IDEOLOGY. The Norwegian writer “Russleman” comments on other aspects in the nationalist struggle that are far more important than parliamentary work.
The road to our goals will demand many approaches, and all of them must work in harmony if they are to succeed in the end.
To see entrance into parliament as the ultimate road to power in today’s society is a naive viewpoint. Modern neoliberal states operate in a way wherein political parties, corporations, the media, academia and other institutions should be increasingly regarded as a cohesive entity that coordinates its actions in order to uphold the hegemony of the neoliberal and cosmopolitan ruling class. Personal relationships formed throughout the elite’s educational phase cross all of these boundaries and undermine parliamentary principles, such as that of institutions functioning as a check on one another’s power.
To maintain this hegemony, the neoliberal ruling class use a variety of methods, most of them based on attacking us as atomised individuals. A system that de facto functions like that of China’s social credit score via attacks in the media and social media, and which utilises the precarity of working people that is implicit in capitalism, can destroy almost any individual socio-economically as long as they stand alone. Ultimately this is the end goal of individualism: not the self-actualisation of the individual, but a tool for control. This is the essence of what we refer to as “atomisation”. No atom functions independently of others, which is why it is a dysfunctional way of life and runs completely contrary to how the ruling neoliberal class operate themselves.
As such, the traditional parliamentary path to power alone is completely inadequate to achieve our aims. Before this can happen, an organic and unified society of nationalists must be created that can function as a foundation and springboard for other operations.
Among these, standing for election will of course be an important approach, but only one of many. It will be just as important to have a presence at street level, to create nationalist media, to aim for the greatest possible degree of self-sufficiency for nationalists, to create our own informal economies, and, most importantly of all, to establish organs for coordinating all of our activity in order to achieve our specific goals. Even something as simple as putting up a sticker on a lamppost, a form of activism that is sometimes ridiculed by know-it-alls on the sidelines, brings us closer to this goal, as it helps create social proof of our ideas.
Jews make up less than 1% of mankind and today dominate most of the globe, despite hardly any examples of Jewish political parties existing outside of Israel. This is not just because Jews are the world’s most hyper-political ethnicity (with at least 90% of their population involved in some form of political activity), but also because of how closely this activity is coordinated, via rabbis among religious Jews and NGOs among secular Jews.
To give an example: If an individual were to oppose Jewish interests in an institution in the USA, whether it be a member of congress who breaks a taboo, a company that goes against the LGBT ideology, or an academic who becomes a little too vocal about the rights of Palestinians, the Jewish community will immediately react as a unit in order to bring individuals, or even organisations, to their knees. In spite of their insignificant numbers, they can accomplish this by operating in unity (as well as by occupying strategic positions in institutions). Highly organised minorities will always outcompete unorganised majorities. This is basic game theory.
The same applies to the false political debate. On one side you have the left, which, after having completely given up on advocating for workers’ rights, today essentially constitutes an organised anti-Whiteness that stands “against” an anti-racist right on the other side. None one speaks for White people, which is why we always lose.
Ignoring this fundamental truth and focusing exclusively on traditional election campaigns is therefore a mistake. Take Golden Dawn in Greece, for example. Had they operated in this old-fashioned way, it would have been the end of the organisation when the neoliberal regime in the country imprisoned the party’s leadership.
Sacrificing ideological discipline by moderating in order to win more quickly in the short term is a form of false pragmatism and will lead to attracting the wrong people and creating an insecure and dysfunctional organisation. Haste always makes waste. Hiding behind humour and irony in an attempt to look clever is not a good strategy either. You are fooling no one, and irony, even if it has historically had a place among dissidents out of sheer necessity due to censorship, will lead to nihilism if you use it too much. And should you still win a significant number of votes, you will soon find, in absence of a solid ideological grounding and responsibility towards an organic society, more and more excuses and rationalisations to moderate yourself further in order to keep the privileged positions you have attained. We only need to look at the Progress Party in Norway, or the Sweden Democrats in Sweden, to know this is true.
While Germany in 1933 should undoubtedly serve as the template for all nationalists, it is important to remember that all revolutions happen in their own context and their own point in time. The ruling regime is infinitely more aware of the threat posed by fascist movements today than they were when Hitler and Mussolini took power, and the parliamentary path has been outfitted with more barricades and pitfalls than any other. I cannot tell you what our assumption of power will look like, but I strongly doubt it will come in the form of 51% of the people one day suddenly “waking up” and deciding to vote for the Nordic Resistance Movement.
As the neoliberal regime slowly collapses under the weight of its own lies, contradictions and dysfunction, opportunities for nationalists will emerge. But the factors that will determine whether we will be in a position to seize these opportunities will have far less to do with the number of parliamentary seats we control and far more to do with our ability to act as a unit on many levels through discipline and solidarity.
So I would like to encourage everyone to spend less time wringing their hands over the lack of a political party that represents our interests, and more time on doing your part to make this unit a reality.