(Cult)ure // Get with the Program!
We are in what Tucker Carlson has dubbed “the convergence,” where not only are both political parties virtually indistinguishable, but there is no daylight between the government, the multi-national corporations, the media-academia-entertainment complex, or a plurality (possibly a majority) of persons presently residing in the United States. Regarding the latter, I intentionally do not use “Americans,” for we all understand that the waves of non-whites who’ve washed up on these shores since the 1965 Immigration Act largely represent an invasionary force, the kind of which Jean Raspail presciently described in his 1973 masterpiece The Camp of the Saints. Immigration generally affects the cities, but “refugee resettlement”—which is entirely involuntary for the residents of a community just as immigration is for the nation as it presently stands—usually hits rural communities hardest. The government puts refugees in these communities specifically because of their homogeneity and their inherent conservatism. This is to further atomize the (declining) white majority, destroy any social capital they may have accrued, and to prevent us from organizing in what must become a guerrilla war if we are not to collectively use our power of production, agriculture, and transport to bend the urban centers to our will. The vast majority of farmers, truckers, industrial workers, and tradesmen are white and Rightward-oriented, and a collective action to use our practical control of the food supply, supply lines, heavy industry, maintenance, and construction as a bargaining chip—or even better, to withhold supply from the major metropolitan centers—would evince awesome power.
The “elites” don’t fear the Dissident Right so much as they fear collective action not just against them, but for us. We can re-organize ourselves along what I call the FUBU principle (“for us, by us”), which would create massive shockwaves in the system but which would actually only improve our quality of life. Certainly the state would attempt to break collective action on behalf of whites by force, and the trick here would be to cleave the pro-white military and law enforcement off from the Establishment and on to our side. Indeed, any of the officers and soldiers worth having mostly hold our views, so perhaps the usurpation of the entire apparatus to re-organize the state along pro-nationalist lines (see: a version of Kemal Ataturk’s strategy) would be a strong possibility. We need to be both pro-nationalist and anti-occupied government in order to achieve victory. We must combat their pernicious forces and hit them where it hurts, but we must also not wantonly destroy. Sow chaos and division within their ranks and in their demographic strongholds, but strengthen our positions and most importantly give people something worth fighting for. The Left only exists in negative—they are against everything we are and as such they are very good at mirroring conservative mores and values in order to not just undermine them, but create a hideous inversion of them. This is in large part why conservatism is untenable. What I am proposing is not an abandonment of principles or values, but at once a re-affirmation of what makes us us with a clear and coherent ideology placing the nation-state above all, and a forward-thinking revolutionary mindset to combat the harmful globalist paradigm.
Perhaps the most damaging and difficult-to-combat aspect of the Cult-Marx/neo-liberal/globalist axis is their success in turning a small but vocal minority of whites against their own; they have actually been weaponized against their own people, and they espouse a toxic anti-white rhetoric directed at the only people who might actually care about them. It is really quite perverse. An appreciable number of Europe’s progeny have been conditioned to adopt a combination of Blackened Retail Therapy and empty status/virtue-signaling (also known as “GloboHomo”) as a legitimate lifestyle, one which is being pushed as the new cultural default, or “normality.”
Now all functional societies or communities require some degree of self-policing, not least of which to enforce norms and behaviors conducive to a reasonable degree of social uniformity, minimal friction, and maximal harmony (when the West was healthy, enforced monogamy was one such example). Such policing can certainly become pathological if it becomes perverted for darker means, however. As John Stuart Mill wrote in On Liberty:
The will of the people…practically means, the will of the most numerous or the most active part of the people; the majority, or those who succeed in making themselves accepted as the majority; the people, consequently, may desire to oppress a part of their number; and precautions are as much needed against this, as against any other abuse of power.
What is important to understand—vital, actually—is that these people only view things through the lens of power dynamics. Their behavior is generally explained by the desire to exert power over others while simultaneously being controlled and wholly at the mercy of their superiors. They are both self-policing and deeply concerned with the mores and behaviors of the out-group, which functions brilliantly for social control. Governments may exploit this pathologized “citizen policing” to exert greater control; consider that in East Germany one-in-three persons was a Stasi informant. This doesn’t just happen. There need to be incentives. Our present situation involves a mixture of both ochlocratic mob-rule and state-compliant informants, and these informants are “morally” and socially (and sometimes financially) rewarded for turning on Wrongthinkers.
State compliance in the present situation is indistinguishable from “private sector” compliance—they are completely enmeshed. The reward system for “exposing” dissidents plays to all of humanity’s worst instincts, and caters to small and psychologically vulnerable people. These are Borzoi Boskovic’s “Hall Monitor Personalities.” They are a combination of said wheedley student-volunteer hall monitor, state informant, and mid-level corporate functionary. These are weak people who must maintain the status quo to have any kind of status at all. As John Stuart Mill pointed out, social tyranny is for all intents and purposes far worse than anything the state may impose due to its intrusiveness and pervasiveness. From college professor to HR commissar to social media hall monitor, prying eyes and alert ears abound. This climate of suspicion and paranoia is by design to create a far more compliant population under the impression—though thankfully not quite (yet) the reality—of a post-modern Panopticon.
But even compliance is not enough. You must believe the programming. Their commitment appears religious in its zeal and fervor, and it is clear that “Social Justice” is indeed in no small part a proselytizing religion, one that will endeavor to forcibly gain converts if need be. Initially, the central planners made a religion out of “civil rights” and deified the most degenerate elements of our society. They erected temples to false idols such as the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial or mythologized places such as the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama. Civil Rights became the state religion, but increasingly over the past decade, this religion has actually revealed itself to be a cult. Consider the characteristics of a cult, from David Brear:
This phenomenon can be briefly defined as: any self-perpetuating, esoteric ritual belief system established or perverted for the clandestine purpose of human exploitation.
1). Deception. Destructive cults are presented externally as traditional associations. These can be arbitrarily defined by their instigators as almost any banal group (‘religious’, ‘cultural’, ‘political’, ‘commercial’, etc. etc.). However, internally, they are always totalitarian... no one ever becomes involved with one as a result of their fully-informed consent.
2). Self-appointed sovereign leadership. Destructive cults are instigated and ruled by psychologically dominant individuals, and/or bodies of psychologically dominant individuals, often with impressive, made-up names, and/or ranks, and/or titles. They steadfastly pretend moral and intellectual authority whilst pursuing various, hidden, criminal objectives (fraudulent, and/or sexual, and/or violent, etc.). The leaders of destructive cults hold themselves accountable to no one.
3). Manipulation. Destructive cults employ coordinated techniques of social and psychological persuasion (variously described as: ‘mental manipulation’, ‘coercive behaviour modification’, ‘group pressure’, ‘thought reform’, ‘ego destruction’, ‘mind control’, ‘brainwashing’, etc.). These are designed to fulfil the hidden criminal objectives of the leaders by provoking in the adherents an infantile total dependence on the group, to the detriment of themselves and of their existing family, and/or other, relationships. Destructive cults manipulate their adherents’ existing beliefs and instinctual desires, creating the illusion that they are exercising free will. In this way, adherents can also be surreptitiously coerced into following potentially harmful, physical procedures (sleep deprivation, protein restriction, repetitive chanting/moving, etc. etc.) which are similarly designed to facilitate the shutting down of an individual’s critical and evaluative faculties without his/her fully-informed consent.
4). Radical changes of personality and behaviour. Destructive cults…comprise groups, and/or sub-groups, of previously diverse individuals bonded by their unconscious acceptance of the self-gratifying, but wholly imaginary, scenario that they alone represent a positive or protective force of purity and absolute righteousness derived from their leadership’s exclusive access to a superior or superhuman knowledge, and that they alone oppose a negative or adversarial force of impurity and absolute evil.
5). Pseudo-scientific mystification. The instigators of destructive cults seek to overwhelm their adherents emotionally and intellectually by pretending that progressive initiation into their own superior or superhuman knowledge (coupled with total belief in its authenticity and unconditional deference to the authority of its higher initiates) will defeat a negative or adversarial force of impurity and absolute evil, and lead to future, exclusive redemption in some form of secure Utopian existence. By making total belief a prerequisite of redemption, adherents are drawn into a closed-logic trap… Although initiation can at first appear to be reasonable and benefits achievable, cultic pseudo-science gradually becomes evermore costly and mystifying. Ultimately, it is completely incomprehensible and its claimed benefits are never quantifiable. The self-righteous euphoria and relentless enthusiasm of cult proselytizers can be highly infectious and deeply misleading.
6). Monopoly of information. The leaders of destructive cults seek to control all information entering not only their adherents’ minds, but also that entering the minds of casual observers. This is achieved by constantly denigrating all external sources of information whilst constantly repeating the group’s reality-inverting key words and images, and/or by the physical isolation of adherents. Cults leaders systematically categorize, condemn and exclude as unenlightened, negative, impure and absolutely evil all free-thinking individuals and any quantifiable evidence challenging the authenticity of their imaginary scenarios of control. In this way, the minds of cult adherents can become converted to accept only what their leadership arbitrarily sanctions as enlightened, positive, pure and absolutely righteous. Consequently, adherents habitually communicate amongst themselves using their group’s reality-inverting jargon, and they find it difficult, if not impossible, to communicate with negative persons outside of their group whom they falsely believe to be not only doomed, but also a threat to redemption.
7). False justification. In destructive cults, a core-group of adherents can be gradually dissociated from external reality and reformed into deployable agents, and/or de facto slaves, and/or expendable combatants, etc, furthering the hidden criminal objectives of their leaders, completely dependent on a collective paranoid delusion of absolute moral and intellectual supremacy fundamental to the maintenance of their individual self-esteem and related psychological function. It becomes impossible for such fanatics to empathise with non-adherents. Their minds are programmed to see the manipulation, and/or cheating, and/or dispossession, and/or destruction, of inferior outsiders (particularly, those who challenge their group’s controlling scenario) as perfectly justifiable.
8). Structural mystification. The instigators of destructive cults can continue to organize the creation, and/or dissolution, and/or subversion, of further (apparently independent) corporate structures pursuing lawful, and/or unlawful, activities in order to prevent, and/or divert, investigation and isolate themselves from liability...Their leaders acquire absolute control over capital sums which place them alongside the most notorious racketeers in history. They operate behind ever-expanding, and changing, fronts of privately-controlled, limited-liability, commercial companies’, and/or ‘non-profit-making associations’, etc.
9). Chronic psychological deterioration symptoms. The long-term core-adherents of destructive cults are psychotic (i.e. suffering from psychosis, a severe mental derangement, especially when resulting in delusions and loss of contact with external reality).
10). Repression of all dissent. This type of destructive cult leader maintains an absolute monopoly of information whilst perpetrating, and/or directing, evermore heinous crimes. They sustain their activities by the imposition of arbitrary codes (secrecy, justice, punishment,etc.) within their groups, and by the use of humiliation, and/or intimidation, and/or calumny, and/or malicious prosecution (where they pose as victims), and/or sophism, and/or the infiltration of traditional culture, and/or corruption, and/or intelligence gathering and blackmail, and/or extortion, and/or physical isolation, and/or violence, and/or assassination, etc. etc., to repress any internal or external dissent.
These particular characteristics become far more disconcerting when you consider that in this instance, most of the planet is one giant Jonestown, and how did that one end? The systemic advantages they have are huge, and their money supply inexhaustible, since they essentially create it out of thin air with no tangible backing. They can simply manufacture more funds. One huge blow would be to nationalize the banks, though this is obviously a step for far down the line after we have either a significant foothold in the power structure (unlikely) or we have usurped the usurpers and restored legitimacy to the system (more likely). The reason the latter is more likely is due to the way the system is structured—it does not tolerate dissent, as evidenced above. It is a powerful economic system with state support, but it also has an ideology that is often concomitant and a propaganda arm so effective as to have manufactured a totally fake narrative and created a global cult with millions of adherents. As evidenced above, the ideology in question does not have to be internally consistent for it to work. They know this, so attacking the ideology head-on with logic doesn’t do it any real damage. We shouldn’t abandon logic obviously, but understand that in a war for hearts and minds we provide explanations after we’ve peeled individuals off the mega-media machine’s mechanized teat with various persuasive appeals. “Red-pilling” is a process, and once you’ve got the individual’s attention, you have viable alternatives and accurate information to facilitate this process. One tremendous advantage we have is that we are telling the truth. We don’t need sophism or duplicitousness, though we need to be creative in how we administer or deliver our message.
All of that said, we still run headlong into the problem of their propaganda’s ubiquity. As with the pervasiveness of social tyranny, the proliferation of technology into every aspect of our lives allows for their messaging to intrude basically anywhere, any time unimpeded, unless one happens to be in the wilderness. As a practical matter, for the majority of the people, their influence is largely inescapable. So what, then, is to be done? Control has to be zero-sum with the way modernity has developed. There won’t be any unmolested tech-free fiefdoms or off-the-grid forest brigades bringing down the global order, though if things get really bad we may see the necessity of the latter. What, specifically, is to be done? Do we seize the machine and use it against our enemies in a targeted, precise fashion? Turn the machine against itself, bringing about utter ruin and re-build from the ashes? Knock the pillars out from underneath it and facilitate collapse? Bleed the system dry? Some combination thereof? As the system exists exclusively to perpetuate itself and protect those in power, anything to gum up the works in the short-term is highly beneficial. Ultimately, however, we must attain power ourselves. For Max Weber:
Organized domination, which calls for continuous administration, requires that human conduct be conditioned to obedience towards those masters who claim to be the bearers of legitimate power. On the other hand, by virtue of this obedience, organized domination requires the control of those material goods which in a given case are necessary for the use of physical violence. Thus, organized domination requires control of the personal executive staff and the material implements of administration.
The state has a monopoly on force (which includes the conditions of anarcho-tyranny whereby state-approved if not directly sponsored groups may act out their violent aims and/or impulses on the tyrannized without fear of state repercussions, though this does not preclude state support directly or indirectly), but this decidedly does not imply legitimacy. The system is illegitimate. It must only exist for the benefit of its people—the nation. Civil war, Balkanization, and/or blowing the whole thing to pieces are not good outcomes; all of the machinery is in place for us to use and we must seize and use it. Combat will-to-power with will-to-power. Assert your will. Bend circumstances to your will. Too long we have allowed ourselves to be seduced by the suicidal delusions of democracy. All power is predicated on force. Our ultimate aim must be to take control of what they’ve built and use it to our advantage. As it stands, we already lost and now they are simply consolidating power. Far be it from being discouraging, however, the acknowledgement of defeat is actually incredibly liberating. Same enemy, but a new war with new tactics. I cannot stress this enough: we must abandon any pretense of “conservatism” and embrace the revolutionary mindset. Put them on the defensive. A guerrilla war, waged long enough, will eventually exhaust the enemy’s morale, provided we have the men and the will to sustain it. And we do: we are still the implicit majority in terms of values and the absolute majority in terms of race, and the number of dissidents in our movement is growing exponentially. This affords us a wide array of possibilities.
A multi-pronged approach is essential. Building up solid communities in real life and focusing on creating healthy families is foundational. Solid communities means a positive influence on local politics, the school board, zoning restrictions, etc. They also provide a base of operations. We should be organizing ourselves in rural areas as employment allows and create the equivalents of Sanctuary Cities, but these will be Free Zones where settlement is conditional on community approval. No discreet injection of thousands of Somalis a la Lewiston, Maine. For those who must reside in and around the cities, their role will be less constructive in tangible terms, though their ideas and efforts in the digital space and in terms of organization will be key; these people must adopt a more guerrilla mindset (sorry Cernovich) as guerrillas in their midst (sorry Da Lench Mob). Humor aside, this is where the gloves come off. The country is our stronghold, the cities our forward-operating bases. Here we sow dissent, propagandize, and generally shape-shift the way we have proven so adept at in the digital space. We can’t fight set-piece battles and expect to win. The United States was realized through a largely-guerrilla war. Never forget that.
A final message: all of our theorizing is for naught if we can’t translate these theories into reality. The major impediment to success so far is that we simply do not have enough serious people, and there is far too much in-fighting and egotism on our side. Cranks and fringe characters must remain on the fringes. For those serious people who genuinely understand where we stand and where we need to go (and how to get there), we need to start setting tangible, achievable goals and regard ourselves as a movement unified in purpose. Easier said than done, but that, precisely, has been a big part of the problem. No longer.