A New Party?
By • 2/11/09Recently, in the comments sections of my posts, there has been a groundswell of enthusiasm for a new political party that would advance at least some of the goals of the pro-white movement. On my last article, latte island raised the prospect of starting an “American National Party” that would work towards “modest goals like immigration restriction and an end to affirmative action” without, presumably, raising the more controversial planks in our platform such as innate racial differences and the right to racial discrimination. Several other commenters expressed support for this idea. On an earlier entry, Old Atlantic declared himself in favor of a “White America Party.”
I’m excited by this enthusiasm, particularly because I think that most of those who read this site are level-headed and intelligent people who would not suggest such a thing lightly and would set about the task capably. This is far from saying that I am confident of the project’s success. I have no experience with building a political party or anything like it, so I can’t evaluate the prospects intelligently.
Nevertheless, I wholeheartedly encourage this effort. If you succeed in creating a viable political party, you may change the course of American history. But even if you don’t succeed, you will gain valuable experience, knowledge, and skills from the attempt that may prove useful in some other context.
While I’m willing to help out with the work of creating a party, I would not wish to take a leading role in this effort even if I were asked to. First, if you create a party with “modest goals,” you should not associate it with me, as my thoroughly immodest goals are already a matter of public record and would discredit the party. Moreover, I believe the pro-white philosophy has enough intrinsic merit to be worth articulating and defending in its pure form even if it is too radical for the public now, so I will continue to devote most of my time to doing so. It may be that you have to tell the truth slant in order to be politically viable, but I believe that there is also a place for those who try to offer the world a direct view of truth’s superb surprise.
Many of you who are talking about creating a party are bloggers. I mean no offense, but I am very glad that you are considering devoting your energies to other tasks. This is not because I think your blogs are bad, but because there is a superfluity of pro-white opinion and news blogging these days—I sometimes even wonder whether my own work is superfluous. With so many excellent and informative pro-white sites, like American Renaissance, View from the Right, and VDARE, more work of this sort is of questionable value. Opinion blogging is interesting only if you have a novel perspective on the philosophy of our movement or novel information to share, as well as the time and energy to communicate your message effectively. Even if you can manage good opinion blogging, people are still likely to grow weary and impatient of endless discussion. What we need is more people trying to put our ideas to effect in political reality, and that is likely the best way for you to make a productive and interesting contribution.
One last thing: even if you found a party with “modest goals,” I recommend that you make combating leukophobia part of your platform. As Concerned’s activism on Howard Zinn demonstrates, anti-white slander today is so blatant and pervasive today that people are likely to respond sympathetically when you complain about it.
If you want this article to be exposed to a wide audience, take the time to recommend it at digg. Millions of readers traffic the site, and the more recommendations an article gets, the better its chance of being read. If you don't have digg account yet, registration is easy. Just click submit to get started. |
Click here to join the White America mailing list. You'll get an e-mail notice whenever White America publishes new entries.
Good idea. Why don’t you start that thread, Hal K? Also, could you put in links to these parties’ websites?
It may be illuminating to look to the (all-too-successful, alas) political Left for parallels.
1.) A doctrinaire party with a complete and consistent ideology.
This might be a disciplined and conspiratorial revolutionary party, as Lenin advocated (and Hitler and Mussolini imitated).
But perhaps the English Fabian Society would serve as a better model for race realists. (One thing which genuinely bedevilled the Marxist-Leninists was their rigid adherence to Marx-Engels spurious “philosophy” of Dialectical Materialism. The anti-Semitism pervasive among White Nationalists is a similarly harmful superstition.)
2.) A mass movement contending for immediate reforms - ie. the Trades Unions.
3.) A mass movement with a more “transitional” agenda, designed to compete for elected office - the sundry Socialist, Social-Democratic and Labor parties.
4.) Back in the day there was usually some kind of party militia - attached directly to the core party among Leninists, or to the mass party among Social Democrats.
The great irony is, that in the western world Marxism is all but dead as a popular movement. But has yet become so embedded in the elite culture of our civilization that it appears nothing short of some kind of revolution would be required to oust it.
White Nationalist have much to learn from the history of the Left.
The time and effort and expense of starting a new party is huge.
While none of the current third parties represent White values perfectly, I believe that the Constitution Party does come the closest.
Having said that, note that the third parties we have are not growing by leaps and bounds… This is due to many reasons, but the biggest one I believe is that people will stay with the more familiar political parties, i.e. Democrats or Republicans.
So, I believe that we should work to infiltrate the Republican Party at all levels, starting with the Precinct Committee Officer - this is the closest to the grass roots you can get as it is by neighborhood, sometimes just a few blocks. The Ron Paul folks are doing this and they are having success at it.
Just my thoughts.
I have started a new thread on political organizations in the activism section of the forum. It will probably show up at about the same time as this comment is approved. I haven’t added any specific information yet, but you are all invited to post a reply in the forum if there are any organizations that you know about.
Hal K,
Thanks much for your post in the forum, which is very well thought through and sets up an intelligent classification system for the different organizations available. You should all read it here. By the way, the forum’s starting to come alive. There were easily ten posts in there today other than the feeds.
Your frustration over the limitations of blogging is valid. There really is no shortage of pro-white blogging, some of it quite articulate, but it’s probably marginally influential. Most of the public that needs to read it doesn’t know it’s there, or would be likely to initially feel the usual induced guilt such things bring up.
The pro-white movement is spinning its wheels — lots of energy, no traction. The limitations of argument have been reached.
That energy needs a political movement to attach itself to. Here’s the trouble: the sort of people who write blogs are not the sort of people, in general, to organize politically. Bloggers tend to be somewhat intellectual, not especially comfortable with people in groups, and — don’t underestimate this factor — they usually have jobs and family responsibilities that leave them with little spare time. They’re in a different life situation from college kids who can cut classes and go to meetings and demonstrations.
Unfortunately, young people with the time and intensity for grassroots politics are mostly leftist. This would suggest that attracting the young to the pro-white movement should be a major priority.
“…an end to affirmative action” without, presumably, raising the more controversial planks in our platform such as innate racial differences…”
On the front cover of this month’s Discover magazine is Cochran and Harpening’s theory of innate Ashkenaz IQ advantage. Cochran etc went so far as to publish a book on it. HBD issues are not shunned entirely given there is no pro-White spin or embarrassing data on Black intelligence.
Race w/ IQ is important but also is addressing the dysgenic nature of our welfare policies. A lot of moderate White Americans would probably agree with strong hereditarianism in regards to intelligence/temperament. Advocating policies that restrict state benefits for lower class parents(mothers) while being race neutral could be good for us.
If the American National Party materializes, I would urge that a pledge for members be mandatory as I was required to sign before I became a member of the Libertarian Party (I’ve since left the party). This deals with guys like Bill Clinton or Timothy McVeigh who had the audacity to claim they were basically libertarian. Here’s the LP pledge: “I hereby certify that I do not believe in or advocate the initiation of force as a means of achieving political or social goals.”
Something like this should include a clause to the effect that ALL ethnic Eurowhites are the party’s object of advocacy. Of tactical advantage, this pledge can be repeatedly referenced to anti-whites who attempt to plead malicious lie, or to those who are just doubtful of the party’s aims. The added clause insures that Eurowhites with animus towards minority Eurowhites such as antisemites have no place in the party.
A strong statement in support of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights would do much to enlist support for the ANP, I think. It could well co-opt the Constitution Party into the ANP.
This is neither a new idea or a new solution to an old problem.
If you want to form a new political party for fringe conservatives….get in line. They are plenty already and none of them make a bit of difference. Create a new one every day, if you like, then you will have 365 new conservative political parties in ONE YEAR.
If you actually want to change the card game in this country, return to the root of politics…..regionalism…..which is very much alive and well. No other region of the country is so deeply identified as a separate region, people, and political philosophy (conservative) as the South.
Start a new political party to replace the Republican Party in the South….a Southern Party, if you like, and the Republican Party is toast. Without the South, the Republican Party would be limited to the Midwest and the Great Plains states. The only hope for a new party with any hope of success in the USA will be conservative party strictly for the South. (The South has a third of the electoral and popular vote.) Without the South, the Republican party will go the way of the Whigs….from which they evolved in the first place.
The South will have much more influence as a separate (regional) party than as a subset of the weaker of two national parties. As a separate party, the South is free to switch or partner with either party, from election to election, that will benefit the South the most.
Define the South as every state from North Carolina to Oklahoma, and all states south of this line, and do not stop until they are all part of the Southern political bloc. No more begging the national parties for crumbs. (Yes, that means leaving Virginia, Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri outside the South.)
There ought to be a thread in the forum, the purpose of which would be to list political organizations that already exist that would be generally compatible with the sorts of goals that have been stated on this website. The list could include various information fields that would help people decide whether it was the sort of organization they would be interested in joining. Here are a few possible entries:
The Loyalist Party
The Constitution Party
The American Reform Party
These do not have racial agendas. I do not find any of the above listed organizations completely suitable. The Loyalist Party seems most promising, except that it focuses excessively on Islam.