Andy Donner to Evan McLaren. September 14, 2017
Mr. McLaren,
I trust you are well.
Thank you for giving me this opportunity. I apologize again for the delay in answering
your question. In the interests of
writing no more than appropriate, I'll stick to answering your immediate
question. I am with the Northwest Front
(a.k.a. the Party) out of Seattle and it is our objective to create an
independent, all-white nation state in the Pacific Northwest. Without going into great detail, this is
firstly because an ethnostate is necessary to stave off White Genocide and secondly,
because the various considerations of what such an ethnostate would require
both for its creation and continued existence dictates that it would be the
Pacific Northwest where this must take place.
I'll be candid and confess this is the last and only option available to
our race if we intend to survive past the next few decades but it is not at all
desirable from the standpoint of preference because it is inconvenient,
difficult, and dangerous. The core
questions one might ask about this proposal are, "could we,"
"should we," and "are we?"
I'll do my best to be brief about these issues.
I initially encountered the Northwest Imperative (or Butler Plan) seven years ago while living in Kansas City shortly after becoming a White Nationalist. Initially, I opposed it for reasons of whether or not it was feasible to actually pull off such a feat. Even at that early date, it was obvious that no other option was available to White Nationalists on the North American continent and no in the Movement even bothered to pretend otherwise with the exception of a few absurd plans involving system politics. I had to examine the issues of "could we" and "should we" for myself and I will briefly summarize. It's worth noting that I decided I was morally obligated to participate in the Northwest Imperative and I arrived in Seattle in late 2011 where I have lived since.
I initially encountered the Northwest Imperative (or Butler Plan) seven years ago while living in Kansas City shortly after becoming a White Nationalist. Initially, I opposed it for reasons of whether or not it was feasible to actually pull off such a feat. Even at that early date, it was obvious that no other option was available to White Nationalists on the North American continent and no in the Movement even bothered to pretend otherwise with the exception of a few absurd plans involving system politics. I had to examine the issues of "could we" and "should we" for myself and I will briefly summarize. It's worth noting that I decided I was morally obligated to participate in the Northwest Imperative and I arrived in Seattle in late 2011 where I have lived since.
Firstly, could we?
The answer, after reviewing all relevant historical material
on the matter, is certainly yes. This is
the portion of the NF's program that is somewhat difficult to discuss openly,
but it is within the law to discuss what I think would be a good idea in
theory. I'm quite plain about my belief
that it would be a good idea for the Pacific Northwest to be forcibly removed
from the existing power's grasp so that a new nation state can be created. Our own country was created through similar
methods and several others have been both just inside and just outside of
living memory. For easily accessible
material about this process, I recommend the films The Patriot and Michael Collins. I spent
time working through quite a bit of written material by people who actually
pulled this off for themselves and there isn't any reason White Nationalists
couldn't do this for themselves if they were so motivated. I can provide a list of that material on
demand. That said, why do this?
Secondly, should we?
Secondly, should we?
An honest individual will have an easier time with this part
of the case for the Butler Plan. In
truth, system politics and use of democracy hasn't been feasible for a few
decades now. This goes doubly so for
White Nationalists who have been given many examples during said decades which
confirm we do not actually have political rights anyone is concerned with.
And even if we did, what would this get
us? Every attempt at either creating an
ethnostate or returning the US to some sort of condition we would consider
acceptable must immediately make plain the method by which it intends to right
the demographic damage which passed the point of no return many years ago. This is important to note because even if by
some political miracle all non-White immigration were to be suddenly halted,
the existing trend at this very moment is such that the final White births fit
to call a generation are happening right now and we are on track (again, even
in the context of this miracle) for racial extinction well before this century
is out. The various non-White elements
and other undesirables are not simply going to cooperate with being made to
remove themselves under any circumstances (either a pro-White government making
them leave or else open race war.)
There is, in any analysis of any proposal one could make, no
peaceful political solution on the path to anything resembling an acceptable
ethnostate solution. That being the
case, the honest individual I mentioned will conclude that not only is there
the issue of physically removing elements which cannot be present in an
ethnostate, but removing ZOG's ability to subject White people to its
laws. The most likely scenario any
desirable ethnostate will have to exist in colonial territory ZOG is willing to
let go of because an assault on the system as a whole will be resisted to the
last whereas a limited acquisition of unimportant regions is far more likely to
succeed (as history has shown.)
There is
also the issue of whether or not such a new nation will have what it needs to
exist and be defensible. I won't spend
time on this any further since the details could fill volumes, but the summary
of it all is simply that only the Pacific Northwest is a fit location for the
ethnostate which almost every White Nationalist I've spoken to agrees we need.
Thirdly, are we (actually doing this?)
Honesty compels me to be entirely candid here, but
thankfully, this candidness is easily extended to all of White Nationalism and
even our race as a whole. Universal
objectivity, sadly, isn't very kind to anyone with our politics right now and
likely won't be for some time. For
starters, I personally am certainly doing everything I can to create the sort
of infrastructure the Party needs to bring the Northwest American Republic into
existence since I came here to participate.
Others make their Northwest Migration to the proposed Homeland all the
time, though not in the numbers we would like.
Overall, the Party has estimated that we will require one thousand
dedicated volunteers to form a functional revolutionary entity. Again, discussing the details of this are a
somewhat challenging thing to do when, like us, one values legality as a tactic
to maintain functionality in society.
The NF's founder, Harold Covington, wrote a series of novels describing
the most likely version of events - with special emphasis on the character of
the people involved - based on how these things are historically pulled
off. If you're interested, PDF copies
are freely distributed when they are requested.
Since this has gone on long enough, I'll be as brief as
possible and then wrap up. It's entirely
true the Party isn't nearly as far along in the Butler Plan as it should be and
the bulk of this fault is on us. That
said, there are more than enough dedicated and sincere White Nationalists able
to assist that if they were to do so (as I believe they are morally obligated
to do,) I genuinely do not believe we would fail (mostly for reasons involving
the weakened and decaying state of America and its empire.)
So what gives? As I have been honest about our situation, I
am entitled to be honest (even though it is downright unflattering) of the
situation in which the rest of White Nationalism finds itself. Truth be told, there isn't anything of
genuine substance going on elsewhere, either, so the NF is not any worse off
than any other Movement entity even though it is barely better at the best of
times. And I in no way mean this as a
criticism, either. I confess the Party
harps about the lack of any other alternative, but this is more profound that
most realize.
Having no other plan to
gauge themselves against, the rest of White Nationalism cannot (with a straight
face) claim to have succeeded in any meaningful way because there is no failure
condition present. It's true that a
handful of demonstrations and a massive online media presence are truly novel
happenings, but without any purpose, they remain novelties (however impressive
I am forced to admit they are.)
In truth, the actual problem we as a race have is that our
character - for various reasons which I readily agree are not all our fault -
has been warped and molded by the societies we see around us. American White Nationalism has a history of
drawing in the most damaged and immoral (or, sometimes, amoral) of our
race. It's true there are some very
clear exceptions to this but they were eventually disabled by - among other
things - those of poor character around them.
This has been documented by an anonymous Movement fellow who the
above-board old hands still around (of which, to be entirely transparent, I am
most certainly not one) agree knows their stuff. This documentation exists in the form of A Brief History of the White Nationalist Movement and I'm happy to
pass along a copy.
We (and I mean White
Nationalism at large, though the NF to a certain degree in particular) also
face an additional (and sadly, very American) problem of newly racial people
not understanding that they are going to have to solve their own problems. Every White Nationalist outfit has "hit
the wall" the NF is currently hitting because it is somehow expected that
we (which, again, is the Movement as a whole) produce a "finished
product" which makes it possible to solve the entire problem of White
Genocide by some means (political or otherwise) without any of us needing to
exert any effort. This, purely in my
opinion, is the largest hurdle any White Nationalist is going to have to
overcome once we, collectively, are willing to accept that no political
solution is available.
To wrap this up and answer the last portion of your request,
no, the NF does not LARP. I actually
gave a long talk about this some years back on the Party's weekly podcast Radio Free Northwest.
Firstly, such a thing only serves to identify individual White
Nationalists for personal defunctionalization and secondly, public
demonstrations don't actually factor in to the strategies and tactics needed to
actually create a new nation from liberated territory.
In other words, they are all downside from
our perspective. I should also emphasize
that any involvement with our sort of politics is deadly dangerous as the White
Nationalist Idaho attorney Edgar Steele found out some years ago (to quote one
example.) If we weren't just as deadly
serious about this, we wouldn't do what we're trying to do.
Is this the information you were looking for? And if so, is it of any interest? I'm happy to provide more information as
needed, but I'd prefer to stop talking now since, while focused, I have taken
entirely too much of your time and I would prefer to know I'm not wasting it.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Evan McLaren to Andy Donner, September 14, 2017
Frankly, it's not the information I was looking for.
I understand the ethnostate and it is the ultimate goal towards which I am driving.
My question is very simple and direct: what are you doing, personally? The goal of the ethnostate is before you, and so to attain it you wake up each day and ... what? Paint a picture for me.
Again, this may sound glib or insulting, but I am serious. I want to understand the position from which you are judging, for example, our activity here at NPI.
I understand the ethnostate and it is the ultimate goal towards which I am driving.
My question is very simple and direct: what are you doing, personally? The goal of the ethnostate is before you, and so to attain it you wake up each day and ... what? Paint a picture for me.
Again, this may sound glib or insulting, but I am serious. I want to understand the position from which you are judging, for example, our activity here at NPI.
Andy Donner to Evan McLaren, September 14, 2017
I have to insist I've actually answered your question, but
since it's been asked again, I'll provide more detail, though not much. Details don't serve here when I'm actually
trying to address big picture issues.
It's not that you're asking an unfair question as such; my criticism is
based entirely on the issue of whether or not you're asking the right
question. For discussion purposes, I'm
quite happy to concede that NPI (and just for fun, the rest of the Alt. Right
and White Nationalism) are better on an item-by-item basis. The focus of my criticism was on the lack of
a plan to govern these activities and productions. But more on that later.
In general, what I do each day is attempt to bring a
particular plan closer to fruition. I
specifically spend most of my time attempting to persuade otherwise decent
White Nationalists that the Butler Plan is the only shot we have and that
there's little point to doing much else.
That, in turn, spurs a fair bit of actual research into change
management (yes, really) and media creation.
I will occasionally devote some effort to ideological education when
we're faced with issues such as why Libertarianism isn't compatible with racial
nationalism (or whatever the issue happens to be at the moment.) In fact, quite a bit of the time I put in to
the Party is conversations like this (which I will expand on shortly.)
In every relevant sense, my answer to your question is that
"I'm following a plan which is known to bring about a tangible
objective" and my basis for judging NPI (which I judge along with the rest
of the Alt. Right and White Nationalism at large) is that no plan with even a
partial chance for actually creating a White Homeland has ever been
presented.
I mentioned a history of
White Nationalism and it's entirely apropos.
In fact, that same history reveals so-called White Nationalists cannot
be taken to be result-oriented at all.
The overall outcome of all the massive (and again, admittedly
impressive) things the White Nationalist Movement has produced is nothing more
than "raising awareness," "spurring discussion," or some
other variant on the "waking people up" trope which has been done so
many times before that there's no reason to concern ourselves with it.
Returning to my primary concern, I can't help but chuckle when the Northwest Front or one of our associates is asked "what are you personally doing?" because the underlying assumption is that the Party and those involved in it are also merely repeating the previous decades of failure and don't have grounds for asking the question.
In truth, it's the other way around. Those of us advocating Northwest Migration (which is the current active phase of the Butler Plan) all kept our mouths shut, brought ourselves here, got settled, and figured out what we each need to do to further the Party's objectives. I'm not saying others in the Movement are doing nothing, but it's fairly obvious to those of us concerned with the outcome that they're not doing anything in service of an actual objective.
It's fine to say that White Nationalists want an ethnostate, but only the Butler Plan has explicitly defined an actual objective (as opposed to saying "an ethnostate is the goal") and how that objective could be realized. Without that, whatever else is going on doesn't matter and White Nationalist history proves that beyond any doubt.
Earlier, I said much of my time goes into one-on-one conversations and occasionally group talks like this (some of which end up being Radio Free Northwest material.) Most of the opposition the Party runs in to from the ever-present White character issue which immediately prevents taking the necessary actions to correctly involve oneself in developing a functional revolutionary Party.
That being the case, and this being one of "those" conversations, I need to ask a potentially vexing question. I still assert that I actually answered you the first time (though, admittedly, in a very verbose way with due explanations) and I believe I was clear. Was I as clear as I think I was? If so, why you to deliberately sidestep my core concern? If not, how would you suggest I alter that presentation?
Returning to my primary concern, I can't help but chuckle when the Northwest Front or one of our associates is asked "what are you personally doing?" because the underlying assumption is that the Party and those involved in it are also merely repeating the previous decades of failure and don't have grounds for asking the question.
In truth, it's the other way around. Those of us advocating Northwest Migration (which is the current active phase of the Butler Plan) all kept our mouths shut, brought ourselves here, got settled, and figured out what we each need to do to further the Party's objectives. I'm not saying others in the Movement are doing nothing, but it's fairly obvious to those of us concerned with the outcome that they're not doing anything in service of an actual objective.
It's fine to say that White Nationalists want an ethnostate, but only the Butler Plan has explicitly defined an actual objective (as opposed to saying "an ethnostate is the goal") and how that objective could be realized. Without that, whatever else is going on doesn't matter and White Nationalist history proves that beyond any doubt.
Earlier, I said much of my time goes into one-on-one conversations and occasionally group talks like this (some of which end up being Radio Free Northwest material.) Most of the opposition the Party runs in to from the ever-present White character issue which immediately prevents taking the necessary actions to correctly involve oneself in developing a functional revolutionary Party.
That being the case, and this being one of "those" conversations, I need to ask a potentially vexing question. I still assert that I actually answered you the first time (though, admittedly, in a very verbose way with due explanations) and I believe I was clear. Was I as clear as I think I was? If so, why you to deliberately sidestep my core concern? If not, how would you suggest I alter that presentation?
Evan McLaren to Andy Donner, September 15, 2017
You answered a little more this time--you converse with
people, and promote your plan through the media.
You have an explicit plan, the Butler Plan, that you indicate is the only one that makes sense.
But in order to execute a plan you need power, and people on your side. There are not enough people who support the Butler Plan, or any notion of an ethnostate, for it to be achieved. More people need to be inspired to believe in their own identity and destiny, and in the idea of the ethnostate, for this to be possible. This is the project at which our work here at NPI is directed.
You have an explicit plan, the Butler Plan, that you indicate is the only one that makes sense.
But in order to execute a plan you need power, and people on your side. There are not enough people who support the Butler Plan, or any notion of an ethnostate, for it to be achieved. More people need to be inspired to believe in their own identity and destiny, and in the idea of the ethnostate, for this to be possible. This is the project at which our work here at NPI is directed.
Evan McLaren to Andy Donner, March 9, 2018
You never answered this email to explain what you find
lacking in my responses yet complain on Twitter that our activity and telos are
unserious and insubstantial. Remarkable. Why are we obliged to justify
ourselves to you? Who are you?
Andy Donner to Evan McLaren, March 9, 2018
I decided there was very little point since you made it
clear you wanted to side-step the issue of whether or not Spencer / NPI / any
other relevant person or entity has some sort of end goal or plan to take the
ethnostate out of the realm of theory.
This is what started the conversation in the first place and refusing to
address that is entirely unserious and insubstantial (assuming one's objective
actually is the ethnostate.) If I've
misunderstood what you're aiming for, then simply say so.
To be entirely frank, given Spencer (and NPI's) morally and ideological oddities (letting alone what may or may not be odd slips in unexpectedly candid moments on film) a certain amount of justification is required. I went on a tiny rant about the important of ideological integrity and how a lack thereof has always been responsible for failures and embarrassments in White Nationalist history. I won't bother repeating it here, though I will point out that there can't be discussion of any solution until everyone is on the same page and Richard Spencer is a key figure (though, to be fair, by no means the only one) holding this back.
NPI claims to speak for the interests of White people and they should expect White people to hold them accountable. That goes double for someone wanting a prominent position (or even leadership status, if some deleted tweets are to be believed) when they have no program whatsoever to accomplish their stated goal while a perfection option exists that they ignore.
To be entirely frank, given Spencer (and NPI's) morally and ideological oddities (letting alone what may or may not be odd slips in unexpectedly candid moments on film) a certain amount of justification is required. I went on a tiny rant about the important of ideological integrity and how a lack thereof has always been responsible for failures and embarrassments in White Nationalist history. I won't bother repeating it here, though I will point out that there can't be discussion of any solution until everyone is on the same page and Richard Spencer is a key figure (though, to be fair, by no means the only one) holding this back.
NPI claims to speak for the interests of White people and they should expect White people to hold them accountable. That goes double for someone wanting a prominent position (or even leadership status, if some deleted tweets are to be believed) when they have no program whatsoever to accomplish their stated goal while a perfection option exists that they ignore.
Evan McLaren to Andy Donner, March 9, 2018
I'd love to talk with you on the phone about this right now
if you are game. You and Covington seek through your repetitive written non sequiturs
to give the appearance the you've identified great lacunae and failings. Your
tedium would not withstand a few minutes of oral, rather than just written
verbal, conversation.
The truly outrageous moment today was Covington's brazen refusal even to attempt to justify his confidently-expressed claim that the Charlottesville lawsuit has cost NPI a great deal of money. I know otherwise, but the facts to not matter to either of you. Have the integrity to call me up and justify yourselves, or not. [Telephone number redacted]
The truly outrageous moment today was Covington's brazen refusal even to attempt to justify his confidently-expressed claim that the Charlottesville lawsuit has cost NPI a great deal of money. I know otherwise, but the facts to not matter to either of you. Have the integrity to call me up and justify yourselves, or not. [Telephone number redacted]
Andy Donner to Evan McLaren, March 9, 2018
Spencer (and, to lesser extent,) NPI's severe issues have
been well-documented over years simply by tweets alone. And all this was prior to anyone in the
Movement calling him our for what was always morally questionable
behavior. Further, it has never been the
NF that documented these things or even brought them to light. Asking us to justify them isn't remotely honest. And for discussion's sake, even if Spencer
and NPI were entirely upstanding according to White Nationalist standards,
there's still the very direct issue of claiming some sort of prominence without
letting anyone in on what the goal is or how we're to get there.
If you would like to lay that on us, we're all ears since that's the single largest outstanding matter. A phone conversation isn't required to reply to this inquiry since ample opportunity is available where we ask on Twitter.
If you would like to ask Harold himself about the lawsuit question, his email is provided along with this response.
If you would like to lay that on us, we're all ears since that's the single largest outstanding matter. A phone conversation isn't required to reply to this inquiry since ample opportunity is available where we ask on Twitter.
If you would like to ask Harold himself about the lawsuit question, his email is provided along with this response.
Evan McLaren to Andy Donner, March 9, 2017
Your repetitive prompts are conclusory and give the strong
impression that you are unserious, bad-faith respondents. I might consider
proceeding with some sort of dialogue if Harold admits that he cannot remotely
substantiate his claim that the Charlottesville suit has cost NPI money. If
not, then I doubt I can dismiss you insultingly enough. Let me know.
No comments:
Post a Comment