Okay, everybody got all the Christmas wassail out of their systems? Good. As the liberals say, we need to have a “conversation” about some things, specifically on the topic of Party professionalization. I know the Bulletin isn’t supposed to be used for internal discussion, just general Haroldic ranting and raving about racial and political things like Coming Home, but we’re at an important juncture in history, and for once we have to reach a serious adult consensus on the way forward for our movement. Until it’s done, I have to use every tool I have at my disposal to accomplish that.
Other people of note within White Nationalism have been coming to the same conclusions I have about the whole loosey-goosey thing for some time, although they seem uncertain how to express them. A lot of us (including myself) at one time embraced loosey-goosey, largely because back in the 80s and 90s we witnessed for ourselves the problems which formal organizations faced. We watched a dozen assorted groups run out of steam and deflate, or else outright fall to pieces in a shambles due to causes that could have been avoided had we been stronger, smarter, braver, and better men. It was not an edifying spectacle.
I’m going to reprint an e-mail I received a couple of weeks ago from long-time British nationalist Anthony Lecomber, who some of you may be familiar with. This e-mail might have a certain Dutch Uncle flavor to it, but I don’t consider it such. There is a difference between Dutch Uncle-ism and genuine constructive criticism. I’ve always gotten far too much of the former and way too little of the latter.
The Lecomber E-Mail
Hi Harold:
The problem is that, because of your personal experience whereby you renounce organisation, because you renounce membership (and Americans can’t do committed revolutionary organisation without membership), you’re screwed. So a lone nut shot the President with one of your membership cards in his pocket. So what?
[There is some question as to whether Hinckley was a "lone nut" or part of something larger, but that's now beyond determining. - HAC]
Problems
1) Need to grow involves generating publicity without getting killed. There has been some success, but none recently. So post links. However, there is a concerted effort on the Net to purge these ASAP.
2) Then again, what good is publicity if there is no structure to capitalise on it?
3) You cannot build structure without membership (however that is defined), but Harold says no membership. No membership because, apparently, some twit will join and do something stupid.
4) Is that just a thing with Americans? There has been the odd embarrassment here in the UK, but nothing terminal. Yes, I’ve heard about the Reagan shooter with the card signed by HAC, but you can’t base policy on what some loon might do.
5) Something you need to consider. If there’s no membership, then anyone can claim to be a Northwester/open a P.O. box/dispense recruiting material and give interviews. Andy recently made a statement on RFN saying what people could do. Clearly you have this problem already.
6) With organisation, membership would inevitably give structure. Membership would give funding.
7) Membership does not have to compromise the revolution because the IRA never gave out membership. But Sinn Fein certainly did and, in my opinion, you do need a party as an outreach organisation.
8) The party reaches out and recruits people. Some are good to build the Party, others can be approached for the revolution. This does mean that some “members” are burnt when put out into the public space and made useless for the revolution. That’s the kind of hard decision that only a true leader can make. But it needs to be made.
9) I am acutely embarrassed whenever I hear about the lack of leaflets possessed by the NWF. Even when the BNP was tiny, we always had leaflets. Then again, these were sold in bulk (1,000, but you could make it 500) to party units i.e. we had membership and a structure. We’d get 40,000 printed up of one kind. They wouldn’t all run out at once and we might have a dozen different sorts. These were A5, two sided, two-colour on 80 bond and on the first side at least had a big eye catching picture.
10) You can’t organise like this because: i) you have no party units and so no one to buy in bulk; ii) you have no premises to store the said leaflets and no where to pack them and mail them from; iii) you have no one responsible dedicated to do the dispatch – certainly not you, you don’t have the time.
Solutions
The premises do not have to be a storefront. It could be a trusted man’s home. If the trusted man is a lively retired type, he could be the “office manager” and deal with dispatch. Charge for membership. Make it plain this is for the party only, not the revolutionary org. You would need a membership secretary. This could be you initially, or it could be the office manager, or another. You could divide membership into two. Full members are in the Homeland. Associate members are outside. i.e. make the outlanders pay for development inside the Homeland.
You really do need to find that mythical National Organiser of yours. Then again without membership, what’s a National Organiser supposed to do? Those who are saving themselves for the revolution need not join, but kick in whatever they do now.
If I were American with my experience, I’d be in the PNW and I’d be organising whichever district/city it was that I lived. It’s easy. When I organised Redbridge BNP (in N.E. London, population approx 250,000), we had 17 activists, all local. We later got a councilor elected though I was no longer Organiser having been promoted to Group Development i.e. forming new groups - I was very good at this.
Harold, at the risk of sounding like one of your Dutch Uncles, I have a lot more experience of Nationalist organisation than you do. I’ve led leafleting teams into shitty areas and got them out again successfully. Many times. One acquaintance of mine was David Copeland who set three bombs (Brick Lane [Paki area]; Brixton [black area]; and Soho [queer pub, killing a pregnant woman]) in 1999. This was bad news for us and I got a visit. But it wasn’t the end of the world. He was a member, but we weren’t fucked. I should say that I have an explosives conviction from 1985, which meant I was of interest.
Harold, it is my belief that unless you differentiate between the revolutionary and the outreach party and allow membership for the latter, you just won’t get anywhere. I have seen how new approaches can bring rapid new growth - if only you will initiate such. You are the numero uno in the American movement, especially in the PNW. No one else is going to try to take over. So unless you initiate these changes, growth will be slow - like molasses.
You constantly complain Americans are timid about doing something necessary but different. Harold, have you thought that you are also part of the problem due to your repeated jaundiced experiences? To sum up, the IRA and Sinn Fein were different, the IRA did not have formal membership, while Sinn Fein did, but the revolutionary organisation ran through both.
And on that final note. Merry Christmas! I’ll send another donation in the New Year. R & N – Tony
* * *
I won’t try to refute what Tony is saying here by pointing out the tremendous differences in the American situation and the British situation, not to mention the atrocious American character and that of the United Kingdom, especially 30 years ago. The fact is that what he is saying here is valid in principle, and I have known this for some time. I will also resist the temptation to rant and rave and add extra pages to this newsletter to the point where I need a big envelope and 70 cents postage to mail it; I think I need to be tightening and shortening my rhetoric as much as possible. To some of you younger people used to electronic screens, I probably read like Charles Dickens.
A Word In Your Shell-Like Ears
Let’s think about something. Can we acquire the necessary skills to build bridges, plant and harvest food, operate factories and repair streets and roads by tapping on our electronics from Mom’s basement? Can we get the required experience on how to run a usury-free banking system and maintain a modern military (a real one, not a video game) through loosey-goosey and “everbuddy do his own thang, dewd” and “you’re not the boss of me!” How can an organized ethnostate come from total disorganization and refusal to accept any personal responsibility for anything?
We fantasize about Mad Max (some of us) but nobody in his right mind actually wants anything like that to happen. The idea that somehow total chaos will lead to anything but our destruction, given the physical and moral shape we’re in, is incredibly foolish and dangerous. Many problems have arisen over the past year with the NF, and with myself in particular, due to the lack of professionalization in this Party. The fact is that I have now pretty much reached the limit of what I can do under the present circumstances. To be blunt, the quality of my work is suffering, and I know it. By attempting to do everything myself I am doing nothing really well.
I’ve discussed these problems in depth in the organizational letters during 2017, and there’s no point in me going off into a long moan over stuff I’ve spent the entire year complaining about. I am aware of our many shortcomings collectively and my own specifically, and I regret them. Almost all of these shortcomings have specific, identifiable causes involving the absence of professional organization and certain necessary physical plant due to my inability to persuade a sufficient number of people to participate in 10 X 1000.
Almost all of these problems would be immediately reparable through the acquisition of a stable, secure work station for use as a general headquarters unit; certain basic items of plant; an adequate sum of start-up working capital, and five to six Class A men significantly younger than myself with certain specific skill sets, here at my side to serve as an operational staff. In other words, roughly the human and financial resources of your average internet start-up. What I refer to as Square One. It’s been nine years now that I’ve been asking for this. Why have we not got there yet?
Let’s be clear: I’m not playing the blame game here. I’m asking a question to which we must find an answer and a remedy. I’m doing pretty much the best I can now with what I’ve been given to work with, allowing for certain subjective factors such as medical issues. I can do better, much better, but I require concrete and material assistance from serious, committed adults to do so. I don’t know what else to do, except to carry on as best I can, while continuing to beg and plead for that assistance. But that doesn’t seem to be enough any more. History is catching up to us and we are not ready.
Speaking of blame, I do in fact have an explanation, not an excuse, as to why I myself have not been running at peak efficiency for the past 20 years, one that some of you know about. One which I will not offer here, because it would be pointless and irrelevant in the face of the impending catastrophe. Of all the luxuries we can least afford now, pointless recrimination pretty much tops the list.
I call [what we are doing now] “waiting for Godot,” and we have to stop it. We have to stop waiting for God to tack on a happy ending just because He loves us. It doesn’t work like that.
[End excerpt.]
No comments:
Post a Comment