Playing Three-Dimensional Chess: Why White Nationalists Should Consider Voting for Bernie Sanders


by James Harting

SOME OF YOU may be ancient enough to remember the original Star Trek television series back in the 1960s. During their downtime, the crew members were occasionally shown playing a version of three-dimensional chess. It is like traditional chess, only exponentially more complex.

That is what the Jews are doing: they are playing three-dimensional chess. They have strategies within strategies within strategies. They pursue multiple options simultaneously: if one gets blocked, they just shift to another one. They organize in depth, and have layer after layer of defensive positions. Above all they think ahead, not just one or two moves, but a dozen or 20.

Compare their strategic sophistication with that of the pitiful White Nationalist movement: while the Jews are playing three-dimensional chess, White Nationalists are struggling to play a basic game of checkers.

The Jews control all of the presidential candidates: no matter who gets the nomination, or who is elected, it does not matter–they win, because all of the candidates are in one way or another under their thumb or in their corner. The whole System is rigged: the only choice you have is to vote for a pro-Jewish candidate. Heads they win, tails you lose!

But many naïve, well-meaning White Nationalists cannot see this. They believe in the fundamental integrity of an electoral system that is completely corrupt–completely Jewed.

With their checkers-like primitive strategizing, they think that the Jews have allowed for an option in which they, the Jews, might possibly lose. The Jew slides Hillary Clinton across the board; they want to slide Donald Trump forward to block her. But the Jews are not playing checkers, they are playing three dimensional chess. The Trump maneuver is a trick bag, a trap to lure angry, racially-conscious White voters into a political dead end.

It has worked before: Barry Goldwater in 1964; George Wallace in 1968 and 1972; Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984, then H. Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul and now on to Donald Trump. The goyim are stupid: they fall for the Trump maneuver every time. No wonder the Jews hold us in such contempt!

In a thread in the main discussion forum, Stormfront member Il fascismo per i fascisti makes a modest proposal: he suggests that instead of voting for Trump, that White Nationalists vote for Bernie Sanders. He reasons that electing a White Anglo-Saxon candidate like Trump maintains the façade that White Americans are still in control. With an avowed Jewish Marxist like Sanders in the White House, the anti-White, Jewish nature of the Old Order would be openly revealed: it would be on display for all to see.

Now, personally, I, myself, am not going to vote for Bernie Sanders: I have never voted in a presidential election, and the first ballot that I cast will not be for Communist Jew. Beyond that, there is ZERO chance that Bernie the Red will be elected, anyway.

But I like the out-of-the-box thinking of Il fascismo per i fascisti. He is playing chess not checkers. His strategic approach is not quite as refined and sophisticated as that of the Jews: it is two-dimensional, rather than three dimensional.

But at least he is thinking more than one or two moves ahead.

We need more of that–and a whole lot less of the Pavlovian conditioning that controls the reactions of the pro-Trump crowd.

Previous post

With Eyes Seeking Prey

Next post

"New World Order" Pledged to World Jewry in 1940


  1. Anthony Collins
    22 November, 2015 at 3:08 am — Reply

    This is a good article, but I think the author fails to mention a fundamental reason why Whites are poor strategists at the racial level: there can be no strategy without identity and agency. Although there are Whites who possess the intelligence, the imagination, the learning, and the extended time horizons necessary for formulating strategies, Whites in general have a weak sense of racial identity, lack racial solidarity, and lack racial objectives.

    There’s an old saying: “What if there was a war, and no one showed up?” One could paraphrase this: “What if there was a war, and only one side showed up?” If you want the answer, look around you. We Whites are in a war, a racial war, and it appears that few of us recognize it and act accordingly. Not only our territory, but the very minds of our people, have effectively been invaded and colonized by foreigners.

    I’m appalled when, browsing through books at bookstores or libraries, I reflect upon the formidable talent and industry that has gone into many books, even those on quite trivial matters, and the lack of talent and industry that has gone into addressing truly significant and vital matters. It’s like crafting objets d’art when one should be forging weapons with which to slay the barbarians outside and inside the gates.

    Revilo P. Oliver once remarked that if Whites had a fraction of the Jews’ racial solidarity and will to power, they would soon own the planet. If this is the case, perhaps there is hope for us: we only need a fraction to change the world and truly mend it (tikkun olam!). As Kevin Alfred Strom remarked in “The Gateway”:

    “One advantage that we have over the Jewish supremacists who oppose our people’s awakening is that their growth curve — either in numbers or power — is severely restricted. Ours is not. Their people are already highly motivated and engaged in their ethnic agenda, so there’s little or no potential for growth there. And, despite their money and power, their numbers are low and probably declining even faster than ours. Our population is more than 50 times larger. And the potential for the growth of our race-based movement is thousands of times greater, perhaps infinitely greater, than any recruiting potential the Jewish power structure might have for its ethnic agenda. As the saying goes, they’re ‘maxed out.’

    “If we and our principal opponent were symbolized by containers balanced on a scale, they’d have 15.9 ounces in a 16-ounce bottle on their side, and an eyedropper to fill it with — and on our side we’d have a nearly-empty 50 gallon drum and Niagara to fill it with.

    “Sure, they’ve got the scale tipped their way for the present, but that can all change in the blink of an eye — as they well know. That is why the Jewish supremacists are so frantic to suppress our ideas. They know that our ideas are powerful, moving, and truthful. And they also know that, if we do our duty well, our ideas have the potential to ‘catch fire’ and remake the world.”

    • 22 November, 2015 at 4:01 pm — Reply

      If an army loses a battle, who is ultimately responsible for the defeat: the privates who actually fought in the trenches, or the general who devised the battle plan?

      “Whites” in general do not develop strategies: that is the function of leadership.

      The failure of the movement for White survival to develop and implement a winning strategy (so far) has been a leadership failure. Consequently, any solution to this problem will also have to come from the leadership.

      • Anthony Collins
        23 November, 2015 at 5:26 am — Reply

        Of course, you’re right that leaders bear the burden of responsibility for the failure or success of a movement, but there’s very little for leaders to lead if political or proto-political instincts are lacking within the collectivity that leaders seek to mobilize. The task then must be one of creating a political identity and political agency within a collectivity, or rather those elements within a collectivity that are amenable to this task.

        For us, this requires creating a different model of politics based on a hard-headed, far-sighted, and creative conception of politics. It means rejecting magical thinking, such as that one finds among conservatives, who seem to believe that they can get “their” presidential candidate elected, and that once he is elected “their” candidate will press the “undo” button on the system that is killing our people. As you’ve noted in several articles, this has been a longstanding delusion of conservatives.

        Conservatives seem to have a craving for messiah figures not unlike the character in Monty Python’s Life of Brian who, after Brian tells him that he isn’t the messiah, replies: “I say you are Lord, and I should know. I’ve followed a few.” Perhaps Christianity lies at the back of this tropism.

      • Anthony Collins
        24 November, 2015 at 4:15 am — Reply

        Are there any particular works you would recommend to White nationalists concerning strategy? It’s easy to point out the absence of strategic thought among White nationalists, it’s much harder to correct this state of affairs. Of course, any reading list on strategy one might devise should be treated as a point of departure, and any doctrine one might formulate should be treated as an open system — open in the sense that it is subject to correction, clarification, elaboration, revision, adaptation, improvement. Any literature on strategy should be read with intelligence, with imagination, and with reference to our particular tasks and environment. Such literature should be used to properly inform and train the minds of militants, to strengthen their powers of observation and ratiocination, to establish a common language and logic with they can coordinate their efforts, and to improve the effectiveness of their activism.

        A key point in this respect is that the White nationalist movement, if it is to be a genuine movement, has multiple functions to perform (e.g., political, cultural, economic). This means that White nationalists can and indeed must draw upon many works and theories relating to these functions. But properly adapting and bringing these things together in a coherent and effective fashion is quite a challenge. Some kind of overarching strategy and hierarchy of values is necessary. (I have deliberately chosen to write of bringing these things together rather than of synthesizing them; systems theorists are right to claim that loosely coupled systems are more resilient and adaptive than closely coupled systems. Different disciplines, and different scales of activism, require different weights and measures.)

        It may be that a good way to address the matter would be with a set of references and readings, and glosses with which to bring these references and readings into focus. Abstract theory should be properly informed, illustrated, and balanced with historical knowledge. And theoretical work should be combined with practical work.

        Perhaps what really matters is not what works are on a reading list, but how one uses such works.

        I’ll admit that there’s some terminological confusion here: I’m sometimes referring to strategy when I’m really referring to tactics and techniques. But this is a short comment, it can only scratch the surface, it’s written more to ask questions than to answer them, and it’s not to be held to the standard of an academic essay.

        • 24 November, 2015 at 11:34 am — Reply

          Two books that every White Nationalist leader (on whatever level) should be familiar with are:

          “The Art of War” by Sun Tzu (Samuel Griffin translation); and

          “Strategy” by B.H. Liddell Hart

          Also, playing chess itself (two-dimensional is fine!) also helps to sharpen one’s strategic thinking.

          • Anthony Collins
            25 November, 2015 at 6:05 am

            The U.S. Marine Corp’s doctrinal publication Warfighting might also be worth recommending in this context. Have you read this work? If you haven’t, you can find a PDF file of it at:


            It’s an admirably pithy work influenced by Sun Tzu, Carl von Clausewitz, and John Boyd.

    • Jimmy Smith
      23 November, 2015 at 6:31 pm — Reply

      ““One advantage that we have over the Jewish supremacists who oppose our people’s awakening is that their growth curve — either in numbers or power — is severely restricted. Ours is not. Their people are already highly motivated and engaged in their ethnic agenda, so there’s little or no potential for growth there. And, despite their money and power, their numbers are low and probably declining even faster than ours. Our population is more than 50 times larger. And the potential for the growth of our race-based movement is thousands of times greater, perhaps infinitely greater, than any recruiting potential the Jewish power structure might have for its ethnic agenda. As the saying goes, they’re ‘maxed out.’”

      Kevin is spot on with that statement. I believe our growth can and will happen once a few more of us with some courage step up and challenge the anti-White policies of the United States. Many of our people must know that there is something terribly wrong with our country even if they are not saying it openly. Dr. Pierce urged us to speak out, and not to be afraid of how our enemies will react to us speaking out. When you do begin to speak out you will find that for every person that disagrees with you there are at least a few more that do agree with you. That is how you get the ball rolling. Once the ball starts rolling it will grow until it is big enough to crush our opponents. Our enemy’s success depends on us remaining silent and not challenging their crazy ideas on how this country should be run. Our enemies cannot beat us in a debate because we have the truth and facts on our side. The best they can do is try to distract us and try to keep people from hearing our voices. It is so easy to point out how dishonest and hypocritical our Politicians are. Here are just a few current event topics which you can use to expose the Government’s hypocrisy: A)Trying to stop terrorism by using Airstrikes in Syria and Iraq instead of simply not allowing Syrian refugees or Muslims from the Middle East to enter our country. You can elaborate by pointing out that at least one of the ISIS terrorists in the Paris attack entered France as a Syrian refugee. Keeping Muslims out of our country will be a lot more effective in stopping terrorism than launching airstrikes into random targets in Syria while simultaneously allowing Syrian refugees to enter our country B)Allowing illegal immigrants who entered across the Mexican border(Mestizos) to get health coverage as long as they obtain an identification card from the municipality they are illegally instead of deporting them back to their country of origin. How can anyone argue that it is wrong to deport illegal immigrants?

      We need to bring common sense back into our government. We are doomed if we allow these lunatics who are running our country to continue to stay in power.

      There are other talking points that can be used but those were just two off the top of my head. I’ll try to think of more and share them here when I have the chance.

      Do what Dr. Pierce told us to do, speak out. That is the only way to attract our people to challenge the traitors who don’t care if we die as long as their career’s are secure. Once you have won over the support of your people then the growth of the race based movement cab begin and rapidly spread.

      • Anthony Collins
        25 November, 2015 at 6:21 am — Reply

        These are good points. However, I think this work is best performed at several levels, to borrow a metaphor from the article above.

        There’s a place for using talking points, such as those you’ve given, in everyday conversation. To expose the criminality, dishonesty, and hypocrisy of the regime in Washington, one should use arguments which are simple yet profound, arguments whose logical, factual, and ethical elements enable one to reach one’s audience, arguments which appeal to common sense, which build upon general knowledge, and which appeal to our people’s sense of morality.

        One should prefer arguments which are simple, cogent, and persuasive. One shouldn’t use clichéd rhetoric and boilerplate. And one should keep clear of conspiracy theories, dubious factoids, and crank obsessions like those of Alex Jones and his swarm of drones. (I wouldn’t be surprised if Alex Jones declared the attacks in Paris to be some kind of “false flag operation” as soon as he heard of it.)

        But talking points are only a start. They have their place, but they’re necessarily superficial. They’re appetizers, not a meal.

        There’s a need for long-term activism to create a culture and community that forms an “autonomous zone” vis-à-vis the regime, and which works to destroy the regime.

        The lies of the regime should be subject to public contradiction.

        The policies of the regime should be subject to public opposition.

        The institutions and agents of the regime should be subject to public execration.

        All of these things evidently require organization of one kind or another.

        Many people find it hard to truly accept the following two great truths of our time: (1) the regime always lies, and (2) there can be no solution without the destruction of the regime. I suppose the only way that most people can truly accept these things is by being part of a network or community in which these truths inspire political consciousness, activism, and solidarity; a network or community in which the lies of the regime are thoroughly refuted, in which its idols are shattered, and in which its agents are exposed as the despicable hirelings and deformed homunculi they are; a network or community which forms an “organizational nexus” like that William L. Pierce once wrote of.

        It is quite possible to break with the regime in an essentially emotional way, leaving one dangerously uninformed or ill-informed about it, and unable to fight it effectively. It is not enough to view the regime with cynicism — a word whose etymology may remind one of the Arab proverb, “The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.” We can and must do better than this.

  2. Bruce Arney
    24 November, 2015 at 3:22 am — Reply

    Thinking inside the box is obviously not working for our race, therefore, all options, including those existing outside the box, should be placed on the table for thoughtful consideration. The hour is growing late and it is time to expand the parameters of creative thought, as the current parameters leave no room for success. All true Jewish tribal thought, revolves around their basic premise of, “is it good for the Jews?” not, is it legally, morally, or ethically correct. The ends justify the means.

  3. wolfsangel
    28 March, 2016 at 6:12 am — Reply

    White nationalist here. Bernie is a useful idiot.

    With the invasion of Europe, the Jewish migration to the holy land, I have to say Bernie got my vote.

    He also stands against the bankers, and capitalists.

    In short he’s the solution to the jewish social burden, with the jews gone we can focus on saving the race.

  4. Classical Liberal
    2 June, 2016 at 12:58 am — Reply

    Bernie is the best candidate for one simple reason: He doesn’t bend over for Israel as eagerly as everyone else.

    Bernie recently refused to sign this,

    “In light of Israel’s dramatically rising defense challenges, we stand ready to support a substantially enhanced new long-term agreement to help provide Israel the resources it requires to defend itself and preserve its qualitative military edge,”

    Nearly everyone else in U.S. government couldn’t sign the traitorous pledge fast enough.

    I also haven’t seen him groveling to AIPAC.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.