Full Thread: ZOG vs WN
View Single Post
Old January 28th, 2011 #19
Greg Johnson
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 138
Default The Implicit Whiteness Fallacy

Yes, most whites are implicitly ethnocentric. Yes, we White Nationalists represent the objective interests of white people.

But that does not mean you can count the majority of whites on our side, because there is a huge gap between implicit ethnocentrism and explicit ethnocentrism--and between objective white interests and consciousness of those interests. And then there is a big gap between being conscious of one's interests and feeling morally right and entitled to pursue them.

The enemy is working overtime to prevent whites from crossing those gaps, but still, we are waking up more and more people all the time.

I emphasize just how few real, explicit WNs there are because it is true. The numbers grow still smaller when you subtract the people who really should not be among us: the crazies, those who are hopelessly locked into nostalgic racial conservatism, etc.

We need to be very realistic about this, because although we do have enormous potential for growth, the white majority is not on our side yet.

Counting WNs before they hatch is one of the errors that allows Hunter Wallace to peddle his retarded mainstreaming fantasies.

I deal HWs irrational assumptions--which are widely shared--in a couple of articles:



We just don't have enough people and resources to diffuse our energy into the political process. We need to pull together and concentrate our people and resources like a fist, rather that spread them out and diffuse them, like a child waving bye bye.