The Moral High Ground, Part 3
Posted on: 11/17/2019 09:36 PM

by John Young

In other words, this country was overthrown by a tiny minority of people who built parallel institutions. So the efficacy of this technique cannot be doubted. When the time came, they were ready to step right in and seize power.

The first two parts of this series (see here and here) were likely a bit overwhelming, and perhaps even discouraging because they brought into focus the enormous uphill battle we face in even being treated as human beings, much less making forward progress.

There have been three major themes throughout the first two parts of this series. The first is that people act on the basis of what they believe, rather than what is true. The second is that our enemies have successfully vilified us and our very just and moral cause in the eyes of the general public, or at least scared them into avoidance. The third is that people will treat someone they believe to be "bad" in abominable ways – such as burning “witches” at the stake – and will never see the irony of their actions.

This third theme is important because it highlights that even though facts and truth are important, we are not waging a battle of facts and logic where there is a legitimate search for truth among people of good will. Instead, we are fighting to take the high ground in a moral battle. Of greatest difficulty is that this high ground is not gained and held by virtue of actually being moral (although that can help), but instead by virtue of others perceiving ours as the moral stance. And in large measure, this perception is controlled by carefully crafted media narratives, years of brainwashing in public schools and colleges, both real and artificial peer pressure and so forth.

These themes illustrate three very important points. First, politics is downstream of culture, and without cultural control we will not have political control. And this means that in very real terms, our ability to apply persuasion in order to sway typical European-Americans to our point of view is dependent on our formation of successful pro-European-American culture to under gird those efforts. To summarize: seizing the moral high ground first requires the cultural impact to define what is moral.

The second point is that we – the audience of this article – are not average people. The sort of information which inspires or alarms us will not have a similar effect on most of our Folk. We see matters in terms of the next millennium, as opposed to today’s convenience. That is to say, we – the core group of pro—European-American activists – will never exceed 3% of the population, and even that is being extremely optimistic. However, as any student of the American Revolution will tell you, 3% is all it takes.

In the absence of developing an intact pro-European-American culture, which only requires that vital 3%, attempts to recruit people to make some sort of mass movement on the basis of beauty, truth, righteousness, or how our people will fare 1,000 years from now … will fail. Because that is not how the game works.

The idea that mass movements and protests have ever changed anything is an illusion intended to distract from what is really going on. The mass protests we see on the Left today, and we saw going way back into the 1960’s, were not at all organic: they were bankrolled and financed by people already in power in order to give an appearance of legitimacy to changes they had already decided to make.

The leftist protesters of the 60’s and the bombers (leftists touched off thousands of terrorist bomb attacks in the U.S. in the 1970’s) had guaranteed jobs if they were exposed, the support of legal teams if they were caught, and bail money ready when needed. Even the Bolshevik revolution was funded by the consummate “capitalists”: bankers in NYC.

The street protesters did nothing. They were simply giving cover for people who had already bought and controlled the system to claim they were responding to democratic pressure.

Thus, anytime we on the right have believed the illusion and attempted such things ourselves, we have found ourselves in a very different situation than former members of the Weather Underground, who today are revered professors at publicly funded universities. Instead of sinecures and accolades, we find ourselves in jail, with any lawyer actually daring to provide us a decent defense being blackballed.

The third point is that affecting the viewpoints of most of our Folk will require us to bypass their mediated reality to deal with them in person in a way they recognize to be fundamentally moral, which will put tangible reality in conflict with mediated reality. In most such cases tangible reality will win, especially when it conveys a clear benefit to the individual.

What all three of these points have in common can be summarized in one concept: infrastructure. That infrastructure might be cultural in the form of new media, it might be members with businesses who can hire other members, or it might be local chapters doing charitable work that engages with members of the community in person. But the focus is infrastructure, and all of these forms of infrastructure can be done in a fashion that bypasses the status quo.

Which points us to the next important concept of parallel infrastructure. That is, we need to create institutions that parallel those of the current model, but which either overtly or covertly serve our interests.

Here, I will divert into a brief dive into history again, looking once more at the radicals of the 60’s. We’ve previously discussed that they were well funded. From whence came that funding? Though, by that point, things were so far advanced that it is hard to see, it all began with simple businesses such as a tailor who offered his services to the general public but who preferentially hired members of his own special ethnic and political interests and who funded his son going to law school.

Let me emphasize this. The tailor likely believed the general public he encountered were his inferiors in every respect. If he didn’t hate them, he believed that he was in a position to know better than them what their interests should be. He saw himself and his kin as having ethnic interests that were distinct from the general public he often served. He delivered good service, he took their money with a smile, and invested that money in growing any of hundreds of organizations that would advance his ethnic and political interests, and in funding his offspring climbing into the highest circles of social prominence.

This began a cycle where his offspring were even better positioned than he was, and incredibly influential both because of increased wealth but also social status and thus access to the ears of the powerful.

In other words, this country was overthrown by a tiny minority of people who built parallel institutions. So the efficacy of this technique cannot be doubted. When the time came, they were ready to step right in and seize power.

Such an approach takes patience, a hatred of what is being replaced, and a love for one’s own people. And it doesn’t take a majority of one’s people, or a majority of the population in general to pull off. It just takes a fraction of a percentage combined with a pursuit of excellence and an eye for victory.

Heads up: things will get worse before they get better, victory will not be handed to us by a charismatic leader, and, as one great man once said, the future is what you make it. But making the future requires work and commitment. Without it we will perish.

So, how do we make this actionable?

Our path forward is in transcending the system.

Many of our members own businesses or offer services. We should coordinate this better so that we can preferentially do business with each other. We need these businesses, when they have employment available, to preferentially provide those opportunities to our own people. This way, for example, we can throw business to a lawyer if he gets blackballed for defending an innocent man. Or we can build an online school or other business that will pay our guys who find themselves unemployed by the regular system because of their opinions. This is the first part of parallel institutions. Whenever possible, we should be using alternative currencies such as Monero, because doing so withdraws support from institutions that hate us. (Naturally, all income via this venue should be reported as taxable.)

The second part is parallel media. Do NOT engage the legacy media. The most powerful emotion that animates our enemy is fear, so we should do nothing to confirm or support that fear. I covered this mechanism pretty fully here. Avoid legacy media coverage of any type, for any reason. Those who own the legacy media are masters of story telling, establishing context and defining narratives. There is absolutely NO situation in which any engagement with the legacy media will work to our advantage. None. No exceptions. Nothing we do should get coverage, and no interviews should be given. As far as legacy media is concerned, we should endeavor to not exist.

Instead, engage the new media that is generally friendly to us and our cause. There are networks of podcasts, alternative video platforms and more that have a distinctly pro-tradition and/or pro-European-American perspective. These are platforms where our views and efforts are presented in a more honest light, and where we can provide our own context while speaking with our own voice. The coordinator for our Boston chapter does a great job of promoting the new media, such as Red Ice and others, including literally paying for people’s subscriptions.

This includes, incidentally, this site, which you should be reading daily, as well as the White Art Collective and others we have highlighted.

So rather than trying to “get the word out” via a hostile legacy media, we instead avoid all coverage from them (and activities likely to attract them), while concentrating on actively engaging and promoting the increasingly robust new media that is friendly to us. Show people how to seek these new media sources. And while you are at it, choose one or two to financially support (including our own) so they can grow and reach more people.

And that is the next part of this. Encourage people to check out that new media, and promote it. Likewise, switch to alternative social media (such as Gab), using a pseudonym, and also use a decent VPN when you can. As much as possible, we need to remove the funding of legacy media by canceling cable, removing ourselves from Facebook, etc.

The third part is in-person community building. DO meet people, in person, to form friendships and alliances. Our community is (relatively) small. Many are well-known or well-vetted. If you need tips on security measures for this, let us know. This is the primary purpose of our Chapter structure – to serve as a place for our members to meet and form friendships in person with people of like mind. If you are part of a chapter, or in charge of one, continue to recruit. Within the chapter, the primary aim is mutual support and fraternization.

Within the context of these in-person communities, the form the majority of our activism should take is charity. Provide aid to deserving and legitimately needy members of our folk. When you do, whenever it can be done without risk, let them know that aid is coming from a pro-European-American perspective. The more people who realize that THEIR best interests are congruent with what WE advocate, the more support our positions will enjoy, and the higher their moral status. The impression we make while rendering in-person charitable aid can override years of brainwashing because of the resolution of cognitive dissonance.

How do you think numerous so-called “terrorist” groups in the Middle East have survived for most of a century? Answer: because most of their efforts are charitable, so they have the support of their people in spite of massive propaganda against them.

These are all simple, safe, and actionable items. They are not glamorous, but they are exactly what it takes to get the job done. All of these have the net effect of giving people a tangible benefit in acknowledging their ethnic identity, bypassing mediated reality, and allowing us to establish a narrative wherein ours is the moral high ground.

Speaking of Simple, Safe and Actionable, let me call your attention, again, to The Three Pillars of the Offensive for things you should already be doing.

Now, let’s talk about you, the member of EAU. (And if you are not a member, why not?)

You’re rare. And you always will be. You are someone who thinks in terms of epochs rather than next week. You are someone who understands complex social mechanisms and how a simple change in voting eligibility could lead to a globalist welfare state. You are part of our natural aristocracy.

The current system by its nature locks out its competitors, and has long ago displaced our natural aristocracy with a hierarchy based on ill-gotten wealth. But the current system is also destined for failure because it has engaged in so much over-reach and acquired so much debt while undercutting the most productive members of society.

If you think about it a moment, you will realize that you are dramatically better informed than the average voter, and that most people are enmeshed in a web of lies from which they have no desire to be extricated. You understand that most people just go with the flow of whatever is laid out for them, and that as long as they are comfortable, the details don’t matter much.

That makes you part of a very elite group. And that makes you someone who is responsible for ushering in the future. It is up to you to meet that challenge.

Printed from Western Voices World News (