Once Aryan Skynet Goes Live It Doesn't Matter Who Pulled The Switch
David Duke has always been a “controversial” person across the political spectrum in our post-World War II world. While it’s not surprising that doctrinaire liberals, the “politically correct”, would find him repugnant, it is somewhat baffling (and revelatory – but we’ll get to that later) to this writer why he is so reviled in many corners of the White Nationalist milieu. I believe, per contra, with some minor qualifications, that Duke is ultimately a resource in seeding White racial consciousness to growing numbers of truth seekers by leveraging his fame (infamy works as well) to amplify the message far beyond what the typical racialist blog, including your eminent Aryan Skynet, has the capacity to do.
Duke has consciously evolved his image over the years to appeal to a broader base of people, including non-Whites. He’s what the “hate watch” partisans have dubbed a “mainstreamer” as opposed to the “revolutionary” (e.g., William Pierce, Louis Beam, Harold Covington). Duke went from being an admirer of George Lincoln Rockwell in his youth, inspiring him to don a brownshirt at LSU, then a Louisiana Klan Grand Wizard outfit, and finally becoming a smartly dressed state legislator with a polished, rational rhetoric digestible to many Whites.
In short, he evolved from the failed strategies of White Nationalism 1.0 to the ascendant White Nationalism 2.0, the populist, big-tent ideal espoused here at AS. The less strident rhetoric constitutes heresy, of course, for some of those still stuck in detention at the school of WN 1.0. Belief in the “Holocau$t” has become a litmus test for many and Duke has failed this test according to the hardliners, despite having an entire chapter that critiques its historicity in his autobiography, My Awakening, and steadfastly defending revisionists while calling for the abrogation of Jewish-concocted laws against questioning the orthodox narrative in Europe.
The personable image and toned-down rhetoric that broadly appealed to lower- and middle-class Whites, coupled with political instinct and industrious organizing, won him a seat in the Louisiana legislature in 1989. Steeled with the confidence that victory gave him, he ran for US Senate in 1990, receiving 43% of the vote, and Governor of Louisiana, which shockingly resulted in a runoff election against crook Edwin Edwards (later convicted of racketeering for which he served eight years in prison). That particular election was educational for White advocates – the entire media, corporate, and political establishment came down like a furious Yahweh. They essentially threatened to crucify Louisiana, ultimately tilting the election in favor of Edwards, even though Duke had won 60% of his constituency – in other words, the White vote. SJWs of the time even had bumper stickers that read: “Vote for the crook – it’s important.”
Revolutionaries of the time, such as William Pierce, didn’t openly criticize Duke. Rather, they championed him; but I suspect that these endorsements were somewhat disingenuous on account of their firmly held conviction that change through the “system” was impossible. Perhaps they valued the propaganda potential of having someone on their side thrust into the limelight. Incidentally, Duke certainly diluted or kept mum about more radical ideas such as separation and focused on pro-White policies with respect to welfare abuse, crime, and “affirmative action”. It was a Pyrrhic victory with limited aims for Duke, a model to inspire likeminded Whites in a war that would last generations.
Duke later ran for President and did relatively poorly. I won’t explore what may have prompted Duke to run for President, but the aggregate result of his political endeavors were to raise his profile to a national and international level and demonstrate the validity and popularity of implicitly pro-White policies. Aside from his initial victory in 1989, the vast array of opposition he faced in the subsequent elections, particularly the governor’s runoff, had shown that “Never Again” was more than a silly slogan, and it seemingly demonstrated the truth of the revolutionaries’ claim, that change could not come from within the system.
While the revolutionaries were still at least nominally on board with him, many of them have decamped over the last several years, with some of them openly hostile. His new style just doesn’t accord with their more rigid ideological viewpoints. Duke has become the postmodern White advocate: he has assimilated the vernacular of multiculturalism, liberal democracy, equality, and globalism, and deftly repackaged them to serve as ideological supports for White Nationalism. And he got a PhD, which he and his followers won’t let you forget (“Dr. Duke”), but that is forgivable considering we need all the credibility we can muster. Duke talks about “human freedom” for “all peoples” and values “true diversity”.
On one of his YouTube videos, he proclaimed that “Diversity is a great thing when it comes to the world. Thank God that we have different nations, cultures, languages, religions, art, music, and even different races that have unique forms of beauty and expression.” The subtext is clear: “unique forms” that must be preserved by separation, control of immigration, and a financial sector and mass media not dominated by racial aliens. There is no gross disparagement of other cultures or races and there is an egalitarian fair-mindedness to accord White interests the same degree of worthiness as that of any other ethnic group or race in their own territory. Some of these ideas were expressed much earlier by the European New Right through such writers as Alain de Benoist. More recently, Eurasianism-curious Richard Spencer of Radix and the National Policy Institute, a man that seems to delight in taking contrary positions and upsetting the expectations of American Rightists, has claimed cheekily that he embraces multiculturalism.
Needless to say, this rhetoric rankles the hardliners. I imagine Duke must enjoy a private laugh though at this sort of Jew-jitsu – hijacking the weaponized vernacular of Cultural Marxism and redirecting it for pro-White interests, anathema to its Jewish innovators and overzealous practitioners. In effect, it softens the edge to racial politics for deracinated Whites steeped in guilt and timorous at hearing more aggressive 1.0 expressions like “White Power” and is effective propaganda that may provide the entry point for the cause. As the demographic tidal wave continues to reshape the White world, more Whites will undoubtedly become susceptible to this style of argument.
Without question, the most contentious aspect to Duke’s approach is his laser-guided focus on Jews, Zionism, and Israel, and most controversially, his solidarity with the Palestinians’ cause and the Islamic world more generally. Libertarian Realist’s video (below) encapsulates many of the major anti-Duke arguments from this perspective. The foundation to this argument lies with the mistaken belief that Jews, as a group, are not a major threat to the White Western world. Some proponents of this argument will acknowledge that Jews are generally very “liberal” and have enormous influence. Some will even grant that much of the modern Left and the increasingly insane mainstream has been brought about through the collective intellectual, organizational, and financial power of Jews. However, as the argument goes, Whites have allowed this to happen to themselves (the “suicide theory”) and furthermore are enthusiastically embracing and advancing through their own volition the very policies and ideologies that will lead to the destruction of White societies. If all the Jews were hypothetically rounded up in gas vans tomorrow, the anti-White virus is said to be so ingrained that their removal would not appreciably effect the reclamation of our own destiny. This argument fails to account for the vigorous policing of thought and political repression that is directly instigated and formulated by organized Jewish power which holds the preeminent position in the economic and political hierarchy of all Western states and – crucially – controls the mainstream media and world of entertainment.
Duke believes, along with Kevin MacDonald, that there can be no reversal of the current decline without explicitly identifying the overwhelming Jewish influence in the anti-White system that currently exists and has been strategically fostered to maximize Jewish advantage and bring about conditions where Jews feel secure. Duke’s YouTube videos relentlessly (detractors would say monomaniacally) attack Jewish deception, hypocrisy, and their collective efforts against White interests, robustly defining an enemy in the Schmittian sense, an essential preliminary for any political action. Of course, that enemy distinction was made long ago by Jews vis-à-vis Whites; unfortunately, it’s now late in the fourth quarter and Whites still don’t know whom they’re competing against.
If consciousness of Jewish identity is raised and an explicit ethnic link is made to the anti-White agenda, their power is significantly weakened and can eventually be broken. Tribal identification among Whites can be reawakened and reinforced by a conscious opposition to Jewish power. The zealous, true-believing Whites that totally embrace the Jewish program are relatively small and could hypothetically be readily neutralized once they are widely seen as traitorous collaborators. The much larger toadying cohort that acts out of self-interest and holds no particular ideology will probably be easily swayed by which way the wind blows, jumping ship when the time is auspicious. A positive byproduct of this dynamic is that the identification of a set of anti-White beliefs directly with an obvious “Other” is a much more powerfully motivating psychological force for the promotion of racial awareness than an amorphous mass of people that simply hold anti-White beliefs. In short, according to Duke, without confronting explicitly Jewish group strategies in Western societies there can be no real fight for the future of Whites since they will always be beaten by the more cohesively organized “team”. Furthermore, history shows that they cannot be enlisted for our cause; they have been and will forever be opposed to our people and the maintenance of our own heritage. You must take them on.
With the rise of the Jewish-neocon-manufactured “War on Terror”, it has become difficult for many Whites, including WNs, to not see our primary enemy as the Muslim peoples, particularly for Europeans whose countries are being invaded through immigration from Muslim lands. This is why Duke’s embrace of the Palestinian cause and defense of Muslim peoples has become his most problematic position for many. He has been to Iran and met with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a man routinely characterized (and mistranslated) by the Jewish media as a genocidal mad man, a “new Hitler”. While Iran, or Iraq for that matter, might not be, nor ever have been, a beacon of Western liberty (and why should it be?) there is no shame in defending a state’s sovereignty against Zionist-led forces of dissolution which will only bring about regional chaos and invite blowback, as indeed, we are seeing now with Iraq and Syria.
In some WN circles, sympathy for the decades-long plight of the Palestinians in and of itself is enough to draw their derision. One commenter sums it up: “I’m not sure what to make of the Dukemeister these days. He doesn’t seem to advocate on behalf of white and European Americans anymore and has morphed into a race neutral human rights advocate. If his heart bleeds for anyone it seems to be the Palestinians and other muzzies judging by the copious amounts of internet ink he’s spilled writing about their plight.” But Whites are not heartless people and can’t help but be moved when they hear that Israel has bulldozed Palestinian homes again, dropped bombs on hospitals and schools, and shot children for sport; this feeling is not incompatible with a frank recognition of the difference between our peoples. The Palestinians and the West do have a common enemy, but recognizing that does not mean that we are the same or that their culture is on par with Western Civilization. Palestinians and many other Muslims have turned into an enemy as a result of the Jewish domination of US foreign policy, but they need not remain so indefinitely. There will always be the potential for conflict with Islamic lands that are so different from ours, but the current pitched conflict is being stoked for alien interests.
I acknowledge that Duke’s position on this matter may be the toughest to swallow considering the ubiquitous anti-Islamic climate fostered by the Jewish media and now held by many Whites. However, the alternative is to simply add to the resounding anti-Islamic chorus which only has the effect (intended by our Israeli friends) of building popular support for a permanent occupation of the Mideast to fulfill the territorial ambitions of Greater Israel. Calls for reducing Muslim immigration to the West, as good as that sounds, tends to reduce the demographic question to the cultural and obscures the racial question, thereby doing little to combat the global migration of non-Whites to the West. Besides, a clever politician will always come forth to argue for the simple cultural assimilation of immigrants (“by the third generation they’ll be just like us!”) and voila – problem solved.
Another important reason for the dislike and hatred of Duke from Rightists is that “anti-Semitism” has acquired a veneer of low-class anti-intellectualism associated with blustering, prole-ish Neo-Nazi types. This impression is largely due to the results of the Second World War and has surely been cultivated by Jewish elites (some would argue that its kernel lies in an Anglo culture that long ago was Judaized through the intermarriage of elite families).
However, a cursory look through Western history dispels this notion – many brilliant artists, statesman, writers, philosophers, and generals held “anti-Semitic” views. Nevertheless, White advocates like the genteel Jared Taylor of American Renaissance, and to a lesser degree Richard Spencer and Tom Sunic, minimize talk of Jews and actively promote the “suicide theory”. They find Duke’s increased focus on Jews and Zionism since the end of his political career distasteful. Truth be told, I sometimes find it a bit monotonous while nevertheless recognizing how essential it is. While Duke avoids glorifying Nazism, admittedly a nonstarter from most people, he does defend a revisionist viewpoint on the world wars, and considers them great and unnecessary tragedies for the West.
Richard Spencer proclaimed on his podcast that Duke “hates them more than he loves us”. A provocative but important question: what’s wrong with hate? It’s part of human nature and essential for our survival. Hate differentiates from that which you love. Frankly, I don’t know of many straight, intelligent men that would buy into a movement whose leaders were simply bloviating about “loving your race”. Nevertheless, Duke’s exposure of Israel, Jews, and Zionism is delivered with a cool rationality that doesn’t sound quite as hateful as Abe Foxman wishes it did. Hate on, haters:
A personal anecdote about yours truly: I became educated on racialism after reading David Duke’s autobiography My Awakening. I got to that point by way of US foreign policy. I discovered that the Iraq War was essentially a Jewish operation, and David Duke, on his website and radio show, was one of the few outspoken commentators pointing at the real culprits. I ordered his book and it arrived in the mail, autographed. The chapters on race, historical revisionism, and Jews were things I had never considered before. From that point on, I immersed myself in literature that was not available at the local public library. For me, and I suspect for many White Nationalists, criminal international Zionism was their entrée into a racialized worldview. With Israel’s constant savagery, deception, pushiness, and arrogance, many more Whites are waking up to the vulgar lie that poor wittle Iswael is “our only democractic ally in the region”.
Duke is now 64 years old and his status as a “leader” among White Nationalists is certainly past its peak. The post-political career model of White activism he has been engaged in is populist in its nature, it appeals to Whites of all socioeconomic classes, and fits the definition of White Nationalism 2.0 – what we believe to be the future for White advocacy. Exposure of Zionism and Jews acts as a powerful gateway or stepping stone towards racial consciousness, while delineating our race’s most formidable foe. There are certainly numerous personal flaws that critics in our camp assail Duke for: it’s said that he’s a self-promoter, a womanizer, an egotist, a fraudster that has manipulated his donors and followers. Some of these may or may not be true and I don’t really care.
On the whole, when it comes to a principled stance in defending White interests, there is simply no other American who has reached and awakened as many people as he has. His message, from the Jewish viewpoint, is insidious because it reaches people on an emotional and rational level while not running afoul of any of our society’s norms (exactly the reason why many absolutists on the Right recoil from this seemingly liberal sensibility). Until a celebrity publicly converts to our cause and crusades for it, I don’t see another man having as great an impact as he had. The cultural atmosphere is far more anti-White now than when Duke was running in elections. The dirty tricks, Jewish terrorism, and outright censorship now seems to preclude another Duke coming along. I do remain hopeful, though, that the memes he has helped to seed, along with a growing awareness of the plight of Whites and their deadly relationship with Jews, will reach the right people and usher in change. To David Duke – excuse me, Dr. David Duke – I salute you.