[Any white person interested in pro-white political activism will need a working definition of "white." We don't all need to have exactly the same definition, but people we work closely with should have definitions compatible with our own.
There are many significant biological aspects of race, but, in the political realm, the "socially constructed" aspects might be more important. If someone says, "Race is socially constructed," then my response is, "Sure is, and if what I'm constructing isn't to your liking, then that's your problem!" In the following, I capitalize White partly to emphasize the necessarily constructed character of a White as a political category.
Here is my working definition: White people are those Caucasian people who are neither Hispanic, Semitic nor Asian.]
We have been gulled and lulled into a sort of racial amnesia. Our general refusal to identify ourselves as White in any way that makes a real difference has left us vulnerable to developments that seriously threaten our future. We are threatened demographically by massive immigration of unassimilable non-white peoples, especially Mexicans. We are threatened intellectually and culturally by the popularity and wide application of absurd doctrines like "multiculturalism" and the related concept of "diversity," which is actually reasonable up to a point, but which is always taken to absurd lengths by the power structure. We are threatened economically by the massive outsourcing of jobs. Our physical security is threatened by the involvement of the American government in a war from which White Americans have nothing to gain.
Those threats would dissappear, or at least their magnitudes would be greatly reduced, if we were able to act in the political realm for the sake of our own interests as White people. Thus, "White" is an identity which we White people must reconstruct if we want our children, grand-children, great-grand-children and all of the generations that follow them to live as free, decent, cultured, peaceful, prosperous, civilized humans. Today's White college students are in a unique position to engage in that reconstruction project and also to study, analyze and understand various factors and forces that make it necessary.
If you are a White college student, you might notice this: regardless of what you think, you will be attacked for your ways of thinking. If you assert your Whiteness, you will be called a racist. If you say, "I just think of myself as human, what's wrong with that?" you will be attacked for failing to understand the importance of race. You will be made guilty if you assert identity, you will be made guilty if you deny it. For a White person, recognizing that double bind is the beginning of racial wisdom.
I believe that the disconcerting and disorienting aspects of that double bind are deliberately intended to undermine any sense of White identity, but I'm not in school anymore, so I'm not right where the main action is. I don't go to so-called "orientations," I'm not required to take any "ethnic studies courses," I don't have to participate in confrontational or tendentious inter-group conflict resolution exercises. I don't have anyone trying to transform me into an ideal citizen of a -- quote -- "diverse democracy" -- unquote.
You, on the other hand, are right there in the center of the re-education camp disguised as an institution of higher learning. I exaggerate somewhat, but the point is: you are in a position to observe this process, to experience it directly, to be critical about it in great detail, to discuss it with fellow students, and, if you wish, to report your thoughts and observations to the outside world.
I would go so far as to say that if White college students do not participate, in sufficient numbers, with sufficient intelligence, immagination and insight, in this project of reconstructing White identity, then White identity will disappear, and we can only speculate about the kind of dystopia that might follow such oblivion.
Fortunately, college students have many resources to help them address the general situation. For one thing, they have people to argue with. Colleges and universities all brag about how "diverse" they are, and there is some truth in that claim. Later in life, in the workplace, it might be prudent for you to avoid discussions of "hot button" issues like race, homosexuality, abortion, religion and so on. Why make enemies? You might be perfectly willing to maintain cordial working relationships with people with whom you profoundly disagree on some serious, emotionally charged issue. But your co-workers and your bosses might not be so open minded. In any case, the reserve that is often appropriate for a working person with family responsibilities does not apply to college students. You can argue away, and if someone else can't deal with you honestly stating your opinion, well, to heck with them. You gain a bit of rhetorical poise; they gain yet another crumb of self-righteousness.
The people who can argue back with poise, conviction and logic are a treasure. The more they disagree with you, the more valuable they are. Because you will find many people -- some who agree with you, some who don't -- who can't really hear or make an argument. They just keep saying the same thing over and over. They repeat clichés and ideological formulas. They might say, "Only white people can be racist, because only white people have power," and then think they have given you a profound, irrefutable argument. In a sense, the arguments are "irrefutable," because the people making them won't listen to anything you say. So, you should value opponents who make good arguments and who respond to yours. They will sharpen your wits and sometimes even help you realize when certain of your own ideas are in error.
Those people who cannot make good arguments still need to be understood. Many aspects of society and public policy are driven by ideological power, by masses of people who have adopted rigid, formulaic ways of thinking. So do pay some attention to the rabid "right wing" warmonger and to the equally rabid "left wing anti-racist activist." The factions these types support are very powerful and are among the key forces arrayed against the interests of White people.
Rather obviously, before becoming any kind of White activist, you need to convince yourself that the issues I mentioned at the beginning of this essay are real and that the cultivation of White identity politics will be, in the long term, an effective response. It is not the purpose of this essay to argue those points at length, and, in any case, you should consult a variety of sources. I suggest that you start with the web sites VDare.com, which deals mainly with immigration related issues, and with Antiwar.com, which deals with the war in Iraq and with other conflicts around the globe. The American Renaissance web site features daily postings of race related news items and provides a moderated forum where readers of diverse perspectives can express their opinions.
As for the issues of "diversity," "multiculturalism," "affirmative action," "anti-racism," etc., look about you. Those ideas are always presented as if they are simply matters of fairness, justice and human decency. In very moderate doses, perhaps they are. But you might note that White people are always on the losing end when actual policies are put in place. You, the White person, are expected to compromise, be reasonable, give up ground and step aside. You, the White person, are expected not to notice that, in the -- quote -- "diverse democracy" -- unquote -- you are being prepared for, you will have a distinctly subordinate role. You will never be quite "diverse" enough for the Brave New Social Environment in whose definition you are not allowed to participate.
The beginning of activism is your willingness to assert your identity as a White person. The next step is to find like minded people you can work with. College is perhaps the easiest place in America to do this. You are surrounded by conversation opportunities, especially in connection with racial issues. You might try something like, "Say, what do you think about that Black guy who said that only white people can racist at the orientation?" or, "Why is our school celebrating 'Hispanic Heritage Month?' Maybe we should declare an 'Invasion Awareness Month!'" or, "Maybe Middle Easterners should solve their own problems. Why does the U.S.A. have to intervene?"
Of course, you will get some negative responses to such remarks, but that's something you'll have to get used to if you really want to make a difference. It might take a bit of work, a bit of trial and error. It's like becoming a good salesperson. Some people have a natural aptitude for it, some people have to get past a few embarassing failures before they become effective.
In any case, I suspect you will get a number of positive responses. These days, White people are very repressed on issues of race, just like people in Victorian England were repressed about sex. Many White people will be willing to talk candidly about race, but some other White person will have to bring the subject up. Naturally, the people you talk to won't agree with you on everything. That isn't the point. The point, in general, is to help yourself and other White people become comfortable thinking and talking about issues from a pro-White perspective.
If you are lucky, you will meet other people who are interested in playing a part in the reconstruction of White identity. That is the "like mindedness" you are looking for. It doesn't matter of someone is a liberal, a conservative, a reactionary, a monarchist, a libertarian or a socialist. A problem of our times is that White racial identity has been scrubbed from huge regions of our political spectrums. I believe "multi-culturalism," etc., have corrupted the mainstream Left and the mainstream Right. Can we really have a "liberal welfare state" if we open up our borders and invite the whole world to come in and share all the goodies? Can we have community, tradition and civility in a town that has become half Mexican so that the local factory owners can cut down on their payroll expenses? Can there be a Kingdom without a People?
Once you've met people who have also developed an interest in reconstructing White identity, the next question is: can you work with them? This is similar to what I call the Trio Problem. Suppose you have some music talent and you want to form a pop trio. You might hook up with two equally talented musicians, but the three of you might not be able to work together. As a lyricist and a (very!) amature vocalist, I've had personal experience. One guy was a fine guitar player, but he never sang along with his own playing and he never backed up a vocalist. He had trouble getting clued into the concept. Another guy was a very creative guitarist, but he wanted to put down a few guitar tracks and then have me come up with lyrics. Apparently, the concept of developing lyrics and accompanyment at the same time was totally alien to his way of thinking. I was working with yet a third guy on Inflatable Woman, a satiric work about academic feminism, but, in the middle of the project, he suddenly lost interest. I think he had some kind of ego problem, as if he couldn't participate in a creative endeavor unless he was personally at the very center of it.
Working effectively with other people will almost always require some real effort. The point is certainly not to give up at the first sign of difficulty. And you might very well have issues of your own. But you do need to be observant and, ultimately, willing to say, "We're not working well together. We need to go our separate ways."
Anyway, once you have an informal group of three, four or five people working together, your first task should be to develop some kind of common base of information, knowledge and opinion. Hang out, get to know each other, do a lot of talking. Read some of the same books, magazines and web sites. Do study projects where you all have a common topic, but each individual gets information from different sources. Colletct news clips about various "diversity" related or overtly racial activism on campus. Learn who the key figures are. Get on mailing lists and forums. Go to their public meetings. You might spend as much as a year, or even more, on this type of activity, but it will prepare you either for collaboration on a serious investigative or research project, or for public agitation.
A small group of people who are well informed and who work well together is much more powerful than its members would be acting purely as individuals. Suppose you decide to put up some fliers around campus announcing the formation of a White Students' Association. If your effort is ignored or only draws a small response, you can still go ahead and form the Association -- you'll at least have enough people for officers. If you get a large positive response, you'll be able to talk to more people, give interviews, etc., and possibly build up a momentum. If you get a large negative response, you won't have to face the hostility all alone. You will get advice, ideas, consolation and strength from each other. A heavy attack against the idea of a "White Students' Association" actually would illustrate the need for re-establishing White identity politics, so, working with each other, you might be able to figure out a way to turn the attack to your advantage.
Every once in a while, campuses in America are thrown into states of racial turmoil. Such episodes often begin with a relatively minor "racist" incident, which is then used as a pretext for sustained agitation organized by trained cadres of "anti-racist" activists. Eventually, university administrators will agree to make "concessions," which often involve committments to bring about major institutional transformations. That sort of thing happened at the University of Michigan. I wrote an article about it: "Virtual Racism at the University of Michigan in the Winter of 1987." It was a wild and crazy scene for a while. Events of that winter set the stage for massive "diversity" initiatives and changes in admissions practices, which led to the famous lawsuits, and so on.
I was working at U of M in 1987. The accusations and confrontations and hostility of the Black activists (and their leftist, white "anti-racist" allies) naturally created large amounts of resentment among White students. They would occasionally express that resentment, sometimes in negative ways, but I don't believe there was any actual organized opposition. I do believe that three White students who had prepared themselves in ways similar to what I've described above could have made a huge difference.
Suppose a season of racial turmoil breaks out on your campus. Your task is to transform the inevitable unfocused resentment into organized opposition. Because such great inhibitions and feelings of guilt and expectations of moral condemnation have been implanted into the minds of our fellow White people, the radicals will have done you a favor. They will have created many thousands of conversational opportunities.
When the question, "What can we do?" comes up, you might answer, "Well, we're having a meeting tomorrow to discuss that. Maybe we'll stage a counter-demonstration. Maybe we'll have a rally. But, hey, come to our planning meeting, the more the merrier." Build up calling lists, e-mail lists, etc. When you meet people who want to volunteer, you can set them to work putting up fliers, posting on forums, following media, writing letters to the editor, organizing discussions in dormitory lounges, etc.
Of course, the "anti-racist" activists might end up winning everything they hoped for in spite of the organized opposition you have fomented. However! You will have created a body of people who have intimate, experiential knowledge of some of the anti-White forces in our society. They will know that Opposition is Possible. And fun! That will be a true accomplishment, a true victory.
One thing you need to learn is how to learn from other activists, even activists whose situations are much different from yours and whose ideas you bitterly oppose. This is especially true for White activists, since we don't have much in the way of a long tradition of White activism. Thus, I recommend that you study the Civil Rights Movement and the Viet Nam era anti-war movement and "the '60s" in general. You might begin by watching the movie Berkeley in the '60s (1990). Another enlightening item is the book "Democracy is in the Streets" / From Port Huron to the Seige of Chicago by James Miller.
Rules for Radicals by Saul D. Alinsky is very much worth reading, but one must be cautious. Much of it boils down to how to get your own way by being an a**hole. Whatever you do politically will affect your own character and have other side effects. There may be situations where Alinsky style activism is the correct approach, but it always has the potential for being merely corrosive. As with many military books, Guerrilla Warfare by Che Guevara contains ideas that might be useful in non-military situations. Do It! by Jerry Rubin is an entertaining manual for street theater tactics.
There is a great variety of activist factions on campuses these days. There are conservative and pro-war movements, as well as the usual leftist organizations. It's always worthwhile to follow their activities, go to some of their events, etc., just to get ideas on how you might apply some of their tactics. Ultimately, the knowledge you gain from observation, thought, conversation, study and, most importantly, struggle, will enable you to write an appendix to "A White College Student's Guide to Political Activism" which could be of more significance than the thing to which it is appended. ;)
There are sound reasons for excluding Jews from our constructed definition of White. The main reason is that the strongest identity felt by most Jews is Jew. They are Jews before they are "white" and, I believe in many or even most cases, before they are American. (Or French or Russian or Argentinian, etc.) If we share a "White" identity with Jews, then we share a concept that is weakened from the start and, moreover, one in which most Jews will not fully participate. We need to construct a White identity that is just as strong, just as deeply a part of our souls, as the identity Jew is within the soul of a Jew. Let us not mince our words. Anyone who tries to deprive us of that strength is trying to deprive us of our humanity.
We must also consider the world political situation. We are fighting a war in the Middle East for the sake of Israel, a country to which many "American" Jews are profoundly loyal. All we really need from Arabs is their oil. They are willing to sell it to us. We don't need a war. It took European countries many centuries to develop democratic, republican forms of government. We have about as much chance of turning Arab lands into instant democracies as we would have of invading Zimbabwe and instantly transforming it into a high-tech wonderland. White Americans need peace. A very significant number of Jewsish Americans are willing to take a chance on war for the sake of Israel. That is a profound divergence of interest.
Professor Kevin MacDonald of the University of California at Long Beach has written extensively about Jewish group identity, cohesiveness and persistence. He was recently awarded the Jack London Literary Prize by The Occidental Quarterly. The welcoming remarks by Virginia Abernethy at the awards banquet, the introduction by Sam G. Dickson and the acceptance speech by MacDonald, "Can the Jewish Model Help the West Survive?" offer moderate but unflinching perspectives on questions of White identity and how it relates to Jewish identity.
Asserting a White identity shouldn't be thought of as an act of hostility. To illustrate this point, consider the VDARE.com article, "The High Road to Turkey: An Indian View of Thanksgiving," by Dr. David A. Yeagley, who "is an enrolled member of the Comanche Nation, Elgin, Oklahoma." Yeagley writes from an "Indian point of view," but his remarks about White people are very much worth reading. It's a beautiful article.
The reconstruction of White identity is a knowledge intensive project. As a college student, you should strive to gain as much relevant knowledge as possible, given the obvious constraints of courses you need for your career, required courses, etc. In some courses, especially "diversity" requirements, your stance will be basically critical. Your instructors might wish to enlighten you with some secrets of critical thinking. You are at liberty to do them one better and think critically about the professional critical thinkers. Non-plus the arrogant twerps. Have fun!
If you're careful, you can avoid the twerps and take useful courses in history, etc., taught by knowledgable professionals. In most cases, it won't matter if they don't share your political beliefs. White identity is part of the larger project of re-establishing a free, viable, orderly society. Any such society will respect various social hierarchies. The erosion of such hierarchies is a major factor in the chaos of our times. I don't recommend a rigid view of these things. I respect professors and scholars unless I have good reason not to. I am not equal to them. I freely acknowledge their higher status. Anyone "challenging the system" risks developing a general spirit of disrespect. Learn from those who can teach you. Lavish your contempt on those who truly deserve it.
You might be able to align your career choices with White identity activism. Try to envision a large movement. It will require not simply "activists" but also novelists, poets, singers, instrumentalists, script writers, camera operators, documentarians, painters, architects. It will require people who can run profitable businesses and give temporary jobs to activists down on their luck. It will require scholars who can relate their detailed mastery of areas of human learning to the struggle.
Every social movement needs theorists. Sometimes theorizing is all a guy can do! ;) If you are inclined to theorize, then theorize away. Even if you don't come up with any good ideas, the process of thinking about big questions like, "How do you initiate and build a large, influential social movement?" will create a useful mental engagement with the cause. Mao Zedong wrote, "A single spark can start a prairie fire." True, but with movements, it takes the right kind of spark. Perhaps you and your little creative circle will be the ones to find it.
A few weeks ago I saw the 1959 movie Gidget on cable TV. It was a silly, cute film about a 16 year old girl who was adopted as a mascot by a bunch of surf bums. During the introductions scene, Gidget was told that one member of the group was rumored to be an existentialist.
I mention this because it is an instance of an intersection of esoteric philosophy and teen pop culture. The movie really was a bit philosophical. You might think of it as a '50s analog of Dawson's Creek. You might think of "existentialism" as the "post-modernism" of the '50s. Both movements include serious ideas as well as faddish components.
I believe that the White identity movement needs to include some kind of faddishly captivating ideas. Some sort of popular insiderism with code words and shibboleths. It needs to be the kind of thing people can stay up all night talking about. You cannot build a large, significant social movement based purely on publicity techniques. I leave my readers to contemplate that notion. And to talk about it.
I think of the White identity movement as having four overlapping phases. The first is the superficial publicity phase. To participate, just post links to this page on appropriate threads in appropriate forums. E-mail your friends, as you see fit, etc. Post a copy on your own web site, after changing the HTML to have your own contact info, then put up fliers around campus with the URL. Print out a few copies and pass them around. Leave them in dorm lounges, etc. If you are ambitious, write and publicize your own essays. Whatever. One way or another, get the words out: White identity.
The second phase is what most of this essay is about. You need to meet people, get to know them, work with them. Do a lot of study, a lot of thinking, a lot of talking.
The third phase involves engaging in public controversies. You can oppose the public activism of "anti-racist" types, etc., or you can start controversies of your own. If the "anti-racists" start picking on conservatives for being "racist" (which conservatives generally are not), then you can join the fun and make a few worthy points of your own. According to my way of thinking, the phase 2 educational and organizational work should prepare you to be strong and effective in phase 3.
The final phase will involve mass movements, political parties, changes in legislation, mainstream media, etc., etc. That phase is so far off at this point, we mostly need to avoid fantasizing about it. If it happens and we are ill prepared, it could turn into a flop.
Colleges and universities advertise their "diversity." They say you need it so you can meet a variety of people and gain an understanding of human differences. There is some truth in that. It really is good to meet people from different lands and different cultures.
I don't advocate any kind of hatred against anyone. I respect the rights of other cultures to define their own characters and to evolve on their own terms. But I believe that we American White people have a right to continue to dominate this nation that we created. A reconstructed White identity is essential to ensuring that continuation.
Copyright © 2004 You may make as many paper copies of this essay as you wish, as long you do not distribute them for charge. You may also re-post this essay as long as you do not change the main text or this notice. You should, of course, change the contact information so that you can meet people who share your interests. I'd appreciate it if you left the "manifesto ad" intact, but suit yourself. I encourage readers to save copies of this essay on their hard drives.
Click here to comment or ask a question.
This page is located on or has been taken from: m3peeps.org
Read Manifesto for the Peoples of the Third Millennium