Staying True to Who We Are

Why the National Alliance is not part of the “pro-White movement”

by William White Williams (pictured)
Chairman, National Alliance

WITH ALL THE TALK about the “White nationalist movement” — and about the Alliance being lumped in with various factions of it, many of them entirely incompatible with our own program and goals — I want to clarify for our members exactly what our policy is. It is based on the policy Dr. Pierce laid out for us in the National Alliance Membership Handbook in 1993, and explained further in a series of his own BULLETIN commentaries in 2002, just months before he died.

As I told the Kansas City Star in a recent interview, the reason I resigned from the National Alliance in 2002 was that I could see the Alliance was getting away from us, and away from Dr. Pierce. There had been an inordinate influx of undisciplined skinheads — many of whom were Identity Christians — mainly as a result of the “White power” music we had been selling through Resistance Records.

When some Alliance members participated in a “unity” rally in York, Pennsylvania in late 2001, the result was a public relations disaster. That event was followed in 2002 by several other rallies at the Israeli and German Embassies in Washington. All these events devolved into ridiculous conflicts between various skinhead factions and “anti-racist” counter-demonstrators. Our image was being tarnished by perceived association with these “movement” demonstrations, and Dr. Pierce was intent on putting an end to participation in them by our members.

In the January 2002 BULLETIN he wrote (emphasis added):

There can be no doubt that we are weak now compared to our enemies, but we will not become stronger by “uniting” with weak or defective organizations – and that includes virtually every “movement” group. The Alliance is not only far and away the strongest and most effective of all the organizations claiming to share our goals: It is the only organization in North America that has any prospect at all for effectively opposing the Jews and their allies in the future. I say this not to disparage any other organization or individual, but as a simple statement of fact.

The Alliance became what it is today by following its own course from its inception. It never saw an opportunity to become stronger by uniting with another organization, and it sees none now…. I am not willing to compromise in any significant way the goals or ideology of the National Alliance…. A member who disagrees with this rather dim view of the “movement” should choose a “movement” organization and join it, or he should start his own organization, but he should resign his membership of the Alliance.

Those are strong words by Dr. Pierce, expressive of what I call his no-nonsense “hard line.” It’s that brutal honesty that attracted me to the Alliance and set it above the “movement” for me. His organizational strategy of attracting the best of our people was being undermined by this growing trend of “unity” with weak or defective organizations.

Dr. Pierce put his foot down and established the following National Office policies governing interactions with “movement” organizations:

• The Alliance will continue to follow its own course and will act independently of other organizations.
• The Alliance will not engage in joint activities with other organizations.
• Individuals who are members of other organizations and who are prospects for recruitment into the Alliance may be invited to attend Alliance meetings or participate in Alliance activities strictly as individuals, not as representatives of the other organization to which they belong.
• The Alliance does not comment publicly on other organizations, either positively or negatively. We do not respond to attacks from other organizations or engage in feuds with other organizations. We have on occasion helped other organizations with extraordinary problems, as when we donated to the legal defense fund of Richard Butler during the time he was being attacked by Morris Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center, but ordinarily we do not become involved in the problems or activities of other groups. We wish them well, but they are on their own.
• In evaluating prospects for recruitment, we do not disqualify a prospect simply because he belongs to or has belonged to another organization, but we usually will regard his membership or former membership in another organization negatively rather than positively and will be especially alert for signs of hobbyist tendencies. In general, the Alliance is not competing with “movement” organizations for members. A person should join the organization for which he is best suited, and if he is at all tempted to join a “movement” group, then he probably lacks the seriousness, maturity, and good judgment expected of an Alliance member.

Though it’s hard to believe that anyone could have misunderstood these policies, some members failed to heed them fully, so he clarified the Alliance’s position further in the February BULLETIN, discussing “hobbyism,” which is defined adequately in the Membership Handbook, but was perhaps not grasped by some members:

I did not expect my comments to straighten out any hobbyists remaining in the Alliance, because hobbyism does not come from a lack of understanding but instead from a personality defect. Members are hobbyists because their principle motivation is self-gratification. They care more about getting lots of different newsletters and having more people to gossip about than they do about real accomplishments. They are not sensible people.

For the sake of those members who aren’t hobbyists but who may have been confused by hobbyism on the part of other members, I offer here two further comments on the subject. First, we are not interested in “uniting” with “movement” organizations because none is significant or serious. Most are make-believe organizations, which do not exist except in the imaginations of a few hobbyists. The few that actually have members are heavily loaded with freaks, hobbyists, and other defective people who like to wear uniforms and give Roman salutes to TV cameramen while shouting, “Sieg, Heil!”

Second, it is very important for us to maintain our own image as a serious organization so that we can continue to recruit the serious men and women we must have in order to continue building our capabilities. These men and women are not favorably impressed by the sort of silliness that characterizes virtually every wannabee “movement” organization.

Even after all this, there were still members ignoring his admonitions, enabled by some staffers who were ignoring them too. So Dr. Pierce returned to the subject in the March 2002 BULLETIN with a piece entitled “Losers, Hobbyists and the “Movement”:

An interesting psychological phenomenon on which I have commented in several issues of the BULLETIN is that displayed by people who send hostile letters to the National Office saying, in effect: “You people claim to be Christians, but you ignore the teachings of the Bible, which says that all races are the same. Don’t you even know that Jesus was a Jew?” They have had the idea planted in their heads that the Alliance is some sort of Christian organization, presumably by Jewish propaganda linking us to Christian Identity and Catholic traditionalist groups, which also are on the Jews’ hit list. Reading our material or listening to one of my broadcasts should persuade them otherwise, but it doesn’t. It probably took quite a bit of effort by the Jews to pound the idea into their heads, and it’ll take dynamite to get it out.

Unfortunately, one can observe a similar phenomenon in many people nominally on our side, even in some Alliance members. I have announced over and over again our policy toward other organizations, and I nevertheless continue to receive letters to the effect: “All of us in the ‘movement’ must stick together. We should unite with all of the other patriotic organizations, and then we’ll be much stronger, etc.” To me this view indicates either hobbyism or a serious deficiency in the writer’s powers of discrimination. If you don’t remember what hobbyism is, re-read section 3.c.iii.2 of your copy of the Membership Handbook.

We will reissue our Membership Handbook to members in good standing once we have the funds and means to do so, but what Dr. Pierce was saying here should be understood by everyone reading this BULLETIN. As Dr. Pierce once told his cadre: “I don’t want ‘movement’ people, I want virgins.” By that he meant the normal people who have no attraction to the Ku Klux Klan, the National Socialist Movement, Aryan Nations, or the prison gangs that the Kansas City Star and Jewish groups still insist on lumping in with our Alliance. Dr. Pierce concluded:

It’s a little hard to say exactly what the term “movement” means to the Internet gossips. To most, it seems to be a clubby sort of concept which includes all of “us” and excludes everyone else. Although I have found the term useful in some contexts in the past, it probably should be abandoned because it has been so badly misused by the hobbyists. Really, what self respecting racial nationalist wants to be considered part of a “movement” which includes all of the phone-booth Fuhrers, the Internet gossips, and an embarrassingly high quota of born losers?

It’s easy enough to understand this club mentality. As our society disintegrates under the onslaught of Jew-instigated multiculturalism, people look for something to hold onto: a sense of belonging, of community. We feel more secure when we have a sense of solidarity with others of like mind. A comforting sense of security is not the primary thing that Alliance members should be seeking, however. We want strength. We want new capabilities. We want to gain an advantage over the enemies of our people. We want anything which brings us closer to victory, whether it is comfortable or not.

The truth of the matter is, there’s not much advantage to be gained inside the “movement.” It is too heavily freighted with chronic losers, incurable hobbyists, phone-booth Fuhrers, and other defectives. Perhaps the “movement” is no worse than the general public in this regard, but we’re looking for the best and strongest people we can find, and we find them much more often outside the “movement” than inside it. It is time for all members who have been focused on the “movement” either to reorient themselves in an outward direction or to find another organization to devote themselves to. As our tempo and our work load increase, being in the Alliance will be less and less fun for those whose primary aim is to amuse themselves with “movement” gossip. And I will have less patience with hobbyists and with those who believe that the Alliance is part of the “movement.” Our aim is not to be the biggest and best organization in the “movement”; it is to leave the “movement” to its clubby introspection while we get on with the job of building a revolutionary infrastructure.

Had Dr. Pierce lived longer, his 2002 purge of “movement” types might have been brought to a successful conclusion. Instead, just a month after his death, his illegitimate successors involved the Alliance in yet another dysfunctional and appalling “unity” event, a rally on the Capitol lawn in Washington.

There is not much I can add to Dr. Pierce’s 2002 commentaries, except to say that as National Alliance Chairman I will adhere to the same policy that set our Alliance apart from and above the “movement” from the 1970s to the end of the last century. Some of our old-timers will recall those days.

We will continue the necessary purifying work that William Pierce began in 2002. As we do so, we gain confidence that the National Alliance’s greatest days are ahead of us, not behind.

* * *

Source: National Alliance BULLETIN, April 2015