The Occidental Observer Blog

Just recently Thilo Sarrazin, a director of Germany’s central bank, made headlines because he wrote a book critical of immigration, basically saying that Germany is commiting suicide. He says (reasonable and popular) things like “I don’t want my grandchildren and great-grandchildren to live in a mostly Muslim country where Turkish and Arabic are widely spoken, women wear headscarves and the day is measured out by the muezzin’s call to prayer.”  He also thinks that Turks aren’t as smart as Germans (they’re not; Richard Lynn on IQ: Germany=102; Turkey = 90); and he thinks that Jews have significant genetic commonality (also true). (A Jewish spokesman said, “Whoever tries to define Jews by their genetic makeup, even when it is superficially positive in tone, is in the grip of a race mania that Jews do not share.” No need to discuss the fact that Jewish genetic commonality discovered by (Jewish) population geneticists can only be explained ultimately by the fact that the Jews have always had a race mania.)

Sarrazin attracted a deluge of criticism for expressing his views. “The German elite is united in its criticism [of Sarrazin]. Sarrazin is representative of a latent Islamophobia, but one which has not been able to take shape in any political formation as we have seen in the Netherlands and Austria.”  Sarrazin has now been sacked because of his views–even though they have nothing to do with his position as a banker; his fate will doubtless be a cautionary tale for similarly inclined others.

It reminds us that the consensus among elites throughout the West is maintained not by force of argument but by brute force, although it’s not uncommon for the media to confidently assert that the facts are on their side. (Time magazine: “Experts reject his argument that innate low intelligence is the culprit.”) Another tack is to gleefully assert that Europe has no choice but to admit immigrants because its birthrate is so low—while at the  same time noting that the German government won’t do anything to encourage births because that’s what the National Socialists did:  “Crucially, however, the memory of Nazi schemes to promote motherhood continues to inhibit governments in Berlin from urging women to have more children.”

But in the end, elites are not willing to let dissident views simply compete for adherents or let people be exposed to scientists like Richard Lynn who, by any reasonable account, is also an expert. It’s all about enforcing orthodoxy.

The question is how to break through this elite monopoly on discourse on immigration and race. I confess I don’t have a clue. That’s what makes the Glenn Beck phenomenon so pathetic. Here’s a guy who has an immense following of angry White people yearning for leadership that would really help their  plight. And all he can come up with is a vague commitment to traditional values and the Constitution. I’ve got news for you Glenn: The only important issue is that Whites are becoming a minority and seeing their political power and cultural influence disappearing. The Constitution will be completely irrelevant when Whites become a minority.

But that’s the thing. Idiots like Beck get exposure on the national media. And if Beck somehow strayed off the reservation and started worrying about explicitly White issues, he’d be gone, just like Sarrazin. He probably understands that.

The elites realize that there are large percentages of Whites who would sign on to anti-immigration attitudes with just a little encouragement. Polls in Germany found that 35% disagreed with Sarrazin, while 30% agreed–a substantial minority, especially given that they receive no encouragement from “respectable” sources. Elites understand that a conflagration could be very easily ignited with a bit of encouragement from the top. Sarrazin’s sacking means that 30% of Germans have just been told that their views are completely illegitimate–so much so, that people who hold them should be fired, even if their beliefs are completely irrelevant to their job description.

Policing elite discourse is the name of the game. It doesn’t matter if an anonymous person writes a well-reasoned article on the internet. But it matters a great deal if the director of the Bundesbank writes a book that resonates with popular attitudes and, because of his position, gets a great deal of publicity in the mainstream media.  That’s why there was such outrage when James Watson got off the reservation on Black IQ. That’s why the Israel Lobby went crazy when John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt–professors at elite institutions–wrote that the Israel Lobby was a very powerful force that routinely acted against the interests of the US.

Elite consensus is not threatened by people like Sarrazin. Even Mearsheimer and Walt have been effectively contained if votes in Congress are any indication.  It’s been shown over and over again that the consensus can be maintained, despite the occasional miscreant. Until we find a way to break through it, we are not going to get anywhere.

Kevin MacDonald: A very encouraging recent trend is the emergence of some very talented young people in the movement for White advocacy and cultural preservation. One of the reasons I was attracted to American Third Position was the presence of young men willing to go out into the street and very publicly proclaim their beliefs. Young men are the backbone of every revolution in history, and the revolution to take back America and the West will be no different.

Of course, it’s still rather dangerous to do so, as I discuss in an article on the A3P website (Being White in Public) two A3P people manning a booth in San Juan Capistrano were harassed by a Latino gang. Vastly outnumbered, they had to withdraw.

Peter Brimelow has recently documented the obvious fact that although there was a media-driven moral panic about the Hutaree militia, the left has repeatedly engaged in violence and intimidation:

“Political violence” in the U.S. and throughout the Anglosphere exclusively comes from the Left. Who shut down the recent American Renaissance conference with death threats? (An atrocity, incidentally, that the Washington Post did not deign to report, although it happened in its home town). Who prevents Ann Coulter or Tom Tancredo from speaking on campuses? Has this ever happened to any Left-wing group or speaker?

As I note in the article, Anti-Racist Action is quite upfront about their willingness to resort to violence to keep White advocates off the streets. We have to be willing to be publicly visible. I think one of our first priorities should be to loudly and proudly participate in public events aimed at explicit White advocacy. Doing so in large numbers would make it very difficult for the left to shut it down.

The encouraging thing is that the number of intelligent, articulate young people who are willing to do that. These people have somehow grasped the depth of the problem faced by their people in the  teeth of wall-to-wall propaganda directed against White identity that they have endured throughout their school years and the enormous social pressures they face as adults against advocating for their people.

Another very promising group of young people is Youth for Western Civilization — an organization aimed at college students that certainly deserves financial support as they try to fund a full-time staff. (Needless to say, A3P is also deserving of financial support and for the same reasons.) Kevin DeAnna, the founder and president, is a very articulate and effective spokesman for the preservation of our culture and traditions. And he understands that in the end it’s about the people who will make up the country. His excellent video, linked below, shows the true face of the immigrant invasion: Ethnocentric and unassimilable non-Whites with historical hatreds against Europeans; commitment to far left ideologies rather than constitutional government and the rule of law; trampling on the American flag while waving their own flags; minority activist organizations like La Raza, often with an explicit ideology of conquering the US for their people — well-funded by corporate America and leftist foundations; unions of public service employees such as the Service Employees International Union, led by Andy Stern, that are committed to big government and non-White immigration;  and sell-out politicians like Dick Armey who are attempting to influence the Tea Party movement to welcome immigration amnesty as somehow good for the Republican Party.

As the film shows, Armey is indeed a sell-out, receiving huge fees from pro-immigration activist groups. One of our biggest problems is that it is financially lucrative for  Whites to become whores for the interests of people who hate them. Funding organizations like A3P and Youth for Western Civilization means that a critical mass of young people have a viable career option in what amounts to pro-White activism.

As DeAnna says toward the  end of the film, if the Republican Party accepts amnesty, it really means the end of the country. He is absolutely right. And the sad thing is that even if amnesty is defeated, it will simply slow down the process of White displacement. Unless the illegals are deported and legal immigration is stopped, White America is doomed. That is the position of American Third Position.

March on America from Western Youth on Vimeo.

Kevin MacDonald: William Sheldon’s current TOO article (“Pro-White Conference 2.0”) offers suggestions on how to avoid the aggressive tactics typically used against any meeting that has overtones of White advocacy. The recent cancellation of the AmRen conference and the cancellation of three speeches in America by BNP leader Nick Griffin (including one scheduled for AmRen) indicate a need to come up with a counter strategy. As Sheldon notes, the face-to-face meetings that are enabled by conferences are a crucial ingredient in any organization. Quite a few people attend conferences not so much to hear the speakers but to be able to network with like-minded others. 

Sheldon’s strategy of using Webinar technology would probably work — provide the benefits of a pro-White conference without drawing the attention of their Leftist opponents. It is an excellent prescription for a group that must remain underground in order not to expose its members to the usual costs of being associated with White advocacy (job loss, etc.). 

The downside is that pro-White advocates would be implicitly accepting their status as an underground movement. Such meetings could essentially go on forever without effecting real change in the direction we all want. 

It seems to me that we have to get above-ground visibility. We have to make noise and have a public presence if we are going to make real progress. We have to get in people’s faces and have the courage of our convictions. Hence perhaps Nick Griffin’s “frequently voiced despair over U.S. politics, given its lack of white nationalist parties” (in the WSJ article).

This is one thing that attracted me to American Third Position. The young men who are the backbone of the party go out onto the streets with signs and pamphlets advocating deporting illegals and other issues related to pro-White advocacy. They are not afraid of people spewing in-your-face hostility at them. (Guess what? You may be called a “racist” or a “Nazi.”) They do not hide away in secret conferences or restrict themsleves to discussing issues among themselves on private email lists. 

Nick Griffin dealing with hostility. The caption in the MailOnline: Heavy with hatred: The BNP leader Nick Griffin, typically surrounded by his security men

Quite clearly, the left is well aware that public visibility would be the beginning of the end for their dominance of public discourse. That’s why the mainstream media has given almost no coverage to the cancellations of AmRen or Nick Griffin — the only exception I have come across is a brief mention in the Wall Street Journal. The article is noteworthy for not mentioning anything about the obvious implications for public discourse in America. The tone of the article is that some meetings of far right crazies got shut down — expressed in the same manner as a story on the cancellation of a meeting of the local school board because of a snow storm. Imagine the outrage if meetings of La Raza or the NAACP were shut down with similar tactics. 

Meetings at privately owned facilities are problematic because businesses are likely to cave under the pressure of the left and I suppose that is their right as property owners.  Some people have suggested using government-owned facilities because denial by such a facility would raise First Amendment issues. I think this is a good idea. And we should be ready with attorneys willing to argue on our side if there are attempts at disruptions or if the government attempts to cancel the event for reasons like “public safety.” And we need security forces; and ways to identify the people who are doing the disrupting. 

And it should all be out in the open.