5 February, 2009

Dr. William Pierce on Video

Posted by Socrates in Socrates, video, videos, White future, White identity, White leaders, white nationalism, White Nationalists, William Pierce at 12:46 am | Permanent Link

Those of you who haven’t yet seen Dr. Pierce on video can do so now. Some may find his tone in this video harsh, but nonetheless, he’s right: there are a lot of misfits in the WN movement – people who are in it for the wrong reasons, people who will only drive away better-quality people:


  • 10 Responses to “Dr. William Pierce on Video”

    1. LoveWhite Says:

      Some good general points have been made about this problem, but
      it’s also worth classifying what a ‘loser’ is. For example, just because someone earns a low income doesn’t mean it’s entirely their fault; as not of all us can be high achievers. Individuals may also fail to attain positions of stature in life due to medical conditions or other circumstances beyond their control. I think the general rule of thumb should be that it’s fine to admit/endorse anyone into the movement who behaves honourably (such as refraining from excessive profanity or humour whether verbally or on internet message boards) and has a genuine concern or love for white society. The latter quality is especially important, as Dr Pierce probably thought losers do not possess that and enter the movement for purely personal reasons. I myself think that overall quality has slowly improved in the past decade.

    2. Krystian Kazimierzowicz Kowalczyk Says:

      Dr. Pierce neglects to outline what constitutes a “loser” or “freak” beyond implying that they are tattoo-bearing, uniform-clad “14/88” types. These types of people will always flock to fringe movements in superfluity, so why waste time thinking about it? The problem wouldn’t be there if we weren’t a fringe movement.

      And what about the sort of people “we should be attracting”? Most racially aware Whites, regardless of ability or status, would not join “our cause” either, usually (and not unjustifiably) out of fear. The biggest problem is that our people are afraid of their own shadows thanks to institutional PC and the like, not that the movement is infested by “losers” (though it is to an extent).

      If Pierce had a meritocratic vision for the WN cause, he should have talked more about the types of people we should be attracting than wildly lashing out at those types we should not be attracting. It seems counter-productive. I would be more interested in hearing about what we want than what we do not want.

    3. Captainchaos Says:

      It is not hard to imagine what outre modes of behavior discredit the cause of White preservation. “Losers” are those who, when engaging in activism, of whatever form, let the indiscipline that has made a mess of their personal lives make a mess of their activism; and discredit the cause by their association with it.

    4. Mark Says:

      These nazi groups and the recent schizophrenia of Justin Boyer come to mind. People like him who are really frauds, who have egotistical and psychological motivations, rather than truly caring about their people.

      Unlike Dr. Pierce’s opinion, I’m not sure having these groups is necessarily a good thing, even if they do capture the rejects. Our enemies just use them in the media to give us all a bad name.

    5. antistate Says:

      Like those who gloat over the rape and murder of a blonde anchorwoman whose behavior goes unpunished:



      We can talk about freaks and losers all day and night, but how about establishing standards of decency and morality in our own forums?

      So tell me, “Socrates,” do you approve of these posts? If you do not, can you tell us why these posters were not rebuked or admonished by ANYONE at VNNForum?

    6. Socrates Says:


      Even though you seem to be looking for an argument, I’ll answer anyway: 1) I don’t moderate VNN Forum. 2) People in the media aren’t well-liked by WNs even if they’re White.

    7. antistate Says:

      I’m not looking for an argument, since I do not identify myself as opposed to you specifically. I was curious as to how a person with the pen name “Socrates,” thus portraying himself as a man of reason, would respond to such displays of amorality from his ideological cohorts — especially given such a pertinent topic as freaks and losers in the movement.

      “1) I don’t moderate VNN Forum.”

      Good. I was curious as to your take on these posts. I was not assigning blame to you. You are, in any case, “higher up” in the VNN scheme of things, as the main blogger. Thus, in some way, the posts and general trends at VNNForum reflect on you.

      “2) People in the media aren’t well-liked by WNs even if they’re White.”

      People in the media need to make a living, just like business people who must behave in a friendly way with Blacks and Jews — otherwise they will get fired and won’t be able to pay their bills, or worse, their kids will starve.

      This is the reality of life. This is not about ideology or looking tough in an anonymous Internet forum — where nothing constructive gets done anyway. In the whole scheme of things, Anne Pressly was a talking head who read from a script — a person with no real power in the world. She was also a young woman.

      The posts made in reference to her rape and murder, which gloat over her predicament: that’s beyond the pale. That’s beyond even what Justin Boyer did: to declare interracial couples “beautiful.”

      See, people will forget the nonentity Justin Boyer is a few weeks or months. He is a nobody — and no one really knows what his motives are anyway.

      But people remember the types of comments made regarding Anne Pressly, especially the intelligent Whites who are professionals and highly successful — the types of people Dr. Pierce in the video wanted to recruit. Unlike the misfits at VNNForum, they know that the real world is very much unlike the fantasy world of anonymous Internet forums — they know they have to compromise with the reality of survival and feeding their kids.

      I’m convinced the level of sociopathy in the WN movement is much higher than in the general White population. And I’m convinced, whatever the rationalizations for this behavior, that these posts are prime examples of that. In the real world, in the world where Whites have power — Whites who individually have more power than most Jews who surround them (yes, *some* Whites who read this blog have more power than the Jews who surround them) — those freaks who made those comments in the forum would be kicked to the curb and forever ostracized.

      It’s noteworthy that not a single person stood out from the group to condemn this very raw, anonymous display of psychopathy.

      But hey, your marginalization is not my problem. It is yours.

    8. Bret Ludwig Says:

      I completely agree with Dr. Pierce in the statements he makes here. No one wants or needs kooks, shitheads and losers.

      And I do not mean by “loser” anyone just because he has a low status job or may have had some types of past problems that are just that, past. I mean habitually unsuccessful people who get fired frequently or malinger on unemployment insurance, get negative police attention all the time, etc.

    9. LoveWhite Says:

      Bret: I think you hit the nail on the head. A loser is someone who repeatedly messes up, and I would add they are often people that have opportunities or advantages but don’t use them. Attitude is often as important as apptitude. Many celebrities I recall from the past could have been described as losers in that they blew their money on drugs and ran their lives into the ground.

    10. gw Says:

      A “loser” is not only someone who habitually “messes up”; a loser is also one who has all the wrong priorities. They accomplish nothing with their lives. Their lives are a total waste.

      I see someone like Leona Helmsley (nee Rosenthal) as a First Class loser, despite all her billions, because in the end everyone hated her, including her own relatives, and she hated them. She died a lonely, bitter old woman, with no friends but her dog, to whom she left millions. Pathetic!

      (Of course the dog had to be nice to her. She was the one who fed it!)

      What did she leave behind to mark her passing? What footprints on the sands of time? Nothing! Zero. Nothing but bad memories.