Thoughts on Recruiting, part one
Thoughts on Recruiting, part one is a commentary by Dr. William Pierce which appeared in the National Alliance Bulletin of April-May 1985. See part two here.
This is a source text. Spelling and smaller errors in the content can be corrected. The source is given in the "Source" part.
The West is being destroyed as much by sick, criminal, or irresponsible Whites who take their orders from Jews, attempt to curry the favor of Jews, or are under the influence of Jewish ideas as it is by the Jews themselves. Without the active collaboration of millions of White men and women, the Jews would be impotent. This self-evident fact raises several questions relating to recruiting for the Alliance—and, ultimately, to ethical behavior for members.
For example, how does one judge the fitness for membership of a former collaborator? What degree or type of collaboration puts a person forever beyond the pale? What mitigating circumstances should be taken into consideration?
Before answers to these specific questions are attempted, the scope of the problem should be set forth clearly. First, in a strict sense nearly every White person is a collaborator to some degree. There are very few people in the West who have put moral principles first in their lives and have refused absolutely every form of collaboration.
Nearly everyone is at least a passive collaborator—that is, he fails to take those actions which reasonably could be expected to thwart the Jews in one way or another: He fails to find out which merchants and other businessmen in his community are Jews, so that he can avoid buying their goods and services, thereby withholding money from the Jewish community which would increase its political strength; he fails to speak out forcefully against false teachings in the schools in his community, thus allowing the Jews to spread their poison unchallenged; in general, he fails to keep always in mind that a race war to the death is in progress, and that he is a soldier in that war.
Clearly, if every passive collaborator were judged unfit for Alliance membership, the pool of potential recruits would be extremely small. Yet, passive collaboration is not a minor sin. If all passive collaboration were halted, the West immediately would become an untenable theater of operations for the Jews, despite all the efforts of their active collaborators.
The problem of passive collaboration is a difficult one. It is not easy to avoid some types of collaborations when one lives in enemy-controlled territory. Paying taxes to the U.S. government certainly is a form of collaboration, for example, as is serving in the U.S. armed forces, even as a draftee. And, it should be noted, there may be circumstances which make some forms of passive collaboration justifiable. The National Office, for example, does not usually take into consideration whether or not a company from which it purchases office supplies or books is owned by a Jew. Is this justifiable collaboration? Would the same behavior be justifiable on the part of a White person not actively opposing the Jews? What’s the difference? The whole question of how one should behave in enemy-controlled territory is an interesting ethical problem, which should be explored at a latter opportunity.
Active collaboration may be a more clear-cut issue, but it still raises questions which require careful consideration. For one thing, there are different categories of active collaborators: there are the Christians who work to bring more non-White immigrants into America and smile on miscegenation, because they are true believers in the Jewish doctrine of race-suicide for the goyim; there are the lawyers, politicians, bureaucrats, and big businessmen who have no beliefs at all, but who calculate that they can advance their private interests by collaborating with the Jews; and there are the heard animals--including many policemen, teachers, military men, and small businessmen, as well as millions of ordinary citizens--who neither believe that Jesus wants them to bring a Haitian family to America nor aim to line their pockets by selling out their race, but who nevertheless collaborate actively with the Jews, simply because that’s the way things are on TV, and they always go with the flow, unthinkingly. Are any of these people suitable Alliance recruits?
Consider the Christians: if there is one thing the Alliance needs it is true believers, people who act from motives other than self-interest. That certainly is a characteristic of many Christians, who are ready and willing to sacrifice personal interests in order to do whatever they think Jesus wants them to do. Some of these people also have good character traits as well--industry, thrift, honesty, reliability, diligence, courage. And there are Christians who wake up one day to the fact that Jesus has been taking them on a bum trip. As abhorrent as their former behavior may have been, they may then be prospects for the Alliance. A man or woman who has truly freed himself from Jewish doctrines--all of them--but who retains the nature of a true believer and has a good character as well may be among the most desirable and valuable of potential recruits. The essential thing to keep in mind in this regard is that ideology can override instinct, so that even a constitutionally sound person, when infected with an evil ideology, may engage in destructive and unnatural behavior, including race mixing. Most will remain permanently corrupted, but a few will not--and in the case of those few forgiveness for past sins is called for.
There is less hope for the self-interested schemers. In some cases their calculations will go astray, and they will then turn against their former Jewish allies. Nevertheless, as long as they remain self-interested schemers they will be of little value to the Alliance, until that glorious--but, alas, distant--day when collaboration with the Alliance will be a less risky enterprise that continued collaboration with the Jews.
As for the herd, the prospects are mixed, but on the whole not very good. Most of the herd always will equate unorthodoxy with evil, and unorthodoxy is whatever it’s defined to be by Phil Donohue, Bill Cosby, and Dan Rather. They will, therefore, certainly not be receptive to a message calling for Phil Donohue and Dan Rather to be hanged for race treason and for Bill Cosby to be shipped back to Lower Volta posthaste, with all of his relatives.
It is important for us to remember, however, that, even among those who appear at first glance to be well-adjusted members of the herd, there are many potential recruits for us. Even among those with barbecue grills in their backyards and fiberglass speedboats in their driveways, there are men and women who feel deeply that things are very wrong with the world. And some of them are open-minded and courageous enough to think thoughts--even to say them aloud--that definitely have not been approved by Dan Rather’s bosses. Some of them are capable of dreaming of a nobler, more beautiful world: a Whiter world. A few of them can be persuaded to work and fight and sacrifice to make it possible for such a world to exist.
Therefore, it is wrong for us to write off all middle-class Americans with a "non-revolutionary" lifestyle as hopelessly brainwashed supporters of the status quo. They may still vote, pay their taxes, and serve the System enthusiastically in other ways--yet some of them can be redeemed.
Consider, for example, veterans of the Second World War. Who could have collaborated more actively and destructively with the Jews than the bomber pilots who dropped their tons of phosphorus and TNT on the residential areas of German cities, with the deliberate aim of killing as many White women and children as possible? Most of them did their dirty work without a twinge of conscience; they believed the propaganda they had been fed, and they went along with the rest of the herd. Yet, how many of those former bomber pilots--and others with equally murderous collaboration in their past--have since regretted that collaboration and now hate the enemies of our race all the more for having been tricked and used by them!
Likewise, it is wrong to write off entire occupational classes, just because those classes are, on the whole, composed of active collaborators: teachers, librarians, civil servants (including policemen), even lawyers and journalists. It is easy to say that teachers of history, by telling the lies required to continue receiving their paychecks; that policemen, by enforcing laws intended to destroy our race; that journalists, by writing and editing to suit Jewish interests instead of those of their own race, all placed themselves beyond the pale. Some would have us shun these classes as unclean and recruit only among members of professions less tainted by active collaboration.
We cannot afford that luxury. We must continue to recruit teachers and policemen and lawyers, no matter how corrupt the classes to which they belong. We must fight the System form within as well as from without, and we can only fight it from within by recruiting former collaborators.
In many cases these former collaborators will have to continue going through the motions of collaboration, in order to remain within the System. This will require us to adopt somewhat less simplistic and straightforward methods of operation than we have used heretofore. It will require more conniving and deceit then we may like. But it must be done; the war in which we are engaged is heating up, and the fighting will get dirtier and meaner. There will be no more room for naivete.