Sunday, April 3, 2016

Response to Ramzpaul on White Nationalism.

Ramzpaul made a video in response to a) a comment by Anglin asserting that Ramz isn't a White Nationalist and b) Anglin's Daily Stormer header, which Ramz felt was a reaction to a Breitbart article that helped to mainstream the Alt Right.

White Nationalism is a Cult

Ramzpaul believes the Daily Stormer header is an effort to smear the Alt Right via association with Nazism and other pro-White movements that were unsavory, run by Jewish agents provocateurs and/or demonized by the Jewsmedia. He thinks the Daily Stormer itself is ADL-funded. Having seen how Daily Stormer trashes White women (and men) as children and degenerates lusting for Negroes, I think Ramz is probably right.

Ramzpaul could have made this point without attacking White Nationalism. He could have disputed Anglin's authority to rule him out as WN-- as he certainly would have if Anglin had ruled him out as Alt Right. He could have just tersely replied that he isn't WN and doesn't care what Anglin thinks about it. But he titled his video "White Nationalism is a Cult" and smeared White Nationalism in precisely the same way as he says Anglin smeared Alt Right.

Ramzpaul spends much of the video attributing extreme positions (hyper-control, exterminate the Jews) to the "cult" of White Nationalism, without any consideration of whether people holding these views actually represent WN. He rejects Anglin as an agent provocateur not truly representative of the Alt Right ("if you call yourself Alt Right"), but somehow accepts him as authentically representative of WN.

I could just as easily gather dubious views of people identifying as Alt Right and ridicule the Alt Right based on them. I expect the Jewsmedia will, if it hasn't already. But I wouldn't do that, because it's a smear tactic.

I agree that for practical purposes we should avoid identifying with historical groups such as German National Socialism and the Ku Klux Klan that the Jewsmedia has thoroughly demonized. Especially the media caricatures of these groups. The truth must be told, but preferably in a separate context. There's a difference however between eschewing historical groups and eschewing basic descriptive terms of our cause, such as White and nationalism.

White Nationalism is a basic description of what is essential for White survival: White nations. Anyone who rejects White Nationalism supports White extinction, unless you explain how Whites can survive without White nations.

The notion that being for White Nationalism means being opposed to nationalism for other people is ludicrous. Naturally, most WNs I know favor nationalism for other peoples as well, including Jews. We decry the hypocrisy of Jewish nationalists who oppose nationalism for others-- not that Jews have their own ethnic state. Many of us recognize a necessity to split up modern states such as the U.S., in order to allow nations for others as well as ourselves. Of course we're fine with more narrowly defined White ethnic states in Europe.

A tactic used against White Nationalism is to assert the strict definition that a White nation must be 100% pure White, and point out problems with such extreme intolerance. But White Nationalists don't necessarily uphold the "one drop" rule or total exclusion. We need only rules exclusive enough to ensure the essentially White character of our nations. A small, carefully screened nonwhite minority would not necessarily destroy this.

I will always be White Nationalist, regardless of what new groups I join, what new terms are coined to dodge the media's fusillade.