Amerika

As with any source of bitter disagreement, there is truth in the claims made by both sides, and the two factions within White Nationalism are no exception.

Vanguardists believe that Conservatives are working with a broken system and a broken culture while being too mainstream and compromising. Conservatives believe Vanguardists are too extreme and alienating, along with having a tendency to over-focus on ideas without a practical application while failing to implement the ones that do. Both are correct in their own right.

The observations of the Vanguardists tend to be spot on: Conservatism isn’t enough to save us as the Republicans are fighting to preserve the previous results of leftism, becoming more indistinguishable from their “opposition” save for irrelevant token issues and a couple of embarrassing personality anomalies like Sarah Palin. Most have no goal beyond a limp-wristed whimper of “don’t rock the boat too much guys…”, phrased with the usual memes to give off the illusion of being profoundly different^TM.

Furthermore, the non-establishment Conservative and Libertarian political figures have no interest in explicitly White concerns, preferring instead to champion their false idols of liberty, small government, and free markets as the unifying principles for all Americans. These amount to little more than the left’s abstractions of equality, tolerance, and diversity, and, like the left, appeal to the lowest common denominator (individualism).

However, it’s  impossible to get elected without appealing to the lowest common denominator, as the population is too diverse to be united toward any principle other than hedonistic individualism with their favorite packaging and method of enactment, and most are too apathetic to respond to anything which doesn’t incessantly bleat their favorite meme and/or shelter their sensitive emotions. This is a consequence of the American mindset and culture itself-  America was largely influenced  by (if not founded upon) Enlightenment principles, and shortly after, was exposed to the Industrial Revolution.

This resulted in a proto-egalitarian framework stemming from the ideas of the Enlightenment  during a period offering the potential for massive economic growth and accumulation of wealth. America began as a fresh nation possessing an incomplete and rebellious culture (which was somewhat disconnected from its European roots), occupying a massive land space with an enormous amount of resources during a period offering the potential for massive economic growth and accumulation of wealth. As a result, American identity began to solidify itself around purely material concepts: economic growth and territorial expansion, along with its founding principles of “freedom” and “liberty” to act increasingly as justifications.

Fast-forward to the present day – we have hordes of immigrants pouring into the country, rampant globalization, a near-dead economy, environmental devastation, overpopulation both within and outside America, lowered standards which continue to sink, and a lazy, confused, neurotic mass of a population who are too afraid to offend someone and too entitled to delay immediate gratification for the pursuit of long-term goals.

All of this results from a materially-oriented mindset and corresponding culture, backed by a proto-egalitarian code of values which snowballed into enforced individualism and more overt egalitarianism, making the material satisfaction of the sovereign individual^TM the supreme goal. And they have a right^TM to that, god^TM damn it! Predictably, all the moral causes Americans gravitate toward are disguised forms of manipulation to service the material demands of someone else, and are pursued for the sake of self-promotion (competitive altruism) in a hedonistic attempt to compensate for the void left by atomization.

As such, working within the system with a more Conservative direction isn’t enough to tackle all of the problems we face, and it never can be due to its ideological limitations and a governing system which resembles a popularity contest: both parties haphazardly propose and enact solutions to quell the disconcerted swarm- the easiest way of doing so is appealing to their immediate material interests, also while acting to benefit their corporate sponsors and/or pet projects, occasionally launching some jihad in the name of a crowd-pleasing abstraction so we can all pat ourselves on the back for doing our part while the home burns to the ground.

BUT —

All that being said, Vanguardism isn’t the answer either.  While Vanguardist criticism of the current political situation tends to be brazenly accurate, and their insights regarding culture and the hard sciences are useful, they have no realistic solution for implementing their ideas, and as the Conservatives often note, Vanguardists have a tendency to act in a very counter-productive manner. This usually takes the form of proclaiming the efforts of Conservatives to work within the system to be a useless waste of time, turning the concept of a destructive Jewish influence into a full-blown anti-Semitic conspiracy, and/or in extreme cases, publicly demonstrating with Third Reich symbols, engaging in theatrics for TV cameras, etc.

NONE OF THESE BEHAVIORS ARE ACHIEVING ANYTHING

…especially when taking into account that the Vanguardist strategy relies on spearheading a revolution.  Most people cannot identify with or understand what is being communicated, and when the drama and theatrics flare up among the more extreme parts, potential supporters are driven away.

Despite the limitations of the Conservative approach, their efforts in engaging the current system and the mainstream population are beneficial. Working to reform Conservatism allows for steering the national dialogue away from its current leftist course by forcing the left into conversations they otherwise try to avoid, and by phrasing and presenting un-PC ideas in terms the masses can handle while demonstrating a tangible benefit.  In turn, this can start shifting the mindset of a large section of the population.

It also allows for reducing the impact of current problems and furthering the discussion of them- examples being immigration, affirmative action, state bureaucracy and entitlements, and so on. While this won’t solve everything, and while the politicians Conservative activists are presenting their interests to probably aren’t racially minded, much of the necessary groundwork is laid out,  and immediate problems which the average person can understand and identify with are mitigated.  If we ignore this part, we’ll be trying to jump from point A to point Q, falling flat on our asses in the process.

Parts: 1 2 3