And without it, we don't stand -- to use a politically incorrect phrase -- a Chinaman's chance. Maybe that phrase should be politically corrected to 'we don't stand a White man's chance'; it would make so much more sense in today's world. Actually the Chinese are in much better shape than we are when it comes looking out for themselves.
But in that BNWW thread I linked above, I had suggested one way of dealing with unwelcome newcomers such as illegals and of course the homegrown people who harbor them or help them. I suggested, as a rather restrained and civil first step, simply 'social cutting'. Maybe people nowadays don't understand that term; it's a relic from the past, like me. According to Miss Emily Post in her Etiquette book (my copy has a 1945 publication date), cutting is simply refusing to acknowledge someone socially.
She says 'A "cut" ...is a direct stare of blank refusal, and is not only insulting to its victim but embarrassing to every witness. Happily it is practically unknown in polite society.'
Miss Emily doesn't approve, but then she lived in a much more genteel America than ours, and an America in which our enemies, for the most part, lived across the ocean.
Every day I see Americans being their usual polite, impartial, colorblind selves while invaders who treat us like the interlopers brazenly overrun our country and fail to show us the least politeness and consideration. They look right through us, and boldly look us in the eye, knowing that they are trespassing, and knowing that we know that they are trespassing. I truly believe they have contempt for our weakness and servility and ovine passivity.
But John David Powell in this piece talks about local action against illegal immigration, specifically shunning as a tactic to be used against those who aid illegals.
...The illegal immigration issue may be a national concern, but it's really an issue that can be addressed only on the individual level. Here's what I mean. A couple of years ago, my mother-in-law nearly died after an illegal immigrant made an unlawful u-turn and rammed into her vehicle. My mother-in-law wanted to talk with her city council member and write letters to her state representatives about passing stricter immigration legislation until I pointed out that neither the city nor the state has jurisdiction.
It's up to you and your friends to do something about it, and that something is simply shunning those who purposely hire illegal workers, I said. Folks concerned about crime in their neighborhood establish neighborhood watches to keep out miscreants. Residents fed up with prostitution chase away the customers from the street corners. Citizens tired of drugs run off the dealers. They don't wait for the government to enforce laws already on the books.
Her preacher frequented the Mexican restaurant that hired the woman who hit her, so I suggested she tell the preacher to either stop going there or else they'd find a new minister. She didn't like the idea.''
A lot of people won't like the idea, because we've all been imbued with the idea that for us to express disapproval of the illegals and their unscrupulous enablers is mean-spirited and bigoted. Miss Emily Post, bless her heart, thought 'cutting' was insulting. But we have to get over some of our timidity, considering our survival and our children's future is at stake. Expressing our displeasure and disapproval of the local business owner who is known to hire illegals, or of our neighbor who rents properties to illegals, or anybody who profits by their presence, is perfectly legitimate. Mean-spirited? Maybe, but some people deserve to have opprobrium directed at them. We are again confusing 'niceness', that syrupy counterfeit of goodness, with the real thing.
Real goodness demands that we give priority and preference to our own, our contemporaries and neighbors and kin, and of course to our progeny who will inherit this country after us -- if we have the backbone to preserve it, or to pry it from the grasping hands of those who intend to wrest it from us.
And I am weary of hearing this particular nod to PC: 'we shouldn't dislike the immigrants; they're just trying to survive and make a better life. Wouldn't we do the same thing in their place?" Please. Let the invaders look for their better life in their own lands. Everybody is entitled to a homeland. They have theirs, and they want ours too. That is selfish and covetous on their part. Let's stop treating them like plaster saints, can't we?
Here, at Adam's Nationalist Notebook, Adam Dawlish gets to the point about the 'false folk consciousness' and the urgent need for cooperation and solidarity among us.
...Be it moslems, blacks, or any other pressure group, official or otherwise, all other races know how to act in unison and band together for their own gain. This is a behaviour which is not only not active amongst whites, but often actively discouraged and sometimes banned and criminalised for whites, a behaviour which looks for the gain and survival of the group as a whole, a survival behaviour. Put simply, a group which does not undertake survival behaviours will not survive. We must leave the False Folk Consciousness behind us and move on as a co-operating group, or face inevitable extinction.''
[...]
Humans, especially that most cultured and developed breed which is the White Race, do not, cannot live on the basis of what is in a manifesto or claimed to be under a microscope. Humans live by blood, by faith, by loyalty and love, and it is those things which tell all who view the world clearly that we Whites are one race, one blood.
Make no mistake, we are united globally by our white race. Be it French heritage, English, German, Australian, we are not under attack for our nationality, nor our faith, nor our politics.''
We are all in the crosshairs. Dreams of some kind of colorblind, multiracial utopia are just that, dreams. In the real world, we are all born into a particular group, and regardless of our politics or preferences, we are part of that group for life. The self-hating among us may have a rude awakening in that regard as diversity culminates in open conflict, or they may remain deluded for life. If so, good riddance to them, but our job is to try to open the eyes of those closest to us and those we come into contact with, and simultaneously to try to fight against the lies and propaganda that have blinded so many of our kin.
