Have you ever wondered why it is that so many people have a hard time understanding that the current immigration policies are, to put it mildly, not ideal? Why is that the nationalist movement has failed to attract a mainstream audience despite how bad it is?
When one first start to realize what is going on regarding the immigration into the West, it can be a very frustrating experience. It seems like a lot of Nationalist groups are frustrated, which is understandable, and since they feel that way they also tend to present their message in an equally frustrated and angry way, which does not communicate well with the majority of the population.
Below, you see an excerpt of a mindset that is common among people frustrated about the current situation:
“Why it is so hard for many people, especially those liberal leftist brainwashed people, to just accept that Third World immigrants commit more crime than us Europeans? That is just a fact! That things have gotten much worse since the Thirld World started to pour into our countries? That these immigrants tend to be more violent and that we are less safe, and that Islam is obviously dangerous with its values and how they view women? That most immigrants just live on welfare and don’t contribute to society, that they can not be integrated in our society because of the big cultural differences etc., and that this is just plain LOGIC! Why don’t these leftist people understand this? Is it because they are only emotional, naive and incapable to understand real simple logic? Are they totally brainwashed? Are they too naive, tolerant and nice so that it is transitioning to become madness? Why are they not attracted to nationalist movements who just want to restore order and common sense? Why do they keep wanting more immigration int o our homelands?”
After having studied at a university and attending a marxist safari for years, where I met and observed all kinds of leftist academic people everyday who eagerly supported more non-European immigration into our homelands, I have some perspective on why they are not attracted to the “white nationalist movement” around the West.
In the first part of this article, we will go through some steps on WHY most Europeans have not been attracted to the nationalist movement during the last decades, and then we will go through some suggestions and solutions on how it could be instead in order to attract a lot more people! After all, we want more people to care about our future and to engage in practical politics in order to do something about all of this.
Before we start, let it just be known that we do have a huge respect for all people out there who are actively doing something, and who might have been traumatized, heartbroken, wounded or are victims in one way or another of the consequences of the anti-white policies. If you feel criticized while reading this text do not take it personally. These perspectives are based on our own research and experiences from talking to leftist people, which have helped us understand their mindset and how they react, what works and what does not. We hope to give you these insights. If you are a person who really wonder why the old nationalistic ways of reaching others have not really worked well, here are some perspectives:
The old nationalist rhetoric is antisocial
Violently screaming harsh messages, such as “REFUGEES GO HOME!”, give vibes of aggression and hate (as you often have heard the leftist people claim that it is). These type of messages are common among many nationalists today and have been for a long time. Phrases and messages such as “Kick the trash back to their shitty homelands” and “Go back to your country!!!”.
Often, the response is equal. People scream and react back with hatred. As the old folk proverb says: What a man yells in the forest, echoes back at him.
However, many ordinary people out there do agree with many nationalistic points, as most people are subconsciously pro-white. We know that by taking a closer look at what people actually DO in their lives, and not on what they say. White flight is an obvious example of that, as most healthy Europeans move to European neighbourhoods and associate with other Europeans. This is natural. But Europeans are not attracted to fear-based nor hateful rhetoric. It is viewed as evil and it brings negative vibes.
So, what is being said, in this case “GO HOME!!”, and how it is said (with aggression, fear and hate), is something that people pick up, and it gives off bad vibes.
The message and rhetoric is excluding, and excluding is negative. It conveys fear-based and reactionary feelings. The result, as we have seen in the past decades, is that the previous nationalist movement have remained unattractive for the vast majority in our society.
On an individual level, when a person is excluding other people in social situations, that person will always be viewed by others as antisocial and unpleasant. The same rule applies to a group of people with the same attitude. If a group is violently screaming excluding messages, that is viewed as antisocial and unpleasant to most people. Contrary, an individual who has the aura of including people, is like a magnet in social situations. Other people like to be around such an individual because they feel safe and accepted around such a person. You probably do too!
Just like children like to be around and listen to a cozy old grandfather who tells them stories with a safe and warm voice, healthy adult people are attracted to that warm, good and including vibe among other people they meet. An including person (who does not feel threatened by other people) is a safe person, and a safe person is someone other people can rely on. The same rule applies with group dynamics.
Excluding people = Bad vibe.
Including people = Good vibe.
People in general are attracted to things that are just, bright and good. They are not attracted to things which they get a criminal, dark or evil vibe from.
The rhetoric has to be social, including and just in order to attract. If we are the good guys, we should show it.
So how can we reverse Third World immigration without being exclusive?
To reverse Third World immigration from our countries does not have to be viewed as exclusion if we have the right mindset about it. There are civilized ways to help Third World immigrants to return home to their countries. Besides, it is not inhumane for Chinese people to live in China, or for Pakistani people to live in Pakistan and so on.
We have to first realize, that the question about our survival as Europeans/whites has in itself nothing to do with other groups of people. They just happen to be here because of the anti-whites who brought them here, which consequently will lead to our people becoming a minority in our countries. In that sense, the immigrants are a tool for the anti-whites, a brick in a game. This is a question about us, our will to exist!
If we focus on ourselves and on our own people, instead of other groups of people, we have the right focus.
You have probably heard the quote from Mahatma Gandhi: “Be the change you want to see in the world”. This is also true for a group of people. Focus on one’s own group, one’s own family.
The fact that we are in the situation we are in today, where we are at the brink of becoming a minority in our own lands is not the other races fault, it is our people’s own fault that we have let this happen. It is our own people’s anti-white mentality that has put us in this situation. If we had a better national unity among our own people, we would not be in this situation we are in today.
Therefore, when talking to other Europeans/whites about this, the focus should be to condemn other whites who eagerly want to justify us becoming a minority in our countries, a.k.a. the anti-whites. They are the reason we are in this situation. If we do that, then the dynamic of this whole discussion will be something totally different.
Many people who define themselves as nationalists have a bad self-image
Many, but far from all, people who call themselves nationalists have a mindset that they have to be necessary evil in order to restore order and peace. Some of them have a lot of suppressed anger which has transformed into a sort of bitterness and malice towards society and ordinary people outside the nationalist movement, which they feel have abandoned responsibility.
It is understandable though, considering how far society has fallen and how individualistic we Europeans/whites live today, where we tend to seek our own personal gain instead of caring about our community and our people. These deep feelings of anger and bitterness tend to create this sort of revenge-mode, which is directed towards the society who have let them down, or towards immigrants who behave badly. We call it “the practical necessary evil syndrome”.
Many people who view themselves as nationalists do actually believe that they are egoistic for choosing to be pro-white instead of “multicultural”. The thought is that nationalists say one should care about their own people first and then the objection from the multiculturalists is that we should care about all people from all over the world, not just the people in our own countries. The response from the nationalists is often that although it may be best to be like the multiculturalists, i.e. to care about all people, but the harsh reality is that it does not work.
Similar to lifeboats on a sinking ship, the nationalist mindset is typically that we cannot realistically expect to fit all people into the lifeboats, therefore we need to be “egoistic” and have a necessary evil approach in order to deal with the situation. While multiculturalists believe there is room for everyone.
So to be more egoistic is viewed as necessary by the nationalists because they see all the chaos and social unrest many immigrants make in the West, and by practical means we can not afford to be “too nice” towards other groups of people.
This mindset drains vital energy in the long run of course. They might not feel they have good moral values or that they feel good about themselves, but they feel that they have to have that attitude in order to be realistic. If they let go of that strict and harsh attitude they are afraid that they are risking to become more softheaded, much like the liberals or “lazy left-wingers” who are “nice people” in a way but do not understand the responsibility and the tough reality out there.
It is a responsibility they do not want to take but feel that they MUST take because no one else does it, which again do not attract ordinary Europeans outside the nationalist community. Feelings of duty is not long lasting if it is negatively motivated, but to feel joy in fighting makes an individual fight harder and longer.
To be a nationalist in itself is not viewed as “evil” or bad by people in general. It is the whole attitude and approach around it, which we explained above, and the current mindset about it, that they tend to react negatively to. I know this, because I know leftist friends who love our traditions in my country, who do love our flag and customs, but they do not like to brag about in a provocative manner. How you choose to express or celebrate your heritage is an important factor to people!
People who view themselves as a necessary evil will act accordingly. That can cause problems for them.
Here, there are many steps to take in order to change one’s worldview and mindset. For anyone who recognize themselves in the description above, it will be a process to establish a new, more positive and loving attitude, and with more optimism it will be easier to see more possibilities.
You can read about the “necessary evil” syndrome in this article. We will write another article about how to view the situation in order to feel good, as well as topics about having clean intentions and how get the moral high ground in social situations.
The movement has a mindset of constraint
You have probably notice that many people who define themselves as nationalists often feel that they “must” do things. They see that no one else takes responsibility around them and that it is forced upon themselves to be responsible, because it is practically necessary in the situation we face. It is something they do not want to do, of course, but they feel that it is their obligation in one way or another. Their duty so to speak. This type of mindset also creates an attachment to a certain outcome, which creates a lot of anxiety and fear.
First step is to realize that there are not anything in this world that you must do. You are not forced to do anything. You have to acknowledge everything that is, but at the same time not accept it. You have to let go of everything that you fear to lose. When you have let go of the attachment in your heart, THEN you can look at the whole situation again from a new perspective. You will then feel different about it and take a moral judgement of the whole situation, a decision free from attachment.
There is not anything in this world that we must do, but there are things that are moral, honorable and justto do.
One thing that is morally right, is to fight for one’s own people’s chance to continue to live on in the future! Most Europeans today are individualistic minded. They care mostly about themselves. If you have strength and love enough in your heart to really care about your countrymen around you, then you are above egoistic. You reach idealism.
The leftists often think progressively, they want change and reform. The conservatives want to preserve things that already is. Change can be scary for some, but change in itself do not have to be bad, it depends on what type of change we are talking about. To change Western civilisation to become part of the Thirld World is adestructive change for our European people. It is genocide. What you want is a constructive change which includes our survival.
Europeans are attracted new and progressive things. They are attracted to change and creativity. They are not attracted to fear and rigid rhetoric. You might be able to scare some people to your way of thinking, but you do not attract.
The mindset has to be “leftist” in that sense, that you are a person who do not get stuck in fear and holding on to whatever you have, but to embrace positive change.
Instead of saying “We MUST preserve the white race”, you should say:
“I want to give our people a chance to live on into the future”.
This is the psychological effect of the words:
Preserving = holding onto (fear based rhetoric, having attachment).
Also, “the white race” is abstract. It is better to say “our people”. Make it personal.
“Chance”, “give”, “live” and “future”= Moving forward (strong, free and abundance rhetoric).
Use progressive words to describe your intention.
You have probably heard people on the right say that leftist rhetoric is “too nice” and “too idealistic”.That it is “a good idea but isn’t realistic enough because people are selfish in their true nature”. In discussions about immigration with other Europeans/whites, however, you want to be viewed as “too nice” and “idealistic” for being so nationalistic and caring about your people. Then you can have the rigrid people to argue with, who justify their egoistic nature, and you can bring forth your love and positive vibe and talk visionary about how wonderful it would be if we Europeans/whites came together as brothers and sisters and start caring about one or another again! To work together for higher goals in a nation as comrades! Talking like that, with a determined attitude, conveys a positive, progressive and idealistic vibe.
Anyone who does not agree on that and tries to justify more Third World immigration into all and only Western countries is anti-white, and that is morally wrong.
The movement lacks visions and moral high ground
Blaming another group of people is considered antisocial, even if that other group is doing bad things. It is always considered antisocial to focus negatively on them or to blame others, whether it is an individual who is blaming another individual or a group of people blaming another group. The same social rule applies.
Europeans/whites today view blaming as antisocial behaviour. But this is not something that they have been brainwashed to believe. Talking badly about other people, or blaming others, has always been seen as antisocial. On the other hand, acknowledging one’s own faults and weaknesses is seen as a strength of character in a person. The same rule applies in group dynamics. It appears more social with self-criticism than to see faults in other people when talking in groups.
The old nationalist movement focuses a lot on all the negativity around immigrants.They do this in the hope of convincing the fellow “unawakened” Europeans. They think that once the “unawakened” Europeans agree, they will also agree to “throw out the immigrants” from our countries. But this is not what is happening. The effect is that all our fellow European brothers and sisters see and hear is a person, or a group of people, who generalizes and blames other groups of people, which again is viewed as antisocial and bad. Many Europeans feel shame about their ingroup to see other Europeans talk badly about other groups of people.
Pointing to a problem is generally seen as okay, as long as you have a solution and can present it constructively.
The old nationalist movement is not solution-oriented
Nationalists are very good at pointing out negative things. Most things we hear from the nationalist movements are complaining, blaming, anger and frustration. That is all it is, and that is what people outside the nationalist movement hear.
People in general think: “Okay, I hear you are upset about things, but what is to be done about it then?”.
No one from the nationalist movement have in public presented any real answers to that, except to “KICK THE IMMIGRANTS BACK!”, which is viewed as hateful, exclusive and antisocial.
Of course, the feelings of anger and frustration is natural and legitimate to feel when being forced into a minority in our own countries, but those feelings have to be used constructively in order to reach and attract other people, and to do anything constructive about the whole situation.
You might feel anger or sadness about the situation. This is healthy and natural, but what is one to do with it?
Do not suppress anger, or any feelings you feel, but use your anger and aggressiveness to transform that energy to be assertive.
Mentally though, people are never aggressive. They have control of their feelings. When they feel anger (as all humans do) that energy transforms into assertiveness and people around them have respect for them. Do not dwell or focus on negativity. That will drain your life energy. Objectively see the negative, but live emotionally in the positive and optimism as much as you can. It is a process and you have to practice it over time.
Try to realistically find long lasting constructive solutions to the things you see which are bad in society. We believe that is our best chance of winning!