Wednesday, May 13, 2009

White Advocacy: Ideas for Alternative Media

One major force brainwashing most Whites against thinking and acting ethnocentrically is the mainstream media (MSM), which includes newspapers, magazines, TV, radio and their internet outposts. Like all of our "civil society" institutions, the MSM constantly treats the smallest assertion of White identity or ethnocentrism as racism or supremacism while hypocritically supporting much stronger racial identity and ethnocentrism among ALL non-White groups. This was an important factor in my realizing that the left is not really "celebrating" other groups so much as despising Whites.

So one important strategy for White advocates is to subvert, replace or neutralize the impact of these various anti-White institutions. Essentially we're in a deep hole and, barring some unforeseen catastrophic event, it will take many years, much effort and much better organization to dig ourselves out.

Regardless of the many possible futures of the US, Whites must fight against the pervasive anti-White double standards that currently dominate our "civil society". Hopefully our system will be open to reform, and it is even possible that a fair, color-blind society could be recovered where Whites' ethnic interests, identity, peoplehood and survival are treated with the same respect as other groups, but unfortunately, we're on a radically different course and have been for decades.

Some Causes of the Mainstream Media's Anti-White Bias

The MSM are dominated by corporate interests, White guilt, multiculturalism, political correctness and disproportionate Jewish influence, among others. Part of this anti-White environment is propagated because the left has gradually taken control of our "civil society" over the last fifty years, so they're able to strongly influence many facets of our culture and society, including co-opting many of our cognitive elites, which further strengthens the forces for the left.

The left has changed the rules by first claiming to create a color-blind society, but then heaping contempt on color-blindness in favor of excoriating Whites and their supposed "White Privilege" and explicitly rejecting the color-blind ideal. This, among other evidence, demonstrates their bad faith and animosity to Whites. Of course many on the left probably don't interpret the evidence this way, so part of our advocacy must be to grapple with the various leftist arguments and values in their strongest, most cogent forms, to be able to rebut them, so we can recapture some of our lost brethren and reduce the losses of our cognitive elites in the various cauldrons of leftist indoctrination. I plan to explore this issue in a future post. It's also important to understand the psychology and motivations that drive leftists and how this manifests in their activism and behavior.

While the left obsesses over equality of outcome between Whites and NAMs (non-Asian minorities), and insists upon coercive law to create an unnatural parity, I've never seen the slightest concern on their part to level disparities between Whites and Jews, which are about as large, or between Jews and NAMs, which are truly massive, or between Asians and NAMs, or all the various intra-group disparities. If the left is truly concerned with disparate outcomes, why do they focus upon one particular dispartity instead of considering the full set of disparities? Of course, if they confronted the existence of these many disparities, they would have to seriously question their belief that the primary cause of the Black-White disparity is anti-Black racism and discrimination by Whites.

Pressures on Existing Mainstream Media

Fortunately several forms of media are struggling financially, primarily from the emergence of the internet, which radically changes the possibilities and economics of information dissemination as well as increasingly draining the advertising that most media channels rely on to fund their operations. Stories seemingly appear daily lamenting the tribulations of the third estate. Yeehah!

The media frequently pushes diversity, multiculturalism, anti-White rhetoric, White guilt and politically correct lies, and it suppresses "hate facts", contrary stories or dissenting views of the diversity party line. They particularly favor hiding non-White crime against Whites, including some shockingly brutal atrocities, like the Knoxville Horror, the Witchita Massacre or the killing of the White Polish-American Marine Sgt. Janek "Jan" Pawel Pietrzak and his Black wife, Quiana Jenkins-Pietrzak, by four Black Marines, including two of Sgt. Pietrzak's underlings.

An analysis of Google or Google News stories discussing Sgt. Pietrzak demonstrate that many of the modest portion of the MSM that covered the story, obscured the fact that all four of the killers were Black. Look at how sparse the Google News coverage is over the last month even though new court testimony is currently ongoing. Google News only shows one non-local, English language newspaper covering the story, The New York Daily News, and they don't mention in this story that the four killers were Black, although they had been one of the few MSM outlets to do so previously.

Our MSM masters insult our intelligence by not even mentioning the possibility that maybe, just maybe, there is a racial angle to the killing. This ABC News link contains NO mention of the racial angle and the embedded video also refuses to articulate any possibility of a racial motive, preferring to blather on about the mysterious motive that will probably be forever unknown. It's only tribute to the possibility of a racial angle was their showing the mug shots of all four suspects which demonstrates they were all Black. What the ABC News video actually does is use coded language that might sail over the heads of some average or below-average people who might interpret their language literally, while conveying a subtext that implies a racial motive is present, particularly through their grandiose evasions and subtle clues in framing the story including the images shown and the background details about the couple, but by explicitly refusing to articulate this, they're demonstrating the power of political correctness to enforce a grossly dishonest interpretation of reality in spite of our "lying eyes". Ultimately it's an exercise in raw power to condition the viewers to recognize and submit to the officially approved limits of allowed speech and thoughts in our increasingly totalitarian society.

This is a classic illustration of Theodore Dalrymple's observation:
Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.

We're supposed to believe that the killers savagely killed Mr. and Mrs. Pietrzak, including rape and sexual abuse of his wife, for a simple robbery. Even worse a CNN transcript of a show from the day before most of the initial stories were published demonstrates that the full details of the story were common knowledge, and presumably all the MSM reporters basically knew the same facts, yet they deliberately chose to hide many of these important details. Note that a few newspapers did report the fact that the four killers were Black, but many deliberately left this out, along with other details indicating the gratuitious violence, rape and racist graffiti.

Also, the authorities are guilty in this little charade, since if it had been a Black sergeant and his White wife savagely killed and raped by four White underlings with racist graffiti at the crime scene, they definitely would've pushed for any applicable hate crimes, under massive pressure from a firestorm of international media coverage and howls of outrage by the Black "leadership" gang of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, the NAACP, among others, and, oh yeah, the press and the rest of our "civil society" would INSTANTLY call it a horrible hate crime. There would likely be many statements released by legions of academic activists denouncing the brutal White racism gripping America and hundreds of candlelight vigils would be held across the county with guilt-drenched SWPLs denouncing their Whiteness (really meaning all those non-enlightened troglodyte White masses). Yet for the Pietrzak family slaughter, the MSM don't dare mention the term hate crime (same for the prosecutors up to this point that I've seen). Hate crime? Nah, it's just a robbery gone wrong.

I personally think hate crime law is a travesty and should be completely scrapped in favor of only enforcing the law based on the criminal's actions without trying to puzzle out whether politically incorrect throughts were motivating the criminal, but given the existence of hate crimes, they should be applied objectively, uniformly and fairly. Obviously in this case and several other notable cases, horrific hate crimes have been committed against Whites with absolute silence from our worthless "civil society". The easy test for double standards is whether people think or act differently when identities are interchanged as I illustrated above.

The media is losing credibility because of their blatant political correctness and dishonesty in hiding and obscuring Black and immigrant crime, among other taboos. "Coincidentally", the big and little lies they push also benefit globalist, corporate interests and a small, wealthly elite, while marginalizing non-elite Whites and the middle and working classes in general. Blacks are and will be hurt more in the future by massive third world immigration, but their "leadership" doesn't care.

The government is also losing credibilty with their handling of this case. These sorts of double standards are exactly why I've given up on the color-blind society and realized it's a huge con game with Whites as total chumps (and I don't think I'm alone in making this conclusion).

Although this media bias hasn't gone unnoticed, and even though many average people might feel uneasy about the media, they don't have any viable alternatives, since even "conservative" media is really mostly neoconservative and in thrall to corporate interests, which also supports much of the politically correct, multicultural agenda, including massive legal immigration and amnesty.

The rise in cynicism and the loss of credibility coupled with the technological possibilities of the internet provide an opportunity for serious alternatives to arise.

Closely related is the development of alternative cultural production and the arts which I'll consider in a separate post.

First I'll lay out some reasons why a diverse alternative media that begins reaching a wider audience seems inevitable, and after considering the specific alternative channels, I'll consider other facets of alternative mass media. America has had a variety of alternative media channels for many decades. In the realm of newspapers and magazines, a wide variety of relatively low circulation offerings have probably been available stretching back to the founding of our republic and certainly many niche publications covering the full political spectrum from far-right to far-left have been available throughout the 20th century.

The internet has enabled a wider audience to see alternative perspectives with very little effort or cost to the consumer, while many of the traditional media costs, like printing and mailing have been eliminated for internet publications. Not surprisingly, many new internet-only publications have sprung up reaching much larger audiences than were previously possible.

Basically I believe it will soon be possible for a variety of alternative viewpoints to begin reaching a much wider audience than previously possible because technological changes will let mass consumers easily bypass the current corporate-controlled distribution channels, like TV cable networks or limited radio channels, using internet-based devices. It will be interesting to see how the established media react to the onslaught of competition from so many diverse sources, including various ethnic advocates, the full spectrum of political beliefs from far left to far right, quirky subcultures and bands of amateur individuals, among others.

Let's now consider some specific media.

Alternative Magazines

Alternative magazines are probably the most successful form of alternative media with the widest current readership. They've blossomed in the internet era as the quintessential example of how internet technologies make it much cheaper to produce and distribute content, enabling an end run around corporate control mechanisms, like limited exposure through bookstores, magazine stands, etc. By using various open-source products and tools, including sophisticated content management systems, attractive, powerful and professional sites can be developed very inexpensively. As new web technologies are developed, web savvy activists can stay right at cutting edge.

Magazines are typically distinguished from newspapers in being delivered on a weekly or monthly basis instead of daily and including more analysis and background rather than raw news coverage. But this distinction seems be eroding somewhat as most online magazines have daily online content that supplements their traditional periodical content.

A few good examples are VDARE, Taki's Magazine and I trust VDARE on immigration and other topics far more than any MSM source. Taki's Magazine is an internet-only magazine offering a traditional or paleoconservative perspective that has been pushed out of the entire MSM by liberals and neoconservatives with very few exceptions like Pat Buchanan, who probably has to mask his real views at least a little to avoid losing his media role. Many of us who imbibed the neoconservative party line from National Review, the Weekly Standard, Fox News or Rush Limbaugh, now realize there is a much wider universe thanks to the alternative media available mostly through the internet. Likewise gives a critique of American imperial and war policies rarely seen in the MSM.

There are hundreds and even thousands of additional sites covering the full spectrum politically and focusing on different target audiences and subject areas. A goal of White advocates is to support existing White-friendly sites while creating and supporting more. When I say White-friendly, I mean it probably doesn't push White advocacy hard, but rather completely rejects the typical anti-White assumptions of the MSM and includes positive views of Whites, probably mostly implicitly, is open to questioning all the current sacred cows and provides a more respectful view of White advocates, among a wide range of voices. Separate media outlets might take up White advocacy more directly. The goal is to encourage an open, honest dialogue and fair treatment.

Part of the propaganda war against Whites is accomplished through subtle (and not-so-subtle) injections of anti-White digs into stories concerned with other matters. We can use the same techniques in the media we control and influence. This should be particularly effective in other domains, like cultural production. So, for example, other topics, like family, parenting, cooking, lifestyle, travel, cultural, educational and many other subjects can be developed that support subtle, non-overbearing White-friendly rhetoric. The goal is to displace a noticeable portion of the audience currently given to corporate media that nearly universally pushes political correctness, multiculturalism and anti-White subtexts. Some of these new media can even be financially self-supporting or lucrative through revenue streams currently going to anti-White corporations. Others may run mostly on volunteer labor with charitable donations or White-friendly foundations supporting the core costs. One approach might be to create more regional and community content to build local participation and identity instead of our current phony top-down, leveled, national culture driven by the manipulative values of our elites and corporations desiring good, little consumers buying lots of crap they mostly don't need.

An excellent project would be to create a White-friendly current events magazine that competes with Time, Newsweek and US News and World Report while keeping the costs much more contained through mostly web operation and skillful use of volunteer labor and organization. Hopefully it could eventually be reasonably self-supporting and synergize with a network of White-friendly companies, organizations and other media allies. Many of the skills used to create professional alternative media have market value, so volunteer labor can also gain valuable experience, skill enhancement and networking to further the volunteer's career while fulfilling activist passions.

Another approach is to aggregate content from several existing alternative magazines to create a higher-reach virtual magazine. This can also act as advertising for the original publications by making more readers aware of the different specific sites. A related concept is to create a Reader's-Digest-like magazine that simplifies and highlights the most important points both for time-limited readers and average readers with non-elite literacy skills. Imagine providing Steve Sailor summaries accessible to the everyday folks along with their ability to navigate to additional detail if they need convince their peers of the substance of the points. An important goal is to enable both our elites and average citizens learn to rebut the left's arguments and rhetoric through facts, logic and our own rhetorical techniques for offense and defense. This is an important part to trying to salvage our "civil society" by opposing and ultimately reversing its current anti-White bias.

I believe that print-on-demand technology, e.g. at an airport booth, will make it feasible to create inexpensive hardcopy magazines for those wanting to read physical media while cutting out pretty much all of the traditional costs and complexities of physical distribution. But many consumers won't bother with reading physical media when they can directly read the content over the web, including the proliferation of flexible new devices. Imagine an Amazon Kindle-like device with another two or three generations of development where you have high-quality color screens that look like paper where you're wired into the internet to follow links, look up unknown words, automatically delve into greater detail for topics discussed in articles, etc. And new magazine content can be automatically retrieved if the user chooses.

Even better, some of these devices will likely enable a full range of media viewing, including magazines, newspapers, audio, radio and TV, as well as sophisticated information management tools. A major goal is for White advocates to be on the cutting edge in developing and exploiting these many changes both to benefit economically as well as spreading our message.

Alternative Newspapers

As mentioned earlier newspapers are under particular market pressure for many reasons including the loss of subscribers as many consumers shift to internet for their daily news, while their primary sources of advertising revenue, including classified ads, are transferred to other channels, like the internet and direct mail. And, as previously discussed, a fair number of people are aware that newspapers are not providing the full story for many important issues, are beset by political correctness and multicultural ideology, and that most are owned by a handful of corporations closely interconnected to our ruling elites, but there aren't too many alternatives.

Most newspapers rely on a few news services, like the Associated Press or Reuters, to provide much of their national and international coverage and pretty much all of these services are aligned with the globalist, multicultural elites. Many of the European news services are closely tied to the state elites, commonly receiving government financing and various monopolistic advantages, and it clearly shows in their coverage.

Even much of the traditional alternative press, which is normally somewhat liberal or leftist, is being bought by corporations to target their predominantly SWPL readers. Some local, alternative conservative newspapers also exist, for example, publishing weekly.

A critical way to gain credibility is to exploit the dishonesty of the current media by bolding covering the stories suppressed by the MSM, particularly politically incorrect crime. The public craves accurate and honest information but the current elites don't want to provide it because it directly conflicts with their goal of radically transforming our country demographically and politically, meaning their plans are directly against the interests of most of the native population, but they don't want the chumps to understand this. Imagine sites that keep reliable and detailed statistics and stories regarding politically incorrect local crimes and other attempted official malfeasance, like when police in some large cities try to keep crime statistics down by discouraging victims from filing crime reports. If the general public knew there were reporters and activists committed to fighting this official corruption, it would be much harder for the elites to continue their current con game, because sympathetic sources, including those within our institutions, would know they'd have trustworthy reporters to inform.

Unless the elites try to create a totalitarian state, they will be unable to stop the free flow of information. If they do try to create the totalitarian state, they will likely find they've gone to far and have caused a major rebellion against their usurpations, at least if they try within the next decade or two.

It is vital that we create some White-friendly newspapers, including many local ones and at least a few national and international ones. A service can be created by pooling together the resources of many local actors with some national and international resources supported by the many local papers and other organizations, foundations and donors who value these alternatives. Many of the national and international resources can actually be part of an international network of people cooperating to provide wide coverage while mostly using local resources in each case. For example, hundreds and even thousands of European volunteers and advocates could provide substantial coverage throughout Europe for worldwide audiences, just like thousands of American workers can provide American coverage for European audiences as well as Americans. Some of this already exists on the internet, but it hasn't been organized to synergize into effective national and international networks.

Many of the local newspapers can start by supplementing existing local newspapers. So instead of attempting comprehensive local coverage, they can start by focusing on those stories normally supressed by corporate media. They can also act as critics of the local papers by demonstrating the various devious and dishonest ways that stories and events are censored and slanted by corporate media. They can also provide truly free speech related to local issues, unlike many existing newspapers which censor many politically incorrect comments. I believe a better approach than censorship is to provide various tools that allow people to filter out intellectual sabateurs without actually suppressing free speech. For example, in an open forum, some people might try to disrupt honest argumentation by creating many nuisance posts. Eventually such commenters will lose their credibility with most readers who will ignore anything they say. I believe tools could be built that would allow full freedom of speech while empowering users and groups of users to overcome those who essentially argue in bad faith and detract from useful discussions. Other tools could also help in supporting or rebutting arguments by pointing to more detailed arguments and evidence. The goal is to encourage honest, open-minded and thoughtful consideration of many different perspectives to try to come up with the truth and the best policies. I plan to discuss this more in a separate post.

Much of this work can be done purely using the internet and various low-cost or free content management tools. Guides can be created to help intelligent average citizens act as effective fact checkers, researchers, reporters, writers and editors. I also suspect that many older, retired citizens who are deeply concerned about the direction and future of our country will volunteer, and since they are retired, they are less able to be intimidated for fear of their future career. So ultimately much less money would be needed because we could harness more activist and volunteer labor and we would not be so concerned about making money. The more success this media achieves, the more volunteers, donors and supporters it will attract. Parts of the media could also pursue various media-related revenue streams which would both empower themselves while denying those resources to the anti-White corporate media.

One way local volunteers and workers, in many cases relative amateurs, can act as effective reporters is to get out and do much of the tedious legwork that is a vital part of genuine reporting. That involves attending various official or community meetings, talking with many different people within the community, pooling and analyzing local information, much like an intelligence gathering operation, analyzing various official and legal records, building relationships with various power brokers, bureaucrats, elites and average workers within many different organizations, and assertively using laws like the Freedom of Information Act to compel the authorities to provide information in the public interest. Evasive or deceptive behavior by authorities can be exposed to create public pressure for keeping them honest. As these movements gain more credibility, it will be much easier for sympathetic or self-interested members of institutions like government, corporations, organizations, etc, to act as sources, including anonymous whistle blowers. Obviously great care must be taken when working with anonymous sources who sometimes have selfish interests for selectively leaking some information or disinformation. Alternative newspapers and news services can have a public web page with different ways to contact reporters to provide information, providing tips on internet anonymity, uploading documents securely over the web, phone calls, personal meetings and even clock-and-dagger techniques for the extremely cautious, like Deep Throat used during Watergate. Also, as they gain prominance, officials will be forced to give these reporters the same rights they given to other professional reporters.

By focusing on honesty, accuracy, objectivity, fairness and long-term credibility, trust can be built up among Whites and non-Whites alike. The core of White advocacy to me is that Whites are merely arguing for simple fairness so that they are treated no worse or better than any other group and that we can pursue our interests just as much as other groups are allowed and encouraged to. White Advocacy to me is about being pro-White rather than anti-Black or anti-Jewish. Sure, some parts of other communities sometimes do things we consider anti-White and we'll criticize them for that, just as it would be reasonable for members of other communities to criticize Whites if they believe Whites have behaved unfairly, like various historical injustices Whites have committed against Blacks, Native Americans or Jews that needed to be rectified and atoned for. Ultimately, we need to look to the future and try to build a positive, healthy and fair society, and I think free speech, inquiry and debate are critical tools to achieving that.

A major goal for much of this new alternative media is to be White-friendly so that our perspectives, beliefs and arguments are treated with the respect, objectivity and fairness they rarely receive in any MSM. Critical scrutiny would also be applied to current sacred cows whose misdeeds are currently shielded by the MSM. The overriding goal is to overturn the current political correctness and de facto censorship that help to deeply corrupt our "civil society" and to reach out to our currently brainwashed average citizens and cognitive elites. Although there would likely be many different niches within the White advocacy ecosystem, I think this relatively moderate one is the most important because it can help the most in deprogramming large numbers of our people and breaking the political correctness stifling much of public conversation.

Print-on-demand stations that rapidly print magazines or newspapers in airports or news kiosks, can be exploited. For example, if a customer knows they're going to go by a certain kiosk, they can order their desired product and prepay for it using standard online payment systems so they'll be assured of not having any significant wait. There might even be a fully automated disbursement system where they enter a purchase code and it automatically dispenses their order with no human intervention. They can choose which stories to include in the printout based on their interests. So each person may get the parts that most interest them. Perhaps it typically takes 20 or 30 seconds to print out a typical custom newspaper (it probably won't have the huge volume of ads that current ones do) and by preordering they can avoid any delays from competing customers. Although the printers would probably be designed so that customers rarely have to wait longer than three minutes under most circumstances even if they walk up. Of course within a few years you'll be able to have your mobile device detect your location and automatically show you local kiosks and their availability and let you quickly make your desired order. This shows how current magazine and newspaper distribution could be radically changed for those demanding paper copies.

But probably most people would dump paper altogether and just read the content over the web or on new-and-improved devices, as discussed above for magazines.

Alternative TV

TV is the critical media for reaching our average citizens. Many average and below-average people don't read all that much but watch plenty of TV. This is a crucial media that must be challenged both for news and for culture production, which I plan to discuss separately. TV can also be valuable for our cognitive elites, with high-quality, thoughtful and articulate programs being an important niche we must cover, i.e. a PBS alternative.

Imagine brutally honest documentaries done with professional graphics and reporters intelligible to average TV viewers directly confronting topics like Non-Asian Minority crime or immigration and how various elites benefit from deceiving the general public about these problems. I think within a year or two such shows would capture significant market attention, even if it was secret guilty pleasure of borderline SWPLs. Imagine frequent, vivid illustrations of how our country is being colonized and transformed into an alien land, which normally Hollywood and the MSM love to hide while propagandizing us with warm little lies. Imagine an investigative news magazine that targets Hollywood, the MSM, corporations, the refugee industry, and the full universe of our politically correct, multicultural and leftist enforcers. Imagine talk shows with experts like Peter Brimelow, Steve Sailor and Jared Taylor instead of the usual liberals and neocons. Of course I'm all in favor of useful debates between a wide range of people including leftists, liberals, various non-White advocates, neocons, moderates and others. The problem is that paleoconservatives, race realists and other perspectives have been almost entirely excluded from MSM exposure and the exposure they typically get has negative framing.

Pretty much all the news programs produced today like morning, noon, nightly and late night news as well as actual breaking news and special events could be covered. Also the full range of support and analysis, like talk shows, interviews, documentaries, debates, group discussions and many others. We should be open to emerging and innovative formats, especially those exploiting new technological possibilities that encourage wider community participation. Various technologies like voice masking could be used to encourage participation in controversial subjects while political correctness still reigns.

The critical innovation will be a new generation of devices that will allow TV sets to connect to the internet and download content, essentially bypassing our current satellite, cable and broadcast channels. These have revolutionary potential to break the corporate control currently applied to all of these capital-intensive or physically constrained distribution channels. So new virtual networks and stations can be created that anyone can "tune into" over the internet. If people like what they see, they will explore other offerings on these channels and related media, and they will recommend these channels to their friends and family.

The new devices can be based on open standards and even open-source software with new features being added periodically. They would have disk storage and act like a DVR where they can hold store shows, perhaps even hundreds or thousands of shows before they run out of space. They might very easily allow extra storage like external hard disks to be added that can boost the available storage. They might even allow customers to use and support peer-to-peer networking so the users can donate some of their internet bandwidth, particularly when they're not using it, and some small portion of their storage to hosting general content, so that there no central server is needed to host the content. Instead the general public can mostly use each others' storage devices to retrieve the shows, which makes media distribution time and cost much lower for content creators. Peer-to-peer technologies can also have very high-performance. Based on upcoming internet improvements, many people will probably be able to watch high-definition TV shows, including news, with at most a short delay to cache a little data to improve the quality of the performance. But people could also automatically download the shows they know they want to see so they can watch without having to worry about network problems disrupting the show.

Even slow network connections would be able to download shows of interest with high quality, it would just take more time, so they would wait to watch the show until after it is fully or nearly downloaded. Like DVRs the devices would be able to both download new content while playing currently stored content. The software could make it easy to create disks to store the shows to share with others who may not have internet access or for archiving. These devices could have reasonably intuitive on-screen menus and help to make them easy for average users. Since they're hooked to the internet, they could download audiovisual help that explains the devices, or allow users to browse help forums on their TV looking for help with their problems or to post a question. The device could probably enable full blown web surfing and other information services and tools as well as TV, especially now that most TVs will be high-definition. Some new internet-TV synergies may be possible, allowing the TV content to be playing in part of the screen while enabling other tools to work next to that. For example, the user may make text or audio notes that comment on the TV show, perhaps to investigate or clarify some point. Friends or virtual communities could interact while watching a show together or a user could create comments and questions for other members of a virtual community synchronized with different parts of a show. One use of the capability would be for activists to critique and analyze existing shows to help create guides debunking MSM propaganda and manipulation.

The tools to create news programs and documentaries, like cameras and editing equipment are much cheaper than historically, so low-cost equipment can be used to create professional-looking shows. Ideas, techniques and software can be shared and developed by this network of local channels, further lowering costs and improving effectiveness.

So given the possibilities of this new technical infrastructure, we want to create a White-friendly alternative media just like for the magazine and newspaper segments. In fact many of the same people can contribute across these different media, for example, doing research and journalistic leg work, and the different organizations can closely collaborate and cross-promote one another. Again, local people can start by covering the set of local stories that are currently suppressed and heavily slanted to build up market credibility. These various local virtual channels can pool their efforts with other local channels to create virtual national channels, perhaps with a small dedicated national or international staff.

As far as advertising, among other possibilities, we can promote local manufacturers, businesses, organizations and individuals that are committed to strengthening local communities and American workers instead of offshoring, outsourcing and insourcing foreign workers like so many amoral, traitorous corporations. Ideally we'd create some alternate retail channels that supply American products made by real Americans. I'll explore those ideas in a separate post. Funding could include donations from appreciative audiences. Using the internet many small donations would go far in helping these enterprises stay solvent. For example, viewers could become sponsors of a yearly series by paying $10, or if they particularly like a show, they can give a $5 donation. They could buy moderately priced disk sets for their personal use or to give as gifts.

One interesting application would be to capture an MSM news show, like the nightly news and then wrap critical content around it so that average people can see where the corporate media is trying to manipulate and deceive them. This can be linked to proof, like detailed documents and stories that elaborate on this for those that want to verify the accuracy of the critiques. This approach can be applied to any TV production, including cultural production, documentaries, public debate, government meetings, etc.

These media can tie into partners in other media, like web sites, magazines, newspapers, radio, organizations, etc. One goal within White advocacy is to create broad networks that collaborate and synergize.

If a network became large and professional enough, it might eventually be hosted by traditional cable or satellite systems. The network could also be something of a grab bag that has a wide-range of shows, particularly early on when less content is being produced.

Alternative Radio

New communication technologies will make inexpensive audio feeds through the internet or personal mobile devices possible so that traditional radio can be supplemented or displaced, just like TV. The main goal is to make it extremely easy and convenient for average people. The same points made for other media pretty much apply to radio as well.

General Strategy of Alternative Media

It is likely that as alternative media becomes more successful, the MSM will feel pressured to be more honest in their coverage of issues, since they'll have been embarrassed by the detailed exposure and critiques they will suffer. This would be good since it would demonstrate success in improving our "civil society" to be more honest and less anti-White.

Since our highest goals are not making money and serving our corporate masters, we can be free to pursue any innovations that emerge, even if they don't bring in revenue. It is likely that many new possiblities will arise in the future, some of which will likely have revenue potential.

A wide range of content targeted to different audiences should eventually be produced. For example we need to target average, above average and exceptional people. Other demographic segments should also be targeted like different age groups, both sexes, different subcultures, including blue collar workers, small businessmen, professionals, government, law enforcement and military, non-White groups, and even artsy, SWPL-types and committed leftists. Different segments may be reachable to some degree by packaging the message differently. In fact constructive relations with non-Whites can be enhanced when they hear an open and honest hearing of White advocacy which I see as pro-White but not anti-non-White, other than our desire to stop further non-White colonization of our country which will upset the ethnic balance of the nation and likely ultimately lead to serious societal problems if not checked. If Whites behave badly, they should be chided and likewise if non-Whites behave badly, they should also be held accountable. A major problem with our current "civil society" is its intentional rejection of a simple, fair standard like this in favor of anti-White ideology.

Although my personal preference is for scrupulously honest reporting and analysis, logically we'd want to have the full spectrum of voices, including those that directly confront various strategems and dirty fighting of the left without being constrained by slavish adherence to the Marquess of Queensberry rules. We need to learn from what our competitors are doing and not doing and also from our mistakes.

Providing Superior Services

Since our main goal is to encourage open dialogue and spread our message, we would be very flexible in helping consumers receive and manage our message. For example, we'd make it easy to retrieve archives, search for particular segments of interest, create notifications when user-specified subjects are to be discussed and so on.

Many of our programs would be more enjoyable because they wouldn't constantly be interrupted by annoying commercials which usually undermines any genuinely thoughtful exploration of a topic. Our shows would also be more interesting because we would enable full discussions unconstrained by the chains of political correctness. More accurately, we'd want to create several different virtual channels that would cater to different segments. One important target audience are the large group of Whites mostly brainwashed by anti-White ideology, so the channels targeting them would be more subtle and circumspect in countering the normal MSM propaganda while raising questions about typical MSM assumptions and values. As consumers are deprogrammed, hopefully many would begin exploring more blunt alternatives.

Since the most important parts of our alternative media would be highly truth focused, we could provide much more background and raw data for interested consumers to see the validity of our reporting. For example, detailed collections of legal documents, perhaps with a few blackouts for the reasonable privacy of innocent parties or irrelevant personal details, FOIA requests and their responses or denials, would be linked to stories, along with more background information and full interview transcripts, press conferences, etc. The goal is to provide much more raw material allowing truth auditing than the press normally provides. This sort of truth auditing can be done by well-organized teams of people.

Other sources could be linked or excerpted under fair use. With some improved software tools some of this effort may not be all that difficult and over time very powerful resources could be built up exploring many issues. For example related stories, topics, background, and many other facets could be interrelated. The tools could also be provided to consumers to help them deftly navigate and search these resources as well as enabling an extensive community that would ultimately help recruit further members and volunteers, while allowing vigorous debate with opponents which would help us sharpen our understanding and arguments, or even make corrections or alter our viewpoint when we're wrong.

Alternative Supplements and Watchdogs to Existing Media

I plan to do a separate post discussing a variety of information services that would act as resources for White advocacy and other topics, but one valuable service is the media watchdog. Some already exist, like Media Research Center, but it seemed to have a somewhat partisan GOP and neoconservative slant when I last followed it off-and-on a few years ago. Sometimes we could make use of existing media watchdogs, but we'd also want our own to expose media bias, manipulation and propaganda based on our concerns.

One very important service would be to dissect MSM stories and shows showing exactly how they lie, omit, distort and otherwise dishonestly report the news. Analysis of how they serve other interests could also be done, including navigating the web of corporate and financial relationships linking various power structures.

Part of the offerings would be classic examples of the various propaganda techniques to educate and sensitize the public to dishonest reporting, while another part would be ongoing analysis of everyday news. Much of this everyday analysis could be done by an organized set of amateur volunteers who could be trained and managed by more sophisticated leaders. They could also use powerful information tools and databases to explore other stories and facts related to the story. This technique could be applied to local, regional, national and international stories and the MSM stories could be linked to corresponding alternative media treatments or to alternative media supplements that provide additional details that the MSM left out. By providing these politically incorrect details that the MSM loves to omit, alternative media will both weaken the public's trust in the MSM while enhancing their own reputation.

Some Miscellaneous Thoughts

One key requirement for building these alternative media starting with limited resources is to begin organizing and managing those resources available to us more intelligently and strategically. By pooling a relatively modest contribution of money, time, intelligence, creativity, energy and drive from tens and hundreds of thousands of volunteers, we could achieve far more than just complaining over the internet. I plan to discuss this in a separate post.

Our new media organizations would periodically be infiltrated by leftists and others desiring to undermine them. We would need to be cautious to prevent them from undermining the trust that must be built up slowly and carefully. Since a key value is honesty and transparency, there aren't any particular secrets to hide, but we must still think strategically about how they might try to undermine our fledgling institutions using dirty tricks.

We'll need a group of White advocacy lawyers and legal organizations to help defend against various attacks from our opponents, including frivilous lawsuits designed to consume our resources and energy. If they play dirty, we can also use our creativity to return the favor.

If a censorship regime is created here, we'd need to apply a wide-ranging strategy to overcome this. This is actually a real issue, because many parts of the White world are already facing creeping totalitarianism and censorship much more serious than the US. We'll likely need to help support and strengthen many technologies and services designed to evade censorship and government control. We'd likely have to work on dispersing our content across many countries worldwide and helping average people learn how to work around official censorship using various software tools. Fortunately we wouldn't be alone because there any many different groups working to overcome government censorship.

It's also important to remember that not everyone in the government is happy with the direction things are moving, so one important goal is to encourage our natural allies within many elite-dominated institutions to help undermine the elite and corporate power grabs, corruption and malfeasance.


  1. Great set of ideas. For us to succeed, i.e. survive, we have to be able to express our ideas without second guessing. We need media where whites can just say what they are thinking out loud, even though the TOO (Takers of Offense) object or would if allowed to interfere. We have to have the ability both in physical meetings and in media to banish the PC repression instinct and let the least sophisticated among us express their thoughts openly.

  2. In Britain SWPL types constantly complain about the right-wing press. What they mean is a newspaper industry dominated by Rupert Murdoch, so its actually more of a neocon press.

    However they know, at least sub-consciously, that most people really get their opinions delivered to them primarily by TV. And thats a solidly left/liberal enclave.

    So complaints about the right-wing papers, while genuine are really a misdirection.

    Its via TV that one is assailed by a constant stream of subtle anti-white messages. All the more powerful for not being clearly articulated.

    Of course many pro-white folks have commented on noted examples of anti-white bias in news reporting, adverts, papers, soap operas, kids TV etc etc etc

    Ive been thinking that we (well me anyway!) should start a blog/site focused pretty much on highlighting these examples. Of course from my pov it would mostly be British examples.

  3. Old Atlantic,

    I agree that free speech is important and would like everyone able to discuss their thoughts, ideas, feelings and so on, including people of all levels of intelligence, education or sophistication. No matter how intelligent a person is, there's pretty much always someone noticeably higher on the totem pole, so it's pointless to be obnoxious or arrogant with those below you as they struggle to gain wisdom by grappling with questions of truth, justice, fairness and so on. Better to help out our fellow human beings and discuss issues with good faith, good humor and a little patience.

    In fact many times highly intelligent people get wrapped up in abstraction and theory and can use some practical wisdom and straight talking that average people offer. They might even gain some real insight if they listen.

  4. Anonymous,

    The American media scene sounds similar although I've gotten the impression that Britain is even further under the boot of the cultural Marxists than the US. Thank God Britain has the BNP! I wish we had a party of patriots like that here. Of course they've put a lot of work into slowly building themselves into a viable party and we're much further behind creating such an alternative in the US. Our electoral rules make it somewhat harder to break out of a two party system that some have likened to a one party system with two wings, what we might call the left/liberal and the slightly less left/liberal. Either way the politically correct, multicultural, globalist elites win EVERY election.

    I'd like to see White advocates, among other interested parties, create very systematic sites like you mentioned, to ferret out all the propaganda techniques used to attack our identity, beliefs, peoplehood and morale, across the full spectrum of media and cultural production. You're absolutely correct that it saturates virtually everything put out, including children's shows, cartoons, ads, etc.

    By educating a wide range of people about the nuts-and-bolts of this manipulation, I'd hope it would somewhat defuse its effect and in time I have some hope that we can create alternative cultural production that uses similar techniques to build up Whites instead of tearing them down.

    We'd probably want each nation to have its own media criticism site although they could share much of the same software and even heavily cross link to help our comrades in other countries see various novel techniques as they are encountered. On factor with these sites is that as our governments try to impose more totalitarian political correctness, we'll probably have to be clever about evading and undermining the commissars, including hosting from many places including many foreign countries and maybe even anonymous, encrypted peer-to-peer data, kind of like electronic samizdat.

  5. The whole problem of reaching a mass audience is that the majority of people aren't smart enough to understand how they're being manipulated, even if it's explained to them in words of one syllable. The way to reach the majority is by entertaining them with well-written popular novels and action movies. If there were a white racialist action hero who is shown protecting his town from immigrants, for instance, it might change a few minds. Naturally, the hero would have to be a decent person who acts in self-defense. If I could write fiction, that's what I would do.

  6. latte island,

    I hold out a bit more hope that average and even slightly below average people can understand how they're being manipulated, particularly when it is pointed out with crystal clarity and concrete examples. I even hold out hope that with enough education in the various tricks, many of these average folks can then independently detect some of these tricks. It would be an interesting project for social scientists to experimentally assess what the cutoffs are across various dimensions like intelligence, street wisdom, personality types, education, etc, for detecting these manipulative techniques. You're right that at some point on the road to dullness and retardation, these folks become much more gullible and easily manipulated, even after careful and patient explanation and warning.

    As an example of why I think many average people have the ability to understand the manipulation when it is explained to them with clear examples, let's consider a variety of dramas and soap operas targeted at average and below average people. Many of these shows contain relatively sophisticated plots with diverse characters that employ many devious subterfuges or manipulative techniques that are typically revealed and resisted or punished by the climax. So intrigue, manipulation, control, exploitation and many other underhanded stratagems are well understand by many common folks.

    But many common folks might not suspect our system and elites are so manipulative, at least without outside coaching, from say talk radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity or Michael Savage, or the future efforts of White advocates.

    I completely agree with you that different audiences need different approaches, so that most average people probably aren't very interested in detailed evidence and carefully reasoned arguments, but would be much more affected by cultural works embedding the desired values and ideas more concretely through drama and emotion as your story idea suggests.

    One of my next posts is to explore the creation of alternative cultural products, which closely complements the alternative media discussed in this post, and the idea is to create exactly the sort of shows you just outlined, essentially using the same sort of propaganda and subtexts currently used against Whites to instead empower Whites, as our traditional cultural products used to do 60+ years ago

  7. Anonymous,

    A follow up thought.

    I encourage you to create a blog or site for pointing out the various examples of anti-White bias and propaganda, and possibly other kinds of propaganda as well. Nowadays many examples of video are on the internet at different video sites so you can even link to the show or the sample to illustrate your point. But even if you couldn't show the video, a verbal description of the technique would still be useful.

    Over time you can build up a taxonomy of different techniques they use for their propaganda and you'd probably get commenters who would provide additional examples and interpretations.

    And if there are other blogs and sites doing similar work, then, in time, you'll probably find out about each other and can cross-link. In this way we can build up a White advocacy ecosystem where many different people are collaborating and encouraging broader community participation while educating more of the general public, some of whom will discuss these issues with their friends and family.

    Eventually, if someone establishes a very professional site with many sophisticated tools, then perhaps most folks would migrate their efforts to that site, but until such a comprehensive solution exists, we need to do what we can to address these issues independently and piecemeal. This relates to an upcoming post where I want to consider organizing and coordinating our efforts to achieve greater return and synergy.

  8. Are you aware of the cartoon that Richard Vigurie (sp?) is running at his web site poking fun at liberal on a daily basis? I don't particularly like his web site, but I do enjoy the "Gentleman from Lickskillet" cartoon which is one small step in the direction I think you are talking about. It is a bit PC in its content, but at least it tries to be conservative rather than liberal. Now if we just had something like that that was pro-white ....

    There was discussion above of a movie promoting a white action hero. While I think this has possibilities, I think it needs to be done with care. By that I mean, it needs to promote white values, not the degenerate values of the non-white culture that has become the norm in our society. Thus you cannot just take a standard script with a black hero and put a white man in his place and accomplish what we want to do. The story line needs to be moral as well. It needs to be something more like a John Wayne western, promoting Western culture, rather than the culture of the jungle and the third world. It would not be a bad idea either to populate it with some really corrupt blacks, browns, etc. to show them in their true form. -- Dr.D

  9. SF,

    I agree with your comments. That is why we have to create the possibility for less educated and lower IQ people to bluntly say the obvious about race, etc. Right now, when they speak, and just say the truth right out, they are attacked. Few people come to their aid.

    The more sophisticated can hide what they say in a PC acceptable way or can pull in science, math, data to overcome seeming "ignorant" and "stupid". But the typical white person who speaks the plain blunt truth is immediately subjected to an attack like that on Carrie Prejean or others.

    Then the PC anointed ones on the "right" don't come to their aid but denounce them. The left will let us talk if we use euphemisms or load it up with science, but they won't let a GI from West Virginia tell the truth about Muslims. That is what we have to change.

  10. Dr.D

    Thanks for the tip. I'd never heard of that site or the cartoon which was indeed a good one from what I saw. I like the clean drawing style; it kinda reminds me of Dave Berg from Mad Magazine. He did a great job nailing the SWPL leader of "Kernel".

    At least Viguerie isn't a GOP toady pushing partisanship.

    You're right that the point of alternative cultural production is not to just reproduce the nihilistic trash churned out by Hollywood, although I think some flexibility is important in reaching broad audiences at different stages of receptiveness. A major goal is to strip out the usual anti-White, pro-multicultural propaganda and add some positive pro-White propaganda and subtexts. Typically the works should promote good values and character, White self-esteem and community and, yup, the villains would be MUCH more diverse than Hollywoods'. Not that I'm in favor of demonizing other groups. I think the shows could also show constructive relations between different groups to illustrate how a well-functioning, genuinely fair society might operate.

    I think many people are hungry to see quality shows that don't demonize Whites and do accurately reflect reality for things like Black and Brown crime or the other side of the story for multiculturalism instead of dissent-free diversity happy talk.

    But it wouldn't be effective to be too overbearing, serious or sappy about everything. I envision the alternative culture producers pretty much targeting all of the stuff currently made by Hollywood, and I'd think there would be plenty of other people and groups pursuing these new possibilities. For example, there might be an explosion of Black-produced content for Blacks, more local productions, like game shows, that let more people seek micro-fame, and tons of quirky stuff done for fun, some of which would become internet phenomena that launch creative careers. Basically production and distribution costs will be much lower, so the rules change.

    It seems to me that these technological changes will radically change both media and cultural production, leveling the playing field somewhat, so a kind of anarchy will reign where pretty much any interested party can make fairly sophisticated and professional works at relatively low cost, and if some group of people end up liking it, it will become popular.

    This will likely lead to a greater fragmentation in our shared culture as different subcultures have less-and-less in common, which is something we should be thinking about more because it's yet another centrifugal force pulling this country apart, which isn't necessarily good if we can salvage a decent civil society.

    I'll save the rest for my main post which I hope to put out in the next week.

  11. Im the anon (I'll stay that way for now) who put forward the pro-white media studies blog idea.

    Many times on sites like this I've seen people complaining of blatant anti-white bias in an ad/film/poster etc They then move on, as all are agreed they have seen the same thing. We need to make more people wake up to this stuff.

    I do think it would be worth having a systematic list of examples. The very point of this propaganda is the cumulative effect, therefore attacking single cases is pointless. Any one example has no real impact, even if pointed out, each individual example can be waved away like an annoying non-liberal fly. So its got to be big lists, movie after movie, ad after ad and so on.

    Ive just seen Beverly Hills Chihuahua, its little transgressions can easily be overlooked, but not when set against a hundred other movies. I doubt a single other parent watching it where I was picked up on anything other than a kids movie.

  12. Anonymous,

    The systematic approach will be extremely beneficial because as knowledge of propaganda techniques is built up, general patterns can be described and then new examples can be categorized according to known techniques and other data. If new propaganda techniques are found, they can be added. Powerful search and browsing capabilities can be added so users can quickly find the different examples among thousands and tens of thousands of examples. Even better, by having fairly systematic coverage, people could browse the shows or ads that they've personally seen or been affected by, and see an analysis of its anti-White bias, if any. Many people will be amazed at how sophisticated and subtle the full sweep of propaganda is when someone organizes this mass of data. knowledge is power. Even better, the work of building up this kind of resource can be split up among dozens or hundreds of volunteers.

    But to get to that point we must have people willing to get the ball rolling, like yourself.

    The cumulative and one-sided nature of the propaganda and its pervasiveness and sophistication in targeting many different demographics in different ways make this an important battle.

    One way we can understand the one-sidedness is by using the "identity interchange test" to see if swapping identities would lead to different degrees of acceptance by our civil society. For example Edmund Connelly discusses, among other things, a long series of TV ads by WAMU (an American bank that catered to minority markets and has subsequently gone bankrupt) that pushed a very strong anti-White subtext. Imagine what the reaction would be if they ran the exact same ads with a brilliant White banker and a herd of corrupt and idiotic Black bankers in a pen. Obviously many people and groups would be outraged and cry racism, yet they have no problem with the same kind of insult against Whites. The least they could've done was to have a more mixed group of bad bankers. James Edwards also discussed these ads.

    If they wanted to be more balanced about these kind of ads, they would mix up the heroes and villains among the different groups. They also wouldn't push so much multiculturalism, so that many ads look like a UN convention with only a modest number of Whites. I wouldn't expect ads in Japan to have only 30% Japanese people.

    One thing that will soon be possible with the relatively cheap production costs are alternative shows and ads, including parodies, that exactly invert the current anti-White propaganda and subtexts. If people find the inverted works outrageous and bigoted, then they can explain why they find the EXACT logically equivalent works acceptable or funny when Whites are the target. Some documentaries and discussions could screen both versions before mixed groups and people could discuss their reactions and why they think it is fair or not.

    Ultimately I think this will help more people realize that our current system is unfair and should be reformed. But that's where we need more people, both average and elite, who can recognize the many ways this propaganda is accomplished, through resources like your blog idea.

    I haven't watched much children's stuff but I've seen a handful of episodes of some typical children's cartoons and they really layed the multicultural propaganda on thick. You're right that lots of average people probably don't see through this propaganda. They're trying to brainwash the kids from a very early age with a near universal flood of propaganda, including movies, TV, books, magazines, school, organizations, etc., so we need guides for parents and stuff for kids to help them resist this manipulation.

  13. Anon,

    I'm interested in categorizing and analyzing anti-white bias in the popular media as well. A few months ago I started to put together a list of anti-white movies for the purpose of writing an essay on the subject, but I became distracted and shelved the project. I should have a lot more free time coming up this summer, and it's something I'm interested in jumping into again.

    Let's start a group blog on this issue. It's a big project, one that I think will take the work of multiple writers. The only issue is that I'm an American. Would it make sense to combine American and British media analysis into one blog? What are your thoughts?

  14. Hi Weston

    I dont think it would be an issue combining British and American analysis. We are exposed to US movies and TV here all the time. (I think the same would apply in all English speaking countries) We might get a greater range of insights that way - dare I say it - the benefit of diversity!

    I'm not sure that the standard blog format is the way to go though.

    Have you ever seen these sites? Here, here and here.

    I'm thinking that a similar format could be used, perhaps the one is closest to what I'm thinking of. From our pov, we arent looking to find every fault in a movie, just to pick up a few particular points.

    What I mean by format in this context is lists of films, TV shows, ads, news stories etc. We could sort by title, date and so on. I just dont know whether the blog format is ideal for that.

  15. Ive just had a look at Its a lot more cluttered and messy than I remember, so perhaps ignore my comment about its format. You get the general idea though.

  16. Anon,

    I agree that the sites you linked would be a better format than blogspot. I had only mentioned blogspot because it's free and easy to use.

  17. Weston - sorry for not keeping up here.

    True as regards Blogger, just for ease of use if nothing else. Disclaimer - though Ive never actually used it myself...

    Could always start of on blogger and migrate to something else in time.

    Im pretty much a stone-age HTML type otherwise, Ive yet to get to grips with CSS.

    A couple of mundane issues have occured to me:

    One, right now I dont have a scanner (too cluttered here as much as anything else!), so thats a bit limiting as regards getting print media into a site. I'll be able to deal with that in time.

    Second, and more damaging, other than video & images online, I dont have anything set-up to cull TV and DVD images and video. Any recommendations on that front?

    For the want of a nail etc etc ;)

  18. Anon,

    I say we start now with the knowledge\tools that we already possess. As we move along we can worry about acquiring a scanner, learning CSS, etc.

  19. OK Weston, youre right we need to get started. A few details I want to thrash out...

    Got somewhere I can email you, I did have quick look at your blog?


    britlurker at yahoo dot co dot uk

  20. There are a lot of good ideas here, but the following comment struck a funny note:

    "Hopefully our system will be open to reform, and it is even possible that a fair, color-blind society could be recovered where Whites' ethnic interests, identity, peoplehood and survival are treated with the same respect as other groups, but unfortunately, we're on a radically different course and have been for decades."

    Is that really what you want? And do you think it's even possible? I can't think of any historical precedent for this system you desire. In the US you had White ethnies, after many decades of conflict, finally arriving to a peaceable arrangement amongst one another and which kept Blacks segregated. If Whites ever rediscover some healthy ethnocentrism, non-Whites are not going to stop demanding more and agree to start reproducing at the same rate as Whites. The only thing that keeps the system from exploding now is that Whites go along with it. This alternative media, if it succeeds, will create a powder keg (and this tells us how hard the establishment will work to prevent it ever taking off).

  21. Dasein,

    Do I want a fair color-blind society? I'd be OK with it if it preserved our traditional society, including getting rid of most illegal aliens, including many anchor babies and their families, encouraging some recent incompatible immigrants to leave and reversing the rule of political correctness and multiculturalism. We're on a trajectory for something much worse within just a few decades, so we need to balance different factors, including what is possible versus ideal. As I see it there is great uncertainty about how things will evolve, so there is a tiny chance that this radical experiment in a post-racial society might turn out OK. Unfortunately, I'd guess that chance is quite remote, something like less than 2%, and it is definitely on the course toward disaster right now, so for it to even have this slight chance of success means changing its direction.

    I think we can pursue this option while concurrently exploring and pursuing other options that are directly focused on White interests. Whether the color-blind approach could work really depends on non-Whites rather than Whites.

    We have to consider that the large majority of Whites are currently thoroughly brainwashed by a powerful system of indoctrination spanning all the major institutions of our society and it will likely take well over a decade to begin seeing many results, like creating influential alternative, popular institutions for media, culture production, education, etc. Unfortunately over the time it takes to wake up some significant number of Whites, much more damage, including demographic, legal, economic, will have been done to the US, digging us in even deeper (although I think the worse things get, the easier it will be to wake up more Whites).

    Do I even think this kind of color-blind system is possible? In theory it probably is, although very unlikely, requiring massive indoctrination, essentially totalitarianism, over a long period of time. But the current elites aren't even trying to create that kind of post-racial society because they're encouraging strong ethnocentrism among non-Whites and biased anti-White law and policy. Essentially what we have is a con game where only Whites are pursuing post-racial and color-blind ideals, while non-Whites get to be both ethnocentric and anti-White. It's a completely unjust scam designed to screw Whites and ultimately I don't believe it is sustainable.

    I get the sense that our system isn't really managed cleverly by a nefarious set of plotters as much as it's a large messy system with built-in corruption through lobbying and other mechanisms, and that it's been poorly managed for at least the last fifty years with the economic and other dysfunction are becoming so serious that the system will probably careen out of control as various internal contradictions and stresses prove too much. Probably most of the people in our "civil society" that push cultural Marxism don't really understand the ultimate implications of the ideology but instead believe they're building a "fairer", color-blind world, kind of like Leninism would supposedly reach a utopian paradise after a "temporary" dictatorship of the proletariat.

    I suspect that a few of our elites might be intentionally pushing the dysfunctions to try seizing more totalitarian control and imposing a police state, including both in the US and the EU. If things degenerate in this manner, it seems like many different outcomes are possible.

    There are other uncertainties that cloud future scenarios, including major technological breakthroughs that might qualitatively change the rules, whether economically, biologically, militarily, etc, both for and against us.

    Ultimately we, meaning the West, seem on track to lose a massive war of conquest to other forces like resurgent Islam or China if we don't find a way to reverse this.



    As for the current system resisting the creation of alternatives, I agree that they'll try various things to prevent or undermine it. I think there's a race between creeping totalitarianism and using perfectly legal and civil ways to advocate for our own interests. That's one reason we need to also consider various compromises between ideal goals versus achievable ones. We need to be flexible and roll with the punches. We also need to have different sets of White advocates exploring different ideas with the ability to appeal to different audiences. We need a broad and diverse ecosystem instead of a few monolithic organizations, and we need to focus on cooperation instead of wasting energy on counterproductive infighting.

  23. ScotchFiend,

    As I see it, the indoctrination has been to make Whites unwilling to resist claims from minority groups. Sure there was some ringleading and provoking involved (e.g. Blacks and Jews in the Civil Rights movement), but groups will always have demands. I don't consider someone like Al Sharpton necessarily racist and I wouldn't use that label on him. I think he's a buffoon and corrupt, but his advocating for better conditions for Blacks (deserved or not) is completely natural. What's unnatural is for Whites not to tell him to f*** off. Group differences, demands, and grievances will never go away, which is why I think a color-blind society is impossible.

  24. Dasein,

    I pretty much agree with you, I just have a different emphasis.

    White defenselessness is indeed one major feature of our indoctrination regime. In the context of America there is White guilt over the historical mistreatment, by modern standards, of non-Whites when White supremacism was pervasive. So most modern Whites believe it would be fair and just to provide some advantageous treatment to Blacks and American Indians, as we've been doing through affirmative action and the welfare state for the last fifty years. But as you pointed out, innate differences between groups, both biological and cultural, will result in disparate outcomes even in a completely fair and non-discriminatory society. Unfortunately, these "hate facts" are taboo to our "civil society". But reality can't be cheated, so there is no way to square this circle, other than creating a totalitarian society controlled by social engineers. But even that would be an illusion of equality because really the controlling class would be privileged above the large, impoverished herd they managed (e.g. Cuba). Another problem with the US is that immigrants arrive and are given these same affirmative action rights (e.g. loans for minority business) even though they have absolutely no reasonable claim whatsoever, unlike indigenous Blacks and American Indians.

    To be clear, by a color-blind society I mean one where the law and civil society is strictly race neutral which is fully consistent with the logic of equality of treatment under the law. It's not that different groups wouldn't exist and advocate for themselves, but that they would receive absolutely no special privileges or status, including as recipients of White guilt and all the associated dysfunction that enables. This sort of society appears to be pragmatically Utopian, i.e. impossible, particularly in the US anytime soon. About the only way it would be workable would be if there were a highly demographically dominant group that granted such treatment to some small, non-threatening minorities without historical grievances, and there was no threat of demographic displacement, and troublesome minorities understood that if they wanted to cause trouble, they would be expelled.

    One reason I discuss the color-blind society so much is because the vast majority of Whites have been under the illusion that colorblindness and equality of treatment under the law were and are core values of our society. In fact the entire "civil rights" movement and law was sold to the public as creating just this sort of fair and neutral order, when in reality this was just a bait-and-switch scam. Many cultural products also embodied these ideas and values as defining justice (e.g. endless TV shows and movies). As I've previously discussed in some other posts, our "civil society" now explicitly rejects the color-blind society in favor of anti-White ideology. But since most Whites don't really understand this, we can help wake up both average and cognitively elite Whites by continually highlighting the anti-White double standards as unfair and anti-White. As I see it, one of our most important tasks is to help the large mass of brainwashed Whites better understand the true nature of our society, understanding that many of these folks are at different levels of ability and have a wide variety of backgrounds and beliefs, so that different approaches may need to be taken with different audiences, including those that don't give the full arguments with their full force, in favor of moving them one step closer to the truth rather than repelling them with too much truth in one dose. In fact one aspect of this outreach is to frame things with respect to the color-blind ideal, even though it is pragmatically Utopian, because it exposes the malevolence of our current "civil society" based on the values they incorrectly believe we're living under.



    Whereas most Whites would happily accept a color-blind society as being just, I don't think they will accept the justice of anti-White ideology. Our anti-White "civil society" uses political correctness and many other mechanisms to pretend it's not, i.e. they're just trying to be "fair", and because they utterly dominate the commanding heights of our society how can most people disagree? So by creating these alternative institutions like media and culture production, more people can see the reality of their anti-White ideology in spite of their duplicitous, deceptive rhetoric that aims to construct an inverted, Orwellian "reality".

    We need lots of little children (and adults) shouting that the emperor has no clothes.