4 February, 2009

Poisonous Doctrines

Posted by Socrates in individualism, libertarians, Socrates, William Pierce at 2:53 pm | Permanent Link

It’s another William Pierce Wednesday.


Today let’s begin by talking about individualism and individualists. I’m using those words in a special sense. In this broadcast today when I say ‘individualist’ I mean a person who habitually fails to consider or to give proper weight to the group context in which he belongs when viewing the world, formulating ideas, and reaching decisions; and who in evaluating other people fails to put them into the group context to which they belong, instead focusing narrowly only on the individual at hand.

I also will use the word ‘individualist’ today to designate a person who makes an ideology out of his individualism. In this sense an individualist is a person who believes that it is good, moral, admirable, proper, and so on to disregard group contexts; and immoral, unpatriotic, reprehensible, and wicked not to do so. Actually it’s impossible to avoid group contexts, and the ideological individualist himself divides people into two groups: namely, individualists, who, like himself, are good people; and ‘collectivists,’ who, like me, are bad people, akin to communists.”

The rest is [Here]. (For the audio version, go [Here] and scroll down to 03-17-2001).

  1. Similar posts:

  2. 09/14/11 Poisonous Doctrines 100% similar
  3. 05/30/19 Individualism and Alienation 59% similar
  4. 01/04/17 Globalism As Poisonous to Cultures and Nations, As Freedom-Stealing, and As Communism II 46% similar
  5. 10/27/15 How To Stamp Out Cultural Marxism In A Single Generation 36% similar
  6. 09/26/20 Basics 36% similar
  7. 26 Responses to “Poisonous Doctrines”

    1. Tom Says:

      I can’t believe such a leader is gone when we need him the most.

    2. Zarathustra Says:

      Exactly, Tom. But thanks to America’s post-WWII pop culture, almost every White teenager since the days of James Dean and Elvis has wanted to be a faux non-conformist rock-star motorcycle rebel beat poet Hollywood reality TV celebrity. The result has been that Whites no longer identify with any larger groups like they used to.

      For example, a White male might have once described himself as Catholic, Irish, Democrat, Caucaisian, businessman, outdoorsman………Now White people will describe themselves as “friendly”, “cute”, “outgoing”, “fun-loving” and other such goofy, narcisisstic crap.

      The truth is, real individuality is meant only for a select few, like Napoleon or Hitler or Alexander the Great or Neitzsche. Most people are by nature supposed to be responsible, contributing members of a group, not friendly, cute, outgoing, fun-loving, self-centered narcisissts.

    3. Diamed Says:

      Collective thinking is good at reaching fundamental truths, but it seems completely incapable of reaching political consensus.

      For instance, after realizing that blacks as a whole are just a curse upon this world, I can reach the collective thinking conclusion that we should annihilate them.

      However, I can never translate that into any collective action, so there it lays, a dead letter. Why even bother coming to collective conclusions when only individual action can ever occur? Individually I could do all sorts of things, and then, upon resolving to do them, I could DO them. Collectively, I can propose things, and then watch none of them get adopted, and none of them get done. For the last 500 years we as a collective COULD have killed all blacks on earth, but what did we do? Some thought, as individuals, hey I could get a good screw from that one. Or, hey, that one might work my farm. Or hey, this one might be good at housekeeping. Then all those individuals went and did their individual action, while the correct, collective action was never done.

      The sphere of individual action is narrow, but it has this advantage, it’s actionable. Everything else is just day-dreaming. When’s the last time whites as a group got together and did Anything? We couldn’t even cooperate during the Crusades, and ended up sacking Constantinople instead of Damascus! Even at the gates of vienna in 1683, France was allied to the Ottomans and doing its best to gum up the anti-turk offensive. The civil war took 600,000 white lives — if we had instead agreed to kill 600,000 black slaves, by God the problem would have solved itself happily enough for everyone. Whites are a cursed race that can never get along, that can never take any collective action, time and time again incredible heroism by individuals and small groups is undone by giant rivalries between groups. Whites had practically conquered the world when in WWI, we engaged in the worst, most pointless, fratricide in history. Unforgivable. Whites act as a collective? When? Where? How can such a dream ever be achieved? At the genetic level, there is some vile flaw, some satanic curse, that will never allow it.

    4. Lee Luttrell Says:

      Just where does the “Lone Wolf” fit into all of this diatribe?????

    5. Junghans Says:

      Many good points here, guys. Yes, whites are self-centered, subsumed, egotistical fools of the first order. Most are totally corrupted by Judeo pop culture, to say nothing of their ideological subversion. They think and feel that they are somehow supposed to be movie stars and millionaires, ’cause they seen it on TV’. Narcissism run wild, indeed. Worse yet, they unwittingly like being lied to, and think that they are somehow still in control, even though they are in fact mentally enslaved to alien economic and racial oligarchies. In short, they thrive on innate, and concocted false pretenses.

      They carry the seeds of their own destruction because of several fatal genetic flaws, namely excessive individualism, gullibility, egotism and contempt of their own kind, the lure of the ‘exotic’ and atavistic, and plain old misplaced altruism. I’m sure there are a few others that I’ve neglected to mention, but I am here shooting from memory on the fly.

      You can get the picture easily enough, our people are genetically vulnerable, and have been exploited by others, in so many disgusting and destructive ways. In many other ways we are, of course, our own worst enemies; and it is difficult to save a people from themselves, let alone from their biological parasites.

      Dr. Pierce is always refreshing to re-read or listen to, he was in fact a racial genius. His insight was the epitome of prescience. His greatest attribute is the fact that he was race-wise, and able to articulate it.

    6. Zarathustra Says:

      Lee, that is a good question. But unfortunately, there aren’t enough Lone Wolves out there to make any real difference, anyway.

    7. Will Williams Says:

      Lone Wolves have been AWOL from Our Cause.

      I find it ironic that Alex Linder is now regularly featuring Dr. Pierce’s essays when a couple of years back he was gloating that, “with this permabanning of Will Williams from VNNF we are breaking our final tie to Pierce’s National Alliance.”

      Brilliant! If there is one thing that’s most missed, yet most craved from the atomized White resistance these days, it’s the deliberate professionalism of the old National Alliance under Dr. Pierce, the “racial genius.”

      Who but a WN fool would want to break ties with Dr. Pierce? Looks like of late that Mr. Linder has “gone over the hill” with all the the AWOL Lone Wolves. He always hated it when I was right about something and he was wrong.

    8. Socrates Says:

      Will Williams:

      Alex did not post that. I’m not sure if he feels the same way about Pierce as I do.

    9. Will Williams Says:

      Probably not, judging from his past commentary on the subject. Regardless, I’m glad you share my view of Pierce’s contributions and are posting his valuable works to others on the VNN Main Page on a regular basis. I had noticed that it was you who’ve been posting WLP’s essays, Socrates. You’re a consistently excellent editor. It’s good to know I’m not permabanned (yet?) from the VNN blog.

      Here’s a forum for serious biological racists where I’m not permabanned: http://creatorforum.net/index.php. I’ve posted some of Dr. Pierce’s essays there for the forum members’ enlightenment and inspiration. I still visit VNNF for current news with a loyalist twist, but the place is just not the same since Donnachaidh and a few others whose posts I used to follow have de-assed the area.

    10. Socrates Says:

      Will Williams:

      Just to be clear, I am aware of the argument that Alex once made that Pierce “ran a book service from a mountain-top,” or similar words. That may be true in a basic sense. However, I value Pierce as a philosopher most of all. NO ONE could take an issue and boil it down into an easily-understood paragraph like Pierce could. I learned so much from him. He was a teacher, a guide, a priest-of-Whiteness. No one can replace him. I like Revilo Oliver, but he was no Pierce.

    11. Bret Ludwig Says:

      Oliver was of a higher IQ than Pierce, and I don’t mean that as a slur against Pierce. Pierce was vastly smarter than most of us, and Oliver was above even Pierce. But Oliver was an academic: he talked and wrote and that was it. Pierce did something: he established what was to this date the best run white nationalist organization ever to exist in this hemisphere. Pierce was capable of and did put the NA together from, essentially, nothing and I believe future generations will have to pay respect to the NA and Pierce even if, as seems likely, it is now over as an organization. The next generation’s White leaders of quality will be either NA people or people formed largely by the work of Pierce.

    12. Will Williams Says:

      Our academies are filled with intellectually dishonest, high IQ White people who can only look down at their shoes in shame when someone like Pierce challenges them. It ain’t about IQ, but moral courage, the capacity to tell intolerable truths publicly that are held privately. Pierce attracted those of us who sought his unvarnished Truth. He showed us how. Have we really forgotten his simple teachings?

      So, who is interested in picking up where Dr. Pierce left off six years ago? Where are you? Come out of the shadows and contact me through this blog while you still can: [email protected]. It’s never too late to start things over right, using Pierce’s fundamental strategy as laid out for us in the original NA Membership Handbook, not the butchered reprint of Gliebe/Walker where Dr. Pierce’s name was even spelled wrong on the cover.

      Every effort to legally challenge the hijackers — Erich Gliebe & Co. to be specific — has either been queered by those on our side or watered down for a so-called “broader outreach” by those claiming to be Pierce’s successor. All of those responsible have posted at VNN at one time or another.

      Linder’s contempt for Pierce is inexplicable. His “National Alliance Book Club” comment is as ridiculous as was his criticism of me of being a problem because I’m “anti authoritarian.” No shit! I rebuke his “authority” as quickly as I’ll rebuke false Jewish authority. He also has said I’m a “60-year old teenager.” I took that one as a compliment. My wife calls me that, too, and she’s never heard of Linder..

      Socrates, please resurrect Dr. Pierce’s humorous expose of the Harriet Tubman Museum of Black History in Macon, GA, to commemorate Black History Month. It’s a timeless classic; January of 1998 American Dissident Voices broadcast.

    13. Socrates Says:

      Will Williams:

      One important thing about Pierce was his attention to detail. Another was his honesty. If Pierce said it, you can bet that it’s true. I’ve never discovered a falsehood told by him. Ever. [Contrast that to the top WN – I won’t mention his name – who called Friedrich Engels a Jew].

    14. gw Says:

      Will Williams Says: “Our academies are filled with intellectually dishonest, high IQ White people who can only look down at their shoes in shame when someone like Pierce challenges them. It ain’t about IQ, but moral courage”

      Oh, how true! When it comes to moral courage (or the lack of it) some of the most craven examples of spinal deficiency can be found cowering on our campuses. From which safe haven they preach morality, virtue, and righteousness to all the rest of us!!!

    15. gw Says:

      [Contrast that to the top WN – I won’t mention his name – who called Friedrich Engels a Jew].

      I don’t know who it is you are referring to; but as I’ve said here before, I am not one of those who imagine every other person is a secret Jew. Generally, I tend to be sceptical about such claims and to give the benefit of the doubt. So I’ll give it to Engels too; but in his case, I still have some reservations.

      Maybe he wasn’t a Jew himself, in the technical sense of having been bar mitzvahed and all that. — just as Disraeli and Mendelsohn weren’t “Jews” either in that sense. But assimilation was very popular in Germany in the 1800s when barriers to miscegenation were dropped for them. Without knowing anything about his geneology, I can’t comment further. But just the business his family was in (textile sweatshops), his revolutionary political leanings, his associations (Marx), and even his name itself raise some doubts in my mind.

      The name alone, “Engels” , being an ancient German tribe, the Angles, is suspect. No real German would have had such a name, the name of a tribe vanished for almost two thousand years. But a Jew pretending to be a German – and flaunting his Germanness – would. It is exactly the type of name a Jew would have. To me, it does not sound natural, but artificial, a name that was chosen not inherited.

      More than that, I cannot say. But with Engels I will leave some little bit of room open for doubt.

    16. flemmard Says:

      No real German would have had such a name,

      You’ve obviously never opened a German phonebook to “E”. The truth is, WNs want to see Jews where Jews frequently ain’t, full stop. Remember: socialism was invented by white men, not Jews.

    17. Will Williams Says:

      The best test for who’s a Jew is whether or not the Jews claim him. Who’s Who in World Jewry, the Jewish Encyclopedia, etc., are standard references for the serious Jew watcher. Dr. Pierce had individual Alliance members dedicated to subscribing to various Jewish periodicals and monitoring them for content relative to our struggle. He had a 15,000+ volume reference library adjacent to his office. Where is it now?

      Pierce made mistakes, but he was quick to correct them when pointed out. He admired George Lincoln Rockwell, but I remember his telling me how he cringed when he read GLR’s White Power and saw Pablo Picasso identified as a Jew by his mentor.

      Our Race is an identifiable collective, thus those of us who rally around our common blood and the primacy of race are collectivists. The libertarians say that’s a no no. Screw the libertarians.

      Ron Paul’s presidential bid was launched this last cycle with a base of support from loyal libertarian fans, some going back to 1988 when Dr. Paul ran as the presidential candidate for the Libertarian Party. His base slowly expanded to include everyone from far Left anti-war activists, 9/11 Truthers, to White racists who appreciated his radical positions that irked the Jew. But Paul is no racist; he’s dead set against “collectives,” while at the same time forming a collective of mostly White people who agreed with his libertarian policies. I always liked pointing that contradiction out to the goofball anti-collectivists in the Paul camp.

      Sam Dixon succinctly identifies this fatal flaw in libertarianism in the Fall 2008 issue of The Occidental Quarterly (p. 8-9):

      “Imagine that by some fuke a libertarian like Ron Paul were elected
      president. Imagine that he really could bring American troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan, block the drive for war with Iran, and end Israel’s ability to loot our treasury [since thoroughly looted by them] and control our foreign policy.

      “Private money and private media power would ‘immediately’ be used to thwart his policies. He would be lucky to avoid impeachment or assassination. And, as a libertarian, his own principles would prevent him from doing anything about it. After all, his enemies have freedom of speech and the right to use their money however they wish.”

      That’s why peace loving libertarians are such predictable losers in the racial struggle and why the collective, hyper-racist Jew loves toothless libertarianism, anti-collectivism, anti-racism in their foes. These otherwise White libertarians who value so highly their personal “pursuit of happiness” will have to come our way eventually or go entirely over to the other side and fight against us.

    18. Ein Says:

      “Remember: socialism was invented by white men, not Jews.”

      Very true. But like so many other white inventions that showed promise, it was appropriated by Jews and virtually made their own.

      Not quite, no. Not one hundred percent. They wouldn’t want to attract too much attention. But all they need (as with anything) is to control it, not fully “own” it.

    19. Ein Says:

      “Remember: socialism was invented by white men, not Jews.”

      Very true. But like so many other white inventions that showed promise, it was soon appropriated by the Jews and made virtually their own.

      Not entirely, even so. Not one hundred percent. But they don’t need that. It’s not in their interest to attract too much attention. All they need is to control it, not fully “own” it. (As with so many other enterprises.)

    20. Zarathustra Says:

      Dr. Pierce was brilliant, but when it came to choosing a worthy successor to lead the Nat’l Alliance after his death, he was thoroughly incompetent, something which diminishes his greatness.

      And there’s nothing wrong with Socialism, especially National Socialism. Remember, Socialism was created in response to the cruel, inhumane excesses of 19th century Capitalism. The great Iron Chancellor Bismarck was a champion of Socialism, whereas the scheming Jew owned the Capitalist sweatshops.

    21. Will Williams Says:

      Thus spoke Zarathustra:

      “Dr. Pierce was brilliant, but when it came to choosing a worthy successor to lead the Nat’l Alliance after his death, he was thoroughly incompetent, something which diminishes his greatness.”

      Could it not be said in a critical conversation about the moral courage of a brilliant “racial genius” that your use of the name Zarathustra diminishes your greatness?

      Who would you have chosen to replace the irreplaceable Dr. Pierce as National Alliance Chairman, Mr. Zarathustra? Be warned, this is a trick question calculated just for you to have you diminish your own brilliance and competence in such matters.

      I’ve noticed lately the lie that Dr. Pierce chose his successor has creeped back into discussions on VNN, without refutation. I can’t use the search function at VNN forum, but it has been explained there time and time again over the years by Fred Streed how Gliebe managed to get himself tapped as National Alliance Chairman by the Board of Directors that Dr. Pierce appointed to guide the Alliance should he die. Simply enter Erich Gliebe’s given name and then look for Fred Streed’s (another given name) commentary about the “goddamned lying, thieving POS” that Fred has said was the biggest mistake of his life in appointing as Dr. Pierce’s siccessor as NA Chair.

      Let’s get one thing straight: Pierce did not choose Gliebe as his succcessor.

    22. gw Says:

      Zara says: “Dr. Pierce was brilliant, but when it came to choosing a worthy successor to lead the Nat’l Alliance after his death, he was thoroughly incompetent, something which diminishes his greatness.”

      I don’t know anything about that. But I do know that it has been a common failing of many otherwise great men throughout history.

      Very often, after the death of a great ruler or leader, things have fallen apart or degenerated into chaos when no clear successor was designated to follow. It is not at all unusual. Unfortunately.

      I must say, though, that I am pleased to see him being so consistently praised here, instead of his bones being picked over by the vultures.

    23. Zarathustra Says:

      Willie boy, Dr. Pierce chose Kevin Alfred Strom, a creepy, effeminate pervert, to be his successor. That tells me Pierce was absolutely CLUELESS about how to keep his organization running in his absence. Where is the NA today, Slick Willie? Maybe you could turn it around? Just make sure you don’t have any obscene pictures of the Gaede Twins on your computer, YOU EEEDIOT!

    24. Socrates Says:

      Zarathustra Says: “Willie boy, Dr. Pierce chose Kevin Alfred Strom, a creepy, effeminate pervert, to be his successor. That tells me Pierce was absolutely CLUELESS about how to keep his organization running in his absence. Where is the NA today, Slick Willie? Maybe you could turn it around? Just make sure you don’t have any obscene pictures of the Gaede Twins on your computer, YOU EEEDIOT!”

      It’s my understanding that Pierce appointed nobody as his successor, which is apparently why, after Pierce’s death, the Board picked Gliebe as successor. But granted, I’m not an NA insider and I don’t have ready access to anyone who was there, at NA headquarters, when Pierce passed away. Were you there, Zarathustra?

    25. Will Williams Says:

      You’re right, of course, Socrates.

      There is much lying among small people.

    26. Will Williams Says:

      The fact is, while we’re on the subject of WLP, “the Internet has given many inadequate people the ability to pretend to be more than they are.” -WLP

      from : “Losers, Hobbyists, and the ‘Movement’,” March 2000