Starting with first principles and the scientific method
America First Books
Featuring ebooks that find a truer path in uncertain times

Kevin Alfred Strom Archive

   

Integrity

American Dissident Voices broadcast
November 13, 2004
by Kevin Alfred Strom

 

Welcome to American Dissident Voices. I'm Kevin Alfred Strom.  

Today I'm going to start my program with an apology. The volume of mail -- both paper mail and email -- that comes into my office has escalated to the point where it's quite difficult to keep up with it, and I want to apologize to those of you who haven't yet received acknowledgement of your comments or contributions. Of course, the increase in correspondence -- and almost all of it is positive -- is a good sign. We're reaching out to more and more people, and getting more writers, activists, musicians, artists, and readers than ever before. Someday soon we'll be able to justify a secretary for keeping absolutely up-to-date with correspondence. But today I am going to answer publicly one of the more important questions I've received. We'll be looking at the difference between compromise and integrity, and how the growth of White media means a new approach to our outreach efforts. That's all coming up next on American Dissident Voices.

* * *

One correspondent, O. R.,  writes to us via Resistance.com about our news reporting on NationalVanguard.org, specifically commenting on our coverage of European nationalist parties:
 
"There's an issue with the National Vanguard Web site that has been bothering me lately, i.e., its favorable articles towards nominally-nationalistic European parties that allow non-Whites, including Jews, to join and hold office. I'm aware that this issue (i.e., Kosher Nationalist parties) has been discussed in depth in other forums, but I think it is necessary to discuss NV's apparent support for these parties....
 
"Does NV support these parties? I know they rely on freelance writers for many of their articles, so it is not clear if they are simply publishing what they are sent, or if they publish only what they endorse. If the former, they should at least provide a disclaimer stating the fundamental flaws of the multi-racialism, conservatism, and Jew-friendly policies of these parties.
 
"Despite the denials of many wishful-thinkers, these right-wing European parties are primarily geographic and/or cultural nationalists. They are not White nationalists. One of their main points is to crack down on "Islamic extremism." Now, obviously, none of us want Muslims or non-Whites in Europe. But to focus on the "Islamic extremists" as the primary threat is doing the work of the Jews. It ignores the looming demographic racial disaster and the reasons behind it. And it focuses energy against the non-Whites who do not subscribe to the New World Order and will not move in next door and marry White women. In other words, it focuses on the least dangerous of the non-Whites, and the ones that the Jews oppose the most.
 
"Some of these parties are strong supporters of democracy and assimilation of non-Whites. Others are openly Zionist. [Some support] ending immigration, and then integrating the non-Whites already present....
 
"It would be unfortunate if the National Alliance has shifted its ideology in support of conservative parties in Europe."
 
Let me make one point very clear: The National Alliance stands alone and we do not endorse a conservative or populist approach to our race's problems, since such an approach is bound to fail. As our Chairman says, we want a revolution in the hearts and minds of our people so we can remake our civilization into one which serves and protects the race -- not the reverse.
 
Having said that, though, we do want and in fact encourage friendly relations with Whites of good will and racial consciousness no matter where they live, what language they speak, what their economic status may be, or what political party or group they may belong to. But we do not officially endorse or support any party or any group except the National Alliance.
 
As our founder William Pierce expressed many times, and our current Chairman Erich Gliebe continues to maintain, and as I maintain on this radio program and in our other media: The National Alliance is unique. It is uncompromising in its principles:
 
We maintain that Whites are the descendants of the race that developed in Europe over many millennia and created Western civilization. We maintain that the Jewish race is an alien, unassimilable race and its international power structure is now by far the greatest threat to our survival. And we maintain that our unalterable goal is White living space, freedom and self-determination for our people in a state which makes racial survival, racial integrity, and racial progress its highest and non-negotiable goals.
 
Our definition of ourselves is a biological definition, a racial definition, and religion and geography have nothing to do with it. No biological Jew, nor any member of the African or Asian races can be "converted" into one of us as one can be converted to a religion. No one not clearly of European stock can be a member of our people -- and, as National Vanguard writer Mike Rienzi has pointed out, we will soon have the technology to accurately test for this. Citizenship must be based on descent, not on an accident of geography or on artificial lines drawn on a map.
 
Assimilation of immigrants can work for immigrants of various nationalities but of the same race -- as America proves. But it does not work for members of radically different races, as America also proves. Attempting to integrate the radically different Mestizos and Blacks into Euro-American society has been a total failure. The founding fathers and American patriots of many generations warned us of this, as the Alliance continues to warn us today.
 
An even greater failure was the importation of an even more dangerous race -- the Jews -- who, unlike the Blacks and Mestizos, had the advantage of similar skin color to ours and quite high average intelligence. The Jewish consciousness of their racial difference from us, and their desire to survive as a unique and dispersed people, were bars to assimilation and, more than that, were spurs to a sub rosa war on Whites that has yet to reach its conclusion.
 
So why do we report on -- and republish reports from -- nationalist parties in Europe or elsewhere who do not have the same uncompromising principles we have? Before I tell you the main reason for that, let me say one thing about these parties. We maintain open communication with many of them. We want to know everything that's going on in their countries that impacts White people or the ability of White people to tell the truth about race and Jewish power. Reports from these parties are useful for this purpose; and many of them are worthy of publication.
 
And we know from these communications that many of the members of these parties are themselves far more radical than the milquetoast platforms the parties publish. We also know that some, though far from all, of the top leaders of these parties are more radical than they believe it is politic to say or espouse publicly. In some case, they must tone down their rhetoric in order to stay out of jail in countries that don't have a first amendment, in countries where even expressing one's racial feelings or telling the truth about Jewish power is an indictable offense.
 
In some cases, however, the party leaders, though they may love their own people, really do wrongly believe that a racially mixed Europe is acceptable as long as it doesn't "go too far" and that a modus vivendi can be reached with the Jewish supremacists. Even in these cases, though, we want to maintain open contact with members and officials of these generally White-friendly parties. Our mission is educating and inspiring White people to understand our people's plight, to understand what our options really are, and to do the right thing. We can't do that if we make enemies of good-hearted people who haven't yet reached a mature understanding of these things. When they are ready -- and we are making more and more of them ready every day -- they will join us.
 
But back to NationalVanguard.org, the latest of our new media efforts. NationalVanguard.org is a news, opinion, and ideas Web site that complements  and promotes National Vanguard print magazine. In many ways it's like the magazine, but there are several important differences.
 
The cost of keeping the Web servers up and running is almost fixed,  no matter how many stories we publish every day. And those costs are minuscule compared with those required for printing and mailing a magazine. In the amount of time we can get 20 stories out in print, we can have 5,000 stories out in digital form. (And those stories can be instantly duplicated by the tens or hundreds of thousands by those who like them, and spread around the globe -- but that's another story.) In fact, there's almost no limit except for the man-hours we have available to put into it, so it could be 50,000 instead of 5,000 once we grow to the requisite strength.
 
And we can put plenty of new material on there every day -- and we should do that. And because of the constant addition of new material, as long as it is good and interesting material to our target audience, the news site will do one very important thing that White media have never been able to do before: People will begin to spend a good part of their day with us, every day or almost every day. By doing so, they'll get to know us and, even if they came with a skeptical or hostile initial attitude, they'll come to understand us as we really are and not as we are depicted by the Jewish-owned media.
 
So what we have here is a very different publishing model from what pro-White groups have been doing for decades: the very occasional and extremely narrowcast purist newsletter model. It's more like a general interest daily newspaper for White people than a theoretical journal or polemic pamphlet -- though, don't get me wrong, those things are still very useful, too.
 
So NationalVanguard.org is big, in the same sense that a daily newspaper is big. It should strive to contain all of the information that becomes available every week and every day that is of interest to intelligent and perceptive White people. We aren't there yet, but with the help of our hard-working volunteer editors and technical administrators I believe we will get there.
 
And under the rubric of "everything of interest" there is room for some variations on our pro-White theme on the site; as with a daily newspaper, readers expect some columnists or authors to differ to some extent from others. That doesn't mean that we'll publish anything, of course: Each piece in some way should contribute to the advancement of White interests as we see them or the long-term interests of the Alliance, or contribute to the knowledge and awareness of the reader in a way that he or she can use to advance those interests. And, since the site is a collaborative effort, there are occasionally going to be differences in how each editor judges such matters. Where there is conflict, they come to me as editor-in-chief.
 
I think there is value in occasionally quoting leftist or other non-racial-nationalist publications, and surrounding them with our commentary. When such writers or sites clearly want exposure by us (such as the MarWen Media anti-Zionist leftist writer, Wendy Campbell), I think it's fine to publish the piece they submit. But when we have some fundamental differences with the point of view expressed, we usually add our own commentary, as I did at the end of the MarWen pieces.
 
If we don't do that, it will appear to some people that we are endorsing, say, Wendy Campbell's multiracialism or faith in 'democracy' -- or, with some other articles, appear to be endorsing some shade of feminism or libertarianism -- or, for example, actually believing that a new (but still multiracialist) policy can ameliorate South Africa's rape epidemic. We don't believe in any such things, and readers need to know that. Leaving such impressions may confuse our core readership and support, which we should not do. We would also be doing a disservice to the newcomers, who deserve to constantly grow in understanding of our scientific, rational, and even cosmic reasons for our pro-White philosophy.
 
When nationalists write a piece for us, or allow us to reprint one of their pieces, the situation is a little different. If some element of the piece itself contradicts a fundamental Alliance principle, we should add our own commentary to make things clearer for the reader, so he can get the value in the piece despite its flaws. However, we shouldn't need to hang disclaimers all over the place just because an author or an author's party has elsewhere made statements with which we disagree. The readership we are aiming for is intelligent enough to know that we don't necessarily agree with every word of every commentator whose pieces appear on our site. And they're certainly intelligent enough to know the meaning of the words appearing at the bottom of every page: "Opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of NationalVanguard.org, the National Alliance, National Vanguard Books, the editors, or any other entity."
 
We're in a new phase now. Our principles have not changed, and will not change. We must recognize, though, that we're bringing perceptive and caring White people of many different social and political backgrounds to us in ever larger numbers. We must have material which speaks to them while it educates them, material understandable and accessible to them as they are now, material they can identify with and understand at their present level of development. And I'm not so full of hubris that I don't think we can learn some things from them in the process too.
 
Everything we publish should contribute in some way, even if only a small one, to awakening the racial consciousness of Whites or to educating them about the centrality of Jewish power as the source of our problems. There is room for hundreds or even thousands of articles every month, and room to publish different shades of opinion on how we should get from here to there, as long as their publication tends in the long run to advance the agenda of the Alliance and bring all these little streams of thought and activism together into a mighty and unstoppable White torrent.
 
I want us to be different from the White nationalist sites of the past. We should be perceived as highly intelligent, literate, and just as professional as a high-end magazine; we should strive to make our pieces as perfect as they can be in those departments. That matters to the people who are competent enough to change the future.
 
We should also strive not to fulfill the enemy's stereotypes about us: We should never be cruel, crude, genocidal, heartless, hate-filled, intemperate, or irrational.
 
We should be positive, enthusiastic, well-spoken. And we should, though not at all minimizing the great dangers we face, radiate hope that, with enough help and hard work, we will surely defeat the multiracialists and Jews and build an incomparably better world. We should show our people not only that we can  save the race, but that there is no greater joy in life than to be a part of our Cause.
 
In future programs, I'll be addressing other important questions that have come across my desk relating to winning a brighter future for White children. Please join me next week on American Dissident Voices.


 
* * *


 
As writer Alan Cabal said in his "Star Chamber Redux" published in CounterPunch: "In a cold cell in Toronto, Canada, a 64 year-old painter and pacifist sits on a fat stack of trial transcripts and marks a year and a half of solitary confinement. He sits on the transcripts because his jailers will not permit him to have a chair. He has no criminal record and has not been charged with a crime, and yet he wears the same orange jumpsuit as the murderers and rapists housed elsewhere in the prison. He is not permitted to confront or cross-examine his accusers in court. The "evidence" against him includes hearsay, double-hearsay, and triple-hearsay. The object of the exercise is to deport this man to Germany, where he faces a five-year prison sentence for the crime of 'defaming the dead.' This man hasn't lived in Germany since he was 19 years old, and hasn't set foot in Germany for years. He emigrated to Canada in 1958, and in the year 2000 he moved to the United States to live quietly with his American wife in the rolling hills of Tennessee. There, he painted landscapes and still lifes in his studio-until he was hauled off one bright morning and whisked to Canada by American law enforcement officials. His name is Ernst Zundel, and he is the world's premier thought-criminal."
 
Find out who this man really is. You will be astonished to learn why this man is so feared by the world's manipulators of your thoughts. Read the new book by the man who is so feared by the would-be censors and rulers of the West: Setting the Record
Straight: Letters From Cell Number 7 by Ernst Zundel.
 
This book is a collection of moving, incisive, and illuminating letters from the man who has felt the Iron Heel of Jewish power directly on his neck for decades -- and who has suffered at their hands as much as anyone this side of the Dead Sea. Ernst Zundel, a pacifist and artist who never sought to harm anyone, who sought only to stand up for the honor of his ancestors, found himself the object of vicious legal persecution in Canada beginning in the 1980s. Even his detractors admit he has done nothing but write and speak -- but writing and speaking outside the bounds permitted by B'nai B'rith resulted in a decade-long series of trials that ultimately ended in victory for Zundel in the Supreme Court of Canada and a great deal of embarrassment for the Jewish supremacists, as many of their most cherished wartime atrocity stories were demolished under cross-examination and investigation by the Zundel legal and forensics team. Zundel made history -- real history -- so when he wanted to retire to the rolling hills of Tennessee, the Jewish establishment would not let him live in piece. Vindictive almost beyond belief, they colluded with corrupt government officials to engineer his abduction and imprisonment without charge. Learn the whole shocking story from the man who lived it by reading  Setting the Record Straight: Letters From Cell Number 7. This 180 page book is our Item 1140n from National Vanguard Books, and is available for $8.95 plus $3 postage and handling, a total of $11.95. Write to National Vanguard Books, Box 330, Hillsboro WV 24946 USA.
 
Until next week, this is Kevin Alfred Strom reminding you that freedom is not free; free men are not equal; and equal men are not free.



.



Source: National Vanguard

For the latest contact, donation, and other update information regarding Kevin Alfred Strom, please visit his web page at Americafirstbooks.com. Please also visit kevin-strom.com, and revilo-oliver.com. Prices, addresses, and availability information pertaining to materials cited in his works are subject to change.

Please also visit the America First Institute donation page.

 

 

 

Flag carried by the 3rd Maryland Regiment at the Battle of Cowpens, S. Carolina, 1781

© America First Books
America First Books offers many viewpoints that are not necessarily its own in order to provide additional perspectives.