Race: The Essence of Our Struggle and Ourselves

Currently, there is an important ideological discussion going on among nationalists: race versus culture as the crucial basis for nationalism. This is a discussion we must take very seriously because it touches upon the very essence of what we are striving for. I am glad to see that more and more people are reaching the insight that race is not only the essence of our struggle, but also the essence of what we are ourselves. Despite this insight, however, there still seem to be some misunderstandings of its practical consequences.

I recently read an article on nationalvanguard.org wherein the author, while agreeing on the fundamental importance of race above culture, still urged racial nationalists to join political parties that neglect race and focus on culture.

The author said "Instead of founding a new opposition, I believe that we could be far more successful if we started entering parties like the Austrian FPÖ and the Front National, by filling the ranks of those parties with those of our own kind, pushing out the Trojan Horses and radicalizing the rank and file by education and good example." According to the author, this would be a desirable strategy partly because "We must not ignore the fact that many nationalist, conservative parties in Europe are successful" (1).

Well, I have heard this argument many times before, almost exclusively from people who want to justify that they already are members of these parties -- though they consider themselves to be racial nationalists. In theory, the idea of taking over existing parties may sound good -- all of a sudden there would be relatively large racially conscious parties in several European countries. In reality, however, there are profound problems with this way of thinking.

I have myself talked to members and former members of several “cultural nationalist” parties who consider themselves to be racial nationalists. Some of them are or have been quite high-ranking party members, and many have shared the dream to use national democracy to establish a racial state. This is by no means a new approach, and there have been several attempts to radicalize existing parties by taking control from the inside. Actually, there was an attempt recently by Jewish hard-liner Moshe Feiglin to take over the Likud party in Israel in such a manner. However, in the course of time, the strategy of radicalizing nationalistic parties from the inside has never proved successful in the post-War era.

Does this signify that it is impossible to clandestinely take over a political party? No, certainly not. I would say several of the non-racial nationalist parties throughout Europe already have been taken over through machinations by various [non-racial] factions. However, there is one important ingredient that has made this possible: These parties have never advocated racial nationalism in the first place.

This fact lays stress on some of the defects in the ‘takeover’ theory, a theory which suggests that we should join the ranks of parties and organizations that don't share our Weltanschauung, that don't share our ideology, that don't have an acceptable platform, because perhaps, hopefully, we can make them change their minds. This is a very speculative approach, which frankly isn't very likely to turn out well. Further it suggests we should be dishonest and offer our people no honest political alternative or analysis, nor help already-existing pro-White parties or organizations. I know that some use the motto "by way of deception thou shalt wage war," but no matter how successful this strategy may have been at times, I certainly don't recommend it in our struggle for survival and sovereignty.

It would be outright foolish to abolish the National Alliance, make the members join the Republican party, or the Reform party, and hope for Pat Buchanan to become party leader, with the rationale that perhaps he could be convinced that we are right and would implement our ideas if he somehow someday would become president. It would likewise be foolish to put our hopes on the non-racial nationalist parties in Europe. Actually, Buchanan agrees with us to a larger extent than most of the leaders of the parties in question.

This lead to another question: Why so many racial nationalists extol “national democracy” in Europe? Besides the confusion the very word "nationalism" may cause, there undoubtedly is some self-deceptive wishful thinking going on. Actually, those who refer to the cultural nationalist parties as pro-White have no basis for using such an epithet; there simply are no facts to support it. And this is not even a debatable question -- either a party is pro-White or it isn't. As soon as we begin to compromise we begin to lose.

[Since the terms are confusing and since the term “national democracy” resembles quite closely the names or slogans of specific parties, National Vanguard prefers the term “cultural nationalist” parties to describe the concept involved with a minimum of confusion. -- Ed.]

Now, is Buchanan to be considered pro-White? If not, neither should any of the cultural nationalist parties. These parties have over and over again proved not to be pro-White, and if any outspoken racial nationalist had done what they have done, he would immediately be branded a traitor.

Take the case of Le Pen, who after all is comparatively politically incorrect -- for instance he doesn't deny the existence of race, though he does neglect its fundamental importance. Besides allowing Jews in the National Front, he actively cooperates with and helps advance Jewish influence in France. One example is the Jewish billionaire and media mogul Serge Dassault (Bloch), who was elected mayor of a Parisian suburb with assistance from Le Pen (2). The equivalent would be if William Pierce had helped Samuel Newhouse to become mayor of Alexandria, Virginia.

At a mass meeting on April 22, 2002, in connection to the presidential elections, Le Pen called "upon the French people, whatever their race, their religion or their social status, to rally to this historical chance for national rectification." Members of all races are, in other words, considered "French." Le Pen also stated that "immigration presents a problem of social equilibrium, of concern to each Frenchman, by means of rising delinquency and inter-ethnic violence. The recent violence that has taken the Jewish community as its target is the worst expression of this policy." In part this is absolutely true, but singling out Jews as the principal victims of the ethnic pluralism insanity is outright disgusting.

Most have heard that Le Pen once called the Holocaust a ‘detail’ of history. Well, that isn't really true. What he did say was that the discussion about gas chambers was a detail in history. Some may already have been aware of this distortion, but I suppose very few know that Le Pen, after being prosecuted a second time for stating this in 1997, summoned a press conference where he publicly took exception to "anti-Semitism."

The Vlaams Blok in Belgium is another example of a party that is often referred to as ‘pro-White.’ It is true that there indeed were some members of that party with a racial outlook. The foremost was Roeland Raes, founder of Were Di, an organization that in the 70s and 80s had some sound ideas when it came to race and the Jews. He later on joined Vlaams Blok and advanced to the position of vice chairman, but was then kicked out three years ago. Why? Because he, in an interview, questioned whether as many as six million Jews had been gassed during the Second World War. Vlaams Blok considered such political incorrectness absolutely unacceptable. And really, we cannot accept members in pro-White parties who question Holocaust orthodoxy, now can we?

To grasp the situation, make an easy abstraction. Imagine a party in America that advocates a halt to -- or at least a reduction of -- immigration. According to the party, all illegal immigrants should be expelled -- however, they interpose, all Blacks, Mestizos, and Jews who have their papers straight should be considered true Americans and be assimilated. By all means, they say, this assimilation should be achieved through miscegenation. They also say that it is essential for Jews to take part in the government, because, after all, Jews are the foremost victims of the mass-immigration policy, and since their papers are in order they do not differ from us. When it comes to the Holocaust, well, the party leadership may have some different opinions, but we must never question it as some members did in the past -- and ‘anti-Semitism’ must at all events be condemned.

Contemplate such a party. What do you have? What should we call it? Well, at least I for sure wouldn't call it pro-White; yet still this epithet is used frequently whenever similar parties in Europe are mentioned.

Those who, for one reason or another, embrace such parties throughout Europe should read a little about how Jews discuss them internally. There are some easily available articles about the French National Front (3), Belgian Vlaams Blok (4) and Austrian FPÖ (5), to begin with. As you read, take into consideration how critical Jews are in general when it comes to nationalism of any kind (except Zionism).

Finally, I can think of one other motive why there are people who urge us to join such parties: namely, to unite the nationalistic effort. This is sound thinking, because we surely do need unity, and I urge all Americans to join the National Alliance just as I urge all Swedes to join the National Socialist Front. However, we must never unite under the banners of parties who deny race. We must put an end to the romanticizing; we must stop being deceived by this phantasmagoria; and we most definitely must quit describing as ‘pro-White’ those who neither want nor deserve that appellation.

M. Eckehart
National Socialist Front (NSF)

Notes:

(1) http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=2689
(2) http://mondediplo.com/2002/12/01press
(3) http://news.haaretz.co.il/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=153419
(4) http://news.haaretz.co.il/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=363479
(5) http://www.jrep.com/SpecialCoverage/Article-9.html