Thoughts for the New Year 2018

Looking for an image for this difficult-to-illustrate post, I came across this one and found it was attached to a very good essay written in 2014. I read it, having already completed my essay below, and think it is an excellent complement to my own thoughts. So I highly recommend you read it too.

Whatever happened to the Truth Movement?

or

Are we living in a climate of anti-truth?

by Carolyn Yeager

TRUTH HAS ALWAYS BEEN SAID TO BE SELECTIVE. That is, we select that which we hold to be true because it agrees with us for a number of reasons, and on the same grounds we hold its opposing position to be false, often without actually having a clear understanding of why.

When it comes to the question of the viable ongoingness of the European people and our culture on this planet, we face that problem of truth. How important is it? Is it better to have the right strategy, or to seek power, or to work toward a larger following? Should we try to defeat our enemy outright in battle or should we use stealth to insinuate ourselves into increasingly powerful positions? The arguments can go on endlessly. And truly, I have gotten weary of all this theorizing in article after article about how to approach the issues, how to respond, how to, how to …

When I first got into this “movement”, I was on a quest for truth. Actually, I'd been on a quest for truth all my life but when I began using the Internet, my quest speeded up considerably. I had been on a slow track; now I was on a fast track. I was excited about all I could learn, how much knowledge (or at least information to turn into knowledge) was available so easily. So I learned, learned, learned. I then began to express myself, and talk, talk, talk. That was harder because I right away got a certain amount of blowback that was designed to put me off what I was doing. But I persevered because the ability to come to absolute conclusions about important questions of fact was so rewarding to me.

At this time it was called "the Truth Movement.” Historical (in particular WWII) and Holocaust Revisionism were a big part of the truth movement for me. I admit that I became critical of several people who used that name for themselves who I thought were not at all devoted to truth but rather to their own or their friends' advancement in a movement. I eventually became critical of what I considered the low standards of the “Truth Movement” itself and switched my attention to the “White Nationalist Movement,” retaining revisionism as a major area of interest.

But this too became unsatisfactory when historical and holocaust revisionism collided with the ideas of an 'all-Europe White Unity' or what was sometimes called “White Pride Worldwide”. In this view, all whites are equal and one has to be very careful when praising a certain ethnicity or nation over another. I came to believe that this contributes to lies in history exactly as all “equalization” ideas do.

In time, this definitely Pro-White movement morphed into the less definite White Identity/Identitarian movement, and now into the Alt-Right movement which seems to have no boundaries or 'rules' to the point that just about anyone can identify themselves with it. The debate going on lately is about how much non-White genetic material one can have and still be considered White, or loyal to the White race, or able to speak for the white race and the alt-right. For me, who is 100% White, 100% German,  100% a non-mixing racialist and committed holocaust denier, the current situation is far from appealing. 

Thus, my preference in all this degradation is to return to the Truth Movement from whence I began, and here are my arguments to recommend it to you.

What can go wrong when the standard is the truth? Under such a banner we can argue among ourselves, if need be, about the facts rather than about strategy. Facts can be ascertained; this is the work of scholarship. Even though our scholarly class has been infiltrated and degraded by liberals, marxists, jews and homosexuals, it can still be straightened out with true effort. To ascertain the facts must be king, the highest good and the main interest of us all. When that is done honestly, we can all form our beliefs based on those true facts – we don't need to be convinced of this or that by the endless essays written by intellectuals on the major pro-White websites. That only provides a platform for a few to keep spinning their wheels in groupie conversations with others of like mind, and not do anything of substance.

We would do well to familiarize ourselves intimately with our 20^th century history, valuing facts over opinions, and be willing to acknowledge and accept the proven truth of every matter. We would do well to condemn the censoring or ignoring of any relevant information, and to not accept acts of omission any more than acts of false commission. Let the truth speak for itself! I am not afraid of that. Are you?

My suggestion would be to insist that those “in the movement” defend their statements rather than get away with avoiding doing so with the excuse that “they have the right to opt out of topics they feel would endanger their well-being.” Bull on that. These are questions that endanger our entire race and, as spokespersons for White well-being, we must insist they add to the truth, not the lies. For example, and this is just one of many well-known people I could use: Dr. Kevin MacDonald, editor at The Occidental Observer, has said in recorded interviews that when it comes to holocaust revisionist arguments, he has looked at them but not found them convincing. [See here and here]. At the same time, he has said he has not studied it. This statement is itself so unconvincing that MacDonald should be required to enter into a friendly debate with a qualified revisionist to defend such a statement. He has said the same about the 9/11 Truth movement, that it's arguments are “not convincing” to him. It's understood by most that he just wants to avoid such controversies, which reveals either a fear of or a fondness for the Jews, the very Jews of whom our understanding has been aided by his work. To clear up ambiguities and to advance our cause forward, “leaders” should not be able to get away with avoiding the facts of history and the laws of physics.

So as not to pick solely on Dr. MacDonald, I will give another example from a very different corner of the White Movement. This is Cesar Tort, owner of the Blog “The West's Darkest Hour.” Just yesterday, he posted a rather violent quote identified by him to be from Heinrich Himmler, with no indication of where or when Himmler said it, but accompanied with an image of Himmler. I wrote a comment to the post, questioning it's authenticity and then searched and found it in an out-of-print book by an Hispanic psychologist – not sourced there either. The words are clearly not from Himmler. Tort removed Himmler's name and image, but said in a comment to a poster who called it a bogus quote that “It doesn’t matter if it’s bogus. Either Aryans will think like that or they go extinct.” In other words, using bogus quotes, if you think it furthers your aims, is perfectly alright, because the only goal is to win. As if this would help us win anything, anyway. This, in fact, is what the Allies did against the Germans and here we are still doing it to them!

(Tort also censored two of my comments and didn't allow me to write any more because, I suspect, he considered I was impugning his motives. It just so happens I have also been censored several times at MacDonald's The Occidental Observer.)

For the New Year 2018, I offer a toast that we return to seeking to pin down and follow the truth and the historical facts … above all else. Anyone who impedes that or fails to cooperate in the search for the truth of a matter should be held in contempt of our values. I think it would have a very salutary effect.