it. That opportunity was wasted, because we have continued to sell the book in the way we have been selling it during the past 17 years. The masses do not buy a book unless it is displayed on a drugstore newsrack or is otherwise thrust under their noses and made available with no effort or thought on their part. The task of a promoter is to thrust it under their noses. Those who would make a revolutionary change in the course of history require several things. They need a revolutionary view of the change they want to make: they need vision. We have that. They also need theoretical understanding: they must be able to explain their vision, so that others can understand why it should be made reality. We can do that. But in addition to these things, they must have the ability to promote their vision, so that it is shared by large numbers of people. If our revolution is to succeed, we must acquire a promoter.
On the Nature of Public Opinion
I am not a cybernaut and, in fact don’t even have a modem attached to my computer. I have, however, been able to learn a little about Internet communications from members with experience in this activity. In particular, I have found it interesting to read the responses to the Alliance message from strangers who have been exposed to it in Usenet discussion groups. The majority of these responses – probably 80 percent – are hostile. Another 20 per cent are mixed – partly disagreeing and partly agreeing. Only one or two percent are really favorable. Some of the hostile responses are quite Jewish, full of obscenities (especially the “f word,” their favorite) and personal insults, and almost certainly intended to deceive other persons listening in on the discussion. For example, a typical Jewish response to the Alliance’s information on the Jewish control of the news and entertainment media may be: “Oh, yeah, sure! The media bosses are all Jews – like Ted Turner!” One sees this Ted Turner ploy so often that it must be something the Jewish organizations teach their members to say. Very characteristic of the Jews is their failure to debate anything in a substantive way. They depend instead on evasion, misdirection, deception, and much smoke and noise – and these tactics generally work quite well for them. Although Jews are greatly overrepresented among the hostile responders – so overrepresented, in fact, that some of them almost certainly are employed specifically to “police” Internet communications and attack any Politically Incorrect messages – the majority of the hostile responders are White persons in which we are interested; one can never hope to persuade a Jew, anyway, or even to draw him into an honest debate. The Internet responses, being written, provide an advantage over the exchanges in an oral debate in that we can study dispassionately how our opponents respond to us and look for common elements that may give us clues as to how they think.
And there are a number of common elements. One sees, for example, very little diversity or individuality in the hostile responses; instead there is clear evidence of groupthink: the tacit assumption on the part of the responder that his views on the subject under debate are those of virtually everyone (“everyone wishes there were no Mark Fuhrmans on this planet”), and that anyone with different views is some sort of freak. One sees the same inane phrases used over and over, and also the same flawed arguments. One realizes that one is looking in the minds of people who passed through puberty watching four or five hours of television every day: one is listening to the children of the sixties, even if they were born in the seventies. Although there is little individuality in the responses, there is much individualism, as defined in our Membership Handbook. Over and over one sees the attitude, “Hey, I’m smart and successful and I’m getting what I want. The only reason you’re not satisfied with the way society is going is that you’re not as successful as I am. Don’t bother me with your racist appeals for White solidarity. And especially don’t bother me with your anti-Semitism. The only reason you hate Jews is because they’re the most successful people in our society. You should emulate them instead of envying them.” This individualism certainly is irritating. It makes one lust for an opportunity to smash in the individualist’s face with a sturdy, oak table leg – or, better, to put him into a cage with a couple of dozen street niggers for 24 hours and let him try his individualism on them. Perhaps more frustrating is the prevalence of flawed logic and the tenacious adherence to non-facts. One sees people who really are not stupid, in that they are quite capable of solving problems and learning new things (provided that those new things don’t require them to come to any Politically Incorrect conclusions), saying really stupid things, and one is tempted to argue with them. And one should argue with them, simply because there always is an audience, and a few persons in the audience actually do have open minds. But reason seldom works on people who are addicted groupthink. They believe what they do and make the arguments that they do because they must. They have no options. They must think the way they perceive that they are expected to think.
And one realizes that these people are not really human beings. They are zombies. One day, when we are able to change what they perceive as Correct thinking, their opinions on matters of importance will swing 180 degrees without the need for reasoned argument. Actually, this is encouraging. The people we need to win at this time are only the human beings, only the true individuals (not the individualists). And to win them courtesy and logic and facts are indeed important, and those are the things we must continue to use, no matter the irritations and frustrations caused by the others.
Cult of The Turner Diaries
The media blitz of the past few months has focused on The Turner Diaries. In one sense this is unfortunate, because the literary quality of the book is not as high as that of some other materials available from us, and this doesn’t help the polished, professional image of the Alliance. It would have been better if the media attention were focused on Hunter instead, or on National Vanguard, or on our radio broadcasts, or on some other aspect of the Alliance. For historical reasons utterly beyond our control, however, The Turner Diaries is what has been chosen to represent us. The consequence has been a great increase in interest in the book. The most striking manifestation of this heightened interest has been the flood of orders for the book received from individuals all over the world who have had no previous contact with us. With so many people asking their local bookstores for the book, a few stores have begun stocking it on their own initiative, without any promotional effort by us. Catalog retailers also have shown a much greater interest in the book than previously. One new catalog retailer which has recently begun selling the book for us is the Institute for Historical Review, the preeminent historical-revisionist organization in the United States. Another is Loompanics, which specializes in libertarian /individualist /anarchist publications. The book is required reading in many more university courses than before, and orders for 50 to 100 copies at a time have been coming in from university bookstores. Finally, many public libraries have been responding to requests by local readers and have been ordering the book and cataloging it. In many cases the library orders are for several copies, in order to meet rader demand. If there were a competent, aggressive promoter in the National Office, we could sell several hundred thousand more copies of the book
in 1996 and substantially increase our operating budget. Our present lack of a promoter is a world-historical need crying to be satisfied. One important consequence of having a very large number of copies of The Turner Diaries in circulation is that the Jews’ task of repealing the First Amendment is greatly complicated. The more people who have read the book, the more difficult it is for the Jews to misrepresent its nature. The more people who own a copy – especially, the more libraries which have it on their shelves – the trickier the Jews’ task of outlawing what they define as “hate” speech becomes. For better or for worse, every new act of terrorism in the United States will result in more media attention on The Turner Diaries: once the authoritarian types who populate the media world get a notion in their heads, dynamite can’t change it, and The Turner Diaries is now their symbol of resistance to the New World Order. And there will be more and more acts of terrorism, as the present society continues to disintegrate. For better or for worse, it is The Turner Diaries by which the world will judge us, more than by any other single thing we have done. If that is an uncomfortable thought for some of us, then we should redouble our efforts to make new accomplishments by which we also can be judged. But we also should accept the attention which has been focused on The Turner Diaries and make the most of it.
New Opportunity in California
Whenever they can the Jews do their destructive work behind the scenes, using shabbos goyim for their dealings with the public. When they start a war, they work through a Wilson or a Roosevelt or a Bush. When they subvert a society they are in the process of destroying, they put a Kennedy or a Johnson or a Carter out front to persuade the Gentile public that subversion is a good thing. Fortunately, the Jews don’t always have an adequate supply of shabbos goyim. Sometimes when they need a really vicious and depraved Gentile to front for them they can’t find one smart enough and energetic enough for the job, so that have to tip their hands by using members of their own tribe. Such has been the case with their campaign to make the White public defenseless: although they have found plenty of Sarah Brady types to go along with them, their pushiest and craftiest agitators have been the Schumers and Feinsteins. And such is now the case in California with the Jewish campaign to prevent White Californians from blocking the sewers which are pouring an ever-growing flood of mestizos into their state. Jews were outspoken in their hatred of White Californians who voted for Proposition 187 a year ago, and they have been in exposed positions during the past year as they subverted the legal process in order to keep Proposition 187 from being implemented. Now a Jewess in the robes of a U.S. District Court judge has declared Proposition 187 invalid and told White Californians that they may not protect themselves at all from the pestilence of illegal aliens she calls “undocumented newcomers.” And the exposed Jews who have been fighting to keep the dike open while waiting for Judge Mariana Pfaelzer’s November 20 ruling have been crowing louder and more conspicuously than anyone else since then. There are, for example, Robert Rubin, who head the pro-mestizo Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights, and Mark Rosenbaum, the legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union in southern California: neither has been able to restrain
himself from gloating exultantly in the media and rubbing the faces of White Californians in the humiliation imposed on them by Pfaelzer. In California there is no issue of more urgent concern to White citizens than the takeover of their state by illegal aliens from Mexico. It is not a matter for academic or legal debate: it is a matter of survival or defeat. Usually the issue is clouded by Christian/conservative protestations that their desire to keep illegal aliens out has nothing at all to do with race, and by the fact that there are token Jewish and mestizo supporters of Proposition 187. The Pfaelzer ruling has unclouded the issue momentarily, however, and the spotlight of public attention is focused on our enemies. Their burning hatred for everything Aryan has never been more evident. Let’s make the most of it.
The New Zeitgeist
This is a topic I’ve written about before, but it merits repeated discussion. There’s a new mood in the air, a new spirit. We can feel it, and the enemies of our people can feel it. It affects their behavior – and, to a lesser extent, ours. It accounts for much of the increased shrillness in enemy propaganda. It is what makes us more buoyant, resilient, and optimistic than we ever have been in the past, despite the enormous difficulties we still face and the lack of any really concrete changes in our situation. Someone trying to analyze the present situation can easily become confused, because there are many things going on at the same time. On the one hand the Jews are corrupting more and more White children with their racemixing and White-guilt propaganda on television and in the schools. One sees more White women debasing themselves with non-Whites than ever before, and more White youngsters absorbing the hip-hop culture from Murray Rothstein’s MTV. The White socioeconomic elite – the country-club set – is just as cowardly and treasonous as ever, terrified of being considered Politically Incorrect and disgustingly eager to curry favor with the enemies of our people. The government, despite the pseudo-patriotic rhetoric of the Republicans, has not changed its ways at all and currently is debating the best way to scuttle what’s left of the Bill of Rights. The White Masses are as foolish, shortsighted, and selfish as ever. Looking at things objectively, the Jews seem to have a tighter grip on our people than ever before. So, why are they becoming so shrill? Why are they doing so many things which betray their lack of confidence in the future? If things are on the course they want, why are they overplaying their hand and irritating so many people who might otherwise not notice what’s happening? Why do they do unnecessary things, such as pushing so aggressively and noticeably for an end to free speech in the United States? The answer is that they are afraid. Their system is falling apart, and in the long run there’s nothing they can do about it. The ideologies
and programs they have forced on our people for so long are inherently destructive, and the destruction they have wrought is becoming more manifest. It its most simplified version, the pitch the Jews have sold to most of the Christians, the liberals, the feminists, and other Gentile sectors our society is this:
We are all equal. Black and White and mestizo, man and woman and homosexual, village idiot and philosopher. To think that some people are better or more capable than others is wicked. Furthermore, all lifestyles and cultures are equal. The music of Gershwin and Bernstein is just as admirable as that of Beethoven and Mozart. The daubing of a Pollock or a Chagall are just as much “art” as the work of Rembrandt or Vermeer. Democracy is wonderful, because it gives everyone an equal voice is running things. The whole world belongs to everyone. The White man has no special claim on America, because the Indians were here first. No one has any right to keep anyone else out of a country or out of a neighborhood. All we have to do is be tolerant of everyone, and pretty soon we will have a wonderful world of love and peace and plenty.
We can see the consequences of this party line all around us. It can lead only to further destruction of our civilization, and ultimately to chaos and death. That is the way it always has been when the Jews invade a society. When the end of the process was still far enough in the future so that it could be obscured with their rosy message about love and peace and plenty, they weren’t worried. Today, with the end in sight, they are. And so are the others who have a vested interest in their system: the treasonous politicians and bureaucrats and all of the officially favored groups, from feminists to homosexuals to the welfare class. A recent letter from a man who buys books from us and who is a very perceptive observer, despite the fact that he is currently confined in a maximum security Federal prison, says it all: It is plain to him, he says, that the balance is shifting, that the whole system is breaking down, becoming less manageable. The prisoners can find this new spirit of the times, and the guards can too. “I can see the fear in their [the guards] eyes,” he writes. Yes, and we can hear the shrillness in the Jews’ demands that the government outlaw those who say or write Politically Incorrect things.
Seeing the end of our civilization does not help us avert that end. The Jews cannot stop what they are doing: that would be contrary to their nature; and besides, they have a tiger by the tail and cannot afford to let go. And we will not be strong enough to seize the reins of power from the Jews before the chaos is upon us. Our responsibility for the immediate future is just to continue reaching more and more of our people with out message and helping them to make the right decision. And, of course, we must organize those whom we persuade into an effective force for salvaging our future from the coming chaos. Meanwhile, deindustrialization and its consequences will continue, non-White immigration will continue, the decline of our schools and other institutions will continue, and racial mixing will continue, along with all the other Jewish programs. And the end will draw nearer, and the new Zeitgeist will become stronger and more palpable. We can draw new strength from this Zeitgeist, while the Jews and their friends can only draw premonitions of the lime pit which is in their future.
The War Escalates
On May 5, I was served with summonses in a lawsuit filed by relatives of a Black who was shot to death in a Jackson, Mississippi, shopping mall in April 1996 by a deranged White Vietnam veteran with drug and alcohol problems. The veteran then engaged in a shootout with police before killing himself. The lawsuit claims that the veteran bad become deranged by reading The Turner Diaries and listening to an American Dissident Voices broadcast. It asks for $10 million in damages from me, National Vanguard Books, and the National Alliance. The judge who has jurisdiction is the Mississippi circuit court judge who recently permitted the Clintonistas to put Byron De La Beckwith on trial for the third time on the charge that he shot a Black civil-rights agitator to death in 1965 or thereabouts. The defense had argued that the 30 years the prosecutors had waited after the second trial for the political climate and the jury demographics to swing against Beckwith so that they could try him a third time and get a conviction violated the Sixth Amendment guarantee to a speedy trial, but the judge agreed with the Clintonistas that Political Correctness takes precedence over the Bill of Rights. The deceased veteran who did the shooting may or may not have read The Turner Diaries or listened to American Dissident Voices, but neither I nor the Alliance ever had any contact with him. I have retained one of the most highly rated defense attorneys in Mississippi, and I am confident that, despite the judge, we will prevail. It will be expensive, however: the attorney charges $175 an hour, plus expenses. That, of course, is the whole point of this tactic. Although the lawyers representing the plaintiffs in this case are not connected directly with the Southern Poverty Law Center, I have learned that they have been in consultation with Morris Dees and his colleagues at the SPLC since the beginning. The way to avoid harassment of this sort, of course, is to keep a low profile, stay out of the newspapers, don’t write books like The Turner Diaries, and make sure that nothing I say on an American Dissident Voices
broadcast will offend anyone. Instead I have chosen to gain as high a degree of name recognition for the Alliance among the general public as I can by accepting nearly every invitation for an interview and to keep punching away at our enemies with the hardest truths I can find. These tactics have made the Alliance the premier racially oriented White organization – and the premier target of our enemies. Because our enemies, even with all of their billions of dollars and their mass media and their control of the government, cannot fight us with the truth, they will use other methods. Since the 1950’s the Jews have been talking among themselves, in their community publications, about using the courts to bankrupt their enemies. As the courts have become more corrupt, this tactic has become more feasible. Now they are using it. In the case of Morris Dees, of course, there is more than the desire to destroy the Jews’ enemies. He rakes in millions of dollars a year doing it by sending out fund appeals to his mailing list: “Help me destroy William Pierce and the National Alliance by sending me your largest possible contribution today in the handy reply envelope I have enclosed for your convenience.” So what should our response be? Should we lie low for a while and try to avoid provoking the Jews until we have become stronger and are better able to defend ourselves? I think not. There already are too many people, nominally on our side, who are lying low and trying to avoid being noticed. If we kept a low profile, we might continue to gain members while the Jews continued to feast on the decaying corpse of Western civilization. I’ll bet that in the last days of the Roman Republic there were a few patriotic societies which adopted a similar strategy. We just don’t have the time to act like church mice. One more generation without opposition, and the Jews and their allies will have eliminated the last possibility for the recovery of our people. Now, at a time when more and more of our people finally are finding the courage to stand up, we must continue to stand up, we must continue to encourage them and help them find the right way.
Should we use the corruption of the judicial system as an excuse to abandon legality and begin a campaign of assassination and terror against our enemies? I think not. Such a campaign would last perhaps a month before being crushed by the secret police. The Jews would be happy to lose a few of their high-profile people to our knives and bullets in exchange for being able to put a final end to us. We must never mistake moral justification for tactical justification. We always have been morally justified in killing traitors and enemies of our people, but we must not actually do that until it is tactically justified. What we must do in response to this new threat, in addition to the things we already have been doing, is build up our legal resources and our financial resources. For a while, at least, we must be able to fight Dees and his ilk on their own turf. We must recruit more lawyers – the most competent and aggressive lawyers available – into our own ranks, so that the burden of combat does not fall too heavily on a few shoulders and so that we do not so often have to hire lawyers from outside our own ranks. And we must bring much more money into our treasury, so that we can fight effectively in an arena that is slanted heavily in favor of the combatant who has the fatter wallet. If we could devote just $1,000,000 per year to litigation, we would be invulnerable to people like Morris Dees, for all practical purposes. The cigarette companies knowingly have been killing hundreds of thousands of Americans every year for decades with their products, and until the government itself entered the arena against them very recently, they were untouchable in the courts. Anyone who sued them could be run right into the ground, because the cigarette companies could keep him giving depositions and responding to motions and interrogatories indefinitely, eventually bleeding him dry with legal costs and forcing him to give up the fight. At this time we will be hard-pressed to spend even $100,000 per year on litigation. Despite this severe limitation of money, the situation is far from hopeless. There are still people in the Establishment with money and influence who are not quite ready to let some hungry legal hyena like Dees snatch the First Amendment and run off with it. It certainly will not hurt our image to be in the position of defending the First Amendment in the courts against Dees and his ilk. There will be
some value in forcing the Jews to explain in court that they really do believe in free speech – so long as it is Politically Correct speech. What all of this means is that we will win the present case in Mississippi, and we will have allies in future cases (indeed, we already have allies in the present case). But if we are to be successful in the long run in defending ourselves against this new Jewish tactic, we cannot depend on anyone but ourselves, and we must have massive amounts of money. There is no other way at this time. And if you are on of those would could donate $100,000 to our legal-defense fund, you must not just sit on your money and watch to see what happens. I am fighting for your posterity and your heritage as well as mine. If I do not win, and if the Alliance is destroyed by its enemies, who will fight for the rights of your grandchildren? What good will it do to leave them a fortune in a world where they and their kind will be a minority at the mercy of Jews and other non-Whites? Indeed, if the Jews have their way and the Alliance is silenced, and there is no voice to contradict them, they may be able to persuade your daughters or granddaughters to mate with Blacks and thereby snuff out your posterity forever. If our lives are to have any meaning or value, the Alliance must not only survive but continue to grow in strength and influence, and it can do that only with the wholehearted support of all of us who believe in its mission.
Coping with Tyranny
As a preface to what follows, I will repeat here what I have said many times and in many places: Under existing conditions the Alliance does not condone illegal activity in general or the Oklahoma City bombing in particular.
Jennifer McVeigh loved her brother and certainly had no intention of helping the government put him to death. The brother and sister were very close, and Tim had spoken often with her about the corruption of the government and its tyrannical behavior. Apparently he neglected to tell her how to deal with agents of the secret police if she ever were confronted by them, however. The consequence of this neglect was that when she was confronted by them they were able to bend her completely to their will. They interrogated her relentlessly, hour after hour and day after day, threatening her, bullying her, lying to her. They told here, “We know your brother is guilty, and he’s going to fry. There’s nothing you can do to save him. If you don’t tell us everything you know we’ll send you to prison for the rest of your life as an accessory. You’ll be locked up with Black female criminals, who will be very happy to get their hands on you. You won’t like what they will do to you.” Eventually they terrorized Jennifer into signing a statement, and then they told her, “Now you’re going to testify for us in court. If you refuse to testify, you’ll go to prison for contempt of court. And if you say anything which contradicts this statement you’ve signed, you’ll go to prison for perjury.” Weeping and terrified, Jennifer did as she was ordered by the secret police and helped them convict her brother. And it was all completely unnecessary. If Jennifer had simply told the secret police that she had nothing say to them and then kept her mouth shut, she could not have been forced to betray her brother. They could have threatened her with contempt of court if she refused to testify, but in fact no prosecuting attorney in his right mind would have put her on the witness stand not knowing in advance what she would say.
Tim probably would have been convicted anyway, but Jennifer at least would have a clear conscience, and she also would still be a free woman. Jennifer made the same mistake that nearly everyone makes in dealing with the secret police. She thought she could turn their hostility aside by ingratiating herself with them. She was afraid to anger them by simply refusing to talk with them. She tried to proclaim her innocence, hoping that would make them leave her alone. As soon as the secret police saw her react in this familiar way, they knew they had her, and the attacked relentlessly. The only way she could have made them leave her alone would have been to remain silent, ignoring all of their threats and lies. A person can no more turn aside the hostility of the secret police by ingratiating himself with them than a wounded doe can turn aside the fury of a pack of wild dogs by appearing to be inoffensive and helpless. A weakling always will be destroyed, either morally by being forced to implicate someone else, or physically by implicating himself. The same is true of a fool, who believes that he can play games with the secret police and outsmart them. This lesson is spelled out clearly in our Membership Handbook (chapter five), but it is easily forgotten at the crucial moment, especially by a member who is inclined to be paralyzed by fear in an emergency situation. Every member needs to recite to himself the dictum, “If approached by the secret police, I will refuse to say anything to them,” until it is deeply engraved in his memory. This rule must be followed whether the secret police are openly hostile and threatening or have adopted a seemingly friendly and professional attitude. The reason that this rule is important is that we have entered a new era of government lawlessness and intrusiveness into the lives of citizens. Obeying the law no longer suffices to guarantee that one will be left alone. Jennifer McVeigh had broken no law, yet the government ruined her life in order to attain their end of convicting her brother. Richard Jewell, the security guard at the Atlanta Olympics, had broken no law, yet the secret police deliberately subjected him to a horrendous ordeal in the hope that he would crack and confess to a crime he had not committed. The 17 children who were burned to death by the FBI at Waco on April 19, 1993 were innocent of any crime, but the FBI was willing to put their lives at risk in order to punish their religious-dissident
parents (who also had committed no crime) for failing to yield. The wife and son of separatist Randy Weaver had committed no crime, yet they were shot to death so that the secret police could demonstrate their authority over Randy Weaver. And these are just a few of the highprofile cases which have occurred recently. There have been uncounted thousands of recent cases in which agents of the Clinton government have trampled the law in order to have their way. Homes and businesses are searched and property is seized without proper warrants, in defiance of the Fourth Amendment. Citizens accused of political crimes are put on trial repeatedly, until the government obtains a conviction, in defiance of the Fifth Amendment. Naïve Americans who studied the U.S. Constitution in high school are inclined to react with, “They can’t do that!” upon hearing about one of these trampling cases. But the truth is that they can do it, because the courts permit them to do it. There is a general sense among the bureaucrats and politicians that things are not as stable in America as they used to be, and that the government needs to have a firmer grip on the reins in order to maintain control and prevent an upset. This is fine with the couch potatoes and sports fans, who make up at least 90 per cent of the population: they pose no threat to the government, and the government threatens nothing that they value. And the elites who in the past could be counted on to raise the alarm against these governmental encroachments on liberty are silent, either because they favor the encroachment or because they are denied a voice in the mainstream media, whose bosses are on of the elite favoring the encroachments. This is a situation which calls for our vigilance and concern, but not for an irrational overreaction. Some patriots, reacting emotionally to the growing corruption and lawlessness of the government, babble wildly of an imminent government roundup of all patriots, and their liquidation or confinement in concentration camps. Such a move by the government is quite unlikely during the next few years. But the likelihood of Alliance members and other patriots having unwanted interactions of one sort or another with the secret police is growing, and so it behooves us to prepare ourselves for such interactions in ways which will minimize the damage our enemies can inflict on us.
The two rules we should follow in this regard are, first, to be mentally prepared for an unwanted interaction (as I pointed out a few paragraphs earlier) and, second, to avoid non-essential activities which make such interactions more likely. Among the non-essential activities to be avoided are irregularities in reporting taxes; associations with people who engage in illegal activity, even if that activity is of a patriotic nature; the possession or acquisition of illegal weapons; and loose talk about hypothetical situations which may arise in the future. Examples of the way in which ignoring these rules can lead to damage are provided, in the case of the first rule, by Jennifer McVeigh’s being mentally unprepared for her interaction with the secret police, and in the case of the second rule, by the recent raid on a Detroit-area music company friendly to the Alliance, ostensibly for failing to handle its sales taxes properly. This music company, Resistance Records, produces and distributes “White power rock” CDs and publishes a magazine which the Jews and their faithful servants in Washington find offensive. Two months ago Michigan authorities, collaborating with the secret police in Washington and with Canada’s secret police, used sales-tax irregularities as an excuse to kick in the door of Resistance Records’ office and seize all of the company’s business records and stock of merchandise. The aim was not only to put Resistance Records out of business, but also to provide the Canadian secret police with the names of Canadian purchasers of Resistance Records CDs, so that the purchasers can be prosecuted under Canada’s “hate speech” laws. One weakness that many of our people have in dealing with these interactions is a reluctance to believe that the government’s secret policemen actually behave in the way they do. Americans traditionally have regarded policemen as “the good guys” and thought of them as helpful, protective, courteous, law-abiding, etc. The first time they encounter agents of the FBI or one of the government’s other secretpolice agencies – most of whom, after all, are still White men – they are unprepared for deceit, treachery, and disregard for both the spirit and the letter of the law on the part of these agents. They do not anticipate encountering men who will deliberately browbeat and terrify a young woman with lies and threats in a non-stop “third degree” interrogation aimed at forcing her to give evidence against her brother.
Unfortunately, such behavior is not limited to Mr. Clinton’s Federal goon squads. The Michigan state police agents who kicked in the door of the Resistance Record office and charged in with guns drawn knew quite well that sales-tax investigations are not normally carried out in this manner. But they also knew what their superiors – including Michigan’s Jewish commissar of taxes Dan Levy – expected of them, and it’s more fun kicking in doors and making people lie on the floor while you aim a shotgun at them than it is politely asking to see their tax records. Besides, they knew that they could get away with such behavior because the controlled media would praise them for it. They had been indoctrinated with the attitude that White racists are troublemakers and need to be slapped around in order to keep them in line. Jewish groups such as the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith and Morris Dees’s Southern Poverty Law Center offer “training seminars” to police and military agencies, in which “experts” teach the cops and soldiers about the danger from White “extremists.” The Jews use their political influence to gain contracts (paid for by the taxpayers) for providing these seminars, and then they use the seminars to indoctrinate those forced by their agencies to attend. Cops have an authoritarian tendency and are not known for their subtlety or intellect, and so they are easily programmed in such seminars to believe that it is permissible to burn down churches packed with religious dissidents who believe in the Second Amendment or to kick in the doors of people who distribute “White power” music. Our only protection against the secret police during this transitional period between quasi-normalcy and the abandonment of all pretense by our enemies are to follow the two rules outlined above and to continue reaching the public with our message. The larger the segment of the public with which we are in contact, the less likely the secret police are to violate our Constitutional rights. Only to the extent that the Jews are able to keep the public convinced that we are dangerous, violent, and evil can they get away with using the government’s powers against us in illegal or irregular ways. The National Office is doing everything it can to increase our contact with the public, but you are the one who is responsible for following our rules.
Above all else, the importance of this one rule simply cannot be overemphasized: Whenever approached by the secret police, say nothing to them except, “I have nothing to say to you. Goodbye.” A Florida member – a respectable business owner and family man who has never been engaged in any questionable activity whatsoever – recently was given a summons to appear before a Federal grand jury. The reason given for the summons was that he had “given conflicting answers” when visited on two occasions by secret police agents trying to obtain information about a former member he had known slightly. It is illegal to give false information to a secret police agent. If one responds in different ways to similar questions, no matter how innocent and non0incriminating the questions may seem, then one may be threatened with prosecution for giving false information. The only proper way to avoid such a trap is to refuse absolutely to give any information at all. And if one is summoned to appear before a Federal grand jury, one must obtain competent legal counsel. A grand jury is an extremely dangerous instrument in the hands of a tyrannical government, and only a scoundrel willing to betray his friends or a fool oblivious to the danger will take a summons lightly. If we were living in normal times, everything I have said above would be superfluous or irrelevant. We are, after all, involved in no illegal activity, and we still have civil liberties guaranteed by our Bill of Rights. But we are not living in normal times. We are living in a period of social disintegration, growing citizen alienation and unrest, growing governmental corruption, and growing fear of its own citizens by the government. In such times, when patriots are morally obliged to become adversaries of the government, vigilance and discretion are essential. We want there to be a time once again when law-abiding Americans can trust their government and can speak freely with policemen – including those who work for the various secret-police agencies. But we must understand that we are not now living in such a time. We must understand that those who are deliberately destroying America will neither change their ways nor cease their destructive activity. We must understand that there is no one in the government who will oppose these destroyers, that the government is entirely in the hands of the destroyers. We must understand that as the destruction continues,
the alienation and unrest on the part of the citizens and the corruption and fear on the part of the government can only worsen. We must understand that as the government’s fear of its citizens increases it will become more and more tyrannical in its efforts to protect itself. And we must understand that despite this growing cycle of degenerative change, the Alliance must survive and continue its work. We can do this only if all of us exercise vigilance and discretion in all of our activities.
Dealing with Fear
Karl Marx and the other Jewish enemies of mankind – as well as many non-Jewish enemies – have assumed that man is essentially an economic animal, who responds primarily to economic stimuli. Their strategies for manipulating us have been based on this assumption: dangle a dollar in front of us, and we can be led into the slaughterhouse without a protest. The unfortunate thing about this assumption is that it works for something between 90 and 98 per cent of our people. Even Adolf Hitler, whose own motives were not economic at all, won a large part of his mass support by persuading Germans that he could give them a better life: that is, an easier, more prosperous, and more financially secure life. Actually delivering on that promise is what allowed him to hold the loyalty and devotion of about 95 per cent of the German population through the genocidal war waged against Germany by the Jews and their allies. Only about five per cent followed Hitler because he offered them a morally and spiritually richer life: a nobler life. Our own appeal certainly has not been economic – which is one reason why our audience has never been more than about five per cent of the White population. Even if we did have a primarily economic message, we couldn’t expect much response during a period when people are more or less comfortable. The persistent apprehension about the future is helpful, but not helpful enough as long as the economy holds up. Anyway, we never have sought mass support and do not anticipate changing our message anytime soon. Our problem with economic motivation now is that the five per cent of the population which is responsive to our non-economic message is largely constrained by economic concerns and fears. I have never seen more fear in those responding to our message than during the past year. What this means in more specific terms is that many people who respond favorably to our message at an emotional and an intellectual level are afraid of economic reprisals if their favorable response becomes known. More people than ever before respond to hearing an American Dissident Voices broadcast by telling me, “You know, the government’s
not going to let you get away with that. The Jews will find a way to stop you.” More people than ever before express concern that any mail or telephone contact with us is dangerous because, “You know, the FBI certainly is monitoring your mail and your telephone.” Any why does it matter to them whether or not the secret police know their feelings toward the government? “Well, I have a good job, and I can’t afford to lose it. I have a family to support.” Probably the fears of many of these people go beyond concern that the government will interfere with their income, although economic fears are the ones most often stated. Almost certainly, the increase in the level of fear among our sympathizers is a consequence of the government- and media-induced hysteria about domestic terrorism following the Oklahoma City bombing. The media made a major effort to link all opponents of the government to the bombing in some way, and that was more true of us than of any of the government’s other opponents, because of Timothy McVeigh’s enthusiastic response to The Turner Diaries. The media incorrectly labeled my book as the “blueprint” for the bombing, even going so far as to misidentify the ingredients of the Oklahoma City bomb by describing it as a “a fertilizer and fuel oil bomb” which was practically identical to the fictitious bomb used to blow up the J. Edgar Hoover Building in the book. (The actual Oklahoma City bomb consisted of nitromethane, a powerful liquid explosive, and ammonium nitrate.) There was so much media coverage of the trial and the investigation leading up to the trial that many people with anti-government sentiments were put on the defensive. They were afraid that because of the deliberate media linkage of militias, tax resisters, racists, people opposed to giving the Jews everything they demand, free-speech advocates, gun owners, and all the rest to the bombing they would be considered “baby killers” or potential terrorists if their sentiments became known. The government’s behavior has had a similar effect. All of the clamor among the politicians and the FBI for cracking down on dissidents, tapping more telephones, conducting more warrantless searches, etc. has made people nervous. If we had a more manly population or a population less dominated by economic concerns, we
might expect that the resentment generated by this behavior would outweigh the fear, but in fact it is the fear which prevails now. There’s not much to be gained by railing at the economy and praying for an economic collapse or a big rise in unemployment now (unless you really believe in the efficacy of prayer). Nor does it help us to curse the cowardice and softness of our fellow men. What we must do now is try to alleviate the fears of reprisal that are rife today, so that they do not interfere with our work of building the Alliance. Specifically, when we talk with potential recruits we should never indicate personal concerns about tapped telephones, monitored mail, or possible raids by Mr. Clintons’ jackbooted thugs. If someone else raises the subject, we should dismiss it confidently with the reminder that our policy is strict legality and that we have never encountered the sort of governmental behavior mentioned. Keep the emphasis on the positive. Point out that we are vigorous and confident defenders of free speech and other fundamental rights, not timid worriers that the government and the media are attempting to restrict those rights. Point out that we have never tried to hide our beliefs and have never suffered economic reprisals as a consequence. Sometimes discretion may be the correct policy, but never timidity. Of course, we don’t want to imply that every recruit is expected to announce his affiliation with us from the rooftops; we just want to show that we are able to act in a manly way and still lead normal – even prosperous – lives. Someday we will have to restructure our society so that it breeds fewer cowards and fewer men of the sort Marx knew he could count on to respond properly to economic stimuli. Until then, we must learn to do the best we can with what we have.
The Meaning of Loyalty
An often made comment by students of human behavior is that soldiers in combat do not fight for their general or their country or their god or any other impersonal entity; they fight for each other, for those with whom they are in immediate, daily contact. This comment certainly is correct for most, thought no all, soldiers. Their mental horizon, normally very limited, becomes even smaller in the face of death. All abstract principles fall away, and only the most primitive instincts remain. When fear of imminent death looms large, all impersonal loyalties lose their meaning, and the individual is controlled only by his desire to stay alive – and by his bond to his immediate fellows in the same situation. He may risk his life to protect one of his fellows, but not to comply with an order from headquarters. He would rather take a bullet in the gut than be seen as a coward or a shirker by those immediately around him, but he doesn’t really care what headquarters thinks. All successful armies are organized with this facet of human nature in mind. The structure of the army must be such that headquarters can count on the individual soldier doing what headquarters wants him to do rather than what he is inclined to do by his instincts. This is accomplished by training and by having a well designed chain of command. The army’s noncoms are a cut above the rank and file; they have somewhat more distant horizons. They are close enough to the men in their squad or platoon to bond with them and demand loyalty from them, but they also are able to identify their interests with those of the lieutenant and the captain. And the officers must be a cut above the noncoms, with even more distant horizons. And so it goes, all the way up to headquarters. This behavior undoubtedly is something we have inherited from our ancestors who belonged to hunting bands a million years ago. Success and survival depended on a strong bonding among the dozen or so members of the band. Because this behavior is natural, we cannot deplore it – but, like any army, we must understand it and take it into account in planning for any objective bigger than bringing down the next wooly mammoth encounter.
We don’t have some of the advantages that an army has. Our members are much more widely dispersed, and our organization is much less developed than the army’s, with a much more tenuous chain of command: relatively few of our members out in the foxholes have any noncom to whom they can bond. Furthermore, we cannot throw people in the brig or put them up against a wall when they don’t behave the way I want them to. We have to make up for these disadvantages by having members with somewhat broader horizons than those of the average citizen. We need members with at least the expanded sense of loyalty of a noncom. Until we have developed a structure much more like that of an army, we need to beware of having too many members whose loyalties are limited to their drinking buddies. This expanded sense of loyalty is mentioned on page 11 of our Membership Handbook, and it would behoove every member to re-read that page now. This is not merely a theoretical matter; it is something which affects us whenever we engage in any activity with other members, and every day we can see the destructive consequences of ignoring it. The only reason that the Alliance has survived and continued to grow while other organizations have self-destructed is that we do have members who are a cut above the average White person: more intelligent, better disciplined, more racially conscious, and with a more impersonal sense of loyalty. But that is true only on the average. Inevitably we also recruit people lacking in maturity, responsibility, self-discipline, and the ability to be loyal to the Alliance and the purpose which it serves. We see this whenever a member observes some destructive behavior on the part of a fellow member which is of such a serious nature that I or someone else in the National Office needs to know about it, but the member observing this behavior doesn’t tell me about it because he doesn’t want to “rat on a buddy.” He places his loyalty to the misbehaving member with whom he is in immediate, personal contact above his loyalty to the distant and impersonal Alliance. We simply cannot afford very much of that, because we are not a neighborhood gang, for which such a limited concept of loyalty might be appropriate.
I have been prompted to bring this subject up now, because I recently was obliged to expel several members from the Alliance whose very limited sense of loyalty had led them to engage in activity harmful to the Alliance. We are a diverse organization, with many types of people among our members. But one thing every member must have if he is to remain with us is a sense of loyalty to the National Alliance and the idea served by the National Alliance which is above his loyalty to any other entity, including his “buddies”.
Tenacity and Patience
There are many traits of character that are desirable in a person engaged in our endeavor, but I can think of none more valuable than tenacity. Tenacity, combined with patience and good judgment, can conquer the world. This is all the more true these days when there are so many moral cripples, born losers, and grown-up mama’s boys among our people: the products of two generations raised on television and permissiveness; men and women whose mothers picked up and cleaned up after them, even when they were teenagers; whose fathers sometimes yelled, “Don’t do that!” or, “Be quiet and do your homework!” but never followed up on their commands; who learned from watching television as children that every problem has an easy solution and every bad situation has a happy ending. Such people are not problem solvers. They have no staying power and cannot overcome major obstacles. They nearly always choose the path of least resistance. They cannot win against people who are made of tougher stuff. Tenacity is a winning characteristic, both at the individual level and at the organizational level. A tenacious individual, once he has decided what he wants to accomplish, is not deterred by setbacks, obstacles, or failures. He learns from every setback and every failure, and he persists until he overcomes every obstacle. A tenacious organization, having set its objectives and its general strategy, pursues those objectives until it achieves them, no matter what tactics it must use, no matter what sacrifices must be made, and no matter how long it takes. The Alliance has set as its objectives securing the physical existence of our people and organizing them in a society governed by our ideology. We would like to achieve these objectives within a few years and with the minimum losses to our own people, but we will achieve them even if it takes us centuries, requires us to endure generations of outlawry and repression, and only a small fraction of our population survives the intervening chaos. We are willing to endure anything and do anything, because the alternative is extinction. Because of this, we have
designed it to endure and survive and continue toward it goals until it reaches them. We have observed the passivity and selfishness and cowardice of our people, who continue to collaborate with our enemies as long as there seems to be some personal, short-term advantage to them in doing so, and we have focused our recruiting efforts on the small minority of our people whose character and idealism lead them to do what is right rather than what is momentarily advantageous. Which is to say, we have built the Alliance on people able and willing to make a long-term commitment rather than on people looking for a quick and easy solution with the next election. We have observed the long-term decay in morale of the government; the inevitable increase in fundamental weaknesses in the economy as the average quality of the work force declines and the welfare burden mounts; and the growing alienation of the population from the government as demographic inhomogeneity, official corruption, and an increasingly unnatural life-style take their toll. We have based our strategy on these long-term trends rather than on any momentary economic dislocations or governmental scandals. Our tactics, on the other hand, are adapted to take momentary advantage of momentary changes. We have made a special effort to recruit members who are involved in every key profession and institution in our society, rather than simply building a generalized mass membership. It is our aim to grow like a living organism – sometimes rapidly and sometimes slowly, but always growing – until we are able to duplicate within our own ranks all of the essential features of the society around us. These are our design criteria for building a tenacious organization. To meet these criteria we must continue to persuade the best and brightest among our people to join us and to make our goals their goals. And we must continue to build our other resources. We must have continuity in members, in ideas, and in resources. We have made some progress in developing the basis for this continuity, but we need more.
In the area of financial resources, for example, we have been fortunate in being able to build a small amount of capital assets, so that we can have a reasonable hope of being able to weather a storm of moderate severity without having to scramble and make emergency appeals. We are still a long way, however, from being strong enough financially to defeat a determined, long-term effort by our enemies to destroy us. For that we need at least ten times the reserves we have now. Members who want to help us build our organizational tenacity can do so simply by making the Alliance the beneficiary of their wills. If we must fight from generation to generation, then we must grow stronger from generation to generation. Inheritance can become a big part of our growing financial strength. Any member who would like to help the Alliance in this regard but is uncertain of the details of the process should contact the National Office for information.
As the Alliance continues to recruit capable, serious members and develop new capabilities relevant to our task, the enemies of our people will step up their efforts to counter us. There is absolutely no chance that we will be able to sneak up on them and take them by surprise. They have thousands of years of experience in the business of genocide and nation-wrecking, and they have encountered opposition from many of their victims. The stronger we become, the more of their own resources they will devote to neutralizing us. We must never think that they have forgotten about us and let down our guard. At the same time, we must never become paranoid or allow fear of our enemies to deter us. The latter is the common failing of the so-called “right wing” or “patriot movement” in America: their standard excuse for their cowardice and inaction is that the enemy is too powerful, and that if they “expose” themselves the enemy surely will retaliate against them by making them lose their employment, be audited by the IRS, or be attacked by minority gangs. We must avoid both extremes – that of carelessness and that of cowardice – and always have a realistic appraisal of our enemies and their tactics, and conduct ourselves accordingly. I have stated several guidelines for members in this regard, both in our Membership Handbook and in various issues of the BULLETIN, but it is good to repeat these from time to time and update them in accord with changes in our situation. The first guideline is to be extremely wary of illegal activity. The use of agents provocateurs and entrapment is standard operating procedure for the various secret police agencies of the U.S. government. People engaged in revolutionary activity ought to understand this, but practically every month we are treated to the spectacle of the Jews and their trained hounds gloating over having tricked some well-meaning but insufficiently cautious patriot into discussing, in the presence of a concealed microphone, a scheme to assassinate a specific traitor or to acquire illegal weapons or the like. Members should pay their taxes, and they should overcome the temptation to build pipe bombs, and they also should overcome the temptation to fantasize aloud about the latter.
Members who are so angry that they can’t stand it any longer should go to public meetings and shout down politicians, bureaucrats, or Jews. It’s not a bad thing to be fined for disturbing the peace in these times, but it is bad to go to prison for five years for discussing with the wrong person sending your favorite politician to his just reward. The second guideline is to avoid distractions which keep us from doing the truly important things by getting us involved in trivial or even counter-productive activities. We still have a few members who are distracted every time a conservative Republican runs for office; for the duration of the campaign they are useless to the Alliance. And we have a few members who are easy prey for those hired to sow confusion and suspicion in our ranks. The Internet has become the arena of choice for the latter, primarily because of the anonymity it offers. Soon after our two World Wide Web sites were set up, our enemies set up a “National Appliance” site, which parodied our materials and was supposed to make people laugh at us. More recently a “National Annoyance” site, complete with an inverted Life Rune, has been opened for the same purpose. Some members let themselves become annoyed by these attacks and feel that they need to respond, thereby wasting their time and making neutral observers pay more attention to the attacks than they otherwise would. The same considerations apply to an individual agent who operates under various name, including “Winston Smith,” “Harold Covington,” and “Gen-sec of the NSWPP.” He concocts and posts phony letters supposedly written to him by disaffected Alliance members; fabricates false “news” stories implicating Alliance members in terrorist activity; and accuses me of senility, cowardice, and self-seeking, among other things. He is extremely prolific, making up new attacks against the Alliance every day, and because he formerly was a hanger-on in the socalled “movement” before he was given an offer he couldn’t refuse and “turned,” he has learned the jargon and is able to make an impression on those with hobbyist tendencies and limited powers of discrimination. The proper response to this fellow, as to the “National Annoyance,” is no response at all. These people have no substance on their own, but they gain the appearance of substance if they succeed in evoking a response from us. And when we respond we are distracted from useful activity.
In summary, let’s stay focused on our goal and not let ourselves be distracted by hecklers or by the temptation to take either conservative or illegal shortcuts. We’ll win, but only if we have tenacity, patience, and good judgment.
The Old Faith Faileth
During the past couple of years we’ve had a growing volume of correspondence from the general public: from people who have never had any connection with a race-oriented or Politically Incorrect organization. Most of these people are responding to one of our American Dissident Voices broadcast or to one of our Internet sites. Their letters, some via e-mail and some via the postal service, cover a wide spectrum of attitudes, from people who have long agreed with us but only recently have been moved to contact us, to people who until recently disagreed strongly with us but are now beginning to have doubts about their former beliefs. A typical letter in the latter category might begin: “I don’t share your racist beliefs, but I must admit that you’re right about….” Then will follow an account of a traumatic collision with racial reality the correspondent recently has experienced. Or a letter might begin: “I don’t agree with your ideas about a Jewish conspiracy, but I’m glad to see that somebody is speaking out against the Clinton administration’s insane plan to start another unnecessary war in the Middle East….” What one senses behind all the letters of this type is a person who used to be Politically Correct but has been unable to maintain his orthodox faith in the face of an increasingly contradictory reality. Major cracks have developed in his system of beliefs as the world in which he lives becomes nuttier and nuttier – and increasingly hostile. He still wants to have “respectable” or “Correct” beliefs, but they are slipping away from him as the evidence against them mounts. Some of these letters don’t even admit to any agreement with us, but one can sense a barely controlled desperation in their statement of belief, as if they’re begging us to prove them wrong and give them something more reasonable to believe instead. Letters of the former type, expressing strong, long-term agreement with us, appear to be not so much from people who have just learned of our existence as from people who finally have been able to overcome their fears and are willing to risk exposure by contacting us. Most of these people are professionals who are certain that their lives will
be ruined if any of their colleagues find out what they believe. The softness of their lives and the non-stop barrage of hate propaganda from the controlled media have robbed them of their courage and greatly exaggerated their fears – but a subconsciously sensed change in the climate around them nevertheless has moved them to act. What is this climatic change? Basically it is a tension in the air caused by the growing gap between reality and orthodoxy. At the same time, the orthodox establishment has lost much of its former status and respectability. The façade of orthodoxy has become more weatherbeaten, while the parade grounds on which the moguls of orthodoxy used to display their might have grown more weeds and developed more potholes. Awe is being overtaken by cynicism. The faithful have become increasingly doubtful, and the unfaithful have become bolder. This process is helped enormously by people like Bill Clinton. He is the high priest of orthodoxy, a man who has made a career of professing his dedication to Political Correctness while doing more than any other person to discredit it, albeit inadvertently. As I write, his approval rating, announced by his media friends during the second week of the Bill-and-Monica scandal, stands at 72 per cent, an all-time high. What a wonderful argument against mass democracy that is! I am willing to believe this amazing approval rating: the people who voted for him – the welfare class, the Jews, the feminists, and homosexuals, and the non-Whites – are rallying around their besieged hero, while other voters are expressing their approval of the act that the U.S. economy is still holding itself up, for the moment, and that’s all they really care about. But the people who approve of Bill Clinton don’t really count, not even the self-supporting, heterosexual White ones. Furthermore, it’s not really “approval” which counts; it’s respect, awe, and fear, and these latter are way down. When people no longer respect or fear their government, that government’s days are numbered. For most Americans Bill Clinton symbolizes the government; as their contempt for him grows, their respect for the government he heads diminishes. And although fear of disapproval by one’s colleagues is not quite the same as fear of being found out by the government to be Politically Incorrect, the two are related: the more one loses one’s respect
for the government – which, after all, is the ultimate arbiter of Political Correctness – the more one is willing to take a chance on being found out by one’s colleagues. There’s more to the change in climate than Bill Clinton’s unzipped fly, of course. There’s the O.J. Simpson verdict, and there are the cumulative effects of a thousand lesser aberrations over the past few years. There’s the increasingly hard line of the television bosses promoting miscegenation, and there’s the increasing difficulty of remaining unscathed by the proximity of non-Whites in our everyday lives. More and more people are coming to the realization that the country is poised on the brink, while the priests of Political Correctness are chanting: “Jump! Jump! Jump!...” Anyway, that’s what I see as the reason for the growing number of people reaching out to us. May their numbers continue to increase!
Dealing with Individualists and Cowards
In the past I’ve written more than once about two obstacles to our recruiting: cowardice and selfishness. Correspondence received at the National Office this month has reminded me again how important these two obstacles are. First we received an e-mail letter from someone who had been reading my American Dissident Voices scripts on the Internet, and he had just read a script in which I urged people to join the Alliance and take part in our struggle for freedom and progress. He said that he agreed with many of my comments about race, the Jews, and the media. He deplored the advance of the welfare state and the Marxist policies he could see in the U.S. government – but what, he wanted to know, would joining the Alliance do to help him achieve his personal and professional goals? How could the Alliance help him get ahead in life? If he joined, what benefits could he expect? I responded as follows:
The National Alliance cannot help you attain your goals or “get ahead,” if by that you mean acquiring better employment, a larger income, a higher social status, or the like, The National Alliance does not exist to further the financial or social conditions of its members. The purpose of the National Alliance is to secure the future of our people and to prepare the earth for a higher type of man. Men and women who join the National Alliance do so in order to work together toward these goals. They do not ask what the Alliance can do for them, but only what they can do to serve the purpose of the National Alliance. If you can adopt the goals of the National Alliance as your goals, then we will be happy to accept your application for membership.
My correspondent, who uses the Internet name “Joe Fenian,” responded huffily that if that’s what the National Alliance is all about, “then you and your organization are the same as those you decry.”
I probably never have encountered a franker exponent of the John Birch Society mentality of the Ayn Rand philosophy of “what’s in it for me?” than Mr. Fenian, unless it be a fellow named Harry Browne, the author of a quintessentially crass book titled How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World and the perennial Presidential candidate for the Libertarian Party. A second letter received this month is from someone in Dallas, Texas, who signs his letter “a supporter” and who identifies himself as “a strong Christian.” Despite his Christianity, he said, he wants very much to provide financial support for the Alliance – anonymously. But he has several very serious concerns. First, what technique can he use to send money to use and be sure that we are receiving it without the government or the Jews finding out about him? Second, how can he be sure that we aren’t some sort of “trick” organization set up by the Jews “as a tool to smoke out anti-Semites?” He then speculates about various techniques he might use for sending money and receiving assurance of its receipt without being found out. One technique he suggests it to wire money anonymously via Western Union, paying for his money orders with cash – but the danger he sees in that is that Western Union offices usually have a security camera, and so he would have to wear a disguise when he paid for his money orders. It is depressing to realize that there are grown men of our race, claiming to be more or less in agreement with us, who are this cowardly. Unfortunately, there are many of them. Which is worse: the Birch-style selfishness and individualism of the first writer, or the abject, groveling cowardice of the second? Can anything be done to make either of these types good for something? It is tempting to write both of them off as fit only for clearing minefields by driving herds of them through suspected areas. If we consider them dispassionately, probably we can hold out some hope for the Bircher, but none for the coward. In the case of at least some individualists their attitudes are based on ideological conviction, and one of these might undergo a religious conversion and switch his loyalty from himself to his race. I hate to admit it, but I went through a libertarian phase myself as a teenager.
Cowardice, however, is much more a matter of one’s innate constitution and one’s accumulated life experiences than of belief. Our coward in Dallas has already had his religious conversion, and it’s hard to see how another could make a man of him. Undoubtedly some cowards are born, and some are made. Men who have been sheltered from danger all their lives, who have grown up in a welfare state, and who have never faced physical danger or seen another man die a violent death may not be able to cope with the idea of risk or be able to overcome even the minor fears which beset all of us every day of our lives. If our people could grow up in a more natural society, we might have fewer of this type of “made” coward, but we need to build that society before we can reap its benefits. Certainly, we’ll accept financial support from even the most miserable coward, but we won’t waste our time trying to persuade him to become something he cannot. And we won’t waste much time on the individualist either. He may undergo a religious conversion, but the impetus for that is more likely to be some encounter with reality which literally knocks him off his ass than any gentle persuasion by us.
The Purpose of Activism
The primary purpose of nearly every Alliance activity is to build the Alliance, and the criterion for the worth of an activity is its effectiveness in doing this. If the net result of an activity is more Alliance members or more Alliance resources or an improved environment for recruiting, then the activity has value. If the net result is none of these things, then the activity probably has no value. An example of a worthwhile activity is posting Alliance stickers in areas where they will be seen by potential recruits. The National office receives a steady trickle of positive responses to these sticker posting, including purchases of additional stickers, requests for catalogs, and new recruits. An example of an activity which is not worthwhile is the posting of Alliance stickers in a non-White area for the purpose of irritating those who see them. This concept of worthwhile activity is simple enough, but a few members have difficulty grasping it. Sometimes their difficulty is based in incorrect motivation, and sometimes it is based in misjudgment or lack of experience. An example of a member with incorrect motivation is the hobbyist, who values an activity by how much fun it is. Sometimes he engages in activities which are exciting to him or give him a buzz; he may get a buzz from shocking the bourgeoisie or irritating non-Whites or drawing attention to himself. The hobbyist’s problem is innate: his nature is such that he judges everything on a subjective basis. There’s not much we can do about hobbyists except try to keep them under control and keep them from having any decision-making role in the Alliance. Members whose difficulty in evaluating activities is based in misjudgment or lack of experience rather than in hobbyism may overcome their difficulty through instruction or experience. They may
learn from the example set by members who engage in worthwhile activities which are reported in the BULLETIN, or they may gain some insight by studying the information in the Membership Handbook. Perhaps the following comments also will be helpful to them. Our basic criterion, stated negatively, is: An action which doesn’t strengthen the Alliance in some way is a waste of time and effort. Distributing anonymous leaflets, for example, is wasted effort, regardless of how cleverly written the leaflets may be. A letter to the editor of a newspaper which doesn’t direct the attention of the reader to the Alliance serves no purpose, even though it states all of the correct opinions. Winning a debate on the Internet means absolutely nothing if it doesn’t result in more recruits for the Alliance. We don’t have enough members or influence to change public opinion through anonymous propaganda. Everything must direct potentially useful or helpful people toward the Alliance. One common fallacy that leads some people to waste their energy in ineffective activity is the notion that there is some sort of “movement” of racially conscious White people, and the Alliance is a part of this “movement.” Members who believe in the “movement” also may believe that helping the “movement’ is pretty much the same thing as helping the Alliance. They have a warm, fuzzy concept of all decent White people pulling in the same direction, and it makes them feel good to think they are helping when they send a donation or volunteer to work in the campaign of some politician who has made a few statements that suggest he has a correct attitude on race. They fail to ask themselves, “How does my helping Candidate X’s campaign help the Alliance?” The thing to understand is that no member by himself can permanently change public opinion or the character of the political establishment. No matter how effective he is when acting alone, eventually he will tire, and then whatever he has accomplished will fade away. If, however, he devotes his time and resources to building the Alliance, he can has a lasting effect, because even after he tires other Alliance members will stand on the ground he has gained and will continue advancing toward the Alliance’s goals.
Neither the Alliance nor any individual or group of patriots has enough strength now to do the things which need to be done to secure the future of our people, but Alliance members, by pulling together and not wasting their efforts on anonymous or non-Alliance activities, can continue building an organization which one day will be able to do what needs to be done. A final comment on the subject of worthwhile activity: the value of an activity should not be judged by how much noise it makes. Sometimes it is useful for the Alliance to be mentioned in the newspapers, and sometimes it is not. If media publicity about the Alliance results in attracting to us the kind of people we want, then it is good – but the newspapers, of course, will only help us inadvertently. Very often an activity which receives no media coverage at all will be much more valuable to us than an activity which puts us into the headlines.
Set Your Priorities
Membership applications have begun picking up during the past month after more than a year of very slow membership growth. It’s difficult to determine the reasons for either the slow growth or the recent increase, although my best guess is that she slow growth has been due primarily to the relatively prosperous economy. People who are sleek and comfortable not only sleep o’ nights but also are much less likely to make difficult decisions or to stick their necks out than are people who are a bit lean and hungry. If the economy remains prosperous indefinitely, nearly all of our people, including those who agree with all or most of the Alliance message, will remain comfortably on the sidelines as non-White immigration, growing miscegenation, and increasing government control over our lives put the final nails into our race’s coffin. They will discuss the matter on the Internet, they will wring their hands in despair over what is happening, they may even send a small donation to the Alliance now and then – but they will remain on the sidelines. Unfortunately, the Alliance does not have the ability to wreck the economy, to put these people out of work, to bankrupt their pension funds, or to stop their unemployment checks. Even if we put all of our effort into it, we couldn’t do as much damage to the economy as El Nino has done. To recruit most of these people to work for the revolution we’ll just have to wait until natural economic forces put them at risk, and loss of sleep takes off some of their sleekness. The same facet of human nature is at work inside the Alliance. Certainly, members are a cut above the general public in their idealism and in their willingness to take risks for the things they believe in, but most members still have not set their priorities correctly. Members, like the general public, are corrupted by excess comfort, and too many of them are not willing to do much more than pay their dues. I don’t want our members to lose their employment in the same way I want the general economy to put non-members out of work, because it is important for the Alliance to be an organization of successful and competent people and to be seen as such by the public. I want a member
who owns a business to prosper and become more influential in the business community; I want a member who is on a university faculty to publish more and better research papers than his colleagues and to rise in his profession; but I also want these members to set their priorities correctly. I want every member to think things through until he has gotten it perfectly clear in his head that it makes no difference at all in the long run how successful his business is, how much money he accumulates, or how many academic honors he receives if his race does not survive. I want each member to put the growth and eventual success of the Alliance – without which the race will not survive – at the top of his list of priorities, ahead of his career, his personal wealth, his security, and everything else. Setting his priorities correctly is something every member – and every non-member, for that matter – should do anyway. It is an especially urgent matter for me now, because the National Office has a severe shortage of people to do the work the Alliance should be doing. We need office workers, whose most important skill is knowledge of the English language. We need research/writing/editorial people. We need people with organizational skills to supervise recruiting and membership activities. And we need people to assist in the construction and maintenance of our physical infrastructure. I have made these wants known on several occasions, but there has been a dearth of volunteers. I believe that the reason is a failure to set priorities correctly. I know that we have among our members individual capable of doing these things well. The primary requirements in each case are good character, good work habits, and correct priorities. I do not expect, of course, that every member will quite what he is doing now and put himself at my disposal. Many members can serve the Alliance better by continuing to do what they are doing now. But a few can serve the Alliance better by taking on National Office staff responsibilities. And the best judge of whether a member belongs in the first category or the second is probably the member himself. I merely am asking that each member set his priorities and then make an honest judgment. And if you think that you are in the second category, then you should discuss the matter with me. You don’t have to wait for the next Leadership Conference to do that. You can write or call the National Office and schedule a visit almost any time.
A Thought on Strategy
The Alliance continues to make slow progress in various ways. During the past year we actually made fairly rapid progress in name recognition. The growth in listenership to my weekly radio broadcasts also seems to have been reasonably good, judging by the growth in the number of responses. In most essential areas, however, our progress was quite slow. In the size of our overall membership and our National Office staff there was no progress at all, although there are signs that the average quality of our membership continues to improve. Our enemies, on the other hand, have been moving ahead much faster. In their own publications the Jews boast about their gains on nearly every front: miscegenation is skyrocketing; Third World immigration into the United States remains on track, and racial demographics everywhere is shifting toward darker elements; the unisexing of the U.S. armed forces is moving ahead, with homosexuals becoming bolder and women engaging in combat operations; more thought-control laws are being enforced nearly everywhere except in the United States; and Jews are moving out of the shadows and into positions of visible power in greater numbers than ever before. Perhaps the most ominous sign of their progress has been the recent public opinion polls showing that a substantial majority of the American electorate still likes Bill Clinton and wants to keep him as President. If we were in a contest with the Jews to win the hearts and minds of the American public – and then their votes – we clearly would be falling further behind. As America slides down the slope toward the precipice, the average American voter is becoming more degenerate and more Judaized, not less. We should expect the Jews to make their moves to abolish the First and Second Amendments almost any time now – perhaps in 1999 – knowing that the majority of U.S. voters can be persuaded to go along with them. Of course, we never have been engaged in a contest for votes with the Jews. All of our efforts always have been directed toward increasing our ability to communicate with the perceptive and
independent-minded minority of the White population, not to become popular with the lemmings. To become popular with the lemmings we would need to develop a media empire approximating that of the Jews, so that we also could offer the lemmings ball games, soap operas, and touchy-feely “news” programs, a la ABC, CBS, and NBC. Of course, we would like to be able to move more rapidly in that direction, but at the rate we’re going now the White race will have become extinct before we have mass-media capabilities able to compete effectively with those of the Jews. Winning the affection of the lemmings is important only because lemmings can vote. If we did not have mass democracies everywhere in the White world, we would not be concerned with appealing to the lemmings at all. Even when the form of government is a mass democracy, there are other elements of power besides the votes of the lemmings. Every society, no matter how much it pretends to be egalitarian, has elites with either actual or potential power. Controlling any significant elite may be an effective alternative to controlling the lemmings. There are many elites, and some are more accessible to us than others. The White business/financial elite – epitomized by men like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet – will remain relatively inaccessible to us as long as the present members of that elite believe that their personal interests are better served by collaborating with the Jews – only if the begin feeling that George Soros, Alan Greenspan, and the media bosses are collaborating to the disadvantage of those who are not Jews – will they remember that they are White. About all we can do now is establish lines of communication and keep a few members of this elite informed, so that when access become better, they won’t have to figure it all out from scratch. The military elite has become so politicized that it almost certainly will continue collaborating with the political establishment, from which it receives its budget for missiles and officers’ clubs. At least, this is true in the highest ranks of the military elite. There is some discontent among the majors and lieutenant colonels, but it is difficult to predict now where that will lead.
The academic elite offers some possibilities. The Alliance now has about six times the percentage of academicians in its ranks as are in the general public in the United States, and our proportional representation in this elite is growing. The cultural elite is a mixed bag. The Jews, of course, have replaced the old cultural elite with a new rabble of Hollywood stars, trash novelists, and rap composers, all of them inaccessible, but this has left the old cultural elite feeling alienated. Perhaps no other elite is more accessible to us now. We certainly will make substantial inroads into the old cultural elite in the near future, but for this influence to have real significance this elite must have new media for expression. When publishers will not publish their poetry or their novels, theater owners will not produce their plays, recording companies are not interested in their compositions, and galleries will not show their paintings, they are relatively powerless. And there are other elites as well, in some of which we have at least established beachheads. One of our principal tasks in the coming year will be to continue developing all of these beachheads, primarily through continuing to develop our means for reaching out and communicating with the members of the various White elites. We also want to learn how to do this job more effectively by gaining a better understanding of the motivational psychology of each elite.
What Makes a Hater?
A huge volume of e-mail flows into the National Office from people all over the world who are responding to our message, primarily our weekly radio broadcasts. Evelyn Hill weeds out the illiterate, incoherent, and irrelevant mail and gives me a selection of 20 or so letters to read each day. Between a fourth and a third of these are hate letters, and I always read them carefully. For one thing they are a barometer of how worried about us the enemies of our people are: from the volume and vehemence of the hate mail following each broadcast I can estimate how badly I have rattled our enemies’ cages. Of course, rattling the cages is not my aim, but it is interesting to note what upsets the inmates and what doesn’t. Even more interesting are the clues the hate letters provide to the psychology of the haters – and I am interested here only in the psychology of the White haters: the psychology our internal enemies, not the psychology of the Jews or Blacks or other external enemies. What I really would like is for a very bright member to write a doctoral thesis in psychology on this subject and develop detailed psychological profiles of the haters. Until such a member comes forward, I must make my own amateur analyses. One thing I already am inclined to believe is that there is no single profile which fits all the ahters, although I believe that the majority of them do fit a certain pattern. I already have mentioned in earlier issues of the BULLETIN that the two characteristics which show up most often in hate letters are Christianity and authoritarianism. Most of the Christian haters seem to be under the impression that the Alliance is a Christian organization which is not acting in accord with their idea of Christianity, and so they try to explain to us what it is we’re doing which is un-Christian and then tell us that we’ll roast in hell if we don’t change our ways. Actually, there’s quite a bit of variety among the Christian hate letters. One which arrived this month might be put into the sub-category of Jew-worship: “I am convinced that Jews are indeed superior to Christians and we should honor them for their great contributions to civilization. After all, don’t we Christians pray to the greatest Jew that
ever lived? Get real, guys. Without Jews we’d all be a bunch of trailertrash (well, you already are trailer trash).” On the other hand, the underlying message of the authoritarian haters seems to be, “You’re out of step with everyone else, damn you! Why can’t you be like everyone else and stop rocking the boat?” Possibly a more sophisticated observer than I would conclude that the Christian haters and the authoritarian haters have similar though patterns but simply express themselves differently – which would suggest that a fundamental trait of most White haters is authoritarianism; some authoritarian haters are Christians, and some are not. One of the more interesting hate letters which arrived this month came from a man using the pseudonym “Thomas Aquinas,”, which would suggest a Christian hater, but his letter is not explicitly Christian – although he does describe himself as a “God-fearing, White, AngloSaxon Protestant.” It’s an exceptionally long letter, and so I’ll quote only a few passages from it here. What he tells us is that there always have been despicable oddballs like us in every society who complained about the way society was changing. He even cites examples from ancient Assyria and ancient Greece. And he’s undoubtedly correct that there always have been people who were unhappy with the way their societies were changing. What’s interesting about his letter is his expression of hatred for such people. After laying out his theory of history and trying to prove that we’re standing in the way of change, he writes: “I’ve plainly tried to lay it out for you here today. And I really hope I cause you some pain with that, because I really hate y’all, more than I hate much else in this life. Because it is people like you who give real decent, real hard-working, real open-minded people a more difficult time in their lives… having to explain… why we should ever tolerate you types…” That’s mixed in with a lot of insulting language to the effect that we’re lazy, degenerate, drooling, closed-minded, pathetic morons (he uses all of those words), “spreading your poisonous thoughts that appeal to the weaker minds in our country.” The writer goes on to say, “We have you outnumbered… history is on our side.” He’s not really explicit about what his side is for or
who’s on it, but many of the things he says suggest that what makes his side the winning side is that it’s the side of the majority, the side of the people who’re happy with the way things are going, the side that Bill Clinton and the producers and scriptwriters at MTV are on. If one can extract an underlying philosophy from his letter, it seems to be this: “Whatever way things are moving is the right way, because God wanted things to go that way, and any opposition to that way is evil.” In reading his letter one gets the feeling that before deciding which side to cheer for he holds up a moistened forefinger up to the breeze of public opinion to find out what the current trend is, then cheers for the side moving in that direction – but with real conviction that he’s on the right side and with real hatred for those on the other side. In this letter there’s not the explicit appeal to authority that one sees in many letters from authoritarians, but I have classified it as authoritarian anyway. The reason I’m interested in the psychology of these people who write us hate letters is that I believe that they’re only the tip of the iceberg. For every hater who writes to us there are thousands who don’t. And I suspect that most of them are governed by the same psychological laws. If we can understand those laws we can understand what makes much of the opposition tick. Understanding how the opposition thinks doesn’t mean that we can win them over to our side, of course. We may not even want to try very hard to avoid offending them. But we have no hope of influencing them until we do understand them. If authoritarianism is indeed the underlying trait of most of the “normal” White people who oppose us, we need to understand in detail exactly what authoritarianism is, its etiology, what other traits it is correlated with, and so on. I suspect that the media Jews who design television propaganda already know these things. It would be useful even to have a better understanding of the psychology of hate. I always have assumed that hate is a natural defense mechanism: people hate the things or people they feel threatened by. If that is so, exactly why do some of our fellow White people feel threatened by us? Specifically, what is it in the authoritarian individual’s personality that makes him feel threatened by us?
As I mentioned above, despite the authoritarian flavor of most hate letters, I am sure that not every hater is a compulsive authoritarian. I am sure that there are some more or less “normal” White people who hate us for entirely rational reasons. For example, there are White businessmen who are profiting from the flood of Third World immigrants pouring into America, and they resent anyone who opposes the flood and threatens their profits. Such rational haters aren’t likely to send us hate letters, but they still can be moved if we understand which psychological buttons on them to push. I appeal here to those of our members with more understanding of psychology than I have to share their insights with me. I am sure that smart people somewhere have addressed themselves seriously to these questions and have written books or research papers dealing with them, because understanding how different types of people think is the key to influencing them: to designing effective advertising, for example, and there’s enough money to be had from that to pay for much research. Careful experiments must have been done to establish an empirical basis for a descriptive psychology, at least; there must be a number of detailed psychological profiles out there which it would behoove us to study. If you know about such things, please share your knowledge with me.
The yahoos at the VFW clubs certainly will not understand this, but in fact Madeleine Albright’s war against Yugoslavia has profound implications for the relationship between the citizens of a modern state and their government, and for the relationship between civilians and soldiers. These implications are discussed in depth in the American Dissident Voices broadcast scheduled for May 8, but for the sake of members who will not hear that broadcast, it is summarized here. Prior to the 20th century the concept of patriotism was generally understood to be the “family” feelings – a blend of affection and loyalty – one had for one’s fatherland, the land of one’s ancestors. A related concept was that of nationalism, the family feeling that one had for one’s nation: which is to say, for one’s people. The etymology of the word implied that one’s nation was one’s extended biological family: everyone in the nation was related by birth. If a nation had occupied a given geographical territory for a long time, then the two concepts were practically interchangeable. Patriotism was much more than an intellectual construct; it was closer to an instinct. It was bred into a people because it had survival value. A tribe which could depend on the loyalty of its members was much more likely to survive than one which could not. Thus also the strong taboo against treason. When North America was settled by Europeans in the 17th, 18th, and 19 centuries, the meanings of patriotism and nationalism were strained a bit. Fairly soon, however, the descendants of immigrants from Germany, Ireland, Scotland, England, Norway, Poland, Italy, and other European countries developed a new sense of patriotism. There was enough similarity among the European immigrants to North America that one might even say that new nation came into being, and with it a feeling of affection and loyalty for America and the American people. There were exceptions, of course. While most Swedish, French, and other European immigrants soon transferred their loyalty from the land of their ancestors in Europe to the new land in America, non-European
groups as a rule did not. Gypsies still thought of themselves first and foremost as gypsies. And Jews remained Jews, with a loyalty only to the Jewish people, wherever they might live. This transfer of loyalty on the part of European immigrants gave America the cohesion it needed to grow and prosper. Unfortunately, it also provided a handle for the Jews and their collaborators to use in manipulating public opinion in America and setting America against Europe in two fratricidal and horribly destructive world wars in this century. Patriotism is a powerful force even when it is misguided. Governments can use it for purposes which are not in the interests of the people. Absent the Jews there still can be bad governments and unnecessary wars, but no government is likely to deliberately and consistently work against the interests of its own people over an extended period. The Jewish presence in America in the 20th century, however, has resulted in patriotism being used against the interests of the American people in a systematic way, at least through the Vietnam war. Incidentally, recently published statistics from the Vietnam war provide powerful support for the suspicion which always has existed that, thought Jews may manipulate the patriotic feelings of the rest of us, they themselves retain their own Jewish patriotism and do not share our patriotism. If one counts Stars of David in military cemeteries from the Second World War, one finds them conspicuously underrepresented in the fields of crosses. In Stolen Valor (Verity Press, 1998), a study of the Vietnam war and its veterans, B.G. Burkett and Glenna Whitley cite a 1992 study of Department of Defense records by Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Arnold Barnett and West Point’s Captain Timothy Stanley which provided much more precise date. Draft-age Jews in America, it turns out, suffered losses in Vietnam at a rate less than one fifth their proportion of the population. This was not simply a matter of rich boys avoiding service while poor boys got killed: young White men from high-income families suffered approximately the same overall casualty rate as low-income Whites. Although some high-income White avoided the draft as university students, Whites from high-income families made up most of the officer corps, which suffered a
disproportionately high casualty rate, and the average death rate for highincome Whites was nearly the same as for low-income Whites. For Jews, however, the difference is striking: making up slightly over 2.5 per cent of the population, Jews accounted for only 0.46 per cent of Vietnam KIAs. This remarkable difference reflects a remarkable difference in attitude between Jews and Whites. Even as late as the Vietnam war, with Bill Clinton and his Jewish and leftist friends demonstrating for the Viet Cong, traditional American patriotism remained a powerful force. Most young White men still looked on military service in time of war as a patriotic duty. Phrases such as “serving your country” were still taken seriously. There was great respect for military heroism and military sacrifice. And although many Vietnam veterans were offended by being called “baby killers” and the like by leftist demonstrators in the United States, the general feeling in the White population remained that men in military “service” deserved the support of everyone on the home front. There still was the feeling that America’s armed forces were “defending America.” Now we have a quite different situation, even though the yahoos won’t realize that for a while yet. In Madeleine Albright’s war against Serbia there’s not even a pretense that American’s armed forces are “defending America” or performing some sort of “service” for the American people which deserves moral support from the home front. The politicians may still mouth hypocritical slogans about “supporting our boys” in order to keep the votes of the yahoos, but no one with a brain takes such slogans seriously any longer. It is clear that America’s armed forces have become a purely mercenary operation. Joining the armed forces these days is an equal-opportunity employment choice, not a patriotic act. Soldiers are paid to enforce the will of the New World Order crowd, not to defend the American people, and because of that they deserve no more support or respect from civilians than the members of any other occupational group; bus drivers or construction workers, say. If an F-117 is shot down, its replacement cost comes out of our tax dollars, but that’s also true of the government’s emergency relief activity after a hurricane or flood. There just isn’t any emotional dimension to it.
And when it comes to a conflict between American military personnel fighting under NATO or United Nations command on one side and Serbian military personnel on the other side, there no longer is a moral obligation to cheer for the Americans. They are not defending us; we don’t have to support them. They’re not even on “our” side any more than the Serbs are. And at least the Serbs have an all-White army. As I said, this is really a big and important change in the nature of things. The Jews always were impatient with our old-fashioned patriotism. It gave them a handle for manipulating us, but they always were a little afraid of it, always a little worried that it might turn against them someday. So now they’ve changed the equation of patriotism. Now they’ve dropped the pretense. That’s one more step in the remaking of America in the Jewish image, and judging from what some of the more reckless Jews have been saying recently, they feel pretty good about it. At least, they don’t have to apologize any longer for the sort of statistics I just cited on Vietnam KIAs. Now they can simply cite that as proof that they’re smarter than we are. My view of the matter is that they have moved a little prematurely on this and eventually will come to regret it bitterly. Based in instinct as it is, patriotism cannot be gotten rid of so easily. They have succeeded in validating the moral contract which used to exist between America’s soldiers and her civilians, just as they invalidated the concept of popular democracy when they put together a majority coalition of welfare rabble, non-Whites, homosexuals, feminists, and ball-game fans under their control. But the patriotic instinct is still there, and it will find a new way of expressing itself. As for us, we still need to move with caution. We don’t want to give the yahoos an excuse for denouncing us as “traitors” or “commies” for not “supporting our boys.” At the same time, however, we must recognize that the old contract is broken, and that perceptive and moral citizens can be made to understand that now. When I said on my May 1 ADV broadcast that decent people everywhere can hope that the Serbs will use on of their submarines to sink a U.S. aircraft carrier in the Adriatic, I received some shocked and indignant responses – as I expected I would. One or two listeners suggested I “got carried away” by my hatred for the Clinton government. For these listeners, who
otherwise have been in almost complete agreement with my broadcasts, the old taboo was still in effect. We still must “support our boy,” even when they are taking orders from Madeleine Albright. It is that conservative mind-set on the part of much of the public that we want to take care not to offend any more than necessary. But among ourselves we must be a bit less conservative. The U.S. armed forces have been brainwashed and trained for some time to be used against rebellious U.S. citizens. Don’t worry about the legalities of the matter; they will be used by the Jews and their allies against Americans whenever the Jews feel threatened. They are being used now to kill people whose thinking is a lot closer to ours than the thinking of most non-member Americans. They really are a mercenary force, and their leaders would just as soon use them against White Americans or Europeans as against Haitians or Somalis. We still have members in the armed forces, and we will recruit more in the future. But the U.S. armed forces as a whole no longer are “our boys.”
Some of the most important things for us to understand in order to accomplish our revolutionary task are things which aren’t taught in school and which haven’t really been set down anywhere in a systematic way so that people can study them and learn what they need to know. At least, I didn’t learn these things when I was in school; and although I’ve found many books helpful in one way or another my understanding, I’ve not found any single source for even a substantial part of what we need to know. Life itself provides the essential lessons for us – not just lessons fro our own lives, but lessons from the lives of individuals and of nations which have come before us: which is to say, lessons from history. But to gain either from our own lives or from a study of history the knowledge we need for our task, we need to know what to look for, and we need to pay very close attention and analyze very carefully what we find. One of the most important and fundamental lessons for us is this: in most cases, people are not what they seem; their professed moralities and systems of belief cannot really be used to predict how they will behave except in rather narrowly circumscribed circumstances. An example: a person professes to find killing abhorrent, unless it is in selfdefense; he professes to believe in law and order, to be against military aggression, to be conservative in his approach to politics; and yet he is not alarmed or upset or horrified or enraged when the government of the United States does what it did to Serbia recently. He does not take an oath to do whatever must be done to rectify the government and punish the criminals who subverted it. He just goes on about his business as if nothing had happened. He does not join the Alliance. We may explain in part this apparently contradictory behavior by nothing that most people have very close mental horizons: only events which are close to home and hearth seem real and evoke a response based on morality or ideology. Modern life-styles seem to have restricted men’s horizons even more, so that today they don’t encompass much more territory than the average for women. But this is only a partial
explanation. One can find similarly contradictory reactions to events much closer to home. An example: a person is a devout Christian and has the uneasy attitude toward sex that many Christians have. He finds public displays of nudity and open talk about sex disturbing, he deplores the spread of sexual promiscuity in American society, and he understands that television and Hollywood are the principal agents responsible for the phenomena. But he refuses to associate the sexual phenomena he deplores with Jewish control of the mass media. He will angrily reject the evidence of a deliberate, concerted effort by Jewish media bosses to change the attitudes and behavior of the public. I could cite hundreds of other examples in which professed morality and ideology have little or no influence on actual behavior I specific circumstances – which is not to say that morality and ideology are irrelevant or that most people are not sincere in their professions of morality or belief. But it does suggest to us that for most people reason is not the only mediator between belief and behavior, and even when reason does play a role consistency may be lacking. It also persuades us that very primitive emotional or instinctual factors are more important than reason in determining most people’s behavior: when reason and instinct are in conflict, instinct nearly always will prevail. One of the most powerful instincts in most people – and one which is especially relevant to our struggle – is the need to conform to perceived norms of belief and behavior, the need to be accepted and approved by others; or stated negatively, the fear of being perceived as a non-conformer or deviant, the feat of social disapproval. All of this ought to be in every elementary textbook in psychology. It certainly is understood and applied widely in our society: the military, for example, bases its training of soldiers on an understanding of this basic truth about the way people function. Successful advertisers understand it. And the media bosses certainly do. What this means to us is that it is not sufficient for us to state the truth in order to change the world around us, or even to change the minds of our fellow citizens. What we must do is state the truth and also change the perception of what is socially acceptable and admirable – at least among those elements of society we need to persuade to behave in the way we want them to. In order to do these things we must continue
to develop our media capabilities, and we must use these capabilities in ways that go beyond merely presenting facts and ideas to the public. We must understand the emotional and instinctual implications of every aspect of our message, and then we must act on that understanding. An example: the Jews and their collaborators have invested a huge amount of effort into persuading the most impressionable segments of the White population that being White is something we out to feel at least a little apologetic about. You know: taking the land away from the Indians, enslaving the Blacks, ruling over colonies in Asia, and always being better off than the non-Whites. Certainly, we should try to forget about our Whiteness and just hope that the rest of the world will forgive us, accept us, and let us mix with them. To try to hold non-Whites back in any way – limiting their immigration into North America or Europe, for example, or cutting back on welfare payments or affirmative action – is unspeakably shameful and “racist,” and anyone who supports such policies should be shunned by all decent people. All of this is done deliberately at a sub-rational level, but it has the effect of making people fearful of associating themselves with the Alliance, even if they don’t agree with the Jews’ propaganda. We counter this Jewish intimidation-propaganda not only by disseminating facts and ideas but by showing that we are neither afraid nor ashamed and are proud to stand up for what is true and right. What a contrast the spokesmen for the Alliance, who are not afraid to be seen and have their names known, make with the pitiful, frightened racial hobbyists one encounters in the discussion groups of the Internet! The latter are fond of bombast and tough-sounding talk, but they almost universally hide behind false names, or no names at all. Most would rather die than have people know who they are and where they live. There is much more than merely showing courage to this business of making propaganda which appeals to the instincts as well as to reason. What all effective propaganda requires in this era, however, whether it appeals to reason or to instinct, is media for reaching a widely dispersed audience: powerful media wielded with skill. And that in turn requires organization. I have neglected organizational development during the past two or three years as I have devoted most of my effort making my weekly radio broadcasts as effective as possible. That is not
an ideal way to do things: ideally, the growth of propaganda and organization should go together, each helping the other. The addition of Sam van Rensburg to our staff is a step toward remedying that unbalanced situation. As Sam develops more effective recruiting mechanisms and builds organizational structures for more effectively utilizing the energies and skills of our members, we should acquire the human and material resources we need for making our propaganda much more effective than it is now. And conditions are ripe for organizational development. Even as the lemmings close ranks and increase the pace of their march toward the precipice, the level of exasperation and alienation among perceptive and idealistic individuals is probably higher than it has been at any other time since the Second World War. Opportunities for recruitment are vastly better now than they were a decade ago, despite increased public fears and other obstacles. One thing for every member to keep in mind as we move to take advantage of the opportunities before us is that more self-discipline than ever before will be required of all of us. We must overcome every temptation to strike prematurely at the enemies of our people. Certainly, we all daydream occasionally of what we would like to do to the politicians in Washington who have betrayed our people or to the Jews who give them their orders and who manipulate the lemmings, or even to the non-Whites whose presence in our cities becomes more intolerable by the day. But we must not let these daydreams progress to action or even to talk. We must continue to tolerate, for a while yet, evils which seem intolerable. We must adhere ever more tightly to our policy of strict legality. There has been much in the news recently about people – none of them our members – who have yielded to the desire for selfgratification by shooting Blacks or Jews at random on the street or setting fire to synagogues. We do not want in our ranks people who do not have sufficient self-discipline to resist such desires. We cannot afford them. Those who commit such acts now may please themselves, but they do not help the Alliance, and they reveal their own weakness and unsuitability for a serious, long-term revolutionary effort.
I understand the frustration which comes just from watching the news every day. In understand the rage which rises in one’s heart just from seeing on television the smirking face of Bill Clinton or one of his court Jews, or from encountering a racially mixed couple on the streets of one of our cities, or from experiencing some of the devilish propaganda the Jews use to encourage racial mixing. But we have constructive outlets for our rage and frustration now. As we put much more of our effort into organization, there will be constructive work for every member, not just those on the National Office staff. So my message to you now is this: Be strong. Discipline yourself. Overcome every temptation which might lead you to do anything harmful to our cause. Nurse your rage, but keep it under strict control. Wait for the day of cleansing. And while you are waiting – work! Sacrifice! Be brave! Think only of your goal, and do not be distracted from it! We will prevail!
The Nature of Revolution
After my recent return from participating in the NPD Youth Congress in Bavaria, I was amused to see some of the commentary about my trip being posted to Internet discussion groups, “chat rooms,” and the like by various armchair revolutionaries. Ordinarily I never look at the material posted to Internet discussion groups, but since some of the recent postings mention me, they were brought to my attention. For a few days there was a furious discussion going on about the significance of the fact that I wasn’t arrested by the German secret police: “So-and-so and What’s-his-name were arrested by the German secret police as soon as they got off the airplane. Why wasn’t Pierce arrested?” There was dark speculation that I had some of “arrangement” with the Verfassungschutz. One or two cooler heads among the spectators pointed out the differences between my trip and my activity in Germany and those of the people who were arrested, but dark rumors continue to be thrown into the discussion by those who profess belief that any “movement” figure is certain to be arrested if he reveals himself anywhere at any time for any reason. I am reminded of the sick joke in Ku Klux Klan circles that if anybody does anything right – a bombing, a lynching, or what have you – and doesn’t get caught by the secret police, then he must be an FBI agent. I suspect that about the same degree of ineptitude and lack of self-confidence prevails among discussion-group addicts as in the Klan. Most of them are chronic losers and failures, for whom endless chatter takes the place of effective action. More than that, an air or unreality permeates these discussions. Many of the people engaged in the discussions are in the same class as some of those which, prior to the modern era, used to rage among Christian theologians who considered the Bible to be an infallible source of truth: How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? What happened to the souls of our ancestors who were born before the time of Christ and so had no opportunity to become Christians? Can God, for whom all things are possible, create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it?
Of course, some of the discussion participants undoubtedly have ulterior motives: they are a little too eager to foment paranoia and fear and to plant in the minds of the susceptible the notion that any open activity is certain to fail and to land the actor in serious trouble. For many of them, such pessimism certainly is an excuse for their cowardice; for others, one can only suspect darker motives. And then there are the “real” revolutionaries, those who huff and snort and demand “action.” What they mean, of course, is that they want to see action, as a spectator, preferably watching it on their television screens from the safety of their living rooms, not engage in it themselves. It is an interesting fact that virtually everyone who participates in Internet discussion groups does so anonymously. The people who talk boldly and knowledgeably about the “movement” and revolution do so using only Internet code names. If the rules of the game changed, and every posting had the name and the physical address of the poster appended, so that he was in jeopardy of having someone who took exception to his comments show up at his front door and punch out his lights, discussion group sand “chat rooms” would dwindle away to nothing faster than the number of death threats received at the National Office dwindled after caller-ID became available. Internet discussion groups are not the only place where unrealistic ideas about revolution prevail. There are plenty of people in the so-called “movement” whose understanding of revolution comes straight from Hollywood. To them, revolution means whispered, candlelit meetings in basements with an armed guard posted at the stairs. It means conspiracy and excitement. It means “getting away” with all sorts of exhilarating things. It means a constant “high”: listening to rousing speeches, rushing around, throwing caution to the winds. It means emotion, comradeship, self-fulfillment, and signing letters “14/88”. It certainly doesn’t mean careful planning, scrupulous attention to details, and dealing with every sort of human meanness and weakness and perversity imaginable. It doesn’t mean pinching pennies and making sure that accounts balance and worrying that there is enough money in the bank to cover every check. Above all, it doesn’t mean iron self124
discipline and long hours of painstaking work, day after day and year after year. The truth of the matter is that a successful revolution must be built: a brick at a time. As far as the mechanics is concerned, building a revolution is a lot more like building a business enterprise than anything about revolution coming from Hollywood would suggest. No revolution can succeed without an adequate infrastructure for communication, for generating and disseminating propaganda, for fundraising, and for a hundred other essential functions. This infrastructure must be run like a business, in a businesslike manner. It must be self-supporting. That’s a fact of life which seems to rub some would-be revolutionaries the wrong way. Talk to them about working in a businesslike way, and they begin muttering about “goddamn capitalists” and “bourgeois pigs.” The fact remains that unless the infrastructure can succeed as a business, the revolution will fail. A serious revolution no more needs people who cannot accept that fact than a business does. Nor does it need people who like to spend their time debating in discussion groups as to how many armchair revolutionaries it takes to screw in a light bulb. And it no more needs people who cannot follow instructions, pay attention to details, and be scrupulously honest in all their dealings than it needs cowards and blabbermouths. For all that, a revolution is not just another business. It is, at least, a very special sort of business, requiring special considerations and special people. Most businesses don’t have to worry about sabotage and other hostile actions on the part of the government, the media, and Jewish groups, for example, whereas anyone trying to build a revolution must view his actions and the actions of others at all times from a war perspective and keep in mind that he is operating behind enemy lines. And most businesses can get along quite well with employees who simply follow directions and work efficiently as long as they receive a paycheck every Friday afternoon. A revolution needs people who work for more than their paychecks, and the least of the reasons for this is that the paychecks handed out by revolutionary organizations are likely to be substantially smaller than its cadres could earn working for a nonrevolutionary business. Revolutionary cadres need a good deal of stress
resistance and immunity to peer pressure. They need a value system that differs from those of most of their fellow citizens, in that is places more value on abstract ideals and an impersonal goal – in our case, an Aryan future for our people – than on social status, security, or pride of ownership. They need a certain degree of stubbornness and courage. On top of everything else, they need a substantial amount of flexibility and the ability to override egoistic tendencies for the sake of an organizational effort. Certainly, the day will come when the armchair revolutionaries will be drawn into the fray, along with the masses, whether they like it or not. I have a suspicion that those who called the loudest for “action” in Internet discussion groups will be those needing the hardest kick in the rear to get them out of their armchairs and into harm’s way when the day for real action arrives. Until then, however, we will continue to need winners rather than losers, workers rather than blabbermouths and armwavers, men and women concerned more with changing the real world than with spinning fantasies, and people with the courage of their convictions rather than anonymous cowards.
Losers, Hobbyists, and the “Movement”
An interesting psychological phenomenon on which I have commented on in several issues of the BULLETIN is that displayed by people who send hostile letters to the National Office saying, in effect: “You people claim to be Christians, but you ignore the teachings of the Bible, which says that all races are the same. Don’t you even know that Jesus was a Jew?” They have had the idea planted in their heads that the Alliance is some sort of Christian organization, presumably by Jewish propaganda linking us to Christian Identity and Catholic traditionalist groups, which also are o the Jews’ hit list. Reading our material or listening to one of my broadcasts should persuade them otherwise, but it doesn’t. It probably took quite a bit of effort by the Jews to pound the idea into their heads, and it’ll take dynamite to get it out. Unfortunately, one can observe a similar phenomenon in many people nominally on our side, even in some Alliance members. I have announced over and over again our policy toward other organizations, and I nevertheless continue to receive letters to the effect: “All of us in the ‘movement’ must stick together. We should unite with all of the other patriotic organizations, and then we’ll be much stronger. Etc.” To me this view indicates either hobbyism or a serious deficiency in the writer’s powers of discrimination. If you don’t remember what hobbyism is, re-read section 3.c.iii.2 of your copy of the Membership Handbook. The Internet has given many inadequate people the ability to pretend to be more than they are. Any troubled teenager or unemployed alcoholic can get a web site, set himself up as a phone-booth Fuhrer, and begin collecting “followers,” and many do. They are the ones to whom the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Southern Poverty Law Center are referring when they announce that “the number of ‘hate groups’ on the Internet is now 457, up 23 per cent since 1999.” Two outstanding examples are a teenaged Jew named Andy Greenbaum, who used the name “Bo Decker” and set up an “organization” he called “Knights of Freedom”; and a professional disseminator of disinformation named Harold Covington (a.k.a. “Winston Smith”). Greenbaum self-destructed
last year, when he announced a giant march in Washington, and only two of his “followers” showed up for the march. Covington occasionally still makes Internet attacks on the Alliance, but he is far less prolific than he was a year or so ago. There are dozens of others who are still active, however. One is a TV repairman in California named Tom Metzger, who publishes a tabloid addressed primarily to skinheads and prisoners called “White Aryan Resistance’ (“WAR”). Metzger promotes an ideology that is a blend of racial nationalism and class resentment, commonly called “national bolshevism.” Another, also in California, publishes a newsletter called “The Nationalist Observer.” Both are proponents of an “strategy” known as “leaderless resistance,” according to which, at the appropriate time, hundreds or even thousands of revolutionary cells, consisting of one to five patriots each, will materialize spontaneously and will overthrow the government by sabotaging or bombing government and media facilities and assassinating politicians, leading Jews, collaborators, and other enemies of our people. All of these cells will operate independently, without centralized organization or direction or infrastructure, so that it will be nearly impossible for the government to infiltrate them or spy on them, and the government never will know where or when they will strike next. Actually, Metzger and other “leaderless resistance” advocates are not so much in favor of “leaderless resistance” as they are against any sort of organized activity. Their thesis is that any organized activity is certain to fail because it will be infiltrated by government informants and provocateurs, and that any racial patriot who joins an organization is a fool who is allowing the government to get his name on the blacklist for unspecified, but presumably severe, reprisals. All of this theorizing takes place in the make-believe world of revolutionary hobbyism. In the real world, “leaderless resistance” is simply an excuse for losers, cowards, and shirkers to do nothing except talk to each other. Building an effective organization of any sort is difficult work, and those who don’t like work or who have tried to build an organization and failed often are resentful or any effort that shows signs of success. Their reasoning is, “I tried it and wasn’t successful; therefore, it can’t be done.” And the reason that nearly every
organizational effort has failed has not been government spies or provocateurs; it has been the low quality of the human material in the organization. Certainly, the Alliance has never had any damage done to it by government agents. Every major difficulty we have had has been the consequence of bad judgment or bad behavior on the part of a member. It’s always difficult working with people. It must be a real nightmare trying to run an organization that has no quality standards for membership and that maintains a flamboyant and sensationalist public image attractive to hooligans, drunken brawlers, criminals, sociopaths, and other losers. The latest issue of Resistance Magazine (of which I am the publisher) had an article written by a professional soldier who pointed out the unworkability of “leaderless resistance.” Unfortunately, he mistakenly used the “Order” organized in 1984 by Robert Mathews as an example of why it doesn’t work. In fact, the “Order,” based on the fictional organization of the same name in The Turner Diaries, was a centralized organization with a strong leader. Because of the author’s slip, a few of the phone-booth Fuhrers, who already were resentful of the Alliance’s progress and were stung by the article’s undiplomatic treatment of their favorite excuse for their own failure, saw an opportunity to criticize the Alliance and seized it. They Xeroxed dozens of copies of the offending article and mailed them to everyone on their mailing lists, including the imprisoned surviving members of the “Order.” They wrote a letter to go with the Xeroxed article, and although Robert Mathews is not even named in the article, their letter said, in effect: “Look, look! Pierce is attacking Bob Mathews, our martyred hero! Isn’t that shameful?” Seeing the article described as an attack on Robert Mathews led some of the readers to look at it that way, and they duly registered their own indignation. The phone-booth Fuhrers then posted everything to the Internet, where it was the most titillating subject for gossip among the hobbyists for several weeks. The term “movement” was frequently used by the hobbyists, as in: “Pierce has shown disrespect for a martyr of the ‘movement.’ He should be expelled from the ‘movement.’” Or: “No, no! We must have unity in the ‘movement.’”
It’s a little hard to say exactly what the term means to the Internet gossips. To most, it seems to be a clubby sort of concept which includes all of “us” and excludes everyone else. Although I have found the term useful in some contexts in the past, it probably should be abandoned because it has been so badly misused by the hobbyists. Really, what selfrespecting racial nationalist wants to be considered part of a “movement’ which includes all of the phone-booth Fuhrers, the Internet gossips, and an embarrassingly high quota of born losers? It’s easy enough to understand this club mentality. As our society disintegrates under the onslaught of Jew-instigated multiculturalism, people look for something to hold onto: a sense of belonging, of community. We feel more secure when we have a sense of solidarity with others of like mind. A comforting sense of security is not the primary thing that Alliance members should be seeking, however. We want strength. We want new capabilities. We want to gain an advantage over the enemies of our people. We want anything which brings us closer to victory, whether it is comfortable or not. The truth of the matter is, there’s not much advantage to be gained inside the “movement.” It is too heavily freighted with chronic losers, incurable hobbyists, phone-booth Fuhrers, and other defectives. Perhaps the “movement” is no worse than the general public in this regard, but we’re looking for the best and strongest people we can find, and we find them much more often outside the “movement” than inside it. It is time for all members who have been focused on the “movement” either to reorient themselves in an outward direction or to find another organization to devote themselves to. As our tempo and our work load increase, being in the Alliance will be less and less fun for those whose primary aim is to amuse themselves with “movement” gossip. And I will have less patience with hobbyists and with those who believe that the Alliance is part of the “movement.” Our aim is not to be the biggest and best organization in the “movement”; it is to leave the “movement” to its clubby introspection while we get on with the job of building a revolutionary infrastructure. We respect our martyrs, and all of those who have shown courage or made sacrifices for our people, but we’ll build monuments to
them after the revolution. Meanwhile, winning is all that we care about, not the fun of playing the game by “movement” rules.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.