So why isn’t anyone working on an anarchist town? 27

White Supremacists Making Bid to Take Over North Dakota Town
Ryan Lenz on August 22, 2013

LEITH, N.D. –– Abandoned houses lean with the weight of years on city blocks connected by gravel roads. A grain elevator still operates on the edge of town, but it hasn’t seen good business in decades. The only storefront business is a bar, and on most afternoons it sits empty like the roads that disappear among sunflower and wheat fields in the distance.

While the economy in North Dakota has boomed in recent years due to the discovery of oil in the miles of shale beneath the state, business in Leith has been in decline for the better part of a century. So when officials in April 2012 noticed that one man was quickly buying up abandoned properties in what had become close to a ghost town high on the Great Plains, it was strange.

“I didn’t have a clue who the guy was until he showed up. All I know is he bought that house sight unseen, $5,000 cash, and had no idea what it looked like, where it was, other than he knew the directions to get to Leith,” Leith Mayor Ryan Schock, a farmer who has lived here all his life, told Hatewatch.

That strange man was Paul Craig Cobb, 61, a bearded neo-Nazi who moved into a ramshackle two-story house without running water, and quickly began buying properties around Leith, population 19. According to county tax records that were first obtained by Hatewatch, Cobb has since purchased more than a dozen lots for a few hundred dollars each, mostly from landowners who live elsewhere in the country.

Cobb’s endgame is clear. Last year, on the white supremacist online forum Vanguard News Network (VNN), he announced his intentions to build an all-white bastion of racists in North Dakota “post haste.” The grandiose plan ends with white supremacists and neo-Nazis taking over the county government, and he has even said he hopes to rename Leith “Cobbsville.”

“Been waiting quite a few months to spring this. Now is the time,” Cobb wrote at the time. Then, in what appeared to be a pitch to those who might have reservations about moving so far north, Cobb touted the benefits of his new home. “There is water, electricity, satellite internet via Hughes at $50 per month, satellite TV from at least 3 companies, trailers, 5th wheels, campers legal, car [insurance] as little as $141 for 6 months and most importantly –– a surfeit of very good paying jobs in two different cities within normal commutable distances,” he wrote.

Cobb’s plan in Leith is to build a Pioneer Little Europe –– an idea long favored on the racist right as a way to escape what is seen as a multiculturalist agenda at work in larger and more racially diverse cities. First proposed in a 2001 pamphlet by H. Michael Barrett, the vision is to consolidate white residents in existing cities and towns and create all-white enclaves. Northwestern states including Montana, Idaho, and now North Dakota, have historically been considered appealing places to start because of lack of racial diversity.

According to the most recent U.S. Census data, 90% of the population of North Dakota is white. That increases to 97% in Grant County, where Cobb has settled.

Already some of the most active white supremacists and neo-Nazi leaders in the country have come calling.

According to county tax and property records, Tom Metzger, of Warsaw, Ind., a viciously racist propagandist who leads a group known as the White Aryan Resistance (WAR), purchased a lot for one dollar from Cobb in June 2012. Four months later, Alex Linder, who runs the VNN neo-Nazi Web forum, did the same. Additionally, Cobb claims to have donated buildings in Leith to the National Socialist Movement (NSM), the largest neo-Nazi group in the country. Grant County tax officials say Cobb could have sold more and not recorded a deed transfer.

News of Cobb’s plan spread quickly this week, when two men moved into tents on one of Cobb’s properties, alarming residents who were unaware of his racist plans.

“He’s worried people over here. In a community like Leith, you get someone strange in and they’re always kind of worrying,” Grant County Sheriff Steve Bay said, adding that he could understand the benefit of an isolated town in North Dakota for someone like Cobb. “What better place to pick up some land if you want to get something established?” Bay asked.

This isn’t the first time Cobb has tried to build a homeland for whites. In 2006, he moved to Estonia and established Podblanc, a video-sharing service for white supremacists. America was beyond help, he warned then. “I believe that the Democrat[ic] and Republican criminal syndicates that run the U.S. with international jewry’s [sic] criminal syndicate cannot now be stopped,” he wrote. “Media barrages too much control the minds of White Americans.”

But four years later, Cobb returned to the United States and reportedly settled in Montana’s Flathead Valley, where other racists including Christian Identity proponent Karl Gharst and neo-Nazi April Gaede had begun working to build a similar Pioneer Little Europe community of white supremacists. Cobb moved to North Dakota in April, where he has reportedly been working on road construction crews.

Cobb’s racist dreams for North Dakota are not isolated to Grant County. As there are nearly limitless job opportunities as a result of the oil boom happening in the western half of the state, other white supremacists have made their presence known in Williston, which has dubbed itself “Boom Town, USA.”

There, at a NAPA auto parts store, Shane Myers sells assault rifles and tactical gear out of the back hallway. He wears a ring with Nazi SS lightning bolts, and white supremacists online have claimed he will offer a deal to other white nationalists in the state. And if there is any confusion about his worldview, a single Post-It note on the wall behind his desk clears up any misconceptions. It reads simply, “Diversity=Division=Disunity.”

27 comments

  1. It’s a valid question. I believe difference between the Anarcho-Libertarians of yesterday and many today is that the pioneers engaged their beliefs to actually raise up alternative communities. Most friends today, however, settle for a non-community building cult that worships historical figures associated with theories of freedom. As such, they don’t focus on advising strangers on how to raise up better communities, but put the emphasis on the best way to break that stranger’s skull.

  2. “So why isn’t anyone working on an anarchist town?”

    Because people attracted to unorthodox and maladaptive ideologies have few friends, little influence, no clue and a fucked-up ideology.

    If you would say that anarchism need not be maladaptive and point to the self-described national anarchists, who do indeed seem to want people like themselves to thrive, survive and recreate, then really you ought to count Cobb as one who’s working on an anarchist town. So, maybe someone is: Cobb.

  3. This is really my field since I came from a radical right political background, all be it never the White supremacist/national socialist end of town.

    It’s going to come as a big shock to conventional “anarchists” and “libertarians” when they realize how serious the radical right is about autonomous communities and how rapidly they have developed a sophisticated view of practical implementation. In the UK for example the “old right” mass movement/popular front/national level democratic participation model is now, I would seriously claim, a minority view among the radical right. That’s why the British National Party collapsed. That’s at a popular level, in so far as the UK radical right can be said to have an intelligentsia then it is fully signed up.

    This nut job, believe me, does not represent the cutting edge of the concept application from that milieu.

    More promisingly still the “accelerated evolution” of the radical right’s strategic conceptions is now bringing them to a far more sophisticated view of autonomous communities than simple monastic models like this clown was trying to implement.

    There is a real simple reason for this dynamism; the radical right is under massive pressure. It’s got a ticking clock constantly on its mind and it is being subject to the full force of the system’s propaganda machine. That pressure is serving to concentrate minds and creating conditions which may as well have been designed explicitly to promote evolutionary development. This is in marked contrast to the conventional “left anarchists” who aren’t operating on a schedule and in any case don’t actually have much of a problem with the system as it stands.

    If Keith is right, and I think he is, when he says that “pan secessionism offers the maximum tactical and ideological advantages available to anyone with a problem with the system” (paraphrase) then it is hardly any wonder that the radical right is at the very front of the queue.

    • I’ve listened to Cobb and followed his activities over the years, he’s a smart and sincere guy, and an active one. If you ever get around to doing anything in the real world, besides blogging about Jedi Secession, we’ll be able to compare your efforts with Cobb’s, and perhaps then we’ll think you’ve earned the right to look down on Cobb.

  4. Interesting comments. Craig Cobb simply used wrong methods because he fell under the influence of the reactionary right. That idea of take over the town is again a right reactionary way of operation. Its influence not takeover that works.Its being done but quietly all over the country. As Texas ranger replied when he was called to a riot and why he didn’t bring more rangers. He replied “one riot one ranger”. Don’t you think we have more to concern ourselves with? Like the WAR CRIMINALS RUNNING LA CESSPOOL GRANDE.

  5. Well exactly Tom. The idea of establishing a completely uniform exclusive enclave is obviously seriously limited in a lot of way. It’s like the absolute perfect target for all kinds of counterintel stuff for one. Which is why the more advanced of the radical right have begun to adopt more sophisticated concepts of “embedding” with the aim of taking control of local systems of governance and mobilizing their considerable natural support base within a specific location for specific attainable objectives.

    As for bigger problems? No-one really has a problem with anything going on outside their spatial operating zone. More to the point, no-one can do anything about anything going on outside it.

    • Welcome to the club I have advocated that type operations for years. Whats s funny is how simple it is especially since the system press don’t even look at it since it doesn’t fit corporate media show and tell.The big press hysteria was not really about Craig Cobb or even taking over a town. Its convenient cover up for the destruction of the environment by corporate oil and nuke trash.

      • Terrible Tommy, your hobby horses are all well and good, no doubt they confound many an expectation of a White advocate, but the media campaign against Cobb had nothing to do with nuke/oil interests, it was because he’s White and did something about it. Nor is there anything reactionary or right wing about migration and democracy – Cobb’s plan.

          • If there are gonna be communities to solve class conflicts, environmental issues and right vs left distinctions, those communities better focus first on securing their own existence.

            ***

            admin: I’m fellist and Nick Dean, btw, one and the same, just wordpress prefers ‘fellist’ even when I’ve posted in my own name that session.

    • “Which is why the more advanced of the radical right have begun to adopt more sophisticated concepts of “embedding” with the aim of taking control of local systems of governance and mobilizing their considerable natural support base within a specific location for specific attainable objectives.”

      That was Cobb’s plan, wasn’t it?

  6. Fellist/Dean. I think Cobb was more following the classic “PLE” concept which most usually envisions something like Orania. The basic premise here a exclusive community of racially and ideologically uniform people. Which is why I described it as “monastic”. Most frequently this approach proposes 100% ownership of land, homes, businesses etc.

    More sophisticated models are more “flexible” understanding that complete control is neither necessary or desirable and is prohibitively expensive. The question of how you enforce such an arrangement is also problematic too say the least. To mention just a couple of the “deal breakers”.

    Integrating within fairly substantial pre-existing communities offers potentially a far more viable proposition. How hard would it be for a small group of highly organised people to exert a disproportionate influence? This isn’t really much use to the White Nationalist National Socialist fraternity since it doesn’t offer an route to a localised Reich (as a prelude to a more generalized one) which is one reason they tend to favorably disposed to the Waco model. However such people, despite conventional wisdom, do not make up the totality of the radical right.

  7. S E Pearson,

    1) You don’t have anything against White people who want self-determination, so you should stop bitching about them on behalf of others who do. That’s one step you could take right now toward personal self-rule.

    2) More correct to say, more flexible models are more flexible. There is nothing in your ‘sophisticated model’ anathema to Pioneer Little Europeans, rather it’s a part of every PLE experiment I can think of.

    3) There is nothing radical or rightist about PLEs or other manifestations of White nationalism (where radical means extreme opposition to convention or tradition, or seeking political, economic, or social revolution). Or about National Socialism.

    White Nationalism and modern manifestations of National Socialism are both all about people just living like people generally have lived, just specifically free of Jewish and other foreign colonization.

  8. Nick. I’m going to hazard a wild guess that you are somewhat sympathetic to the doctrines of WN and NS? Then this is going to be kinda hard for me. By nature I’m a very tolerant and generous spirited person. I’ve spent a lot of time around WNs and NSs and I know that their intentions are motivated by an admirable concern for the well being of their own people rather than, as is conventionally thought, by Satan. I understand, absolutely, the pain and anguish that their perception of reality causes them because of that natural and laudable concern.

    I get no credit for this from WNs and NSs because the same empathy which allows me to understand their condition also allows me to understand that of other groups; like commies, progressives and black people.

    But WNs and NSs are by far the dumbest motherfuckers I’ve ever come across. Why? Because it would be so very easy with just a minor adjustment in their thinking patterns to overcome the crippling ideological problems which make them about as popular as pubic lice. We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children? Why not make a couple of simple amendments? We must secure the existence of ALL peoples and a future for ALL Children? Lotta problems just went away didn’t they? And what did you lose apart from the prospect of governing Zambia at some point in a highly unlikely future?

    It worse than that though, much worse, because for all their noble aims in preserving a unique and valuable human culture there efforts have had the diametric opposite effect. When the system is really up against it, who does it wheel out and point to as the “alternative”? that’s right, the good old boys whose efforts have done more to prop up the establishment than any other group, including the establishment itself. For fuck sake it was the unlikely prospect of the revenge of NS which allowed the conventional radical left to gratefully throw down their weapons and become the miserable auxiliaries of the system they are today. Not only did NS and WN not threaten the elite, not only was it used as a prop to keep that elite in place, but it persuaded almost every other oppositional tendency to throw its lot in with the progressive state.

    When the propagandists of the orthodox take aim as this very project, the awesome ATS itself, what is the angle they go for every single fucking time? That should tell you all you need to know about WN and NS.

    I understand how WN becomes NS and I know that those who tread that path do for motives more deserving of respect than those of the vast majority of people possess. But good intentions do not presuppose any great perceptive abilities. Once a few basic assumptions have been accepted the rest follows very naturally. Problem is those assumptions are BS.

    Those assumptions also prevent a comprehension of the whole idea of pan-seccessionism because for the NS an autonomous community is not the goal, it is, it must be, a stepping stone to creation of the ethno state capable of resisting all threats, real and imaginary, actual and potential. So what was an attainable objective has now become an practical impossibility.

    Which is why someone like Cobb is always going to fuck it up. The whole point of pan seccessionism is to create a weapon system, a political version of deconstructionism, something anyone can use any where any time to take on what looks so strong on advantageous terms. Some of the radical right now get that, that all that is required to ensure the survival of peoples and cultures, which are every bit as justified as every other, is merely to get the progressive boot off those culture’s collective neck. That is never going to be enough for NSs, survival, a fighting chance, isn’t good enough. That survival must go somewhere and go somewhere very specific; where there are no, and can be no, threats ever from any quarter.

    Fear is the defining characteristic of the NS and control is their answer to it. Its basically the same mentality which drives some people to lock their kids in a basement rather than allow them to face the very real dangers of the world. In that of course and in much else, and as you note, NS is an ideology of the left which shares that mentality with it. We here at ATS don’t go in for that shit “come back with this shield or on it!” It doesn’t get any more right than that.

    NOTE: Comments on ATS threads from contributors, especially those off their face after a night in the pub, do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the collective itself.

  9. S E Pearson wrote,

    “I’ve spent a lot of time around WNs and NSs and I know that their intentions are motivated by an admirable concern for the well being of their own people rather than, as is conventionally thought, by Satan [but…] I get no credit for this from WNs and NSs because the same empathy which allows me to understand their condition also allows me to understand that of other groups; like commies, progressives and black people.”

    Normal White people – or NSs and WNs as we’re calling them here – are generally in favour of all other ethnic groups enjoying the advantage of self-determination they seek for themselves, but also of allowing multicult expemiments for those who prefer to rot in hell. That makes ‘em objectively more ‘progressive’ and tolerant than mainline politicals or even most anarchists (both of which are solid on self-determination and related ‘rights’ until it’s White people wanting their own place in the sun). Naturally WNs and NSs would oppose Communism in their own countries, but almost every person would.

    You’ll have to find a better reason for knocking them. This one won’t fly.

  10. S E Pearson wrote,

    “it would be so very easy with just a minor adjustment in their thinking patterns to overcome the crippling ideological problems which make them about as popular as pubic lice. We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White Children? Why not make a couple of simple amendments? We must secure the existence of ALL peoples and a future for ALL Children? Lotta problems just went away didn’t they? And what did you lose apart from the prospect of governing Zambia at some point in a highly unlikely future?”

    You have it precisely backwards and in a fashion that reveals your willingness to throw over ATS’s stated ideals in favour of public racial correctness.

    1) If anyone has an ideological problem with the perfectly reasonable idea that White people might secure their existence and a future for their children, then you would more appropriately address your finger wagging at those genocidal motherfuckers.

    2) As already stated, normal, healthy White people – WNs and NSs – are usually quite vocal about their support for any and all all initiatives seeking to secure the existence, self-determination and freedom from colonization of any and all other ethnic groups. David Duke, for example, has for years made a point of making that point at the beginning of every single one of his radio shows.

    Duke, Cobb and other sane White people are not attacked by the mainstream media, establishment politicians and professoriat because they fail to say that other groups deserve the same rights as Whites; they are attacked by the regime precisely because they do say White and non-White peoples should enjoy the same rights.

    3) However, where White nationalists would generally support the idea that other peoples could benefit by securing for themselves the advantages of self-determination White nationalists seek to secure for their own peoples, for good reason they stop short of taking to themselves the responsibility of ‘securing the existence of ALL peoples and a future for ALL Children?’

    Such an ideology of universal responsibility would ultimately necessitate and justify ceaseless intervention in other societies. It’s precisely that kind of universal brotherhood happytalk that traps mainline politicians and press into needing so often to support wars of Jewish and commercial aggression. They don’t usually have the excuse of being shit-faced after a night down the pub, though. Telling a complete stranger, “Aw I love you bruv,” can seem to make sense at closing-time, Saturday night, but it isn’t good political philosophy.

    When ideologies are defined by expressly universal standards, it inevitably follows that they justify intervention and force in foreign countries when these standards are challenged. Where loyalty to a particular people is replaced with loyalty to an idea that’s said to have universal applicability, it becomes necessary to oppose alternatives to that idea, or that model of political order, wherever that opposition arises. Even Zambia! (In which country, of course, White nationalists have zero interest despite your hysterical fear-mongering.)

  11. S E Pearson wrote,

    “When the system is really up against it, who does it wheel out and point to as the “alternative”? that’s right, the good old boys whose efforts have done more to prop up the establishment than any other group, including the establishment itself.”

    You need to be a lot more specific.

    ***

    S E Pearson wrote,

    “When the propagandists of the orthodox take aim as this very project, the awesome ATS itself, what is the angle they go for every single fucking time? That should tell you all you need to know about WN and NS.”

    You need to be a lot more specific.

    ***

    S E Pearson wrote,

    ” good intentions do not presuppose any great perceptive abilities”

    I agree. I think you have good intentions.

    (But like I say, you’re being misled into serving other people’s agendas. If I can perceive it, you could too if you’d just look honestly.)

    ***

    S E Pearson wrote,

    “Those assumptions also prevent a comprehension of the whole idea of pan-seccessionism because for the NS an autonomous community is not the goal”

    Your hang-ups about NS prevent you from sticking to your principles regarding pan-secessionism. Let them go and do whatever the fuck they want to do. When you bitch and fuss about what this one particular group might one day do in some hypothetical future where they’re free to do what they want, all you’re doing is reinforcing the establishment’s propaganda about why the the ‘progressive boot’ can’t ever be taken off the people’s collective neck.

    ***

    S E Pearson wrote,

    “Fear is the defining characteristic of the NS and control is their answer to it. Its basically the same mentality which drives some people to lock their kids in a basement rather than allow them to face the very real dangers of the world.”

    Fear of those who fear WN/NS is clearly the defining motive behind your endless attempts to warn people away from National Socialism and other forms of self-rule for peoples that happen to be White.

    Control of the debate regarding who is and isn’t a good secessionist, and why some ideas and groups really shouldn’t be supported in their attempts to gain the freedom to live as they choose, is your answer to that fear.

    It’s basically the same mentality that drives establishment politicians and writers to create basically the same bullshit excuses for their objectively anti-White programs.

    For fear of the anti-Whites.

    You all should stop doing their dirty work.

  12. I read some of your blog, Spencer, where you talked about exhausting debates at SF. I’m feeling that right now. If I don’t post here again, it’s not you it’s me, I’m just not ready for a major commitment.

    Although of course I’ll read with interest anything else you post.

    And I’ll be fascinated to hear any answer to the question I posed over at your blog (comment awaiting moderation reproduced below)

    http://spencerpsn.wordpress.com/2012/09/01/confessions-of-a-right-wing-radical/#

    Spencer … “mountains of evidence that the Holocaust had took place”

    But you don’t identify any in the essay. Would you care to correct that omission and point out one or two here and address their significance? Just for closure.

  13. The real issue is the mountain of evidence that holocaust deniers are all retarded and that associating with them is politically suicidal.

  14. On the contrary,

    1) where the politics is all about freedom of association, as it is for nationalists, anarchists, secessionists, libertarians, and anti-war, anti-colonial and anti-empire movements, then allowing others to dictate which associations are acceptable is abject, open, deliberate and flagrant political suicide.

    2) allowing others to control your freedom of association is potentially suicidal in the real sense.

    3) by any reasonable measure the leading holocaust deniers are way more intelligent than average (a high proportion are PhD.s, most are very clear and cogent writers, they are often very successful in their professions). Their works likewise are of a far higher intellectual level than average writing. Typically the reader would need to way more scientifically and/or historically literate than average.

    4) Where the overlap between holo-revisionists and -deniers is undeniable, if holo-deniers are stupid, crazy, evil, how come they have successfully revised so many of the myths about the holo despite the intransigence and denials of orthodox historians?

    Why did holo-deniers have to force the orthodoxy to admit that the evidence refuted their myths about ‘death-camps’ in Germany proper; ‘human soap'; ‘electrocution conveyor belts'; ‘human lampshades'; the ‘order from Hitler’, the ‘centralized planning’ of the destruction of the Jews and so on?

    Why didn’t orthodox historians ever challenge the patently absurd claim of chief US prosecutor at Nuremberg, Robert Jackson, that the Germans had invented a device and used it to instantly ‘vaporize’ tens of thousand Jews at at a time, leaving no trace? Why did holo-deniers have to bring all the sanity and rationality to that party?

  15. Dean, I think you maybe guilty of something I am too frequently myself, which is of projecting my beliefs onto others. I wish it were the case that most WN and NS I have conversed with really did support the right of other people to self determination. If they did then things would be so much easier. However the sad fact is that most do not. Sometimes this is a result of a “white man’s burden” approach which, while it implicitly asserts the white supremacist argument refuted by all observable fact, is at least motivated by a concern for the common good. However more frequently it is driven by the assumption that “white” nations can not tolerate even potential threats on their borders. Or that they “must” secure resources from other nations at any cost in order to perpetuate, by which they mean extend for another couple of decades, the system which has reduced our people it the state they are in.

    Like I said there is a growing and encouraging movement with the radical right now, at least in the UK, who will no longer accept this BS. Who will no longer accept that the only solution is the final solution and who will simply not allow that NS is the only alternative, or that those that say it is, are some type of intellectual elite.

    There are alternatives. You noted that WNs were unprepared to accept responsibility for the right to self determination et al of the whole planet; and quite rightly so. A nation which can not free itself does not deserve to be free and nor can it be made so by some outside force; ask the Afghans. But by the same token nor are elements of any nation responsible for the rest of it. No one person or group may speak for a nation, the will of that nation is determined by the composite actions of every member of it. And no group has the right to impose its own beliefs on that nation, anymore than “a foreign power” does. This is nationalism 101.

    Which is why NS is BS. It is a simplistic solution based on obsolete assumptions, that the state has the power, or the right, to modify society as it sees fit. The irony is that the Germanic tribes which stopped the Empire at the Rhine refused point blank to become a pale imitation of the Empire. They fought and they won on their own terms, if they had NSs in their ranks they certainly weren’t listening to them.

  16. Actually a very good book on this is Wilmot Robertson’s “The Ethnostate.”

    It’s a popular book in US WN circles, and much of it would be offensive to leftists and libertarians.For instance, Robertson holds to a 1920s classic “Noridicism” and has views that are otherwise similar to Jared Taylor’s, though less Jewish-friendly.

    But beyond this, Robertson actually favors a pan-nationalism with self-determination being the guiding principle, and considers the decimation of indigenous peoples by the European colonialists to have been crimes against humanity. He also advocates outlawing war on an international level, and treating heads of state who initiate aggressive war as the equivalent of common murderers and robbers, subject to comparable punishments.

  17. I have no doubt that Robertson’s ideas listed there by Keith Preston would get a hearty cheer from the vast majority of members of Stormfront, the BNP or NDP. No doubt at all.

    It’s not I who is projecting, rather it’s Pearson who is first taking on other people’s fears and fear mongering canards and then projecting them onto normal White people or National Socialists.

  18. All I can say to that Nick is that ideas like anti-colonialism/imperialism and the universal right of self determination (nationalism) weren’t getting big love when I advocated them over 5000 odd posts on SF back in the 00’s. Nor were they all that popular when I was an active member of the BNP. Although the BNP isn’t actually, or wasn’t, comprised of fascists anyway, the rank and file were mostly plain old reactionaries who were more inclined towards Enoch Powell than Mussolini.

    NSs, kinda by definition, tend more towards Hitler than Mazzini. (Although of course there are those NSs who hold a similar view to Trotskyites with the Strassers in the role of Leon, betrayed embodiment of “real” X.) And Hitler wasn’t a big fan of 19th century “volkish” nationalism if you remember. In fact he hardly preferred it to gay interracial porn, and sensibly so because that’s what nearly killed him when Stauffenberg wrecked that party and on a couple of other occasions IIRC.

    If that has changed, and I admit and desperately hope it might have, then I would be surprised. But let’s not live in hope labouring under false illusions, let’s go right on down to SF and find out. But before we do, just so there be no confusion about the issues here, we are attempting to ascertain what exactly?

    I propose that we ask our WN friends if they feel the need to extend the rights they claim for themselves to other ethnicities. If the right of self determination trumps the “national interest” (we really, really need that, your, oil). And what they think “self determination” might be.

  19. Go ahead, Pearson, perhaps this time you’ll get the message.

    Somehow or other you missed these two threads from the 00’s, even though you were battling the SFers on these issues at the time, and somehow or other they didn’t tally the way you claim they should have:

    Poll: Imperialism: good or bad?

    Imperialism is a good thing. 6 26.09%
    Imperialism is a bad thing. 17 73.91%

    Representative comments:

    What if you’re on the loser’s side, in that case imperialism doesn’t sound that good, does it? And superiority in military strength does not equal moral or cultural superiority. Just look at the USA, currently trying to control the world, without a doubt the strongest country militarily wise, and yet i doubt there’s anyone who would want to live in a world controlled by them, where the dominat culture is the american one.

    i couldn’t care less about if the rest of the world is civilized and has white’s culture, i just want a world where i can live peacefully among whites. Others have their own culture, great for them, it’s wrong to impose any culture over another. If they realise our’s is superior and better and decide to adopt it, so good for them, otherwise, they can do whatever they want in their own countries, it’s not our business.

    1) Every people has the right to determine its own future.
    2) Imperialism will only bring benefit to the ruling classes and will take its toll to the ordinary people.
    I think these two reasons alone are enough to not be in favour of imperialism.

    Like Jonathan Swift, I am staunchily anti-imperialist.

    I find the concept of one country exerting its will over another very revolting, and so should most of the people who visit this forum and site.

    While empire may be good for the country on top; it only lasts for a little while…but the consequences can linger for much, much longer after the zenith has passed.

    Look at Rome, Britain, France, and the soon-to-be United States of Mongrels.

    http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t65252/

    ***

    Poll: Should we switch to Imperialism? (signifying that at least one SFer expected that other SFers would see imperialism as a change in general WN attitudes. An expectation borne out by poll results and comments, so again I wonder whom you were reading at SF).

    Yes 4 30.77%
    No 9 69.23%

    Representative comments:

    Its Best To Control Whats Inside Our Own Borders Before We
    Go After More Or We Could Wind Up With Nothing.

    The key to real wealth is genetics and you’re not going to get it by lording it over some mud.

    We are not in a position to do it right now. Even if we were i don’t know if its a good idea as once you go down that path you cannot stop until your the last one standing. It creates to much hate and resentment….and humans have long memories.

    We have a continent all to ourselves right now. It is said that only the US has the capability to invade us successfully. I’d rather see our defences upgraded so that no one can successfully invade us.

    Then we would be in a position to do what we like.

    Empires have always crumbled because they couldn’t hold their own borders! We must concentrate all of our efforts on holding ours

    Not that it will ever again come to pass, but I support Imperialism. I would support of a return of the Hohenzollerns to the throne of Germany, my family served the crown for many years prior to 1918. The world, particularly the third world was a much more stable entity during Imperial/Colonial rule South West Asia, India, Africa and the Middle East were much more peaceful. Sadly though, the time of and for imperialism has come and gone.

    Let’s keep the good Western countries as havens of White culture and enterprise. Australia, USA, New Zealand, Canada and the better parts of Europe!

    Imperialism is the last few centuries, mate! We now further our race through maintaining our homelands and using our wonderful White intellect and abilities! That doesn’t mean isolationism. We trade with other nations, establish practical political relationships, and when required take action to further our security and interests, even on foreign soil if necessary.

    http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t281893/

    ***

    And from 2011 … Poll: Most Americans Strongly Oppose U.S. Intervention in Arab Countries

    Where SFers celebrate the fact that normal Americans think like White Nationalists. Representative comments:

    I don’t want a single U.S. Marine, soldier or sailor killed in yet another barbaric, third world **** hole.

    I’d bet that most American parents out there are unwilling to let their kids they raised for 18 plus years die for some cause halfway around the world that has nothing to do with them. This filling the role of the World’s Police Force has got to come to a grinding halt, now.

    And **** libya. Let them sort out their own problems…

    My dear mother was right. She said ” Bush doesn’t need to stir up those little brown people.”
    Now we have a tiger by the tail.
    Bring our troops home.

    http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t783620/

    ***

    And from a coupla months ago … Some good news: Poll says majority of Americans aligned with Libertarian Party on foreign policy (where again the langauage and assumptions give a clue to how SFers see themselves quite differently to you)

    Representative comments:

    We’ve seen the consequences of US meddling with others’ wars and affairs several times before. World War 2, Korean War, Vietnam, Gulf War, Libya, Egypt, Syria…
    It’s time US starts worrying about its internal problems and puts aside the securing of Israel’s interests on this planet.

    Surely this could be an issue that actually unites everybody on the political spectrum. I think plenty of people; whether they be conservative, liberal, or moderate are opposed to endless amounts of money thrown at the Middle East.

    TY for this thread. Most Americans oppose wars for
    Israel and Jewish supremacism, even the minorities.

    Isolation. The only answer for White , Christian America. We will survive

    This is good news! Stopping immigration is a lot more important.

    The media will endlessly slander non-interventionism as isolationism. And all people who support it as “Populists.” Which is of course more media code speak.

    Populism is when white working class people want something.

    Democracy is when the elites and/or the nonwhites want something.

    The only reason we need US military bases in so many foreign countries is as an insurance policy for Zionist Imperialism.

    http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1012661/

    ***

    Also from last year … Poll: How do you feel about Black Nationalism
    I support it, black nationalists have the same goals we do, and wish them the best 31 23.85%

    I support it, only because it serves white interests for separation, don’t care about their fate 58 44.62%

    I oppose it, because it promotes violence against white people and unites an aggresive crowd 29 22.31%

    Other 12 9.23%

    http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t869748/

    ***

    Finally, another poll from the early 00’s you missed.

    What attitudes/ideologies do you have (WNs only)?

    Selected results:

    Imperialism (desire to conquer and rule other groups) 5 7.94%

    Nationalism 45 71.43%

    Environmentalism 22 34.92%

    Fascism/Corporatism (also National Socialism/Nazism) 23 36.51%

    (Even Anarchism beat Imperialism @ 7 11.11%)

    http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t186820/

    ***

    How do you explain how wrong you were about these people and the opinions you say they were expressing, S E Pearson?

  20. Nick, I only used the SFUK forum, that’s how much I’m into self determination, I didn’t even want to influence other nations through a bulletin board . So OK, we do have some people here not being complete assholes. However I would suggest the methodology isn’t what it might be, your first link is from SF Latin America for example, not representative. The debate on American foreign policy isn’t the same as a debate on Imperialism, a lot of those guys might have a very different attitude if rather than “US soldiers dying for zionist NWO” it was “US soldiers dying for white pride, national security, glory etc”. Also most of those threads were short, these were not issues that really grabbed the locals. I went on over there and clicked the first one in “opposing views”.

    http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1029610/

    What do you make of that?

    Yeah sure, we have some people making a least some sense. However you’ve got an equal number just being massive jerks, notice that the second group is generally comprised of those who have made the most posts?

    One thing I have noticed about the radical right, is that the one almost universal denominator is a belief in the malevolence of Jews. That’s the least controversial issue on the whole spectrum. On the thread I picked out some explicitly state that “well the guy is a N***** but at least he’s “Jew aware”” (paraphrase). That is kinda a really big problem for most people who are not inclined to the radical right, it’s a deal breaker in fact. I find that to be just incredible since that is not a view found very often in the general population and isn’t actually essential to the doctrine, well I don’t see how it is anyway.

    Another problem we have hear is that you are using the term “NS” and “WN” (and “normal people” whoever they are) interchangeably. I really don’t think that your idea of NS is one shared by many people of any political orientation. Self determination is not an idea associated with it commonly for example. The concept of WN is pretty flawed, since most people who use it aren’t proposing “pan-white” states, so what is the relevance of the “white” bit if not to specifically exclude everyone else? However even if we assume we know where people who call themselves “WN” are coming from that does not make them NS (or even the other way around, you can be NS and not WN or any kind of “nationalist”).

    But anyway, let’s go see what they say.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s