Amren update #3

We ended the conference with speeches by David Yeagley and, as usual, Sam Dickson. Every single speaker did an oustanding job and the conference was a great success. We had about 150 people. Notably absent were Don Black and his crowd. They might not have felt comfortable anyway, given the copious love and admiration that each speaker showered upon Jews – a bit too much for my comfort personally.
Jared Taylor asked the audience if we wanted to use the same venue in the future. Given the friendly staff, beautiful surroundings and nice accommodations, we made it clear that the answer was “yes”.
Now that the conference is behind us, I’m spending another couple of days exploring this part of the South. When I get home, I’ll share some photos and videos. I did record some of the speaches in entirety, but because they will be made available for a fee through Amren, I’ll release only small sections of them.

This entry was posted in activism. Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to Amren update #3

  1. WMarkW says:

    I’m particularly interested in learning Prof. Weissberg’s recommendations about strategy. The most useful frontier for Amren is showing how the diversity philosophy emphasizing 1960s solutions (expanding the scope of welfare and the definition of civil rights) is not tenable in current demographic and economic environment.

  2. jewamongyouw says:

    In a nutshell, Prof. Weissberg recdommends non-political solutions (he says white nationalist politics is untenable) involving white enclaves defended privately, such as vigilante groups. He stated that higher I.Q. populations could keep themselves white through higher housing costs and entry qualifications that would filter out the NAMs.
    I found this solution unsatisfactory and asked about lower i.Q. whites. Don’t they have a place in this new world? His reply was that lower I.Q. whites already do hold their own in certain redneck enclaves. My problem with this is that, as it stands, lower I.Q./income whites are at the mercy of NAMS because there is no official infrastructure to teach them pride in their own identity. Who is going to do it in Weissberg’s world?
    Furthermore, what is going to keep successful non-whites out of such enclaves? With Africa’s rapidly growing population, and permissive immigration policies, there will be enough smart/wealthy Africans to transform any white areas into mut-lands. What about Asians? I believe there must be official policies in place in order to maintain white civilization and the white race.
    I disagree (for the most part) with Prof. Weissberg, but he is still a good, and funny, speaker. I hope he’ll defend his position on this, or some other, forum. It’s worthy of debate.

    • WMarkW says:

      Thank you for the quick and complete reply. Although I wasn’t expecting enclave-type issues to be his thrust. Since his specialty is education, I was hoping he would emphasize a reduction in the amount of government involvement (taxes and regulations) over pipe dreams of achieving socio-economic equality without equal performance. And end programs premised on the dogma that differential achievement constitutes prima facie proof that whites are to blame and owe a solution.
      Black self-help advocates like Sowell, Steele, Williams and Raspberry are rapidly aging. I’d like to think that some entity can pick up the “racism is not the problem” mantel.

  3. SFG says:

    Off topic for the post but not the blog, have you read about the recent shootings in France? The NYT went out of their way not to say who the perpetrators were 😉

  4. Anna says:

    [First of all — Forgive me for any ramblings I might of had. I have a headache right now like you would not believe.]
    There is something I am intensely curious about, dear, and perhaps you can shed some light for me.
    I do have to ask about your views on the role of Jews in the decline of European civilization. Browsing through your blog, which I thoroughly enjoy, I can’t see too much credit you have afforded to those great Jewish pioneers in reform liberalism that set the stage for the destruction of white culture, morality and being. More or less, you seem to disproportionately place responsibility with the blacks as being the instigators, not just toys run amok.
    Now, I do identify as a National Socialist [not to be confused with Neo-Nazi]. The ideology supports European rights, not to the exclusion of others, as well as home-states and cultural self-governance. Yes — This applies to Jews alike. Jews, just like every other ethnicity, should be given their own autonomy [the way Israel went about being created is despicable and shameful, but that is another conversation]. That being said, where responsibility falls, it falls — And I feel that if Jews are to truly be contributing members to the various sub-NS movements, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to expect some kind of ‘ownage’ on the part of the Jews as to their [very prominent] role in international cultural destruction.
    As an outsider looking in to what seems to be a strange new mutation the White Nationalist movement is taking on, I have to express some fear at the liberalism that has been infecting the movement. While I encourage and appreciate different people participating in activism, it seems that there is some kind of a mirror being placed inside the movement by the various groups that have been [for lack of a better word] installing themselves en mass inside White Nationalism/Heritage Conservatism. It seems almost ironic, in a way, that we would have an affirmative-action copycat within our own ranks. I say that because it seems that whenever there is a Jew or other non-White who appreciates the movement, they are swarmed with fawn-eyed fans — And suddenly accommodating their needs seem more important then the integrity of the movement.
    I have seen that a lot in the comments to your posts, as well as in your posts themselves when you hint, with an air of disdain, to lack appreciation for those higher-ups on the WN scale like David Duke and Kevin MacDonald, simply because of their views on that Jewish role I was previously talking about. Those men have done so bloody much for the movement, I can’t even begin to list their achievements. And yet your commentors [is that even a word?] are so willing to accept your perspective, even taking it on as their own — A frightful sight to behold more divides within an already fractured movement. And I don’t think we have the good Doctors to blame for those fractures.
    Another good example might be the whole fiasco that happened with David Cole back in the 1990s with the Holocaust Revisionists [again, for lack of a better word: Oy Vey!]. Further, there has recently been a surge of Homosexual White Nationalists, who refuse to even entertain any theories regarding Homosexuality and the movement being incompatible. In fact, I remember just the other day reading a Sienfeld-esque conversation between a Homosexual rights activist who was also a White Nationalist [yes, you read that correctly], and a AltRight poster.. What was impressive was seeing the resolve of the WNs breakdown to the will of this Homosexual’s rantings and ravings regarding ‘his’ place in the movement, as well as ‘his’ place in an white ethnocentric society. It was amazing to see the these heterosexuals lose their ground to the point where the conversation became a parallel to the hypersensitivity and forced tolerance we are so familiar with on the streets of America today [the exact ones we are trying to fight].
    So I suppose that is the stance from which my question was derived.
    Very hopeful for a response, though you seem to be quite good with those.

  5. Kiwiguy says:

    Good to hear that you had no trouble with protesters. I guess the lawsuit against thugs like Imm must have done the trick.
    You mentioned the rapidly growing African population. I think that is something people in European countries have underestimated. The other day I was on the and discussing the need to curb immigration from high risk groups. A student responded to me that the horse had already bolted, as there were 4th generation afro-carribbeans in the UK.
    I replied that they can still prevent exacerbating their problems by having a more sensible entry criteria. I pointed out that in 2005 the sub saharan population was 770 million and by 2050 it is projected to reach 2 billion. I pointed out that the difference would be England having problems in certain suburbs, and England becoming another Zimbabwe.

  6. Lif says:

    “it seems that whenever there is a Jew or other non-White who appreciates the movement, they are swarmed with fawn-eyed fans — And suddenly accommodating their needs seem more important then the integrity of the movement.” – Anna
    This is such a TYPICALLY white thing to do and the cause of our downfall.

  7. Lif says:

    @Jay: What percentage of attendees were female ?

  8. The Friendly Grizzly says:

    JAY: I would like to contact you “off-site” and ask you a couple of questions. I don’t see a “contact” link here. If you can see the email addresses that one puts in in order to comment, will you please drop me a line? Thank you.
    the friendly grizzly

  9. anon dude says:

    Hey jewamongyou,
    I was the guy from Maryland. Love the blog. Just leaving a comment saying it was good to meet you.

  10. Though a former Amren member who gave up on that Judeophile organization some time ago, I am glad thay had a successful – and undisturbed – meeting as, from JT on down, there are many worthwhile individuals involved. As a HardRight with one foot in the WN camp I am also, when push comes to shove, willing to accept ANYONE (including individual Jews, homosexuals, etc.) as allies, providing they play no Group Entitlement games and are aiming their lethal weapon in the same direction I am. Let’s just call it OPERATIONAL White Nationalism and get on with the struggle.

    • Amren seems jewish neutral rather than judeophilic although in that organization there may be some judeophiles.

    • Anna says:

      Lord knows I understand what you are saying — Just wanting to get things done and encourage the growth of the movement despite who’s in our ranks. But I do have to remind you of the implicit problem that accompanies false expectations and overexposure.
      We would be, ultimately, giving Jews/Homosexuals/Whatever, the idea that they would, in some way, have a place in a European traditionalist society — When they would not. We’d also be encouraging a very toxic perspective to enter in the movement and, possibly, influence the less-stable Nationalists, this is what I saw on AltRight that day. I saw white nationalists sway under the influence of other perspectives that are not compatible with the movement.
      So yes, it would be wonderful just to accept any and all people into the movement because, yes, that would speed things up quite a bit. But I’ll remind you of what happened to the Greek Model of democracy when they did that very same thing — Case and point, the democrats of today are nothing like the democrats of the yesteryear — Which National Socialism is a democratically-based system, and yet we have nothing in common whatsoever with the democrats of the Liberal parties. A good example of what happens when a movement is infected for the purposes of popularizing the view.
      And really, long term, would you rather have a solid, stable, loyal [but smaller] movement, or a large barely-fisable, fractured movement that is based off of a million different ideologies taped together by an unstable underlying principle? The latter isn’t cohesive, and thus, can’t be expected to perform very well endurance-wise. There most certainly is a case for endurance over strength in everything from the Olympics to Politics.

      • WMarkW says:

        I think it would be a mistake to jump to enclaves or other separatist strategies as the first goal. Big improvements would come from:
        1. improving the free speech environment, not just legal First Amendment protections but getting Amren viewpoints treated as respectfully as other opinions and news are
        2. as a consequence of 1., breaking up the “diversity coalition” that lumps blacks, Hispanics, women, gays and Jews into one entity fighting to overcome the social barrier of white heterosexual male privilege
        Those groups have plenty of contradictory interests. The artificial strategic consensus they’ve built around fighting traditionalism will disappear, once we’ve created a more honest environment about discussing how gayness does cause AIDS, Hispanics don’t support the white liberal version of feminism, a lot of blacks hate gays and Jews, and while JAY and Michael Hart are OK, things like the role of Jewish culture in creating the Madoff affair need to be discussed in an open, respectful environment.

      • SFG says:

        I’d be more concerned about immigration restriction and automatic US support for Israel than the Madoff affair when it comes to negative effects of Jewish clout. Madoff stole only from other Jews, ironically enough.
        You might be thinking of the financial meltdown, but I think that had more to do with bankers not wanting to be regulated than anything else. We had the same thing in 1929 with a largely WASP Wall Street, after all.

      • Anna says:

        @WMarkW — [Again, rambling a bit. Really my style is just shooting ideas off and seeing what happens ;)]
        While I agree in totality with your two points — It would be wise to consider, how, exactly, we would get to enacting those suggestions.
        If we have hostile minority groups, which I think we can all agree by now have been pioneered [at the very least] by Jewish people, attacking our efforts to attempt to secure our First Amendment rights, as well as demonizing all of those brave people who are fighting on behalf of those rights — How far can we really go?
        Well it’s easy to say, because so far that’s what has been happening — And though the environment is getting slightly volitile, the powers remain unshaken, and will remain unshaken. The only thing that could possibly occur to change that stability is if the power was to swell to such a porportion, so that, like a great Star, it eventually imploded on itself. I think we see some signs of this occuring — But before it’s death, comes its climax, and what chance do we have to survive as a fractured front?
        In your second point, you noted how ‘minorities’ are a cohesive front fighting against White Males. And how effective they have been! Where is our cohesive front? Can I ask? Most of it is in prison, or exiled on Hate Crime charges.
        So really it would be difficult to suggest that the environment surrounding White issues be slackened, when there still is an all out war being waged on it by the left.
        See, this is why I asked my initial question to JAY anyway — I do agree that accountability and discussion is the only route to reparation. But even the more ‘open minded Jews’ seem to be compeltely adverse to the idea of accepting responsibility for their actions which have directly contributed to the downfall of European civilizations.
        It’s actually kind of funny — I flicked on the tele while I was writing this and that TLC flick, ‘My big fat Gypsie Wedding’ about the English Pikies was on. And on this particular episode, a non-Gypsie girl was marrying into the Gypsies. And as the announcer was mulling over how this girl would be expected to disgard her old life and become a traveller, and how the Pikie community was upset they were bringing in an outsider because they saw it as their traditions and culture would be influenced and ‘drowned out’. They wanted to stay ‘pure’ traveller.
        And this outlines the problem of having minorities in the movement precicely. Minorities are WONDERFUL at protecting their points of view, and very prone to becoming spiteful when they realize that they really aren’t welcome in a European ethnocentric society. I’ll refer back to that AltRight post, if I could, and I know I have done it alot, but its really the perfect example of the problem.
        [Continued on next post]

      • Anna says:

        The homosexual male was confronted by an Altright poster who suggested that a ‘cure’ for homosexuality was soon-ahead via the recent discoveries made regarding it’s cause, the homosexual said, and I quote:
        “No, I’m not willing to tolerate your support for wiping out my cultural and genetic ingroup.”
        Imagine. Homosexuals identifying as a a ‘cultural and genetic ingroup’ now. And how fast he shifted gears from ‘doing the best for the white community back to his ‘cultural and genetic ingroup’. And I really can’t say that I am off when I realize the pattern in minorities immediately regressing to that state of mind. Jews are absolutely notorious for it — And though I cant speak for JAY, I would be willing to put money on that he would fight for the Jewish cause over the White European cause anyday.
        I think this is the reason even some whites are against white rights — They are simply not identifying the way they should be anymore. The reasons for this is debatable, but for me, personally, it always comes back to the overwhelming amount of manipulation perpetuated by the Multiculturalist agenda.
        I think that, at this point, we actually need to take a hint from the minority groups and, as my old professor used to coin, COA [cover our asses].
        I think we are getting a bit too ahead of ourselves when we think that simply swarming the movement with ‘fly-by-night’ minorities that want to sandbox around as a WN will somehow progress it and move things along faster then they would have been had we simply tracked along with the demographic that would be most loyal.
        To paraphrase Kirk and his 6 points of Conservatism, engineering events hardly ever allows for the true result to occur. I think I can be confident in the signs that are pointing in the direction of a weakening system, or at least of a volatile environment building in White society – So I feel secure in the idea that the right demographic will bring our success. Europeans are a unique and wonderful people, its time for us to manufacture a movement made by Europeans for Europeans. That’s something we’ve never had before.
        Whoo! Loving this damn discussion — Can’t wait for JAYs input.

      • WmarkW says:

        I posted a reply as comment #13 below.

  11. WmarkW says:

    Continued from comment 11. above for formatting.
    I suppose I’ll share my own background here. I didn’t come to the Amren philsophy from conservatism, I came from the liberalism America had from the mid 30s-60s that modernized our industrial economy, and pushed wealth to the common people. It got ruined in the late 60s by well-meaning but naive white elites, who designed a welfare state that would have worked among the white population, but didn’t among a minoirty population that was: 1) less intelligent; and 2) held a resentment against the majority population, who they believe own them stuff.
    I am also a secularist. I don’t really care who’s a Jew, for example. This is why I think liberal hypocracy is our most important enemy. There is nothing liberal secularists hate more than Creationism, and the anti-scientific arguments made against evolution, like “teach kids they’re apes and they’ll act like apes.” But when it comes to discuss the post-speciation effects of different human environments, suddely brain skills are off the table as a topic even to discuss. It certainly seems on its face reasonable, that the people who remained in the environment where our pre-human ancestors lived, were under the least environmental pressure to select for adaptive traits. And the people who moved where food acquisition required seasonal agriculture, were culled of the population members too dumb to practice those skills. But tell any liberal this, and they’ll say something like “there wasn’t enough time for mental abilities to diverge that far,” even though our melanin and hair changed a lot more than that.
    That said, I most certainly don’t hate blacks, as a group. I more feel sorry for them. Through no doing of their own, they’ve been put into a society that’s too advanced for many of them to be successful at it. There’s enough wealth in our society to take care of them. We mostly need to dis-emply illegal immigrants, distribute their jobs to people who can do them, and then more black men will be desirable marriage partners and their kids will stop growing up unsupervised and turn into criminals.
    But my point is — the above is a lot simpler set of steps than creating a national partition. Liberals wax loud and long about the importance of free speech and exchange of ideas. They just think race is too powerful an issue to trust the American people to make the right decisions about. I’m more optimistic. I think ending hypocracy would be VERY powerful.

    • SFG says:

      It’s ‘hypoCRISy’, by the way. I know it sounds like a system of government…and it sometimes may enforce one 😉 …but it isn’t.

    • SFG says:

      I actually think ‘hypocracy’ is a pretty good word for ‘rule by lies’…anyone want to help promote it?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *