The Racialist Manifesto

From Metapedia
Jump to: navigation, search


by Max Frith

After over four decades of Movement orientation and debate, we have yet to see any theoretical divergences appear which succeeded in dramatically transforming the Movement as a whole; and this was fairly predictable. Even when significant developments arose, the majority of Racialists simply culled them for what could be twisted and hammered into their already existing dogmas. The two best examples are the Bruders Schweigen in the 80's and the White Order of Thule in the 90's. The former attempted to develop the Practice aspect of the Cause, by utilizing heroic Deeds of a bold revolutionary nature--putting themselves on par with such important revolutionary groups as the IRA, the Weathermen, and the Black Panthers--to fund and strategically empower the Movement. The latter attempted to develop the Theory aspect of the Cause, by utilizing heroic Ideas of a bold revolutionary nature to expand and deepen the fundamental thoughtforms of the Movement, primarily by incorporating ancient methods of self-transformation and transmutation today known as Hermetics, Alchemy, Rosiscrucianism, and Paganism. But although these two groups, so different in tactics yet so similar in strategy, took significant steps toward squaring the Movement circle, what most pseudoactivists did with these developments was simply pound their square pegs into old round holes. In simpler terms, they "borrowed" the money and prestige of the Bruders Schweigen but did not apply such to their principles; and "borrowed" the concepts and principles of the White Order of Thule (W.O.T.) but did not apply such to their practice.

One begins to wonder if Movement endeavors of this sort--which went in the same general directions and many of which contained talented individuals--were not tainted by Egos, piling up like so many soap-box monologues which can't follow the ideas and acts of others. To clarify what I mean regarding the under-use of theory: unhealthy egos couldn't simply follow trends of obvious importance; rather, they had to assimilate them into their incongruent patterns, and then regurgitate them as from themselves. Thus we find a group like Fourteen Words Press, with a "philosopher" who wasn't even the second or third most influential man in the Bruders Schweigen, putting forth its rehashed ideas as if he was the guiding factor in the group; thus we have groups like American Front, with infantile adolescents at its helm, perverting and disseminating profound concepts of W.O.T., while simultaneously slandering persons in W.O.T. who had contributed significantly toward the original development of the concepts.

The secret which these and all similar charlatans missed, is that the Bruders Schweigen lacked sufficient theory for its practice, and the White Order specifically refrained from much practice so that this theory could be developed. That is, the whole point was to conjoin theory and practice in order to push the movement out of its existence in farce. To declare at this point that one does not separate theory and practice is not yet to practice theory; and putting revolutionary theory into practice is not at all messianically postponed until the victory of the revolution, but is required throughout the entire process of revolutionary activity. Similarly (and this too is not only a theoretical observation, but a necessary one), we must naturally refuse to consider even the most fundamentally theoretical activity as practically separable from even the most distinctly practical activity.

To formulate the most general revolutionary theory is inconceivable without a very precise practice, and vice versa. And even in street-fighting you must think! But if we leave aside these dialectical truisms on limiting cases, we can consider the most common concrete situation in which dialecticians reveal themselves as such (even if many do not have the intellectual background enabling them to talk about dialectics or to write theory at the dialectical level). Activists interact with ideas and deeds; they judge each other while judging their environment; and each judges the judgments of the others. They agree with or oppose each other's projects. If there is a common project they have to know at different moments what this project has become. Their success or failure is measured by practice and their consciousness of practice. In a word, it is this concerted and theorized action that revolutionary dialecticians have to recognize as well as possible the decisive elements of a complex problem; the probable or modifiable interaction of these elements; the essential character of the movement as result, as well as its progressive negation. This is the territory of the qualitative where individuals, their acts, meaning, and life know each other--and where it is necessary to know how to know. This is the presence of history in the everyday life of revolutionaries. Thus the stupidity of most who have criticized W.O.T.: it was, after all, the only organization which members of the Bruders Schweigen felt compelled to join, and which Robert J. Matthews would have joined--exposing the superficiality of all the "clerical" criticisms.

The Movement's total lack of collective dialectical discourse is a deficiency at the heart of our primary problems--note the incredible growth and early destruction of important developments! The hostile reactions to some of W.O.T.'s theoretical critiques are a perfect example of this issue. Although every criticism ever made by the Order--several by myself--was solidly based on fact and offered objectively with no bias or ulterior motives, even the slightest critique was often felt as a total calling into question, an absolute distrust, a manifestation of hostility, etc. and this emotional reaction was not only expressed by the criticized comrades; when our Brother, Peter Georgacarakos, objectively warned the movement that Resistance Records was misrepresenting some legal charges and funding needs--the Label was charged with assaulting a young girl, and proclaimed itself to be charged with "conspiracy to commit genocide"; and had its property seized for failing to pay taxes on two million dollars in revenues, yet requested "legal assistance"--lots of hate mail was the response (the article was printed in Sigrdrifa). People with no connection to Resistance Records defended it based on nothing but a refusal to consider criticism! And when Peter turned out to be 100% correct--and George Burdi (aka George Eric Hawthorne) renounced the Cause, took his millions to the Church of Satan, and moved on to marry and Indian girl and participate in a multicultural music group--how many people apologized? How many commended the presence of mind in W.O.T. for trying to save movement funds? NONE. In fact, the Movement largely ignored the verification, which explains why it allowed National Alliance to simply purchase Resistance Records--the biggest traitor in Movement history--without requiring National Alliance to compensate the Cause for the treason it purchased. As with Resistance Records itself, National Alliance put money first, made George Burdi even richer, and was in no manner called to account. Of course, this is the same National Alliance which also sold the rights to Turner Diaries to an anti-White book publisher in New York City, with an agreement that it would be distributed with an anti-Movement preface and with $1.00 per copy going to Handgun Control, Inc. The Cause is on it's knees, but Capitalism thrives!

Almost everyone in the Movement is quick to judge outsiders, but almost everyone manifests a strange reluctance when it comes to judging anything about a member of the Cause. They are visibly uneasy even when someone else does. The sale of Turner Diaries to an enemy, for example, was an act of treason, yet rather than demanding an explanation from the millionaires at National Alliance, people will more likely respond to this article with hate mail irrationally defending treason! Sic simper tyrannis. I cannot believe that some shallow tact is at the origin of this--the Movement is infamously tactless. Is it bad conscience? Perhaps W.O.T. was the only group in Movement history to question such matters because it was the only group in history with a genuinely clear conscience? The failure to critique must be the result of a certain fatigue that sets in at certain moments of all lost causes. Is the Movement defeatist? Perhaps W.O.T. was the only group optimistic enough to realize that the Cause will survive criticism, transformation, even purges? In the face of Movement vampires like Resistance Records, W.A.R., National Alliance, American Front and Fourteen Words Press, what could the Cause need more than a Night of the Long Knives?

Any truly revolutionary Movement has as its principle reference point not its enemies, but itself--its own operation. W.O.T. was criticized from the day of its inception until now--years after its demise. We were never upset by any critique, only some falsifications. By critiquing W.O.T., people were paying attention, and--usually unconsciously--engaging in the dialectical method the Order endeavored it introduce to the Movement. Ultimately, the underdevelopment of internal criticism in the Movement clearly signifies the underdevelopment of the Cause's theoretico-practical action.

The crisis which has continually devastated the Movement in the course of over four decades--Rockwell was assassinated, Tomassi was assassinated, Klassen perverted our ideals unchecked, Matthews was betrayed twice, Metzger has been funneling Movement Funds to an Ethiopian family in Oregon for ten years, Burdi stole millions, Pierce made several treasonous business deals which the National Alliance still collects revenues on, Fourteen Words Press faked a wedding between Ron McVan's wife Katja and David Lane, so she could defraud the Movement as "Mrs. David Lane", and so on, ad nauseam-- has deep roots, and has repeatedly revealed the need for more than reform; the need for a Revolution within the revolution.

I was not part of the non-hierarchical "leadership" of the White Order of Thule; I was just the member of the Order's inner circle most knowledgeable about Movement history and best versed in its Mythology (using the term in its purely positive sense), and thus I became its ad hoc "spokesperson". The others had too much important work to do with Order programs to write articles for a largely apathetic Movement, so this duty fell to me, because I was capable of it and dedicated to high-minded Racialists. Considering that the subsequent Movement publication, Crossing The Abyss, carried out a forum that has been at least substantially influential and has had a great importance for the Movement of the period 1996 to present (though with an element of failure we must never forget); and that this work can continue to make a significant contribution, without W.O.T., by lucidly comprehending the conditions of the present, including post-W.O.T. developments; and that the deplorable condition of the Movement in the intervening years tug at my sense of Duty--I have decided to continue my Dialogue with the Movement.

My dialogue, however, shall be, as always, unapologetic and uncompromising. My aim is to break completely with the Dogmas of the Cause, and with their manifestations in activity: the reactionary idiocy and egotistical defeatism that conceal and maintain inferiority and insincerity. I want an exact definition of the Cause and an exact vision of the organizational activity that is actually possible of implementing it. I want an actual application of the name "Aryan".

After everything we have seen these last four decades, and the half-decade since W.O.T., I reject in advance any abstract response, any response that might aim, still, to evoke the old lies, or to admire the old idols; that might try to evoke the old "White Power" euphoria by finding nothing specific to criticize or self-criticize in the functioning--or nonfunctioning--of a Movement that we all know to be crippled, if not terminally ill. After what we have all seen for decades regarding the course of our common activity, nothing can any longer be accepted as before: routine optimism becomes a lie; unusable abstract generalization ("race war", "ZOG", etc.) become a dodge. Several of the most prominent Movement "activists" have become traitors; several prominent "P.O.W.s" have become informants; several "leaders" have become profiteers; most others don't talk about what they know, and they talk about what they don't know. I want a radical critique--a critique ad hominem.

The shameful indifference in the Movement is going to stop immediately because I demand, in the name of the rights and duties of those who have been loyal to the Cause for many, many years, or even one year, that each activist accept his or her responsibilities right now. Indifference to treason is complicity with treason. Let us henceforth no longer accept people or ideas that are in contradiction with the real Cause; let us purge those elements that are like sores upon that Cause.

If certain activists have hidden goals different from ours, we want those goals to be brought out into the open and to be expressed, as they should have been naturally, in distinct actions carried out under distinct responsibilities. When I tried to discuss National Alliance's shady book deal, for example, I was told that the funds raised would be put to good use. That was eight years ago--where are the results? Rather than investing these funds into the Cause, they were invested into another treasonous business venture--the purchase of Resistance Records, which had already embezzled at least 2 million dollars from the Cause. When I tried to discuss this with Movement activists, need I state what the response was? That this money, too, would be useful to the Movement. Since National Alliance purchased Resistance Records, well over one million dollars has been earned--I demand a full account of where all this blood-money is going.

My dialogue is addressing this declaration to all present activists of the Movement without distinction or exception. I am a dedicated, upstanding activist in the Cause, who has never uttered a false word or taken the slightest personal gain from the Movement. I have adhered to the strictest and most disciplined principles of Duty, Honor, and Loyalty possible--since most activists were still in school. As such, I demand that my claims are just; moreover, that anyone who proclaims themselves a part of this Cause but disputes my demands--is a traitor to the Cause. Considering that the crisis has attained a level so extreme that the very existence of the Cause stands poised on a precipice, such adamant demands are the Duty of every person worthy of calling themselves an Aryan.

The numerous deficiencies which have marked the Movement were invariably produced by individuals who needed the Movement in order to personally be something; and that something was never the real, revolutionary activity of the Cause, but its opposite. At the same time, they pushed the praise of the Movement to the extreme, both to make it seem that they subsisted in it like fish in water, and to give the impression that their personal extremism was above any vulgar corroboration of facts and acts. This sycophant activity generated the Movement's dogmas and idols. And yet the alternative has always been quite simple: either we are Aryan, i.e. noble, or we are merely White. As for myself, I take part in the Movement because I don't need it. I am a true Aryan, and thus self-sufficient--revolution runs in my veins, literally. If others like me are out there, then together we may lucidly combine our Aryan natures and potential for a collective action which, ipso facto, may mark the rebirth of the Cause.