Power

In 1927, the young Chinese Communist Party was having a meeting, and all those young Chinese Communists were doing their thing, discussing stuff using arcane Marxist jargon. Mao Zedong cut the discussion short, telling them: “People, cut the crap. We gotta focus on the military stuff. Governments are born out of the barrel of a gun.”

d50735fae6cd7b8911fa5ca90d2442a7d9330e01

History proved him right, and his comrades know it. They know it so well that even after the Cultural Revolution killed and maimed most of his old comrades, his successors never disowned Mao or tarnished his legacy, the way Kruschov publicly said Stalin was an evil bastard. During the Cultural Revolution Deng was purged three times, his whole family imprisoned, sent away. His brother was forced to commit suicide. His son was thrown out of the window of his college dorm and became a paraplegic for life. Even then, after Mao was dead, Deng Xiaoping refused to criticize him. Why? "The only reason all of us are here is because Mao won the war". Damn straight.

Now of course Mao's quote isn't completely correct. He didn't grab a gun and win the war by being the best shot in the country. No, he won the war by having the best army. That means having a lot of guns, and having people willing the guns under your orders. So more precisely, power isn't born out of the barrel of a gun. Power is born out of the ability to have people with guns do what you tell them.

Let's apply this dictum to the present situation in Western countries. PEGIDA just run a series of protests against the Islamization of Europe. I've been writing about that these days. Well, what happened during those protests? A commenter was nice enough to post a link from the Daily Mail:

30efe86500000578-0-image-a-28_1454776360616

Plainclothes police officers wrestle a man to the ground during the PEGIDA demonstration held in Amsterdam, Holland, today

30efee6e00000578-0-image-a-29_1454776366265

A man sticks his tongue out at the camera as he is led away from the demonstration by plainclothes police officers

30f141de00000578-3435093-image-a-77_1454778543466

Police officers in Calais, northern France, detain a man taking party in the demonstrations near the town's railway station

30f095a900000578-3435093-calais_saw_20_arrests_today_where_anti_islam_demonstrators_oppos-a-23_1454797210907

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZou9CahPlU

This guy up here is a General of the French army. Leader of men. Alpha of Alphas. Kissing the ground.

If you want to get anything done, if you want to win, you gotta read about people who have won in the past. Like Mao. You need to own the guys with the guns. The police. The army. As long as those guys are against you, as long as those guys are willing to grab an awarded General and make him kiss the ground, all you're doing is LARPing. Which has its place, of course it's important to show that people are angry, and provoking the state gives us iconic images such as poor old General Piquemal. But let's not kid ourselves. LARPing isn't going to solve anything. Leftists don't win because they are masters at protesting and PR. Leftists win because the guys with guns obey them. When General Piquemal goes to protest, he gets arrested and humiliated on national TV. When Antifas trash a whole commercial street, the police make a wall to protect them. When Blacks burnt Ferguson, the police went out to arrest the shopowners who wanted to defend themselves. When Somalis rape Swedish children, the police doesn't answer the phone.

This state of affairs is often called Anarcho-tyranny, a coining of Sam Francis. It's funny because there's no word for that in most languages. Fish don't know what is water; the Chinese don't know what anarcho-tyranny is. Anarcho-tyranny is the natural state of affairs. The word only makes sense if you assume that the state is a social contract made for the defense of the rights of the citizens. But that's a myth. A state is what comes out of the barrel of a gun. In simple evolutionary terms, the state will protect those that the state needs to protect to survive in its present form. You and I don't want the state to survive in its present form, we very much want it to change forms. Well, they won't protect you then.

You wanna get something done? You want to have influence? Then you gotta join those who get things done. Pull a Gramsci and join the police. They're going to be expanding a lot in the next decades.

[…] By spandrell […]

Note that the video is from Russia Today. Russia is currently helping nationalist and ultra-nationalists throughout Europe. The reason is of course that Tsar Putin wants to restore Russian prestige in Europe. The Cathedral can quash this if it abandons its "Abolish White People" policy. Somehow, I doubt The Cathedral will abandon its Anti-White policy, thus there will be Civil War in Europe.

I read that that general was former commander of the French Foreign Legion. French Foreign Legion was involved in the last serious coup attempt in 1961. The coup would have succeeded except for the fact that equivocating *liberal* generals were in charge, perhaps because the rightist generals had been purged as part of the Communist-democratic liberation of 1944-45.

[…] Source: Bloody Shovel […]

Fascism is an explicitly pro-state ideology and does not demand changes to the state; it just demands those traitors currently in the driver seat to be given the helicopter ride. Fascism doesn't trigger the state's self preservation instinct. The reason it doesn't work in Europe at present is that it triggers the anti-Hitler immune response. But this is kind of irrelevant, because you can't defeat progressivism in Europe. You can defeat progressivism in America, or you can defeat America in Europe (then deal with the remnants of progressivism if any.) Converting to Islam will not help. If you think America will leave a white Islamic country alone, you're an optimist who was born yesterday. There's even a ready word for that, one that lingers unused - Islamofascism.

Huh? Europe has an anti-Hitler immune response but not an anti-fascist immune response? What does that even mean? Last time I checked USG was paying for the defense of Bosnia and Kosovo. But anyway, I wasn't talking about countries converting as a whole tomorrow. That doesn't even make sense. But incremental conversion of whites would mean that some proportion of the population can go on with its business, perhaps breeding a bit more, while the Cathedral is busy fighting the rebellious nationalists that remain. Eventually the Cathedral will stop being able to afford the empire, and voila, you have majority Muslim countries in Europe with a Muslim White elite, which can then proclaim that Allah now allows sausage, oh and those brown immigrants of yore are heretic kafihrs and we're going to kick them all out. Thanks for bringing the True Religion, you can go home now.

[…] protection.” Cosmic evolution. Compressed exit. Closet cleaning (1, 2). On loudmouths. Power. Signals (also). Libertarianism on a knife edge. Defending Roosh (1, 2). The weekly […]

[…] political protection.” Cosmic evolution. Compressed exit. Closet cleaning (1, 2). On loudmouths. Power. Signals (also). Libertarianism on a knife edge. Defending Roosh (1, 2). The <a […]

"Europe has an anti-Hitler immune response but not an anti-fascist immune response? What does that even mean?" Nothing. I didn't say that. I said that fascism is pro-state and does not trigger the state's instinct of crushing anti-state movements. It does trigger the anti-Hitler immune response. These two are separate. The first is universal, the second is not, and will eventually wear off. "Eventually the Cathedral will stop being able to afford the empire, and voila..." And voila, your work is done, there was no need to convert to Islam. Nobody had to convert to Islam for communism to fall. The center stopped being able to afford the empire, and everyone suddenly had adopted Western values for years already.

I think it would more helpful if we simply looked at this a different way. Progressives are duty bound to oppose everything right wing. Since they always win, the correct strategy is to present the right as being for all kinds of horrible things. Call it "controlled opposition." The opposition advocates the precise opposite of what it wants to accomplish. Then the left reacts against it and does the right thing. It might work but would destroy your pride and self-respect. You would deliberately setting yourself up to fail, giving the left an excuse to do something sane. Of course it might be too late for them to turn back in favor of the white race. By the way, the white race is synonymous with liberalism. By turning against it the left has possibly destroyed/alienated its own voting block long-term. Example of getting the left to do the right thing: (1) The right allies with Islam, giving the left an excuse to attack it. (2) The right supports criminalizing women who rape men, drafting women, and equal custody quotas, turning left-wing women against equality. (3) The right insists on blacks and refugees being housed in liberal neighborhoods, making liberals become racist. (4) The right creates a 15 dolor minimum wage, making millions of immigrants unemployed as they are replaced by machines, then dumps housing projects in liberal neighborhoods while creating a private, for profit, deportation industry that the left can invest in. The right ties educational funding to the fees gathered for deportation, making liberals financially profit from an industry of kicking out immigrants. The combinations of incentives makes liberals support racist policies by default.

also, my blog http://theanti-puritan.blogspot.com/

>The word only makes sense if you assume that the state is a social contract made for the defense of the rights of the citizens. But that’s a myth.<< A myth that most people in the West still believe. But maybe people are beginning to wise up a little.... The state has to maintain some kind of basic order to maintain credibility. Not only is the Western state unable to maintain order, it actively promotes disorder. Is there anything like that in Chinese history? I was typical mainstream Republican until maybe six years ago. I don't discuss politics seriously face-to-face with many people, but all I know have gone way off the reservation.

In Iraq they used torture in their rage against an invincible opponent.

"Armies cannot resist an idea whose time has come." --Leo Tolstoy "Armies cannot force an idea whose time has yet to come." --dc.sunsets At times of Narrative change, sentiment changes first. Then politics. THEN law. Sentiment Politics Law In that order. Given that I believe history is a river and its path ahead is all but impossible to alter, it follows that the Narrative will change (no tree grows to the sky) and the Old Narrative appears near its end because 1) its advocates have recently doubled-down on it to the point of insanity and 2) its maintenance is requiring increasingly totalitarian means. To me, this suggests that Sentiment is already changing. It is the role of cannon fodder to provide the entertainment (bloody bodies, broken lives) during the period after Sentiment changes and before Politics & Law change. Change is inevitable; it is the essence of life itself, and life is its own purpose. Go make a baby.

Good piece. As some of us have been recommending for years, Nationalists should make outreach efforts to the police and military. Cultivate friends and allies in the security forces. It can be done. Some of us have found WN sympathizers among Marines at local Camp Pendleton.

[…] lesson from the General Piquemal arrest on how not to become worthy. Spandrell has his own take on the situation in Europe, bedecked with lessons from (relatively recent) Chinese history. “Situation”, that is, […]

[…] Power comes from force. Related: Means, goals, and signalling. […]

[…] Power comes from force. Related: Means, goals, and signalling. […]

Sun Tzu says: "For the Cathedral to fall, the military must mutiny."

I had this exact same thought. Neoreactionaries should indoctrinate the upper ranks first and lower ranks second.