Fascinating speech by Sam Dickson at NPI

Dickson is a communitarian, and says we should have collective freedom but not individual freedom. Individual freedom is “corrosive.”

Islam is a communitarianism of the sort he describes. Christianity once was as well, and other religions. Attila has given me a picture of a masculine communitarianism — the Chechen mens dancing:

A self-described racial communitarian who abides by the ancient Greek moto, “one man, no man,” Dickson introduced his speech by stating his belief that communities need to be racially and culturally the same. While he did say that he himself is an American, and that he has “proprietary feelings” towards the U.S., it’s obvious that he doesn’t believe the United States belongs to Whites anymore.

For the purposes of his speech, he referred to America as “our country,” which is to say that we at the NPI conference were born here and live here. For whatever its worth, all of Dickson’s ancestors except one German immigrant can be traced back to before the Revolutionary War. Therefore, Dickson is a founding stock American, not the product of the Ellis Island melting pot.

As can be derived from the above quotes, Dickson is anti-individualism and anti-libertarian, which is to say he’s pro-community and pro-order. In his speech, Dickson argued that separating from Mother England in the 1770s was a grave mistake. He noted that all his colonial ancestors supported the American Revolution.

He took the critique of America a step further by arguing that “the Reformation bought many bad things,” two of which he identified as opposition to hierarchy (specifically that of the Roman Catholic Church), and individualism as manifested by the Protestant ethic. Protestantism was the founding religion of America in both Massachusetts (the Puritans) and Virginia (the East Anglicans). He argued that both these groups of settlers, particularly the Puritans, had an unjustified grudge against their mother country.

In regards to massive European immigration of the late 1800s and early 1900s, Dickson thinks that these immigrants didn’t have a connection with their communities in their native homelands, whether that be Ireland, Poland, Germany, etc. Money and “freedom” mattered more to them than community. According to him, the immigrants of Ellis Island had no commitment at all to Anglo-Saxon values.

Interestingly, Dickson made it clear that he is not “anti-freedom,” per say. It’s just that “courage, loyalty, marital fidelity, etc.,” are also key values, not just freedom. Moreover, freedom to the average American means individual freedom, not collective freedom. He supports collective freedom, whereas he believes individual freedom is a “corrosive acid.”

He said that, by Tea Party standards, there is more individual freedom today than there was when he was born. But to him, individual freedom is destructive to community and to the natural organic relationships that allow unique groups everywhere to survive and thrive. He didn’t really define collective freedom, but suffice to say that he is very much against the Tea Party worship of maximum individual freedom.

Despite being a native-born Southerner of colonial stock, Dickson made clear near the end of his speech that he doesn’t have much use for the mantra of “States’ Rights.” He told the audience that if you are really against the very idea of a central government and want a decentralized system of states’ rights, then move to Congo.

He closed his speech by comparing White Americans, particularly Tea Partiers and other conservatives/libertarians, to abused children. He thinks that all the shows of “patriotism,” such as flag-waving at parades and rallies, are the behaviors of children trying to impress and please their abusive daddy. He called out Southerners for jumping in to support the military despite being the most hated group of Whites in America.

Sooner or later, says Dickson, Whites living in this land must realize that daddy is mean, daddy hates you, and daddy is abusing you for his own gain and profit. We shouldn’t try fruitlessly to impress daddy, we should kick him to the curb by releasing ourselves from the oppressive chains of American identity.


About Rob

Come with me if you want to live
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Fascinating speech by Sam Dickson at NPI

  1. PA says:

    “Freedom” is just another word for mercantilism. It’s an effeminate, atomizing ethos of service to the highest bidder. What we want is Liberty, which is I’m guessing what Dickson means by “masculine communitarianism.” Liberty means belonging and investment into a community that is a realization of one’s highest values.

    As to the Chechen dance, it taps into that nation’s expression of Mannerbund. Something similar that’s Nordic is hinted at in heavy metal headbanging.

    • mindweapon says:

      Right. Maybe headbanging and moshing needs to be de-electronified into something more like the Chechens are doing.

    • “Freedom” is just another word for mercantilism. It’s an effeminate, atomizing ethos of service to the highest bidder. What we want is Liberty, which is I’m guessing what Dickson means by “masculine communitarianism.”

      The original “liberalism” meant a republican form of government and a capitalist economy. I’m guessing what he means by “masculine communitarianism” is what feminists call “patriarchy.” No one has “individual rights” but instead, everyone has responsibilities to their family, and by extension, the community. The community simply being a partially intermarried group of clans.

      Classical liberalism worked ok in the proto-industrial era where you had Patriarchs running workshops and employing families and neighbors. “Individual rights” simply meant the Patriarch could make decisions for his own clan, and that a Patriarch was on somewhat equal footing with royalty (at least the worst abuses of royalty were checked by the doctrine of individual rights.)

      In this era of mass propaganda, demographic collapse due to below-replacement level fertility, mobile workers and nuclear families abandoning their extended families/clans, and mass democracy (one person, one vote: an established, successful Patriarch or Matriarch getting no more of a say than some errant 18 year old) classical liberalism is dead.

      As for the goldbuggery style libertarian capitalists, the main allure of gold as wealth is that it’s portable. Perfect for a mobile, international clan that needs to move wealth across borders every generation. You could see two neighboring farmers doing economic exchange by swapping acreage between their farms; a transfer of real wealth that is not portable.

      Plus, with technology, money itself is long past due for a reinvention.

      Kevin MacDonald says that Europeans always had loose extended families and very low clannishness; hence the householder system where youth from one family would go work for another family in a town next over. That’s why Europeans developed the “moral community” – religion, etc. It’s why whites are so damned hung up on ideology, and always fall victim to universalist ideologies (sending missionaries to Africa to convert them to Christianity, Ron Paul’s open borders, Ayn Rands “racism is the lowest form of collectivism,” etc.)

      I remain a techno-optimist. Complex cooperation outside of the official monetary system is now possible for the first time, thanks to the internet. We could literally start a “White Points” system and use it for economic exchange, a simplified, exclusive version of bitcoin. But that’s stage two, stage one is actually cooperating economically with your neighbors, which requires high trust and low coordination.

      A while back during one of the first sex fights on this blog, MW said to be a “true” WN you have to have children, and I’m starting to see the reasons for that. White men without children are Wild Boys, just as likely to destroy as to build, with zero personal investment in the future. White women without children are essentially comfort women and/or workers. It keeps coming back to this problem: the intelligent, highly educated whites are not having enough children, leading us everyday close to Idiocracy – and that’s just the whites. Imagine what it will be like when whites are a minority and Colored Idiocracy is the majority.

  2. curioser & curioser says:

    The older men are more near the center where they don’t have to run so fast or far. There appears to be some jockeying for position around the outer band, maybe like musical chairs, ie, get ur spot before the running stops or it might just be that the guys on the outside have to go much faster to keep up.Don’t make me do it. I don’t want to. Isn’t my way.

  3. Stary Wylk says:

    Look up “Ormurin Langi” on Youtube, or Sigmundskvaedid Yngra.

  4. Frankie says:

    MW, were you at the conference? If so, please post the de Benoist presentation as soon as it’s available. I’m a big fan of his writing, and am hungering to listen to what he said at the NPI conference. Thanks.

    • Dan Poole says:

      I was the one who attended the conference and wrote this report. I’ve got two other reports coming tomorrow sometime late in the afternoon. For the record, de Benoist’s speech was a notch below Dickson’s and Alex Kurtagic’s, but that’s just one man’s opinion. (:

  5. Denise says:

    Dickson is a brilliant man. A truly spiritual man.

  6. Hereward Saxon says:

    Thomas Jefferson certainly wouldn’t have accepted communitarianism instead of individual liberty, but what did he know?

    That Chechen ‘dance’ behaviour reminds me of how they would march around the shrine at Mecca, and of Land Bridge Asians circling around a camp fire or Africans, around a missionary in a pot. They seem more Western when dancing like this:

    • mindweapon says:

      I like the Chechens’ mens dance because it seems to bring out the savage in them. We need to bring out the savage in the Western White man.

      • Craig says:

        The only thing that I have done similar is a huddle after you win a footy game, the other was marching parades in the Army, I remember doing a Funeral in Sydney it was pretty full on for a few hours.

  7. Ex-pat in Oz says:

    Democracy has failed. I’d give up the vote in exchange for being left alone (my definition of liberty) all day long….

  8. Hereward Saxon says:

  9. Adit says:

    What I have noticed is that there is far too much romanticism floating around regarding Europe or the United States. There were very good reasons why people left their mother countries to come to America, or for that matter any of the European colonies. In those days a trip to any of the colonies was usually a one way affair and was not taken lightly. Contrary to popular romanticism about the America, it was not all milk in honey here either. This immigration also provided a very necessary relief valve for Europe and probably prevented many revolutions and wars while adding wealth obtained from the colonies.

    Many Americans yearn for a an idealized version of 50’s White America (Beaver-Cleaverville) which never existed, while others have these idealized notions of a ‘perfect’ Europe which never existed either. We can’t go back and armchair quarterbacking about the decisions of people 300 years or more ago is useless navel gazing. If the American revolution had failed, and America remained with Britain, people would be sitting around romanticizing about the revolution and how much better life would be if the revolt had succeeded.

    • mindweapon says:

      Yeah I agree. But the good point he made is about communitarianism and the idea of ordered liberty rather than “freedom.”

      • Adit says:

        Well, with communitarianism (that’s a mouth full) I basically consider it the kind of society Whites would create if left to their own devices. I’m sure that the original colonies were like that and not a village of lone wolves running amok like we have today. The idea that ‘individual freedom is the end all, be all of everything’ is being imposed on us from the outside via propaganda.

    • Dan Poole says:

      You’re right that there is a lot of romanticism on both sides of the Atlantic, but lets be honest: The decisions of European monarchs, aristocrats, and rowdy peasants (which is what the Puritans were) 300 years ago to pursue wealth and “build new lives” was extremely selfish and had disastrous consequences for their ancestors. The Puritans were outright spiteful and wicked. QED: 1692 Salem.

      It’s fair game to criticize selfish, short-sighted decisions of 300 years ago.

      • Adit says:

        Probable useless navel gazing follows.
        I think to understand the colonization of the Americas, etc, you need to ask the question: What was Europe like, say 300+ years ago? (This is where the romanticism on both sides may come into play. Some of the things I list may vary in importance in different times.) Well let’s consider this: debtor’s prisons, indentured servitude or serfdom, a strong class system (with little chance to move up), corrupt church/religious conflict, land shortages with poverty and starvation being all too common. Add to that a useless Aristocracy sitting on a lot of the wealth and land. Not exactly the ‘perfect’ Europe that people romanticize about. If you were the 2nd, 3rd, etc. son (not inheriting land or business) or you came from crushing poverty the New World probably didn’t look that bad.

        The New World was very dangerous, etc. but what did these people really have to lose? People sold themselves into Indentured Servitude to get to the New World. Seriously, how lousy does your lot in life have to be to sell yourself into limited slavery just to escape? Let that thought percolate for awhile. If (a very big if) you survived the crossing, angry Indians, disease, and your indentured servitude what did you get? A chance at a better life than what you had in the old country. Not a guarantee, just a chance. That should speak volumes about what Europe was like for a lot of people. Sure, the rich made more money and the monarchs made money, as is always the case, but many of the average colonists may just have been trying to escape life in Europe. That may help explain why America broke away and went a different direction. If you were escaping your lousy lot in the European society of the day, you probably wouldn’t recreate the system that screwed you in the first place. Why make the same old mistakes when you can make new ones?

        If, by 1692 you’re referring to the witch trials, that kind of thing was not exactly unheard of in Europe as well. If I recall correctly that only took place in one colony and was not something that went on all over the American colonies.

  10. lylo says:

    That is Sufi prayer, not dancing per se. Some Sufis spin individually. Chechens spin communally.

    • Attila says:

      I love the Chechen zikr (from Arabic dhikr- which means remembrance of God). Sufism is simply the flower of al-Islam, the world’s only antidote to everything else.

  11. Marcus says:

    I think southern people are a lost cause (pun intended), as a group we have totally invested in abstractions like states and a religion that is antithetical to our nature.

  12. TabuLa Raza says:

    Communitarianism is the main NWO philosophy. The head intellectual is jew Amitai Etzioni.

    >>>You can see that the groundwork for this has been laid and is being implemented throughout the nation. When you create deep dependence and then withdraw assistance the result is chaos and poverty. Propaganda infuses our culture with messages that there are just a few winners and many losers; that we are killing the earth and time is running out; that prosperity is an anachronism and detrimental to life; that individual freedom is selfish and injures those who are less free.

    This is UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development.

    Communitarianism is the ‘balancing’ or subsuming of individual rights below the needs of the ‘community.’ The community is defined now as the global village. So anything identified as serving the global village takes precedence over the rights of the individual. In the United States, our constitution guarantees our rights to life and liberty. Ownership of property includes that of our own persons.

    Personal liberty is at odds with Communitarianism, the new standard of the Twenty-first Century. Join us in fighting UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development.<<<


    • ben tillman says:

      That’s not communitarianism; it’s “Communitarianism”. They don’t own the language.

    • mindweapon says:

      Communitarianism is merely a weapon. It’s either a weapon in their hands, or in our hands. The Mormons know that.

      I kind of like being an individualist, but you can get used to anything. The Mormons who grow up in it, generally stay in it.

      If we don’t create our own brand of communitarianism, a left wing, Jewish Communitarianism will be put on us. We will only escape it/overcome it by creating our own communitarianism in opposition to it. We can do that sooner or later.

  13. Attila says:

    I came across these wise words from one of the Shi’ite Imams (Jaf’ar As-Sadiq) while doing research about Sufism and Irfan::


    Reflect on what has passed of this world. Has any of it remained for anyone? Has anyone remained in it, be he noble or lowly, rich or poor, friend or enemy? Similarly, what has not yet happened of it resembles more closely that which has passed of it, than water resembles water. The Messenger of Allah said, ‘Death is enough of a warner; the intellect is enough of a guide; precaution is enough of a provision; worship is enough of an occupation; Allah is sufficient as an intimate friend; the Qur’an is enough of a clarification.’

    And elsewhere, ‘Only affliction and trial remain of this world. If a person is saved, it is only by sincerely seeking refuge.’ And Noah said, ‘I found this world to be like a house with two doors. I entered through one of them and went out through the other.’ Such is the state of the one who was saved by Allah: so what is the state of one who feels at ease in this world, relies on it, wastes his life by cultivating it, and is full of worldly demands?

    Reflection is the mirror of good deeds and the expiation of bad deeds. It is the light of the heart, and guarantees ease to other people and success in obtaining betterment for the next abode; it allows one to foresee the outcome of one’s actions, and causes an increase in knowledge. Worship of Allah is unparalleled when accompanied by this quality. The Messenger of Allah said, ‘To reflect for an hour is better than worshipping for a year.’

    The station of reflection is only obtained by him whom Allah has singled out for the light of gnosis (ma’rifah) and tawhid.

  14. MOISHE NOT says:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s