Dr. Pierce distances the National Alliance from the “Movement”

  The “Movement”
            Despite the commentary in the Membership Handbook and periodically in
the BULLETIN, there are members who
still have a fixation on something called the “movement” rather than on the
Alliance. These “movement”-oriented members see the Alliance not as unique and
irreplaceable, but merely as one organization among many, all working toward
the same goal. “How much stronger our movement will be” they think; “when all
these organizations are united. Now we are weak because we are divided, but if
we all work together we will be stronger and more successful.” These members
also tend to regard anyone who sticks his arm out and shouts “White power,” as
a “comrade” much like a fellow Alliance member.
            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. If
in the future a suitable organization with which the Alliance might unite comes
into existence, then we can explore the possibilities for collaboration. That
is not a likely prospect however, for the following reason: if someone decides
to form a new organization, instead of becoming a member of the Alliance, it is
either because he actually has a significantly different goal or ideology from
the Alliance or is determined to use significantly different tactics, or
because it is of personal reasons.
            By far the most common personal
reason is egotism: he wants to have his own
organization: he would rather be a phone-booth Führer, with a letter head, a post office box, and three devoted
but mentally challenged followers, than just another member of an effective
organization. In that case he will have to give his organizational efforts to
try and see what he can accomplish by himself.
am not willing to compromise in any significant way the goals or ideology of
the National Alliance.
The examples that come to mind of other organizations or individuals that had
similar goals but significantly different tactics are those that were too impatient
to follow a course of legality and were determined instead to move ahead faster
than the Alliance by using illegal tactics. So far such a course has not been
successful, and it is my carefully considered judgment that such tactics are
not likely to be successful prior to a major weakening or disruption of the
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.
            For the guidance of members, the
following is the policy of the National Office governing interactions with
“movement” organizations.
  1. The
    Alliance will continue to follow its own course and will act independently of
    other organizations.
  2. The
    Alliance will not engage in joint activities with other organizations.
  3. 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.
  4. The
    Alliance does not comment publically 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
The text above is Dr. Pierce’s commentary from the
internal National Alliance BULLETIN for January, 2002. Below Dr. Pierce
reemphasizes his Alliance policy message to members in the
February, 2002, BULLETIN:

More “Movement”
I expected, my comments about the “movement” in last month’s BULLETIN elicited complaints from a few
members of the hobbyist persuasion. It elicited louder complaints from a
phone-booth Führer or two who had
been hoping to ride on the Alliance’s coattails by means of various “unity”
            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”
Inline image 
            Another item in last month’s BULLETIN that caused some unhappiness
was the announcement that henceforth all internet activity that purports to be
associated with the Alliance in any way will be coordinated and required to
adhere to guidelines. There are several reasons for this new policy, but as
with avoiding “movement” entanglements, the most important reason is the
maintenance of the sort of image that the Alliance needs in order to accomplish
its mission. We must not present to the public an image of illiteracy,
incompetence, foolishness, poor judgment, immaturity or disarray.

 Find the hobbyist in this group

            Most members who have commented on
the new Web Activity Guidelines (WAG) have agreed that they are needed, but a
few think that they go too far and impose too many limitations. Perhaps so. The
current WAG are subject to modification and the Web Activity Coordinator will
value any constructive criticism from members.
            One misimpression on the part of a
few members is that they are no longer permitted to represent themselves as
Alliance members except on an approved website. This is not so. Members are
free to identify themselves as members in discussion groups, “chat rooms,”
bulletin board postings, etc., as long as they make it clear that they are
speaking only as individuals and not as spokesmen for the Alliance.
            The views I have expressed in the
past about discussion groups and similar internet entities have been largely
negative, for two reasons. First, the anonymity and lack of accountability in
discussion groups lead to irresponsibility and foolishness. Much of what goes
on in discussion groups is beyond silly.
            Second, the internet becomes a
make-believe, alternate world for many people. Instead of using their time to
disseminate our message and recruit in the real world, they escape into the
more agreeable, make-believe, world of discussion groups and “chat-rooms” where
they can feel themselves safely among friends. Indeed, the internet is like a
habit-forming drug for many of our members. As soon as they come home from work
they turn on their computers, and they stay glued to the screen until bedtime.
As so often is the case in this soft, emasculated society, chatter takes the
place of action.
            A few members whose opinions I
respect have tried to persuade me that internet discussion groups do have some
potential redeeming value after all – provided that the members using them do
so in a disciplined, purposeful way, keeping their minds focused on the
objective instead of succumbing to the drug. Perhaps in the near future the
National Office will offer some useful guidance to such members.

2 comments to Dr. Pierce distances the National Alliance from the “Movement”

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>