Vanguard News Network

I’m certainly always open to correction, but it seems to me that the very interesting theoretical discussions above and elsewhere on this site would serve some practical purpose only if whites were already back in power.

In our present circumstance, isn’t the main necessity to present to other whites the many truths that are kept from them, and to present those truths to them over and over and over until those truths become as much a part of their mental furniture as the collapsing chairs of the MSM are?

For the last two years I’ve been posting at knoxnews.com, and in spite of their bannings and other maneuvers, I’ve always found a way to keep my words up there.

What might have been accomplished there if some of the brain power evident on this site had been honing its skills along with me there?

Instead, I was struggling alone against the monitoring staff, except for a few occasional excellent local posters there. (And now I’m about burnt out from the solitary effort).

“You have to come to knowledge of the jews through ‘gateways,’ we are told.”

From the context, I assume Alex is referring to the “Amren kiddie pool,” to the adult pool route.

That can be a long route! What’s wrong with the Israel route, and other routes?

A fair number of mainstream figures have spoken now on Israel’s power over U.S. policy , which gives us an opening. For two years I’ve been posting at knox various versions of the long post quoting some of those figures that I copied above, and I’ve been pleased to see that recently there have finally been other posts on the site that mention Israel’s power.

There are also posters at knox who seem to acknowledge Jewish ownership of much of media. I sometimes use usernames “Who_owns_media,” “Who_owns_finance,” and “Who_owns_government,” depending on the post.

The obvious heavy role of Jews in media, and even in finance, is fairly obvious. If other posters reply, “So what?”, one can ask them why they think they’ve heard so little from their media of what the prominent figures I quoted say about Israel’s power over our gov’t.

Etc. etc….the openings are there, but one has to get out in the mainstream and learn where they are….and it helps if one not only identifies with “the white race” but also with its members, so that you can form friendly relations with the posters who will disagree with you or even abhor you initially, and perhaps forever. I’ve come to have pleasant sparring relations even with the latter.

That’s my take, for whatever it’s worth.

alex Says:

Whenever powerful interests become committed to a particular worldview, they have a desire to suppress other, competing worldviews.

That’s an entirely different thing, just conventional suppression. I’m talking about people who see the same problems we do, but advise NOT teaching people the whole full truth in one explanation. That is unprecedented.

I don’t see a significant difference. The key is, changing worldviews is a big step for most people, especially if there are powerful interests that are resisting that change. Mere ideas (such as Holocaust denial or other minor heresies) may be suppressed without much consequence or trouble, but changing a whole worldview affects one’s relation to everything in the world. In the case of Galileo, changing from the geocentric theory to the heliocentric theory meant that man was no longer at the center of the universe. In a significant sense, it dethroned the existing order; it diminished the Church and man’s place in relation to God. That made the heliocentric theory a real threat, for reasons quite unconnected to its scientific truth or falsity. Likewise with your attempting to replace the “evil-white-man-centric” worldview with the “evil-Jew-centric” worldview. If allowed, it would affect everything and have far reaching ramifications for the existing order. It directly threatens the elites.

Galileo had his supporters. The telescopes he manufactured clearly showed the inconsistencies of the geocentric view. In direct contradiction to the geocentric view, they showed that Jupiter had moons orbiting it, and also showed phases of Venus that were difficult to explain without the heliocentric view being true. One can easily imagine some of these supporters trying to reason with him, “Look, Galileo, you know and I know that the Earth revolves around the Sun, but you can’t just come right out and say that — that would be heresy! First we need some time to prepare, time to reason with the Vatican and show them that when the Bible seems to say that the Earth is immovable, that e.g., “the Lord set it on its foundations and it can never be moved” (Psalms 104:5), and similar passages, that it isn’t to be taken literally. Then, after perhaps only a few years, we’ll be able to bring them around. We’ll also show them some of the good things that your telescopes can do so they won’t be able to just dismiss them as the Devil’s work! Meanwhile, stop it with the Earth goes around the Sun rhetoric. People are beginning to talk! They’re saying you’re against God! That you’re tool of the Devil yourself!”

In spite of the fact that the suppression was successful — he was imprisoned and forced to recant — Galileo’s view still prevailed because the nascent modern technological system was able to deliver the goods in a way the Church was not. Not just the telescope, but all the trends of Renaissance innovation on the run up to the Industrial Revolution supported it. Unlike faith and prayer, the white man’s invention of technology and the scientific method — applied, systematized technique — were a way of getting the same result every time. It seemed to be a clear improvement over the time-honored methods of the Church, which was basically no more than a form of magic. It prevailed because it succeeded in giving people MORE. It was a more efficient means of satisfying man’s desires.

The moral would seem to be that you will prevail when you can do something similar. Can you deliver MORE to the people who side with you? You may say that you will deliver racial survival, but as it happens, they don’t value that very much. They care much more about their own personal fortunes, as the global technological system expands, they see that not valuing it brings them MORE. Further, they see that siding with your “evil-Jew-centric” theory will bring them only a host of cares: ostracism, loss of status, possible unemployment, possible divorce and family breakup, even possible imprisonment. That being the case, they have no motive to change.

Adam writes to Alex:

“Can you deliver MORE to the people who side with you?”

If billions of dollars weren’t being spent on warring for Israel in the Middle East, “more” could be delivered to people in the form of reduced taxes or less debt for their offspring.

Israel’s control of our policy in the Mid East is a weak point that can be attacked, because prominent mainstream figures that ordinary people will give some credence to have referred to it and can be quoted, as I gave examples of above.

Persons with Alex’s strength could teach it publicly, and the rest of us fraidy-cats could keep posting it over and over at some chosen website.

It seems to me we should be discussing concrete steps that can be taken. Alex put forth a very interesting idea in his radio interview with Jim Giles recently (is there a thread on that interview here? Navigation of this site is impenetrable to me), that relates to his post above 25 December, 2009 at 12:00 am.

I’d like to discuss that post, but I’ll wait until I get responses, if any, to what I’ve already put out in posts above.

I’m telling you guys!!! You keep talking about symptoms, but the only way we can solve the problem is to turn our women in the right direction. Right now women are following the Jew mantra of “EVERYONE IS THE SAME” and “DIVERSITY IS OUR STRENGTH”. There is this woman that threatened to shoot me because i told her that BHO was just another puppet. I don’t know the answer other than to keep preaching the truth. Many people reject it but once in awhile you snag a truth seeker.

Adam:

So what do you think WNs as activists should presently do?

That makes 3 questions.

The rally is good but did not get much coverage. We need to keep talking about everything. Get the word out. Strive to tell the truth. Have something to back up what you are talking about. All the people that have a hand in destroying us always make mistakes. Point it out right away before they have time to cover up their mistakes.

Another thing that helps is to learn to be a cameleon. Blending in with different types of people. You have to make them feel comfortable before they will listen to you.

Norsk Says:

“The rally is good but did not get much coverage.”

I assume we’re both speaking of the rally in Knoxville, and I think I disagree that that rally was good (I’m not sure, and I’m putting my ideas out to hopefully be commented on. Though I imagine…I hope…this is old, old territory for everyone here except myself).

My only exposure to Alex has been reading his piece on women in the WN movement (tremendous fun to read, and probably has some truth in it), his interview recently by Jim Giles, and youtube clips of his words at the Knoxville rally.

As a writer and interviewee, I find him wonderfully engaging and extremely likable, but I thought he was a terrible speaker at Knoxville. I think he could be an excellent speaker, if he were of a mind, and of a temperament, to present his arguments in a way that would draw his audience to attend to his words instead of be repelled by them.

An almost immediate reference to “Big Jew” doesn’t exactly warm the crowd up for what follows. His strongest point as a crowd catcher was IMO his reference to the innocence that radiates from the boyfriend/girlfriend pictures of Chris and Channon (I’ve posted at knoxnews on that crime for two years, and never thought of working off of that point, but I surely will now…those pictures of Chris and Channon occupy a large place in the mind of everyone in Knoxville)…I wish Alex had led with that, and framed it with words and tone of voice that drew his audience to him (if he has the feeling for the audience that would allow that to be natural…it’s hard to hold our views and not develop almost unnoticed an adversarial feeling toward the very persons we hope to draw to us).

The innocence radiating from those pictures could lead naturally to discussion of the innocence white behavior exhibits in so many other ways, and finally to how that innocence is maintained by the media…”Who owns media? Who owns media? I don’t have to tell you; you know what answer you’re expecting from me. And that’s the RIGHT answer.

Your response to that answer is, ‘So what?’ Please let me tell you ‘so what’: So you won’t learn what organizations have been principally responsible for so many of the changes in this country that you detest. So…”(etc. etc. Alex can write all this about 10 times better than I can)

I admire tremendously Alex’s getting out there, and my impressions of the effect of the rally are based on the almost universal repugnance to it expressed by posters on the knoxnews forum…but they may be a skewed sample.

To Hugh Lincoln 25 December, 2009 at 1:34 pm:

I agree with your post. But I also think that the call Linder made on Giles’ program for persons who will get out and be public as he has been, provided they have a realistic sense of what is helpful and not helpful in each public situation they introduce themselves into, is immensely needed.

My mind is open, but I believe Alex isn’t seeing that he himself could much improve the realism of his view of what is effective in which situation, and he might then be more likely to attract others to join him in being more public.

Alex’ criticism on Giles’ show of MacDonald turning toward Sam Francis is beyond my knowledge and understanding, but as far as being public about Jewish power, I don’t see how MacDonald can be faulted.

In fact, I believe that in one point in the interview, Alex said that (despite his criticisms of MacDonald) he thought MacDonald was also doing useful work in many ways.

Alex’ extemporaneous and natural nature is part of what makes him attractive, but it can also cause confusion when one utterance seems to contradict another!

What’s wrong with KM and the TOQ approach is that they can’t keep a principled line. They mix WN with conservatism. They do this because they are unable to separate personal feelings from political principles.

The key is explaining your point clearly so people with an IQ of 100 and above will understand what you are talking about.

hdumpty says:
at 3:02 pm

“the main way to make them feel comfortable is to allow yourself, if you have it in you, to like them.”

You don’t get it. You don’t need to like them.You need to learn to control your emotions. You act like they’re your friends. That’s how the Jews do it. When i come apon someone that is running on dangerous political views (and have no clue of the danger) I feel them out. If they are not perceptive of the danger i move on. Don’t waist time on the sheeple.

“WN’s who identify with the “white race” but don’t much care for the members of that race aren’t going to get very far i think, unless they have tremendous charisma.”

Dont let your emotions get in the way. It’s hard not to. The bottom line is, What are we fighting for and who are we fighting for? A true white Nationalist fights for the 14 words. If you don’t beleave in the 14 words your not a white nationalist.

The crux of the matter is whether we treat conservatives as friends or enemies. I say we treat them as enemies and attack them. KM and crew treat them as friends, and tolerate attacks on themselves.

TOQ is conservative, no matter what it labels itself. It cannot produce the change we need, it’s men don’t have the right mentality. Read the NS material at calvin.edu. Study the mentality and actions of successful revolutionaries in circumstances somewhat like our own.

NS didn’t try to influence the elite, as TOQ does. They tried and succeeded, in forming a new elite. That is what we should emulate. Not trying to get a favorable mention by Buchanan, KM’s wet dream, but by getting rid of Buchanan and the rest of the anti-White Zoggies.

“I don’t see how MacDonald can be faulted.”

He won’t mention the fed or fractional reserve.

He only focuses on the important stuff.

The Kwan has been intensively conditioned for Tolerance. Obama’s change will help to bring a change of mind when the Tolerance becomes unbearable. I have no idea when this will happen. But things are getting more unbearable as the days go by. What change will BHO inflict on us in the next three years?

Ive been reading TOQ’s articles and comments and you are right Alex. They are pussies.What else can be said. Yes let me argue with my neighbor,if I use superior logic,surely he will see it my way and join my struggle. Oh wait a minute,that doesnt fucking work! Show me one leader that led through rational arguments. The masses cannot and will not be swayed that way. You must angry up the blood!

Alex…thanks for the reading tip, which I’ll take, as well as catch-up reading of TOQ, etc.

My understanding already is that Herr H’s early successes in increasing his party from the handful it started as were due to his studied and practiced abilities as an orator.

In that regard, I’m hoping to get some discussion from you about your speech in Knoxville, unless that topic has been beaten to death in the past so much that you’re totally sick of it.

My impression has been, honestly, that the speech was ineffective, for the reasons I touched on in my post above yesterday at 2:55 pm.

But now that I understand at least slightly better what kind of persons you’re trying to attract, maybe I’m mistaken.

So I’m wondering, has anyone who watched your speech there contacted you and said, man, that was great, you named “Big Jew” right away, etc. etc., and your way of doing things is the way for me.

Or do you have other reasons to think that your words there brought anyone to your cause?

As I explained in my post above, my criticism isn’t directed at the content of that speech, but at what seems to me an insouciant attitude on your part toward organizing and expressing your content in a way to draw listeners to it. That aspect of speechifying was of course something Herr H paid a LOT of attention to!

But maybe you are aiming just for people who already have the main understandings and who need galvanizing to action (of some sort)….if that’s the case, I’m wondering if you have reason to believe that your manner of presenting your case in Knoxville did indeed have the effect you desired on some such people.

Adam…as analysis, I’ve really enjoyed your posts on technology and find them extremely insightful.

But I can’t imagine any group of leaders or any large group of people being willing to turn its back on technology. Checking that no potential enemy was secretly redeveloping technology would itself require more and more sophisticated technology.

And do you want whites to give up technology before, or after, we restore our position? Perhaps after would be better, don’t you think?

Which is my wry way of saying that I don’t see how your discussion of giving up technology has any more bearing on how to move forward from our present circumstances than a discussion of the desirability of whites establishing ourselves in space colonies (I wish I could live to see that great adventure) would have.

Kuda Bux Says:

“Common Sense was a bestseller.”

Good point. And I’ll read that too.

Tom Paine was Jew-wise, no doubt about it. He rightly accused the Jews of “blackening” the history of every country they inhabited. When Paine refered to “all mankind” he was doubtless referring to all White men first and foremost. Why would he have cared about the political well-being of the Turk, the Negro or the Chinaman? He surely must have realized that such people are incapable of creating civilized, democratic states.

Re Knoxville, I was arrested at my rally. I spoke, impromptu, at the second rally.

The effect of my or any speech is limited because the cops are allowed by the court to lock the speakers too far away from the public for any real reaction and interaction. That was my purpose in walking down the street at the first rally, to get in front of the public and the antis where they could hear me. But that’s illegal, per cops and court. Until this obstacle is got around, public speaking is largely irrelevant.

Never mind the Reverend Billy Sol Hargus, Weird Harry Covington is God’s Other Son.