Ideas versus Goals
Posted on: 04/13/2018 08:20 PM

by John Young

It is not surprising that, in a world where fully 69% of college graduates don't read proficiently, that people would have difficulty separating ideology from goals.

For example, our goal, in a nutshell, is for our Folk to survive and thrive. There are, I suspect, many millions of Americans who would share that goal if they understood it to be an issue. But among those who DO understand the issue, there is often an entanglement such that they mix ideology with the goal.

I have seen numerous people who contend that their particular take on political form, religion, economics or a host of other issues are a precondition for success. For every person who says we must restore Christianity, there is another who wants it supplanted with Odinism. For every person advocating socialism, there is another who claims without capitalism, we cannot succeed. The list of tangential issues goes on and on.

And so what happens is those precious few of our people who understand the necessity for action become divided, estranged and even at odds with each other. They will form organizations around their particular take (e.g. The Right Handed Aryans of the Capitalist Pagan Path) and then war with other organizations for scarce members and activists.

At best, this leads to lost efficiency as each organization has to duplicate all of the functions of all of the others. And because active members are scarce, quite a few organizations will lack members with important competencies. At worst, this leads to infighting as organizations, jealous for dollars and other scarce resources, cannibalize each other.

This is what happens when ideology is placed ahead of goals, especially since many people are used to equating their own self-worth with adoption of a certain ideology.

So it is important to put things in the correct order.

Where I grew up, the land was fertile and game was abundant. If my goal was to eat, the ideologies of farming and hunting were a tool to achieve that goal. But if game became scarce, it would make no sense for me to continue adhering to a specific hunting modality for its own sake. Instead, perhaps I would be wiser to adopt husbandry and raise domesticated animals. The key is to eat.

Furthermore, there are two different levels to ideology. There is the level for those "in the know," and a level for presentation to members of the general public.

One of our activism campaigns comes to mind. That campaign was called "TV is Child Abuse."

The ideology for those "in the know" involved understanding that media is extremely powerful, and our media is controlled by a hostile ethnic group. So our goal is to diminish its current power, deprive the controllers of income and wrest control of that resource so we can use it to promote our end goal of securing the existence and well-being of our People.

But the ideology presented to the "man on the street" in fliers and petitions involved references to a series of honest studies demonstrating that TV is extremely harmful to the physical, intellectual and psychological health of children.

Ideology is a TOOL. It is a tool that can be used to guide actions toward a goal, but it can also be used to motivate people to help you achieve a goal of which they are not aware.

Ideology must therefore always be questioned in terms of its end-game and motivations. Adherence to ideology for its own sake -- as we find many libertarians doing mental gymnastics to preserve the "non-aggression principle" -- is a dead-end that leads to paralysis or self-destruction.

This can clearly be seen in the libertarian open-borders position, in which the country is flooded with people who will form a vast consitutuency for social services, expansion of state power and reduction of liberty. Yet they can't see beyond their ideology because they place it ahead of their goal.

Instead, ideas must be flexible so they can adapt to changes on the ground and always point in the right direction to achieve the goals.

If you search the phrase "goal directed action" on the Internet, you will find that such engagement is part of defining what it means for something to be alive.

Ideology for its own sake can require actions contrary to goals, or result in paralysis altogether. This is something that affects Republicans in particular, leaving them unable to accomplish their stated goals because they use ideology to unilaterally disarm themselves in the face of an opponent who is solely goal driven. This phenomenon is what gave rise to the concept of an "alternative right." When Republicans hold both houses of Congress, the Presidency and a 5-4 majority on the Supreme Court yet accomplish NONE of their stated objectives -- an alternative is required. They are so tied up in their ideology that they can't engage in goal-directed action. They are dead. (Some of this is also attributable to being beholden to powerful contributors and, increasingly, being held hostage to a deep state.)

You do not see this on the left. Though the left's ultimate goal -- which they do not consciously understand -- is to ultimately bring all of humanity back into mud huts and squalor, they will not let ideology stand in their way. When Minister Farakhan recently made statements clearly condemning organized Jewish interests and was roundly condemned, not a single member of the Black Congressional Caucus disavowed their association with him.

Now ask yourself ... in the past 100 years, has it been the left or the right that has gained ground?

If you want to gain ground, goals must come first.

Printed from Western Voices World News (