On social media there has been some discussion about whether William Pierce had adjusted some of his racial views later in life, jettisoning his more extreme Grant/Stoddard-style Nordicism based on “scientific discoveries” about genetics and race, and that he wanted his screed Who We Are edited to reflect his altered opinions on these matters.
I do not know whether this is true or not, and I have reasons to be skeptical; however, I argue here is that is not, or should not be, relevant to Southern (and Eastern) European activists today.
Of course, from the standpoint of “movement” history and from the standpoint of a critical analysis of Nordicism, it may have some relevance. Knowing what the alleged “scientific discoveries” in question were would provide some talking points against Nordicism, albeit that those discoveries are more than twenty years out of date, and one can find many more facts against Nordicism that have become known since Pierce’s death, including more of those "scientific discoveries.”
However, from the standpoint of on-the-ground practical biopolitics and from the standpoint of “White ethics” I ask – who cares what Pierce thought on the matter? This is the Shabbos Sud (and Shabbos Ost) mentality – that Southern (and Eastern) Europeans need to worry what Nords like Pierce (or Taylor of Johnson or any of the rest) think about them. White ethnics need to go “hat in hand” begging for acceptance from their “racial superiors; “ Nords will sit on their racial thrones and bestow, or withhold, the mantle of “whiteness” from groups and individuals as they see fit. That nonsense has gone on long enough. It must end. Stop enabling it. Stop making every Nord proclamation about accepting or not accepting this or that group as having the highest relevance to you.
I have repeatedly argued that as long as Southern and Eastern Europeans try to win acceptance into racialist structures set up by Nords this problem will always come up. The “whiteness” of White ethnics will be questioned every 15 seconds, and so “ethnics” eager for acceptance, lickspittle subaltern Shabbos servants, will slavishly grasp onto any alleged comments from the likes of Pierce that give the appearance that the “great man” was (begrudgingly?) willing to accept them as second class citizens of the race. Pierce’s opinions on the matter have real relevance only as far as Southern and Eastern Europeans value those opinions as being important for their own sense of self-worth. If they instead adopt the attitude of “who cares what Pierce thought?” then the relevance of those opinions dissipates.
And I have to say here, as an aside, that part of the problem are those Southern and Eastern Europeans who, in pitiful Shabbos Sud and Shabbos Ost fashion, try to curry favor with disdainful Nords by throwing other Southern and Eastern Europeans “under the bus.” Notorious in this regard are some Spaniards and Northern Italians who attempt to play the “Nords, please love us, we are White too, unlike those greasy real swarthoids” game by attacking Southern Italians and Greeks, while some Eastern Europeans play the same game by claiming that “Russians are 50% Mongolian” or “Albanians are transplanted Turks” or whatever. Sorry fellows, the Nordicists and other fetishists will use you as useful idiots and dispose of you once you are not needed anymore. Don’t you have any sense of honor whatsoever?
Therefore, I have also repeatedly asserted that the Southern and Eastern Europeans, along with authentically Pan-European Northern Europeans, need to form their own racialist groups, highly effective and desirable groups, and so that THEY get to decide who gets to belong and who does not. Maybe it will be relevant to hear what those groups think on racial issues. Was Willilam Pierce “White enough?” What about Sammy and Greggy?
Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing.
Thus, any pro-White group, not explicitly Pan-European sooner or later becomes Nordicist. Of course, even being explicitly Pan-European may not be enough. In the early days of Yahoo discussion groups, I founded an explicitly Pan-European online group. A specimen posting under a Germanic surname joined. Within weeks, he was openly questioning whether I was “White enough” to belong to the group that I founded (!) and to which he later joined. I kid you not. He then stated that we needed to carefully question and debate the “whiteness” of certain ethnic groups; of course, his own group was not included in that category, which seemed to be limited to Southern and Eastern Europeans. When I told him that this behavior would not be tolerated, I was informed through a private email from another “swarthoid” in the group that the Germanic was privately contacting the other members of the group to have me – the founder – expelled and to remake the group according to “tradition racialist principles.” Again, I kid you not. At which point, I confronted him about that and he and whatever sycophants he had in the group left, while I learned a valuable lesson. It is not enough to be explicitly Pan-European, you also have to be explicitly anti-Nordicist and anti other “ists” and “isms” – petty nationalism, ethnonationalism, Medicism, etc. I may have had some relapses since then but have now learned the lesion anew, and permanently.
So, to summarize – whether or not Pierce changed his views should NOT be relevant to us today (and shouldn’t have been relevant back when he was alive either). The dictates of King Nords on their racial thrones are irrelevant. The only false relevance those opinions have comes from YOU – you enable it with your Shabbos attitudes, your “do nothing” laziness, your unwillingness to do the work to build your own groups. You beg for admittance to groups built by others and so the opinions of those others gain unjustified relevance. It is up to you to make their opinions irrelevant.
Image credit: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:William_Luther_Pierce.jpg, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/