0 comment Saturday, May 24, 2014 | admin
When was public virtue to be found where private was not? Can he love the whole who loves no part? He be a nation's friend who is, in truth, the friend of no man there? Who slights the charities for whose dear sake, that country, if at all, must be beloved?
- CowperThinking about the Tea Party movement, and the disagreement that exists on the right about it, it seems to me a shame that many on the pro-White side regard the Tea Partiers in general as what they disparagingly call ''patriotards'' or sheeple.
I've certainly been critical of the deluded efforts of the Tea Parties to scurry away from any sign of political incorrectness, and their need to quickly grasp at some evidence of their lack of 'racism.'
However, I don't want to leave the impression that I look down on the many White Americans who are involved in, or sympathetic to the Tea Parties. For many people this seems the only opportunity to express a growing sense of unease, at the least, if not a sense of outrage about what is being done to our country and to the soon-to-be-dispossessed majority. Having been propagandized into believing that there is no option other than the TP, they are grasping at it as a drowning man reaches for a lifeline.
It does disturb me that there is so much rancor for those people, many of them good and decent Americans, who are not racially conscious enough for some people on the pro-White end of the spectrum.
We've all been subjected to the propaganda of the existing multicult system, with its taboos and shibboleths, and with its relentless methods of shaming and punishing those who violate its ubiquitous rules. Some of us were among those 'patriotards' not very long ago, and some of us have, nevertheless, made our way past the hedges and barriers of political correctness to a more realistic and honest point of view. Some of us are still on that path, and those who are farthest along might have a little more patience and empathy with the stragglers and strugglers who are moving towards truth, however slowly.
This piece, by Samuel J. Phillips, from TOQ deals with the Tea Party movement. It's a very good piece, and in it he says:
''It is tempting to simply dismiss such people as saps or fools. Unfortunately, we have no choice but to at least try to engage. Our numbers are too small and our forces too weak to write off any potential allies.''
Lest I be considered one of those who dismiss the Tea Party attendees as 'saps or fools', I second what Phillips says there. In a recent piece in which I disparaged Glenn Beck and the rest of the self-appointed 'leaders' of the movement, my intention was simply to point out the suspect motives of the 'leadership'. Does this mean I think that the Tea Partiers are not potential allies? Not at all, provided they are able to take off the blinders and listen to something outside Fox News and 'conservative' talk radio. As always, there will only be a small minority that is really seeking the truth; unfortunately most will not go against what they perceive to be the tide of popular opinion among their Republican friends. But some can be led in the right direction.
Phillips implies that it will be necessary to engage with the people that many on our side look down on as dupes and fools, to 'reach out' to them, in the cant phrase that is so much used nowadays.
I think he may be right.
'Intellectually, there is the beginning of an alternative right that is capable of confronting and destroying the premises of the system that oppresses us. We have to build on this foundation and create institutions that are capable of real political action. This will require compromise, sacrifice, and innumerable defeats. It will also require many white advocates to leave their comfort zones and engage with people that they may regard as mistaken or even immoral. However, there is no other way forward.''
Phillips also links to this piece by Mark Hackard at Alternative Right.
Towards the end of that piece, he says
''What then is the core of American identity? It is a point of hope that throughout the land there are still many Americans of strong faith and generous heart. They love their country without conditions, as they love their family. And they would see America as a Christian nation, though its ideology belies the notion. These positive qualities and instincts are exploited in the service of democratic pluralism, a pseudo-religious creed.''
That is the point at which we have to try to engage with the people some write off as 'patriotards.' I have to say, sadly, that there are some on the pro-White side who really don't like most of their fellow Americans very much, and that is a huge problem. Without the 'strong faith and generous heart' and the love of country (which to me, means the love of the people) we will not reach many of our kinsmen with our message. As Hackard's essay implies, these good qualities of our people have been misused and exploited to turn us into a people without a country, a people who are afraid to assert their own interests, and instead put everyone else's interests first.
Hatred of a common enemy can only unite people for a brief time, and the alliance will be an uneasy one. A common love for our people and heritage and yes, the land which is our birthright is the only thing that might truly unite us.
Love of country, as in love of our people and the land itself, is a good thing, , despite the cynicism with which many have come to view it. If we can connect with these lost sheep, who at least have some vestigial love for their people and nation, we might salvage this country and the future of our progeny. We will not prevail if we neither like nor respect our fellow Americans, even those who are bewitched and exploited by unscrupulous 'leaders.'
- CowperThinking about the Tea Party movement, and the disagreement that exists on the right about it, it seems to me a shame that many on the pro-White side regard the Tea Partiers in general as what they disparagingly call ''patriotards'' or sheeple.
I've certainly been critical of the deluded efforts of the Tea Parties to scurry away from any sign of political incorrectness, and their need to quickly grasp at some evidence of their lack of 'racism.'
However, I don't want to leave the impression that I look down on the many White Americans who are involved in, or sympathetic to the Tea Parties. For many people this seems the only opportunity to express a growing sense of unease, at the least, if not a sense of outrage about what is being done to our country and to the soon-to-be-dispossessed majority. Having been propagandized into believing that there is no option other than the TP, they are grasping at it as a drowning man reaches for a lifeline.
It does disturb me that there is so much rancor for those people, many of them good and decent Americans, who are not racially conscious enough for some people on the pro-White end of the spectrum.
We've all been subjected to the propaganda of the existing multicult system, with its taboos and shibboleths, and with its relentless methods of shaming and punishing those who violate its ubiquitous rules. Some of us were among those 'patriotards' not very long ago, and some of us have, nevertheless, made our way past the hedges and barriers of political correctness to a more realistic and honest point of view. Some of us are still on that path, and those who are farthest along might have a little more patience and empathy with the stragglers and strugglers who are moving towards truth, however slowly.
This piece, by Samuel J. Phillips, from TOQ deals with the Tea Party movement. It's a very good piece, and in it he says:
''It is tempting to simply dismiss such people as saps or fools. Unfortunately, we have no choice but to at least try to engage. Our numbers are too small and our forces too weak to write off any potential allies.''
Lest I be considered one of those who dismiss the Tea Party attendees as 'saps or fools', I second what Phillips says there. In a recent piece in which I disparaged Glenn Beck and the rest of the self-appointed 'leaders' of the movement, my intention was simply to point out the suspect motives of the 'leadership'. Does this mean I think that the Tea Partiers are not potential allies? Not at all, provided they are able to take off the blinders and listen to something outside Fox News and 'conservative' talk radio. As always, there will only be a small minority that is really seeking the truth; unfortunately most will not go against what they perceive to be the tide of popular opinion among their Republican friends. But some can be led in the right direction.
Phillips implies that it will be necessary to engage with the people that many on our side look down on as dupes and fools, to 'reach out' to them, in the cant phrase that is so much used nowadays.
I think he may be right.
'Intellectually, there is the beginning of an alternative right that is capable of confronting and destroying the premises of the system that oppresses us. We have to build on this foundation and create institutions that are capable of real political action. This will require compromise, sacrifice, and innumerable defeats. It will also require many white advocates to leave their comfort zones and engage with people that they may regard as mistaken or even immoral. However, there is no other way forward.''
Phillips also links to this piece by Mark Hackard at Alternative Right.
Towards the end of that piece, he says
''What then is the core of American identity? It is a point of hope that throughout the land there are still many Americans of strong faith and generous heart. They love their country without conditions, as they love their family. And they would see America as a Christian nation, though its ideology belies the notion. These positive qualities and instincts are exploited in the service of democratic pluralism, a pseudo-religious creed.''
That is the point at which we have to try to engage with the people some write off as 'patriotards.' I have to say, sadly, that there are some on the pro-White side who really don't like most of their fellow Americans very much, and that is a huge problem. Without the 'strong faith and generous heart' and the love of country (which to me, means the love of the people) we will not reach many of our kinsmen with our message. As Hackard's essay implies, these good qualities of our people have been misused and exploited to turn us into a people without a country, a people who are afraid to assert their own interests, and instead put everyone else's interests first.
Hatred of a common enemy can only unite people for a brief time, and the alliance will be an uneasy one. A common love for our people and heritage and yes, the land which is our birthright is the only thing that might truly unite us.
Love of country, as in love of our people and the land itself, is a good thing, , despite the cynicism with which many have come to view it. If we can connect with these lost sheep, who at least have some vestigial love for their people and nation, we might salvage this country and the future of our progeny. We will not prevail if we neither like nor respect our fellow Americans, even those who are bewitched and exploited by unscrupulous 'leaders.'
Labels: Activism, Ethnoconservatism, Ethnopatriotism, Nationalism