Here is a thoughtful and very much appreciated comment on my Discovering Implicit White Communities article. -WS
a Finn
Posted November 22, 2009 at 5:45 am
http://www.toqonline.com/2009/11/implicit-white-communities-2/#comment-4339
William Sheldon,
You are implicitly asking a huge question. Rather than explicitly saying what you should do, I say instead what kind of evolving processes you should start.
But first, before you do anything else you could read two concentrated books on influence: Robert B. Cialdini, Influence, The Psychology of Persuasion; Robert B. Cialdini et. al., Yes, 50 scientifically proven ways to be persuasive. As always, filter out any and all liberalism and apply as is necessary to your work.
Establish evolving (real) community networks. Start from little things, communicating and meeting regularly. Establish social ties (when meeting, prefer coffee and tea over alcohol, clear thinking is necessary) and trusted relationships. Later when you ready, explore the possibilities to enlarge the scope of relationships to economic and other cooperation, more tying group rules, more exclusive membership etc., hopefully one day ending in rule based endogamous and largely independent (the more you can produce and create what is good for the group, the better) community networks. Members of the community doesn’t have to live beside each other, but close enough to meet easily. Learn from resilient communities (Hutterites, Jews, etc.), learn the principles of communities in general, local economies, and work and production skills. Study the latest production technologies, connectedness and leveraging that enable so called super empowered individuals/ group networks in technological innovation and their utilization, production and international trade (Global Guerillas site owner John Robb is an expert in this field). Apply to your situation as suitable. Some books related to this: John Hostetler, Hutterite Society; Rick Goldberg, Judaism in Biological Perspective; Joseph and Natalie Henrich, Why Humans Cooperate; Richard L. Moreland, John M. Levine, Small Groups; Elliot Sober, David Sloan Wilson, Unto Others, The evolution and psychology of unselfish behavior; Christopher Boehm, Hierarchy in The Forest; Robert Boyd, Samuel Bowles et. al., Moral Sentiments and Material Interests: The foundations of cooperation in economic life; Miles Hewstone, Wolfgang Stroebe, The Introduction to Social Psychology; Richard Douthwaite, Short Circuit: Strenghening local economies for security in an unstable world; Steven Hassan, Releasing the Bonds (inverse the information and contemplate if it can be applied in some modified and benign way); Jack Schultz, Boomtown USA (about local businesses); etc.
Study, study groups, and discussion groups. Internet information is overrated. Read books regularly and discuss them with your pro-white friends over coffee or tea. Develop ideas and plans based on their information. Deal reading tasks in coordination with others so it is spread fairly evenly and there is no overlapping reading, when it is not necessary. Study power, politics, economics, political psychology etc. To the authors I mentioned in the previous answer I add Mitchell Dean, Governmentality, Power and rule in modern society; Graham Burchell, The Foucault Effect; Steward R. Clegg, Mark Haugard, Sage Handbook of Power; Luther H. Martin et. al., Technologies of The Self; Howard Lavine, Political Psychology; Michael Parkin, Microeconomics.
Our societies’ functions are steered with information. We must start to compete in information learning, use, and processing. This is our central task upon which other things are based.
Analyze environmental/ social/ psychological etc. influences on you and your group and environment in general. What dependencies you have? What incentives, influences and punishments steer, inhibit, prohibit, activate, confuse, etc. you, and who ultimately decides them? What are the limits of your allowed environment? What norms (norms are not used to reject or exclude, but to transform and correct according to it) you apply to your actions and self transformations and where have you acquired them and why? What productive and other flows (humans, transportation, capital, information etc.) there is and how much you can can influence them? What kind of operations and processes limit you; visible and hidden in the background or in history? What timetables you have, why, decided by who? Where you have to be in certain times and what functions you have to do, decided by who? What is the political environment? How discourse, both written and spoken, is related to these processes?
Test your environment. Make small peaceful civil disobedience transgressions to find out things about it, if necessary. How can you adjust, change, cancel, transfom etc. any of the functions, influences, flows etc., both related to you and others, in such a way that they give your group small or greater advantages (notice especially small things because they are more often overlooked)? If you can’t do a certain change, how much more information, power, skills, humans, resources, time, etc. you would need to make the desired changes?
Relation to incoming information. It is important to teach members to not just to passively receive incoming information from surrounding society, but to analyze it, compare it to other information, filter it, to use it in internal discussions and in discussions between people. This is generally better than just severely limiting the incoming information flow, because it gives immunity against large variety of manipulative, false and harmful information and at the same time enables one to receive useful information.
Translation of personal and small group to community or collective political. Translating and connecting every aspect of people’s life to community and political. Offering practical advice, what people can do. Start from easy feel good things that don’t require commitments and gradually progress toward more integration.
Legitimation crisis. What things in society’s functions cause tensions and problems to such extent that when they are combined, they cause significant legitimation problems, especially when they are made sufficiently visible to the people. Jürgen Habermas lists crisis tendencies in liberal capitalist societies in Legitimation Crisis.
Economic crisis: a) the state apparatus acts as unconscious, nature-like executive organ of the law of value; b) the state apparatus acts as planning agent of united “monopoly capital”
Rationality crisis: destruction of administrative rationality occurs through c) opposed interest of individual capitalists; d) the production (necessary for continued existence of the system) of structures/ things foreign to the system
Legitimation crisis: e) systemic (capacity) limits; f) unintended side effects (politicization) of administrative interventions in the cultural tradition
Motivation crisis: g) erosion of traditions important for continued existence; h) overloading through universalistic value systems
Expand that as necessary. E.g. the expanding soft totalitarian state has increasing and rich legitimation crisis potential in the USA. A legitimation crisis is a crisis that has the potential to end the present system and replace it with new, better one.
Stable basic identity, but fluid identities in certain situations. Keep the European-American identity as your foundation, but use different respectable identities when necessary, e.g. concerned citizen, father/ family man, church member, etc.
Leveraging influence. What groups, both white, but not pro-white and non-white, have some common interests with you and you could work with them in such a way that it doesn’t uphold the present system, does it minimally or facilitates the birth of new better system? Use suitable identity.
Critique of opponents, but also positive communication to opponents. Create both pressure and incentives that support each other. Positive communication draws them towards desired direction. I quote scholar of feminist studies 
Suzanne Jaeger: “… It is the concept of blocking. An actor in an improvised scene begins by offering some line or action in response to which another actor is expected to develop the scene. To block is to reject the offering. It closes the scene down and quickly becomes frustrating. Here is a very simple example taken from Keith Johnstone’s book called Impro: Improvisation and the Theatre:
‘Hello, how are you.’
‘Oh, same as usual. Nice day isn’t it.’
‘Oh, I don’t think so.’
Here is another example: an actor mimes wiping a table and clearing away cups and saucers. A second actor walks in and says, “Did you find a large black purse under this table?” The first actor replies, “this isn’t a table.”
In both these scenes one of the improvisers says “NO.” Their response is a form of aggression that blocks the development of action. Blocking occurs in improvisational theater when actors get scared, or embarrassed, or when they are worried about being original. The contrast with blocking is accepting. Here is an example of accepting from Johnstone’s book:
‘Sit down, Smith.’
‘Thank you, Sir.’
‘It’s about the wife, Smith.’
‘She told you about it has she, Sir?’
‘Yes, yes, she’s made a clean breast of it.’
Johnstone tells us that neither actor in this improvised scene is quite sure what the scene is about but he’s willing to play along to see what emerges. Accepting involves saying ‘yes’ to the norms, values, concepts, ideas that constitute a scene as a recognizable scene. To block a scene is to stymie the flow of creativity. I am suggesting here that to maintain a constant state of resistance with all social norms similarly blocks the development of one’s own and other’s creative powers to be in a situation. To retool subjectivity within the conditions of human social existence requires some acceptance of social situations and the complexities of power dynamics. In other words, resistance isn’t always the best answer.”
- See also these comments from a Finn: here, here, and here.
opinion
Recent Comments