I had the good fortune of being able to attend my first NPI conference, which took place on this last All Soul’s Eve, or Halloween—a fact cheaply exploited by liberal media hacks.
According to NPI’s President and CEO, the charming and mild-mannered Richard B. Spencer, the media reported attendance at upwards of 175, including a rather unprecedented number of Millennials (those under 30). It was refreshing to see so many young faces, who, despite the mass pressure from the politically correct, the education system, and social media, have apparently developed a healthy skepticism of what they have been told, something that favors dissident modes of thought. It is heartening to see this group developing a modicum of self-interest that looks towards a post-capitalist and post-liberal America. In short, they have been “red-pilled,” which was one of the themes – or memes – of the conference. Happily, there were also many women in attendance.
Such would-be “think-tanks” as the SPLC would have us think that the events at the dignified HQ of the National Press Club resembled a KKK rally or skinhead rock show rather than a meeting by a group of citizens concerned about their displacement from society and culture, and their marginalization by the media at large.
This may seem alarmist, given the large number of Europeans in attendance, but in light of the on-going migrant “refugee” crisis in Europe, there was an atmosphere of urgency and heightened concern at the conference.
Several millennials with whom this writer spoke, were bright, articulate, and cultured. My standard of comparison here are the average applicants whom I have interviewed time and again at various investment firms. Though possessing degrees from Ivy League institutions or top schools in finance, marketing, and economics, I often found them to be not only misinformed as to how Wall Street works, but also lacking basic skills – and let’s not mention culture!
The young people at “Become Who We Are” were, by contrast, truly an example of nature triumphing over nurture. Despite the handicaps placed upon them, many have begun to think for themselves and have embraced their marginalized American and European cultures and identities, rather than the multiethnic morass of decadence offered to them by society.
These young people are tired of being stigmatized for being Caucasian, or of Anglo-Saxon or European descent. This hardly seems surprising given the great concern about the coming catastrophe of a world which has forgotten the West.
The first presentation was by Dr. Kevin MacDonald, Professor Emeritus of Psychology at California State University Long Beach, on “The Origins of the White Man.” He elaborated, on his PowerPoint presentation, that there were two strands of Nordic and European character (and thus behavior): firstly, an individualism which stems from Indo-Europeans, and secondly an egalitarianism with roots in ancient Nordic hunter-gatherers.
It is this latter group, which has exhibited altruism based upon empathy rather than kinship, and it is this that has paved the way for the “universal morality” indicative of the Enlightenment (and consequently, our present political system of government). This is also behind our present, self-effacing ideologies.
This writer observed that Kant’s Categorical Imperative locates moral rationality in “the Other,” that is the universal, rather than in the self, in apparent agreement with MacDonald’s analysis.
His social, psychological, and ethnological insights concerned the behavioral patterns of the family group of Caucasians, with particular focus on the Anglo-Saxon and Nordic cultures. According to MacDonald, these patterns are invariably consistent, from the Neolithic period to the current age. We are bound by hunter-gatherer behavior, but socially distinct with a preference for monogamy rather than polygamy – an implied difference with Semitic, Asian, and African peoples and cultures.
Since most of his academic work has been in behavioral genetics and intelligence, it will be interesting to see how these studies are informed by further gains in the genome project, which has punctuated the nature/nurture debate.
Evoking political theorist, Carl Schmitt, Richard Spencer’s address was passionate and articulate, as ever. Its title, “Political Theology,” was rather appropriate, given the current Ernstfall and the political, economic and demographic predicament in which we find ourselves. He also detailed his rude awakening at last year’s European Congress, when he was detained by the Hungarian authorities on the decree of Prime Minister Viktor Orban.
This state of affairs has not been lost on this writer, or, one would imagine, some of the Europeans who spoke or attended the conference. They were quick to acknowledge that so-called free speech has been highly curtailed in the EU – including historical “revisionism,” as though “history” were not indeed an abstraction, subject to addition or detraction in light of new evidence. While the flag of the Confederacy has now been ruled a “symbol of hatred” in our own allegedly constitutionally-protected republic, in the European Union such moves have gone much further. In politically sensitive Germany and France, the symbolism of the Third Reich, and even criticism of public policy on immigration and Israeli foreign policy, has long involved various sanctions and punishments. Mr. Spencer’s unfortunate experience in Hungary last year, which he briefly shared with me at the conference, fitted into a similar pattern. Having resided in that country for a year after the fall of Communism, it would not be unwarranted to suggest that democracies and their supposed “protections” have had virtually no enduring tradition.
Offering my own thoughts on the matter, I would say that what may work Stateside, may not be entirely appropriate in a European context. This ambivalence was reflected in Spencer’s address, in which he made the case that playing “smart” – rather than “hard” – has been a winning strategy. He recounted how he had dealt with a “witch hunt” he experienced in his hometown in Montana.
I daresay that a little notoriety is necessary to appear on the radar, however, as with the “first name only” tags worn by attendees at the conference, a little discretion remains the order of the day.
It is of the utmost importance that both the form and content of future efforts to gather freely and openly be thoroughly thought through, as well as the particular attractions of place, time, and history. For example, Hungary has long been on the losing side of history, from the invasions of the Ottomans and the Treaty of Trianon to Horthy, Stalin, and the events of 1956. This has given the nation a strong subjective xenophobia, while membership of the EU has resulted in a need to affect certain politically correct airs to “save appearances.” Such factors should have been taken into account beforehand, determining such things as Spencer’s interview with Hungary’s major leftist news organ Népszabadság.
It is regrettable that Spencer had to undergo this ordeal, but I believe that both he personally and we collectively may have learned from it. Nevertheless, one could sense his deep sense of satisfaction with the large turnout this year, as well as the convivial and informal atmosphere stemming from the increasing number of attendees, particularly among the young; as well as the greater sense of urgency and self-assuredness we all have regarding the “race question” under present geopolitical circumstances.
Spencer stated that our collective “project” (“Becoming Who We Are”) is unfinished, giving an existential spin to the conference. He referenced the Matrix metaphor of being “red-pilled,” and emphasized that knowing and doing were two distinct projects, and, in my words, that the intention of fighting the good fight was but a beginning. We too must see how deep the rabbit hole goes.
Rather than repeat the substance of Richard Spencer’s thoughts, I shall refer the reader to his brief summary:
Self-avowed former Marxist, Keith Preston spoke of “The Empire vs. Identity,” that is, how barren the mainstream political climate is, entrenched as it is in consolidating the power of the ruling elite. The imperial policies by both neoconservatives and the present administration have inevitably resulted in “blowback” of the kind that has resulted in the present Syrian refugee crisis. His point is that neoconservative ideology exports its capitalist egalitarianism wherever it rears its head.
His left and right sensibilities converged in what was an astute analysis and critique of empire that reflected the wider mood of dissent. Social media has certainly contributed to this greatly, not only allowing politically incorrect people, resistant to the ruling ideology, to network in a grassroots way across manifold time zones, but has also led to a general mistrust of the mainstream media, who benefit from business-as-usual.
Indeed, the current “cuckservative” phenomenon as a means of characterizing the political climate in America today, has actually been a benefit to the movement, which, even in the eyes of secularist PC media, seems to have moved away from some of the old, hackneyed “racist” associations and dead-end tropes traditionally associated with a southern White protestant base.
More on the media’s response to the conference shortly, which reflected this ambiguity. As an aside, it is worth noting, that Mr. Preston’s move from left to right is more often than not the rule rather than the exception. It must be remembered that far leftists are much more likely to move to the far right than to look for solutions in the median, with which they were disenchanted to begin with.
Whether one was a veteran or had just swallowed the “red-pill” – as many of the attendees had – the second half of the conference was a clarion call to action, beginning with Sam Dickson on “The Tragedy of Southern Identity.” He emphasized that race was more central than political consciousness, whether one was a communist, fascist, liberal or conservative, or straight or gay. Such distinctions paled in comparison with the increasingly urgent race question.
As a well-known speaker at several nationalist and identitarian conferences, this attorney’s affiliation with the “far-right” has been disingenuously seized upon by the media, who present him as a Southerner “openly affiliated with the KKK,” simply because he had once provided legal representation for that group (as though they didn’t deserve it, unlike every other “innocent until proven guilty” defendant across the land). Apparently, #BlackLivesMatter more!
Although the conference was taking place at the National Press Club, a couple blocks from the Capitol, Mr. Dickson’s speech gave this writer pause to reflect on the increasing hostility to free speech in our own country. An increasingly autocratic executive, in the name of Barack Obama, has now made it illegal to display the historical symbol of the Confederate flag in the public arena. Given the current myopic ignorance of most young people, who in general do not even know who Christopher Columbus was, it is worrying that the Civil War will continue to be downplayed or simply ignored in history education, except in the degree to which it can be utilized for purposes of “White Guilt.” One wonders when we too shall have our “free speech” curtailed with prison terms like out European brethren.
Roman Bernard, Radix Journal‘s European Editor discussed free speech issues, and remarked that there was a fine line to tread in terms of what could and could not be said, specifically on the continent. Bernard’s view of the EU incorporated a sense of irony, viewing this “coldest of cold monsters” as a means of giving Europeans a backdoor consciousness of belonging to a common family. While we have every reason to oppose the EU, Bernard argued, we should at least embrace the idea of a European Union, and maybe even consider taking it over to turn it into a powerful and lasting tool.
While a factor in the present EU, the Vergangenheitsbewältigung of the German people, who were accused of being “Nazis” for not agreeing to bail out Greece, is also a factor at work facilitating the colonization of Europe by hostile migrants and refugees. This was a situation soundly criticized by Bernard’s compatriot Guillaume Faye.
Rather than the current federation, it seems to me that Europe’s pan-European identity would be better served through reverting to a group of nation states, each true to its own heritage, culture, and history. There is little doubt that as such, they would be much better able to protect their sovereignty and ethnic and cultural destiny.
I daresay the same applies to the decreased sovereignty of the various states in our own Union, as federal policies, such as same-sex marriage, become the law of the land, in disregard of states’ rights. Indeed, given the fact that there was both bloodletting at the founding of this country and a hundred years later with the attempt at secession by the Confederacy, one wonders whether we are not now approaching a similar “high noon.”
The keynote address by political philosopher Guillaume Faye, “Why We Will Win,” sounded the alarm. He ridiculed Pope Francis’ inclusion of Muslims and Angela Merkel’s masochistic open-door policies, eviscerating the “ethno-masochism” of White Europeans in a way that was both funny and disturbing. He emphasized the notion that “demography” does not lie; and that statistics show that Germany not only has the lowest birth rate, but also an immigration policy that will inevitably lead to its extinction. In France there are areas (he did not use the term “ghettos”), where there are no Whites at all.
Also, in many of these areas, in which the living conditions are execrable, Sharia law is being instituted. Germans have promoted multiculturalism and liberal policies due to the collective guilt of the past. Messrs. Bernard and Faye explained that many of the topics under discussion at the conference were inexpressible in both Germany and France, where most politically incorrect discourse falls under the definition of “hate speech.” As Mr. Dickson showed earlier, the situation is fast becoming similar in the United States.
Faye explained how even Aristotle stated that two peoples–demos–could not cohabitate the same polis. In the 1970s and ’80s, Faye was a member of the French New Right and a member of GRECE, after which he disengaged with Benoist in 1986. Much of this is referred to in his excellent books, Archeofuturism (1999), Why We Fight (2001), and Convergence of Catastrophes (2004). Indeed, his prescient analysis in Archeofuturism is prophetic, given the current global state of affairs.
Some of the speakers dovetailed with each other, with Faye reiterating Dr. MacDonald’s points about an altruistic “ethno-masochism” leading to a unilateral policy that overrides peoples’ wishes. In fact, Germany is an interesting case in point.
Faye believes – and many of us agree with him – that migrant hostility and criminality, already a matter of public record, will lead to a breaking point, where, it is hoped, the White man will at long last come to his senses. Is it possible that Europeans and Americans will yet literally transform from acquiescing victims into berserkers?
Faye seemed to contradict himself somewhat as to the solution of this dismal state of affairs. For example, he expressed the hope that the recovery could be headed by a Front National-led France, but later stated that, just as the United States has checks and balances between its branches of governance, so too do countries such as France, which has a General Assembly that would make it impossible for the Front National to legislate unilaterally, etc.
This writer wondered why Faye did not speak more about the role of Russia in the fate of Europe. This is probably due to Russia’s unique situation as not being a point of entry for immigration – apart from the likes of Edward Snowden! The reader is highly advised to read Guillaume Faye’s books, especially Archeofuturism, if he has not done so already.
Faye was followed by a live podcast. Participants, for those still not in the know, were Richard Spencer, Mike Enoch of The Right Stuff, and Red Ice Radio’s lovely Lana Lokteff and Henrik Palmgren – with both of whom I had the pleasure of sitting and getting acquainted. We discussed the situation in Sweden and the legacy of the late Girl with the Dragon Tattoo author Stieg Larsson.
Jack Donovan & Robert N. Taylor
After this, libations were poured and offered, accompanied by a narrative and musical performance by Teutonic spiritualists Jack Donovan (who is even larger in life than he is in print and pictures) and Alt-Right veteran folklorist, musician, and poet, Robert N. Taylor.
In his piece “The Tribal Mind,” Donovan laid out some barbarian “guiding principles” we should all consider adopting.
First, no tears for strangers; second, loot and plunder; and third, no apologies, no arguments, and no explanations!
The conviviality and excitement did not wane, neither late into the night, nor after we made our collective getaway from the masked Antifa outside the National Press Club, a maneuver that was recorded on location by Master Chim!
The press coverage was, as expected, rather skewed. Pieces by the Huffington Post and Daily Beast were highly inaccurate and biased. Self-avowed Jewess Sarah Lachman, titled her article, “White Nationalists Gather on Halloween to Discuss How Oppressed They Are: They’re not racist, they just want a white ethno-state.” Even the National Review was there. I informed their reporter that it used to be a decent rag, but, alas, no more. Later I couldn’t find anything about the conference on NRO.com.
There were demonstrators outside the Press Club, but for the most part they were laughable. I got “silly string” shot at me on the way in earlier in the day. At the Press Club I spoke affably with the Black security guards there, who were very nice. They did not seem to know or care what was going on at the conference.
In his “Thoughts on the NPI October 2015 Conference” Mr. Robert Venturelli a German Brazilian (or Brazilian German, I’m not sure which) incorrectly states that Jared Taylor was not at the conference. I met Mr. Taylor there briefly, at the beginning, after which he promptly left.
In fairness, however, may I say that Mr. Venturelli’s summary was spot-on. All-in-all, it was a heartening and classy affair. I am grateful to all the speakers and the many in attendance, with whom I had the pleasure of becoming acquainted. The important thing to remember is that you are not alone.
To conclude, I would like to quote from our enemies at the SPLC:
“Spencer, a relatively young racist activist himself, was able to do something many similar groups have failed to do—attract lots of young people to his event. And he did something else white nationalists aren’t known for: Spencer made it clear that anti-LGBT voices would not be invited. Every other kind of extremism, and in particular anti-Semitism, was perfectly welcome.”
See you at the next conference!