Now we get to the racial suff - 'civil rights,' to use the jewish term.
But first:
"The conservative movement was born on November 19, 1955, the publication date of the first issue of National Review. The publisher's statement, signed by William F. Buckley Jr., then still just shy of his thirtieth birthday, set forth what have become the most famous words in the history of modern conservatism. National Review, he declared, 'stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so.'
Notice the shticky similarity to 'alt-Right' today:
"Readers quickly grasped that this was not merely a magazine. What they held in their hands was a cry for a crusade -- a battle for the future. The crusaders were to be iconoclasts, people who found themselves out of place in America. It was, moreover, not to be a crusade by everyone who called himself a 'conservative.' Buckley sought to appropriate that term for a narrowly defined group. Conservatives would no longer include people who sought to conserve and improve upon the then-existing American model -- people, we might imagine, such as the late Robert Taft. ... [Buckley] wrote, 'Conservatives in this country -- at least those who have not made their peace with the New Deal, and there is serious question whether there are others -- are non-licensed nonconformists.' ... The crusaders would be attacked -- 'suppressed,' 'mutilated,' 'ignored,' and 'humiliated' were the words Buckley used -- not only by liberals, but also by 'the well-fed Right, whose ignorance and amorality have never been exaggerated for the same reason that one cannot exaggerate infinity.' Thus Buckley and his coeditors threw down two gauntlets: one against liberals, who they conceded controlled the government and the press; the other against conseratives cut from a different cloth. 'Radical conservatives' were the true crusaders, and those on the 'well-fed Right' were not allies but adversaries. (p. 141-2)
Gee, now what does that sound like? My very own strategy. But notice that Buckley's forces ended up not triumphing but reversing on race, supporting big government, and supporting endless wars that even "rollback" anti-communist Buckley would have seen as going too far. Buckley became the establishment right, so in that sense he succeeded. But nothing substantial in American politics changed because of his efforts. In that sense he failed. He did not arrest history or liberalism; it is closer to the truth to say he allowed the liberals, i.e. the jews, to coopt him. But there was nothing wrong with his original idea or strategy: destroy all competitors and redefine the right. While simultaneously taking on and destroying the left. That's what the White right must do: attack and destroy the conservatives, all of them, including the alt-right posers, and stand alone as the champions of our race - all while simultaneously taking on and eventually destroying the jews. Take over the right. Polarize the country between White and jewish forces. Defeat the jews and live happily ever after. That is the correct political strategy for WN to follow. Notice it runs direct opposite to the fellate and pander and promicuously mingle (with the conservatives) strategy recommended by...everybody else.
|